PDA

View Full Version : Andre Dawkins lights it up



Zafort
04-13-2014, 12:03 PM
What a show.

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/sports/2014/04/12/dukes-dawkins-upstages-warren-crossfire-game/7657959/

Zafort

Kedsy
04-13-2014, 12:21 PM
What a show.

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/sports/2014/04/12/dukes-dawkins-upstages-warren-crossfire-game/7657959/

Zafort

He had 41 points at halftime? I still dream about what Andre might have accomplished at Duke if things had been just a little bit different.

Bob Green
04-13-2014, 12:25 PM
Dawkins with 47 points - I really hope a NBA team gives him a shot.

MCFinARL
04-13-2014, 02:42 PM
Dawkins with 47 points - I really hope a NBA team gives him a shot.

He is scheduled to play in the Portsmouth Invitational (https://www.portsmouthinvitational.com/) this week, which may give him a chance to catch some eyes. Hope he can hit his shots like this.

GGLC
04-13-2014, 04:21 PM
Can't help but feel like he wasn't deployed optimally this year.

Highlander
04-13-2014, 08:29 PM
Can't help but feel like he wasn't deployed optimally this year.

Go back and look at his stat line from the Mercer game, then.

Dre has always been a streaky shooter. When he is on, he is ON! But when he's cold, he offers very little intangibles. In an all-star game with very little defense he lit it up. But in the NCAA tournament this year, he went 0-5.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy for him and hope he gets a shot at the NBA. And his breakout performance couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. If he can gain some consistency, he can find a home as a Matt Carroll type bomber.

But I don't see how he could have magically saved our season had he been "deployed optimally" this year.

Kedsy
04-13-2014, 09:10 PM
Go back and look at his stat line from the Mercer game, then.

Dre has always been a streaky shooter. When he is on, he is ON! But when he's cold, he offers very little intangibles. In an all-star game with very little defense he lit it up. But in the NCAA tournament this year, he went 0-5.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy for him and hope he gets a shot at the NBA. And his breakout performance couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. If he can gain some consistency, he can find a home as a Matt Carroll type bomber.

But I don't see how he could have magically saved our season had he been "deployed optimally" this year.

I'm not sure this reasoning is any more persuasive than the person with whom you disagree. Andre only played 7 minutes against Mercer. If he'd played 21 minutes, and shot 4 for 15, who's to say those extra 12 points might not have made the difference? (And based on his history, there's reason to believe that if he'd taken 10 more 3-point shots he'd probably have made four.) There's no guarantee, of course, and if he'd played 14 more minutes, then someone else (or a combination of someone elses) would have played 14 fewer minutes, and whatever contribution they made in those 14 minutes would have been replaced by Andre's, so it's really impossible to say either way whether "deploying" him differently would have made the difference or not. We just don't know.

Newton_14
04-13-2014, 09:29 PM
Anyone know how Andre did in the 3 Point shooting contest at the Final Four? I don't recall hearing anything other than he would be participating.

FerryFor50
04-13-2014, 09:41 PM
Anyone know how Andre did in the 3 Point shooting contest at the Final Four? I don't recall hearing anything other than he would be participating.

Never made it out of the first round...

brevity
04-14-2014, 12:44 AM
I'm very happy for him and hope he gets a shot at the NBA.

This is as good a thread as any to discuss Andre Dawkins' NBA prospects (via the draft, preferably).

We can (and will, I'm sure) discuss this topic at length over the next few months, but for me the whole thing is simple. I just go back to what he said (http://blogs.newsobserver.com/dukenow/dukes-andre-dawkins-and-sean-kelly-use-his-year-away-from-basketball-to-build-close-bond) about how shooting the basketball is like breathing to him:


"People ask me if I can still shoot, and I ask them if they can still breathe. That’s kind of the same thing," Dawkins said, sitting in front of his locker, holding court with the media on the first day of practice. "I’m going to be able to shoot for a long time."

Based on that alone, it seems to me that there should be a place for him in the NBA. After all, the Cleveland Cavaliers drafted Anthony Bennett #1 overall in the 2013 draft*, and he's not very good at shooting the basketball (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bennean01.html) or at breathing (http://www.easybreathe.com/blog/nba-first-pick-anthony-bennett-struggles-sleep-apnea/).

* We can only blame the Cavaliers so much. If not #1, Anthony Bennett was going to be drafted somewhere in the lottery. Even the DBR Mock Draft had him go 8th.

dukelifer
04-14-2014, 06:08 AM
This is as good a thread as any to discuss Andre Dawkins' NBA prospects (via the draft, preferably).

We can (and will, I'm sure) discuss this topic at length over the next few months, but for me the whole thing is simple. I just go back to what he said (http://blogs.newsobserver.com/dukenow/dukes-andre-dawkins-and-sean-kelly-use-his-year-away-from-basketball-to-build-close-bond) about how shooting the basketball is like breathing to him:



Based on that alone, it seems to me that there should be a place for him in the NBA. After all, the Cleveland Cavaliers drafted Anthony Bennett #1 overall in the 2013 draft*, and he's not very good at shooting the basketball (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bennean01.html) or at breathing (http://www.easybreathe.com/blog/nba-first-pick-anthony-bennett-struggles-sleep-apnea/).

* We can only blame the Cavaliers so much. If not #1, Anthony Bennett was going to be drafted somewhere in the lottery. Even the DBR Mock Draft had him go 8th.

A lot will depend on the situation. It would be much more likely if his defense was better or if he was a tad taller. He could have a very good career in Europe. His game is well suited to those leagues.

Highlander
04-14-2014, 07:41 AM
I'm not sure this reasoning is any more persuasive than the person with whom you disagree. Andre only played 7 minutes against Mercer. If he'd played 21 minutes, and shot 4 for 15, who's to say those extra 12 points might not have made the difference? (And based on his history, there's reason to believe that if he'd taken 10 more 3-point shots he'd probably have made four.) There's no guarantee, of course, and if he'd played 14 more minutes, then someone else (or a combination of someone elses) would have played 14 fewer minutes, and whatever contribution they made in those 14 minutes would have been replaced by Andre's, so it's really impossible to say either way whether "deploying" him differently would have made the difference or not. We just don't know.

If you're arguing that we should have shot 10 MORE three pointers against Mercer than we did to win, or that Andre should have taken minutes and shots away from someone else, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Other people in that game made shots, so just giving Andre 10 more shots doesn't necessarily give us 12 more points, because he took shots away from someone else, and some of those shots likely went in, too. Anyway, it's kind of a silly argument in hypotheticals, IMO. Better to just look at what did happen in the game and not on what could have given more time/shots.

My point is that Andre is a streaky shooter. Compare his performance in the all star game vs. his performance against Mercer. Or, I can pick two other games this year if you like. Heck, just look at the All Star game, where he missed everything he shot in the second half (compared to hitting everything in the first). You can vary his minutes however you like, but the results are the same. Some days he will be on fire and hit 6-10. Other days he will be ice cold and hit 2-10. While percentage wise (as you note) he should hit at least 4 out of 10, my point is that he will more likely be at either extreme based on the streakiness of his shot. And an 0-5 start tended to tell you what end of the extreme he was that day.

Has nothing to do with how Coach K deployed him. It's just how he is.

MCFinARL
04-14-2014, 08:00 AM
If you're arguing that we should have shot 10 MORE three pointers against Mercer than we did to win, or that Andre should have taken minutes and shots away from someone else, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Other people in that game made shots, so just giving Andre 10 more shots doesn't necessarily give us 12 more points, because he took shots away from someone else, and some of those shots likely went in, too. Anyway, it's kind of a silly argument in hypotheticals, IMO. Better to just look at what did happen in the game and not on what could have given more time/shots.

My point is that Andre is a streaky shooter. Compare his performance in the all star game vs. his performance against Mercer. Or, I can pick two other games this year if you like. Heck, just look at the All Star game, where he missed everything he shot in the second half (compared to hitting everything in the first). You can vary his minutes however you like, but the results are the same. Some days he will be on fire and hit 6-10. Other days he will be ice cold and hit 2-10. While percentage wise (as you note) he should hit at least 4 out of 10, my point is that he will more likely be at either extreme based on the streakiness of his shot. And an 0-5 start tended to tell you what end of the extreme he was that day.

Has nothing to do with how Coach K deployed him. It's just how he is.

I don't want to reopen the endless debate about whether Andre is a streaky shooter or whether there even is such a thing as a streaky shooter, which is heavily worked territory. But I think there might be a chicken egg issue here. To some extent, "how he is" may be a function of how Coach K has deployed him. Obviously, it's not that to the exclusion of factors inherent in Andre's game, it would have to be a mix. I'm just saying that very probably his game, and his ability to hit shots consistently, have been affected by his playing time and his coaches' goals for him and expectations of him. For example--a player concerned that he will only stay in the game if he hits his shots may tighten up if the first one doesn't go in and have trouble hitting the next one. Or if that first one does go in, he may relax and hit more. It's how he is, yes--but it's how he is within a particular context and set of circumstances.

GGLC
04-14-2014, 12:32 PM
I don't want to reopen the endless debate about whether Andre is a streaky shooter or whether there even is such a thing as a streaky shooter, which is heavily worked territory. But I think there might be a chicken egg issue here. To some extent, "how he is" may be a function of how Coach K has deployed him. Obviously, it's not that to the exclusion of factors inherent in Andre's game, it would have to be a mix. I'm just saying that very probably his game, and his ability to hit shots consistently, have been affected by his playing time and his coaches' goals for him and expectations of him. For example--a player concerned that he will only stay in the game if he hits his shots may tighten up if the first one doesn't go in and have trouble hitting the next one. Or if that first one does go in, he may relax and hit more. It's how he is, yes--but it's how he is within a particular context and set of circumstances.

Can't spork you, so I wanted to say that I couldn't agree with this more.

Any other college basketball program would have loved to have someone with Andre's offensive capabilities this year. I'm pretty sure most would have found a way to get him in there for consistent minutes every game, even if it meant that some nights he'd only go 2 for 7 or whatever. He is an insanely elite offensive weapon when he's on, and ideally we'd be able to maximize his production. I simply don't believe that giving Andre, for example, 7 minutes in our championship loss against Virginia, where he went 3-5 from three in those seven minutes, was maximizing that production. Heck, we should have done more to run sets to get him the ball more consistently when he was on the floor, as well. He's that dangerous, even if some nights he'll be hotter than others.

Saratoga2
04-14-2014, 12:48 PM
I don't want to reopen the endless debate about whether Andre is a streaky shooter or whether there even is such a thing as a streaky shooter, which is heavily worked territory. But I think there might be a chicken egg issue here. To some extent, "how he is" may be a function of how Coach K has deployed him. Obviously, it's not that to the exclusion of factors inherent in Andre's game, it would have to be a mix. I'm just saying that very probably his game, and his ability to hit shots consistently, have been affected by his playing time and his coaches' goals for him and expectations of him. For example--a player concerned that he will only stay in the game if he hits his shots may tighten up if the first one doesn't go in and have trouble hitting the next one. Or if that first one does go in, he may relax and hit more. It's how he is, yes--but it's how he is within a particular context and set of circumstances.

Whatever the reason, coach K evaluated his players and decided Andre was not that much of a positive for the team and played him very sparingly. I agree, it is hard to turn a player off and on like the faucet. A player has to be made to feel he is valued for his important contribution. In Andre's case, he must have felt the coaches had a negative perception of his game. Like you, I believe that could have impacted Andre's performance. All of that is conjecture at this point as Andre has finished his career at Duke. Other players, Like Alex, Semi, Matt and Marshall may also have been impacted by the message they received(lack of PT). Perhaps the use of line changes gave a spark to the team because some of the little used players were given a chance and fought to gain respect.

I see the same problem next year as many good players will not get much PT.

UrinalCake
04-14-2014, 12:50 PM
I think defenses figured out that Andre only has one move - curl around a screen and shoot the three. Once they took that away from him, there just wasn't anything else that he really provided on either end of the floor. When he couldn't get open he would shoot anyways, often leading to a long rebound and runout the other way. Compare that to JJ, who wasn't nearly as athletic but just never stopped moving; eventually he'd get open for a shot. Andre spent so much time just standing around waiting for someone to pass him the ball. I don't blame K for not giving him more minutes; I have the opposite opinion than most on this board in that I think the reason he was so efficient is BECAUSE he played so few minutes, and that if he had played more he would have given us less.

Now with that said, I do think the NBA is more specialized and he could fill a valuable role as a shooter. Teams try to have one or two stars and surround them with role players, so he could play the Shane Battier role on offense and just stand on the perimeter and launch threes.

Dev11
04-14-2014, 12:55 PM
Now with that said, I do think the NBA is more specialized and he could fill a valuable role as a shooter. Teams try to have one or two stars and surround them with role players, so he could play the Shane Battier role on offense and just stand on the perimeter and launch threes.

The problem here is that Shane represents the "3 and D" player, guys who can hit the 3 and defend the perimeter. Andre probably has a fair amount of work left to catch up on the defensive side to be a viable NBA player.

But hey, Korver's still around. Anything can happen. Go Andre!

GGLC
04-14-2014, 01:10 PM
I think defenses figured out that Andre only has one move - curl around a screen and shoot the three. Once they took that away from him, there just wasn't anything else that he really provided on either end of the floor. When he couldn't get open he would shoot anyways, often leading to a long rebound and runout the other way. Compare that to JJ, who wasn't nearly as athletic but just never stopped moving; eventually he'd get open for a shot. Andre spent so much time just standing around waiting for someone to pass him the ball. I don't blame K for not giving him more minutes; I have the opposite opinion than most on this board in that I think the reason he was so efficient is BECAUSE he played so few minutes, and that if he had played more he would have given us less.

Now with that said, I do think the NBA is more specialized and he could fill a valuable role as a shooter. Teams try to have one or two stars and surround them with role players, so he could play the Shane Battier role on offense and just stand on the perimeter and launch threes.

I think this is extremely unfair to Andre. And if you think that all he did was stand around waiting for someone to pass him the ball (which isn't true anyway), then you've got a problem with how the Duke coaching staff designed the offensive schemes this season, not how individual players implemented them. I can guarantee you that if the Duke coaches wanted Andre to be cutting and moving without the ball and all he did was stand there, he'd have been yanked immediately and found a permanent place on the bench until he could execute the things they were telling him to do.

Cameron
04-14-2014, 01:27 PM
I don't want to reopen the endless debate about whether Andre is a streaky shooter or whether there even is such a thing as a streaky shooter, which is heavily worked territory. But I think there might be a chicken egg issue here. To some extent, "how he is" may be a function of how Coach K has deployed him. Obviously, it's not that to the exclusion of factors inherent in Andre's game, it would have to be a mix. I'm just saying that very probably his game, and his ability to hit shots consistently, have been affected by his playing time and his coaches' goals for him and expectations of him. For example--a player concerned that he will only stay in the game if he hits his shots may tighten up if the first one doesn't go in and have trouble hitting the next one. Or if that first one does go in, he may relax and hit more. It's how he is, yes--but it's how he is within a particular context and set of circumstances.

That was said well. There's no question, at least in my mind, that Andre wasn't used properly given his particular set of skills. I said it all year. The general lack of stability in playing time really seemed to affect Andre's ability to achieve any sort of momentum and flow in certain situations, especially during games in which he saw two-minute windows of action where it appeared as if he was expected to either hurry up and make a shot or get benched. That kind of pressure is definitely going to negatively impact one's performance.

I do agree with highlander that, even in spite of the inconsistent minutes, Andre was inherently more streaky than pure. As hot as Andre could get over a stretch of four or five games, he just as easily could go 6-for-29 over the course of two or three weeks, as he did to end this season. Now some of that was probably attributed to the insecurity of his role on the team and not knowing how many minutes he'd get in a given game, but, even when given minutes beyond his average, when he was cold Andre was almost totally ineffective, to the point where it appeared as if he had difficulty seeing the rim. The thing with Andre, though, is that the good stretches were so good that even when he had missed 10 in a row the eleventh looked like it was going in. He was so hot when the switch was flipped on that it made us forget that he ever missed. I'm going to miss him.

Son of Jarhead
04-14-2014, 03:42 PM
That was said well. There's no question, at least in my mind, that Andre wasn't used properly given his particular set of skills. I said it all year. The general lack of stability in playing time really seemed to affect Andre's ability to achieve any sort of momentum and flow in certain situations, especially during games in which he saw two-minute windows of action where it appeared as if he was expected to either hurry up and make a shot or get benched. That kind of pressure is definitely going to negatively impact one's performance.

I do agree with highlander that, even in spite of the inconsistent minutes, Andre was inherently more streaky than pure. As hot as Andre could get over a stretch of four or five games, he just as easily could go 6-for-29 over the course of two or three weeks, as he did to end this season. Now some of that was probably attributed to the insecurity of his role on the team and not knowing how many minutes he'd get in a given game, but, even when given minutes beyond his average, when he was cold Andre was almost totally ineffective, to the point where it appeared as if he had difficulty seeing the rim. The thing with Andre, though, is that the good stretches were so good that even when he had missed 10 in a row the eleventh looked like it was going in. He was so hot when the switch was flipped on that it made us forget that he ever missed. I'm going to miss him.

I'm going to miss him, too. Streaky shooting or no, when he is on, he is so electrifying to watch. And he is such a likable kid with a terrific smile and compelling story that I can somewhat relate to.

I always had the impression that Andre's shooting/scoring trailed off late in the season every year. Anyone else notice that? I don't know if it was defenses catching on to him, fatigue, loss of focus, or what, but it just felt, to me, like he trailed off in his shooting/scoring. That likely would have affected his play in other areas as well. I was curious, so I looked it up on GoDuke's statgeek. His percentages became significantly lower as the seasons wore on, as did his minutes per game. Sort of a chicken-or-egg thing as to whether his shooting/scoring trailed off because K used him less OR he was used less because his shooting/scoring trailed off. (see numbers below)

As for this recently ended season, I think K was searching for chemistry on the court and sometimes he found it with Andre, and other times, not. I definitely noticed improvement in Andre's overall game this year. He drove more, hitting some nice floaters. He was better on D. Sure, he got beat on backdoor cuts a few times, but so did others, even Tyler. That is going to happen in our defense with the over-playing of passing lanes K likes to do so much. Still, the trend of his shooting/scoring trailing off towards the end of the year was there again. Not sure why.

Career numbers by month

FG%

Nov - .488 (83-170)
Dec - .538 (78-145)
Jan - .400 (82-205)
Feb - .348 (48-138)
Mar - .370 (37-100)


3PT%

Nov - .484 (61-126)
Dec - .477 (51-107)
Jan - .355 (55-155)
Feb - .382 (39-102)
Mar - .315 (23-73)


FT%

Nov - .789 (30-38)
Dec - .778 (28-36)
Jan - .854 (41-48)
Feb - .667 (16-24)
Mar - .533 (8-15)


Min/per game

Nov - 20.2
Dec - 21.3
Jan - 19.1
Feb - 14.8
Mar - 12.8


Pts/per game

Nov - 9.5
Dec - 11.2
Jan - 7.6
Feb - 4.9
Mar - 4.0

UrinalCake
04-14-2014, 04:03 PM
I can guarantee you that if the Duke coaches wanted Andre to be cutting and moving without the ball and all he did was stand there, he'd have been yanked immediately and found a permanent place on the bench until he could execute the things they were telling him to do.

You're describing exactly what happened in most of his games from the last two months of the season.

GGLC
04-14-2014, 04:41 PM
You're describing exactly what happened in most of his games from the last two months of the season.

I strongly disagree with your assertion.

If Andre wasn't doing what the coaches wanted him to do in the offensive gameplan, they would have sat him on the bench and he would not have come back in the game. And if the next game out he continued to disregard the gameplan (as you're suggesting that he did), he would have been benched as long as it took to get the lesson through to him. How many games from the last two months of the season can you find where Andre was pulled as soon as he started standing around the perimeter (which, according to you, would be as soon as he set foot on the floor) and was relegated to the bench for the rest of the game?

The alternative explanation, of course, is that Andre WAS doing what the coaches wanted out of him. If you have a problem with all the standing around on the perimeter, maybe it's not Andre you should be looking to for the initial portion of that blame.

GGLC
04-14-2014, 04:46 PM
I'm going to miss him, too. Streaky shooting or no, when he is on, he is so electrifying to watch. And he is such a likable kid with a terrific smile and compelling story that I can somewhat relate to.

I always had the impression that Andre's shooting/scoring trailed off late in the season every year. Anyone else notice that? I don't know if it was defenses catching on to him, fatigue, loss of focus, or what, but it just felt, to me, like he trailed off in his shooting/scoring. That likely would have affected his play in other areas as well. I was curious, so I looked it up on GoDuke's statgeek. His percentages became significantly lower as the seasons wore on, as did his minutes per game. Sort of a chicken-or-egg thing as to whether his shooting/scoring trailed off because K used him less OR he was used less because his shooting/scoring trailed off. (see numbers below)

As for this recently ended season, I think K was searching for chemistry on the court and sometimes he found it with Andre, and other times, not. I definitely noticed improvement in Andre's overall game this year. He drove more, hitting some nice floaters. He was better on D. Sure, he got beat on backdoor cuts a few times, but so did others, even Tyler. That is going to happen in our defense with the over-playing of passing lanes K likes to do so much. Still, the trend of his shooting/scoring trailing off towards the end of the year was there again. Not sure why.

Career numbers by month

FG%

Nov - .488 (83-170)
Dec - .538 (78-145)
Jan - .400 (82-205)
Feb - .348 (48-138)
Mar - .370 (37-100)


3PT%

Nov - .484 (61-126)
Dec - .477 (51-107)
Jan - .355 (55-155)
Feb - .382 (39-102)
Mar - .315 (23-73)


FT%

Nov - .789 (30-38)
Dec - .778 (28-36)
Jan - .854 (41-48)
Feb - .667 (16-24)
Mar - .533 (8-15)


Min/per game

Nov - 20.2
Dec - 21.3
Jan - 19.1
Feb - 14.8
Mar - 12.8


Pts/per game

Nov - 9.5
Dec - 11.2
Jan - 7.6
Feb - 4.9
Mar - 4.0

Also, BuschDevil's excellent post clearly shows a striking correlation between Andre's offensive production and his minutes played per game on a month-to-month basis over his collegiate career. I don't presume to know whether his production hit a cliff in conference play because his minutes dwindled or whether his minutes took a significant hit because he stopped hitting shots, but the job of the coaching staff should have been, and presumably was, to coax November-December style production from Andre in January, February, and March. Obviously that didn't happen, for whatever reason, although I do think it's notable that his free throw shooting ALSO declined precipitously at a time that coincided from his minutes per game going from 19+ to less than 15. This signals to me that Andre's ability to hit shots may have been detrimentally affected by his decline in minutes, whether or not the converse is also true.

FerryFor50
04-14-2014, 05:03 PM
I'm going to miss him, too. Streaky shooting or no, when he is on, he is so electrifying to watch. And he is such a likable kid with a terrific smile and compelling story that I can somewhat relate to.

I always had the impression that Andre's shooting/scoring trailed off late in the season every year. Anyone else notice that? I don't know if it was defenses catching on to him, fatigue, loss of focus, or what, but it just felt, to me, like he trailed off in his shooting/scoring. That likely would have affected his play in other areas as well. I was curious, so I looked it up on GoDuke's statgeek. His percentages became significantly lower as the seasons wore on, as did his minutes per game. Sort of a chicken-or-egg thing as to whether his shooting/scoring trailed off because K used him less OR he was used less because his shooting/scoring trailed off. (see numbers below)

As for this recently ended season, I think K was searching for chemistry on the court and sometimes he found it with Andre, and other times, not. I definitely noticed improvement in Andre's overall game this year. He drove more, hitting some nice floaters. He was better on D. Sure, he got beat on backdoor cuts a few times, but so did others, even Tyler. That is going to happen in our defense with the over-playing of passing lanes K likes to do so much. Still, the trend of his shooting/scoring trailing off towards the end of the year was there again. Not sure why.

Career numbers by month

FG%

Nov - .488 (83-170)
Dec - .538 (78-145)
Jan - .400 (82-205)
Feb - .348 (48-138)
Mar - .370 (37-100)


3PT%

Nov - .484 (61-126)
Dec - .477 (51-107)
Jan - .355 (55-155)
Feb - .382 (39-102)
Mar - .315 (23-73)


FT%

Nov - .789 (30-38)
Dec - .778 (28-36)
Jan - .854 (41-48)
Feb - .667 (16-24)
Mar - .533 (8-15)


Min/per game

Nov - 20.2
Dec - 21.3
Jan - 19.1
Feb - 14.8
Mar - 12.8


Pts/per game

Nov - 9.5
Dec - 11.2
Jan - 7.6
Feb - 4.9
Mar - 4.0

Good post, and I think the bold part of the paragraph hits the nail on the head.

What I saw from Andre late in the season was that he didn't work very hard to get open. His man would often just stand there with a hand on him and Dre was in there to basically keep that guy out of the paint.

When he did get plays called for him, he'd work around screens ok, but then wouldn't necessarily get the best look at the basket. I loved the kid to death, but I never saw the work put in that other great shooters use to get open. Just look at any of Brady Heslip's games vs Andre's... Heslip would run non-stop.

Another part of the later season swooning was the fact that the competition got a little tougher and K's bench shortened, as per usual. Since Dre hadn't really earned the minutes over other guys that K trusted (TT is the main one who took the minutes Dre would have seen), he didn't get rewarded unless he came in and hit a few shots.

It stinks, but the reality of it is that Dre's college career was derailed by what happened to his sister. He was on track to play significantly but it never transpired due to his loss of desire, focus, and other things you'd expect from a kid in mourning. To top it off, the coaching staff hedged their bets and made sure they got recruits/transfers in to fill the scorer's role, just in case Dre didn't come back. Recall from the article on him (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20131113/andre-dawkins/) that there were no guarantees he was coming back to Duke.

If Dre hadn't suffered his loss and played the entirety of his career uninterrupted and un-distracted, we probably don't go after Rodney Hood as hard. Dre probably gets those minutes and goes on to be an all time Duke great. But it's irresponsible to say in hindsight that Dre would have lit it up this season based on intuition and one all-star game performance.

There were many factors in Dre's lack of minutes this season, and the main one, in my opinion, was the fact that he was not as good on defense as TT. Hopefully Dre shows the world that he can play at an elite level.

UrinalCake
04-14-2014, 09:55 PM
I strongly disagree with your assertion.

I feel like the hypothetical situation you've described - that the coaches wanted Andre to work on certain things, he failed to do them, and thus he got the short hook - is exactly what happened most games. If the coaches wanted him to remain stagnant on offense and passive on defense, then he would have been playing 40 minutes a game. As the numbers prove, he shot great in the preseason against lesser competition when he could take wide open shots, but as competition improved, the stakes got higher, and defenses figured out how to defend him, his effectiveness diminished.

I had to keep disparaging a player that I really do like, but the Andre supporters are equally disparaging to our coaching staff in suggesting they should have played him more, and I just don't see it.

MCFinARL
04-15-2014, 09:22 AM
I feel like the hypothetical situation you've described - that the coaches wanted Andre to work on certain things, he failed to do them, and thus he got the short hook - is exactly what happened most games. If the coaches wanted him to remain stagnant on offense and passive on defense, then he would have been playing 40 minutes a game. As the numbers prove, he shot great in the preseason against lesser competition when he could take wide open shots, but as competition improved, the stakes got higher, and defenses figured out how to defend him, his effectiveness diminished.

I had to keep disparaging a player that I really do like, but the Andre supporters are equally disparaging to our coaching staff in suggesting they should have played him more, and I just don't see it.

Not to split hairs, and I know there have been some posts saying the coaches should have played Andre more, but I think there is a difference between saying that Andre would likely have been a more effective player if he had gotten more minutes and saying that the coaches made a mistake in not giving him more minutes. The coaches' primary goal, after all, is to deploy players in the way that they think is most likely to win games. Given the particular personnel available and the game situations available, that goal may have at times conflicted with the goal of using Andre in the way that was most likely to make Andre effective.

Whether a different choice by the coaches might actually have made the team better as well is no more than speculation on our part at this point. It's my gut feeling (also purely speculative) that Andre would have been a more effective, more consistent player with more minutes. Whether that would have made the team as a whole better--I don't know. But I don't think saying so means I am disparaging the coaching staff.

CDu
04-15-2014, 12:58 PM
Not to split hairs, and I know there have been some posts saying the coaches should have played Andre more, but I think there is a difference between saying that Andre would likely have been a more effective player if he had gotten more minutes and saying that the coaches made a mistake in not giving him more minutes. The coaches' primary goal, after all, is to deploy players in the way that they think is most likely to win games. Given the particular personnel available and the game situations available, that goal may have at times conflicted with the goal of using Andre in the way that was most likely to make Andre effective.

Whether a different choice by the coaches might actually have made the team better as well is no more than speculation on our part at this point. It's my gut feeling (also purely speculative) that Andre would have been a more effective, more consistent player with more minutes. Whether that would have made the team as a whole better--I don't know. But I don't think saying so means I am disparaging the coaching staff.

In other words, the coaches can't put every individual's best interest first when making decisions. When dealing with a team with finite availability of minutes, somebody's interests are going to be compromised for (hopefully) the best interests of the team.

It appeared that the coaching staff relied more on ballhandling and defense from the minutes that Dawkins might have gotten. So unless he was hitting at a fantastic rate, the staff felt that the team was better served with a guy like Thornton (better ballhandler, better team defender), Sulaimon (better ballhandler, better individual defender), or Jones (better defender). Whether or not that is the right decision, nobody can know.

I think the assumption that more minutes would have been better for Dawkins is a pretty safe one. Very few players actually play better in limited minutes. Most guys need to play more to get into a rhythm. So that I think is a fairly safe assertion on your part.

And as you said, I agree that this assertion doesn't (on its own) serve as a complaint about the coaching. I think most would agree that getting Plumlee more minutes would benefit him. Same for Ojeleye. That doesn't mean that limiting their minutes was a mistake by the staff. It just means that the staff felt the team would benefit more by other guys getting those minutes.

MCFinARL
04-18-2014, 08:34 AM
Andre led his team with 20 points on 8-17 shooting in 29 minutes in his first Portsmouth Invitational game, which his team lost, 88-81. The team will now play a placement game (the invitational is set up like a tournament, but with every team getting to play three games, win or lose) this afternoon and another on Saturday. The leading scorer for the other team was Shayne Whittington of Western Michigan, with 19. https://www.portsmouthinvitational.com/uploads/2014GM5.pdf

MCFinARL
04-18-2014, 08:54 AM
And here is something you don't see every day--Dawkins making an alley oop dunk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUs7_w2EUFI&app=desktop

Saratoga2
04-18-2014, 09:37 AM
And as you said, I agree that this assertion doesn't (on its own) serve as a complaint about the coaching. I think most would agree that getting Plumlee more minutes would benefit him. Same for Ojeleye. That doesn't mean that limiting their minutes was a mistake by the staff. It just means that the staff felt the team would benefit more by other guys getting those minutes.

A reason for questioning PT of certain players was the good results the team experienced when making line change and or very heavy substitutions. That tatic did get more players involved. Reduced fatigue and fouls on key players and mixed the rotation, perhaps finding better combinations. Clearly we went away from that approach and the overall result was not good. I know this was primarily about Andre but think it also applied to Marshall, Semi and Matt. I don't expect any change in concept next season as coach K has talked about getting into better shape and concentrating more on defense.

GGLC
04-18-2014, 11:00 AM
And here is something you don't see every day--Dawkins making an alley oop dunk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUs7_w2EUFI&app=desktop

Andre can drive and finish far better than people think. When he did so in a few games before conference play started, good things generally happened. He just wasn't asked to play that kind of role in the offense.

MCFinARL
04-18-2014, 11:12 AM
A reason for questioning PT of certain players was the good results the team experienced when making line change and or very heavy substitutions. That tatic did get more players involved. Reduced fatigue and fouls on key players and mixed the rotation, perhaps finding better combinations. Clearly we went away from that approach and the overall result was not good. I know this was primarily about Andre but think it also applied to Marshall, Semi and Matt. I don't expect any change in concept next season as coach K has talked about getting into better shape and concentrating more on defense.

Yes, I think that will remain one of the unsolved mysteries of this season--that approach seemed to work fairly well, in limited use. But it didn't last long--once Sulaimon got going, things went back to pretty traditional substitution patterns. As always, we don't see the practices, and we don't know everything that goes into the coaches' calculations. Possibly the platoon rotations would not have continued to work as well as they did for a while. Possibly even if they did work to some extent, going back to the old pattern worked better. But from an outsider's point of view, they did seem to add a real spark to the team and produce high quality minutes from just about everyone.

superdave
04-18-2014, 11:32 AM
Yes, I think that will remain one of the unsolved mysteries of this season--that approach seemed to work fairly well, in limited use. But it didn't last long--once Sulaimon got going, things went back to pretty traditional substitution patterns. As always, we don't see the practices, and we don't know everything that goes into the coaches' calculations. Possibly the platoon rotations would not have continued to work as well as they did for a while. Possibly even if they did work to some extent, going back to the old pattern worked better. But from an outsider's point of view, they did
seem to add a real spark to the team and produce high quality minutes from just about everyone.

What matters in games matters more than practice. To some extent, practice is not a 100% indicator of in-game success. Usually we hear stories of a guy dominating practice but getting flummoxed in games.

If the B-team gets dominated in practice by the A-team (<chuckles>) but can provide three or four really good 2-minute stretches in games, then why go away from that? As Allen Iverson says "we talking about practice." The goal is to win games. Throw out customs, traditions and what should be. Just win.

I have not doubt that more Andre would have meant better than a 26-9 final record and early NCAA exit. We were our best as a team with him having a more substantial contribution rather than less. If you have to throw practice out the window, then be flexible and do that. Coach K didnt do that, and I'm not really sure why not.

Granted, we all were not at those practices, so maybe there's a lot more to the story. I also buy the theory that opponents were effective in reducing Andre's number of open looks as the season wore on. However, we watched Duke revolve its entire offense around getting JJ open looks for years, and Andre actually has a sweeter stroke (but maybe not the requisite work ethic?). So why not run plays for Andre and work just as hard to get him going?

I'll always look back on this season, and particularly Andre's ever-reducing minutes and shot attempts, and think "what if". I hate thinking that way. I wish we could have a do-over for a number of reasons. Andre is one my favorites, so the finish was really frustrating.

Super "Regrets, I've had a few" Dave

sagegrouse
04-18-2014, 11:57 AM
What matters in games matters more than practice. To some extent, practice is not a 100% indicator of in-game success. Usually we hear stories of a guy dominating practice but getting flummoxed in games.

If the B-team gets dominated in practice by the A-team (<chuckles>) but can provide three or four really good 2-minute stretches in games, then why go away from that? As Allen Iverson says "we talking about practice." The goal is to win games. Throw out customs, traditions and what should be. Just win.

I have not doubt that more Andre would have meant better than a 26-9 final record and early NCAA exit. We were our best as a team with him having a more substantial contribution rather than less. If you have to throw practice out the window, then be flexible and do that. Coach K didnt do that, and I'm not really sure why not.

Granted, we all were not at those practices, so maybe there's a lot more to the story.

Allan Iverson's soliloquy on practice is always on topic:


Iverson: If I can't practice, I can't practice man. If I'm hurt, I'm hurt. I mean ... simple as that. It ain't about that... I mean it's... It's not about that... At all. You know what I'm saying I mean... But it's...it's easy ... to, to talk about... It's easy to sum it up when you're just talking about practice. We're sitting in here, and I'm supposed to be the franchise player, and we in here talking about practice. I mean, listen, we're talking about practice, not a game, not a game, not a game, we talking about practice. Not a game. Not, not ... Not the game that I go out there and die for and play every game like it's my last. Not the game, but we're talking about practice, man. I mean, how silly is that? ... And we talking about practice. I know I supposed to be there. I know I'm supposed to lead by example... I know that... And i'm not.. I'm not shoving it aside, you know, like it don't mean anything. I know it's important, I do. I honestly do... But we're talking about practice man. What are we talking about? Practice? We're talking about practice, man. [laughter from the media crowd] We're talking about practice. We're talking about practice. We ain't talking about the game. [more laughter] We're talking about practice, man. When you come to the arena, and you see me play, you see me play don't you? You've seen me give everything I've got, right? But we're talking about practice right now. We talking about pr... [Interrupted]

-jk
04-18-2014, 11:58 AM
I'm afraid this season won't be measured by offensive deficiencies, but rather defensive. And Andre really didn't help our defensive issues.

On offense, Andre was reliable against middling competition, but much more unpredictable when the other team's defense ramped up.

He faced his demons and appeared to have fun playing again. That's enough for me.

-jk

MCFinARL
04-18-2014, 12:09 PM
What matters in games matters more than practice. To some extent, practice is not a 100% indicator of in-game success. Usually we hear stories of a guy dominating practice but getting flummoxed in games.

If the B-team gets dominated in practice by the A-team (<chuckles>) but can provide three or four really good 2-minute stretches in games, then why go away from that? As Allen Iverson says "we talking about practice." The goal is to win games. Throw out customs, traditions and what should be. Just win.

I have not doubt that more Andre would have meant better than a 26-9 final record and early NCAA exit. We were our best as a team with him having a more substantial contribution rather than less. If you have to throw practice out the window, then be flexible and do that. Coach K didnt do that, and I'm not really sure why not.

Granted, we all were not at those practices, so maybe there's a lot more to the story. I also buy the theory that opponents were effective in reducing Andre's number of open looks as the season wore on. However, we watched Duke revolve its entire offense around getting JJ open looks for years, and Andre actually has a sweeter stroke (but maybe not the requisite work ethic?). So why not run plays for Andre and work just as hard to get him going?

I'll always look back on this season, and particularly Andre's ever-reducing minutes and shot attempts, and think "what if". I hate thinking that way. I wish we could have a do-over for a number of reasons. Andre is one my favorites, so the finish was really frustrating.

Super "Regrets, I've had a few" Dave

My heart tells me you are right--Andre had me at "hello" and I have continued to be a big fan. But my head tells me I don't know enough to be confident more Andre would have led to more success. Andre fully integrated into the game plan, successfully doing what he does best, would almost certainly have led to more success, but I don't know for sure how hard it would have been to make that happen and what the trade-offs would have been.

Also, re "practice"--there is a reason why AI never played for Coach K. :-)

GGLC
04-18-2014, 12:22 PM
I'm afraid this season won't be measured by offensive deficiencies, but rather defensive. And Andre really didn't help our defensive issues.

On offense, Andre was reliable against middling competition, but much more unpredictable when the other team's defense ramped up.

He faced his demons and appeared to have fun playing again. That's enough for me.

-jk

I refer again to his nine points in seven minutes against defensive powerhouse Virginia as one data point to the contrary. ;)

Papa John
04-18-2014, 12:27 PM
It stinks, but the reality of it is that Dre's college career was derailed by what happened to his sister. He was on track to play significantly but it never transpired due to his loss of desire, focus, and other things you'd expect from a kid in mourning. To top it off, the coaching staff hedged their bets and made sure they got recruits/transfers in to fill the scorer's role, just in case Dre didn't come back. Recall from the article on him (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20131113/andre-dawkins/) that there were no guarantees he was coming back to Duke.

I think this sums things up nicely. I disagree with Urinal Cake's assertion that Dre showed only one offensive move—Andre demonstrated effectiveness this season in driving the ball to the hole and either finishing and/or getting fouled to go to the line. The problem was that he was not one of the primary weapons being asked to do that (he was actually the #5 option in our offense for dribble penetration), so we didn't see that dimension from him often this season.

Unfortunately for Andre, he was sidetracked by a personal tragedy that really threw him in a funk and stunted his development. He took time off to get his head in order, but [again, unfortunately for him] returned to a complete logjam of offensive talent, which made it difficult to gain quality minutes (particularly given the perception [whether correct or not] of Andre being a one-dimensional offensive weapon). I believe that the Andre Dawkins we saw this season had demonstrated improvement on the defensive side of the ball as well as tremendous improvement in the scope of his offensive game—he added the ability to put the ball on the floor and blow by the defender who over-committed to defend the 3-pointer for either a mid-range jumper or a dribble-drive. In other words, he started to show the type of development you saw in guys like JJ. The problem, however, was that Dre had Hood, Parker, Sulaimon, and Cook ahead of him as primary offensive options on the perimeter (Parker and Hood clearly being versatile offensive options on both the perimeter and the blocks any time down the floor).

In short, Dre returned to a situation where he was simply buried, so we never really got to witness definitively how much his game had progressed. If I were an NBA GM for a team in relatively good shape personnel-wise, I'd be very tempted to roll the dice on Andre with a mid to late second round pick. Now that he has come to terms with his personal tragedy, he'll be more able to focus on honing his game. I agree with those who say he is an elite offensive weapon—he definitely is, and now that he's found his ability to focus, I think his natural development as a basketball player can [and will] continue. I see Dre as potentially being one of those guys who come out of nowhere to become a solid, valuable role player in the league...

Kedsy
04-18-2014, 01:20 PM
I have not doubt that more Andre would have meant better than a 26-9 final record and early NCAA exit. We were our best as a team with him having a more substantial contribution rather than less. If you have to throw practice out the window, then be flexible and do that. Coach K didnt do that, and I'm not really sure why not.

Here's the thing about Andre -- to maximize his performance the offense would have to be structured around him.

I alluded to this a couple times during the season and it didn't get any traction, but imagine this year's team without Rodney or Jabari. The starters at the beginning of the season would probably have been Quinn, Rasheed, Andre, Josh, and Amile. At some point during the season, Marshall probably would have passed Josh and become the starter (after much clamoring and hand-wringing on DBR about why it didn't happen earlier).

In that scenario, Coach K has no choice but to structure the offense around Andre's shooting (like we did for JJ) and Rasheed's driving. Our somewhat offensively-challenged bigs would spend most of their time setting on-ball screens for Quinn and Rasheed and multiple off-ball screens for Andre. Andre probably scores 20+ ppg and Rasheed and Quinn somewhere in the mid-teens. Amile cleans up around the basket and Marshall gets a couple alley-oops a game. Oddly, our overall scoring is probably pretty similar to our actual 2013-14 scoring.

However, that team would be suspect on defense, maybe ranked as low as 100 or so in Pomeroy. Tyler and Matt would help defensively off the bench -- Tyler might even displace Quinn as a starter at some point -- but with Tyler and Matt our offense might sputter a little. We could have hung with anyone but we might not have had quite enough juice to beat a Kansas or an Arizona. Even more problematic, if an opponent could shut down Andre (or, to a lesser extent, Rasheed), we would be susceptible to upsets -- on the road to, say, Notre Dame or Clemson, or even Wake Forest. We'd probably lose 8 to 10 games, get a 3 or 4-seed, and might be in danger of an early NCAAT exit.

In short, in my mind there's a pretty good chance that team would have had the exact same season we had in real life. Maybe if a few bounces had gone our way we could have had a better season than the one we actually did. Who knows, maybe everything goes right and we make the Final Four.

But we did have Jabari and Rodney, and while I don't think the team without them would have performed much (if at all) worse than we actually performed, I do think the team with Jabari and Rodney had WAY more upside. It made a lot more sense for Coach K to structure the team around Jabari and Rodney (rather than Andre and Rasheed), and if you accept that, then it's it's very possible that Andre's best role was as sniper coming in for 10 or 15 mpg for an offensive burst.

That's my take, anyway.

Billy Dat
04-18-2014, 02:15 PM
In short, Dre returned to a situation where he was simply buried, so we never really got to witness definitively how much his game had progressed. If I were an NBA GM for a team in relatively good shape personnel-wise, I'd be very tempted to roll the dice on Andre with a mid to late second round pick. Now that he has come to terms with his personal tragedy, he'll be more able to focus on honing his game. I agree with those who say he is an elite offensive weapon—he definitely is, and now that he's found his ability to focus, I think his natural development as a basketball player can [and will] continue. I see Dre as potentially being one of those guys who come out of nowhere to become a solid, valuable role player in the league...

I agree that he'll get a chance at this outcome. Every NBA team needs dead-eye 3 point shooters, now more then ever. He'll mostly have to prove that he can guard.

dcar1985
04-18-2014, 02:29 PM
http://www.draftexpress.com/article/2014-Portsmouth-Invitational-Tournament-Day-Two-4475


Andre Dawkins is an interesting character in this setting, a former five star high school recruit who played only 14 minutes per game as a senior after redshirting his junior year due to tragic circumstances.

Dawkins played one of the most narrowly confined roles of any player at this tournament in college, as an astounding 78% of his offense came off spot-up jumpers, screens, or hand-offs—which he absolutely excelled at, making 42% of his 3-pointers on the season. Dawkins had a chance to show off a more expansive skill-set in this setting than we were able to see at Duke, something he found mostly mixed results with last night. 11 of his 17 attempts came from beyond the arc, with the rest coming mostly in the form of one dribble pull-ups from just inside the arc. He did make some nice passes off the dribble, showing a solid basketball IQ, but for the most part struggled to separate himself from the group despite scoring 20 points.

Looking somewhat out of shape, and not showing the highest intensity level, Dawkins didn't come out with the type of urgency you'd expect considering his situation. His defense was porous, and he failed to run back on a few occasions, showing some concerning body language at times. When he tried to put the ball on the floor he had a difficult time getting past his man, throwing up some awkward floaters in the lane and not getting to the foul line even once.

While measuring out well (6-5 with a 6-8 ½ wingspan) for a shooting guard, Dawkins will need to show he can be more than just a spot-up jump-shooter to make it in the NBA, at least in terms of putting forth better effort defensively. He has two more games to improve his standing here, and would be smart to use them wisely.

That was an observation on Dre from Jonathan Givony from Draft Express as he's covering the Portsmouth Invitational.

tele
04-18-2014, 03:00 PM
I agree that he'll get a chance at this outcome. Every NBA team needs dead-eye 3 point shooters, now more then ever. He'll mostly have to prove that he can guard.

I also agree and I think he has the size and athleticism to guard nba 2's too, especially in the regular season. I always enjoyed watching Andre play at Duke and hope to continue to watch him play in the pros. Opposing coaches all knew what player they couldn't leave open when Andre was in the game, so someone should give him an opportunity to play at the next level.

superdave
04-18-2014, 03:46 PM
I'm afraid this season won't be measured by offensive deficiencies, but rather defensive. And Andre really didn't help our defensive issues.

On offense, Andre was reliable against middling competition, but much more unpredictable when the other team's defense ramped up.

He faced his demons and appeared to have fun playing again. That's enough for me.

-jk

I wholeheartedly agree with your final point. Once Andre got going after a slow start to the season, I was relieved then ecstatic. Great kid, great to see him back.

But on the defensive deficiencies, I say own it. Dont spend all season chasing the dragon. Eventually you have to maximize what you are really good at which is scoring. This Duke team should have gotten up and down, put up a ton of points, and maybe packed in the defense a little more to avoid giving up the easy buckets. Very few teams could have scored with this roster. Coach K should have dared them to try.

FerryFor50
04-18-2014, 03:59 PM
I wholeheartedly agree with your final point. Once Andre got going after a slow start to the season, I was relieved then ecstatic. Great kid, great to see him back.

But on the defensive deficiencies, I say own it. Dont spend all season chasing the dragon. Eventually you have to maximize what you are really good at which is scoring. This Duke team should have gotten up and down, put up a ton of points, and maybe packed in the defense a little more to avoid giving up the easy buckets. Very few teams could have scored with this roster. Coach K should have dared them to try.

Totally agree. At some point you just have to recognize your strengths and weaknesses and play to them.

GGLC
04-18-2014, 04:02 PM
Totally agree. At some point you just have to recognize your strengths and weaknesses and play to them.

I'm very surprised that we didn't run more this season. Seems like we had perfect personnel for it. I would have loved to see Andre hit some trailing threes on the break like Battier, Redick, and Dunleavy used to do so well.

FerryFor50
04-18-2014, 04:17 PM
http://www.draftexpress.com/article/2014-Portsmouth-Invitational-Tournament-Day-Two-4475



That was an observation on Dre from Jonathan Givony from Draft Express as he's covering the Portsmouth Invitational.

Sounds a lot like his time at Duke. Tons of potential, but never really worked hard to get open (as I mentioned before, compare to Brady Heslip) and was a sieve on defense.

Class of '94
04-18-2014, 09:36 PM
I wholeheartedly agree with your final point. Once Andre got going after a slow start to the season, I was relieved then ecstatic. Great kid, great to see him back.

But on the defensive deficiencies, I say own it. Dont spend all season chasing the dragon. Eventually you have to maximize what you are really good at which is scoring. This Duke team should have gotten up and down, put up a ton of points, and maybe packed in the defense a little more to avoid giving up the easy buckets. Very few teams could have scored with this roster. Coach K should have dared them to try.

But to be fair, I think K wanted to push the ball more (and even said I believe it in a presser towards the end of the season); but the players weren't able to do it and the team had to adjust expectations. Looking at how Quinn would regularly have at least 1-2 unforced errors in a game when he was a starter and Tyler wasn't necessarily a push it up the floor guard, I'm not so sure that this team would have been successful long term playing a run and gun style. I think the team's problems were mostly on the defensive side of the ball in that we couldn't consistently get timely stops when we needed to. I also wonder if packing it in would've worked considering we were so small as a team. Philosophically, I agreed with K in that I thought the best way to defend was to pressure the opposing team's guards to make it tough to throw the ball into the post (like Duke tried to do). It worked well for UConn imo; and we had players like Sheed, M Jones and Tyler that could apply pressure. Unfortunately, even that, was not completely what K had envisioned imo. K, early in the season, pulled the defense back and we still got burned on defense; thus, with this particular team, i'm not so sure what type of defense would worked best for this team; and again, I'm not so sure that this team had the quality depth to play a run and gun style of offense. JMO.

rsvman
04-18-2014, 09:51 PM
I was at the game today. Dawkins was OK, but not great. He missed a fair number of 3's in the first half. At halftime he was knocking them down, but when the game started up, he promptly missed a couple more.

He made a couple of nice drives that ended with scores. He made a couple of bone-headed plays, including one time when he ended up essentially dribbling the ball off his foot and out of bounds despite little to no defensive pressure.

On the defensive end he sometimes played well, denying passes to his man or fighting through screens; at other times he was beat pretty easily off a quick first step.

His effort waxed and waned. Overall I'd say he didn't appear to be fully engaged.

After the game he was kind enough to sign a shirt for my son and to allow my son to get a picture taken with him. We had a really good time at the game and we cheered loudly for him.

g-money
04-19-2014, 02:23 AM
His effort waxed and waned. Overall I'd say he didn't appear to be fully engaged.

After the game he was kind enough to sign a shirt for my son and to allow my son to get a picture taken with him. We had a really good time at the game and we cheered loudly for him.

In the 0.1% chance that Andre is reading this, I say: Come on Andre, it is time to get your a-- in gear!!!

We're all pulling for you here in Duke Nation.

MCFinARL
04-19-2014, 08:22 AM
I was at the game today. Dawkins was OK, but not great. He missed a fair number of 3's in the first half. At halftime he was knocking them down, but when the game started up, he promptly missed a couple more.

He made a couple of nice drives that ended with scores. He made a couple of bone-headed plays, including one time when he ended up essentially dribbling the ball off his foot and out of bounds despite little to no defensive pressure.

On the defensive end he sometimes played well, denying passes to his man or fighting through screens; at other times he was beat pretty easily off a quick first step.

His effort waxed and waned. Overall I'd say he didn't appear to be fully engaged.

After the game he was kind enough to sign a shirt for my son and to allow my son to get a picture taken with him. We had a really good time at the game and we cheered loudly for him.

This is a somewhat different view than I got just looking at the stat line--where Andre once again led both teams in scoring with 21 points on 8-19 shooting (5-13 from 3, which is admittedly not lights out but still a respectable 38%) and had 3 rebounds, 2 assists, and 1 turnover (presumably the foot dribble). Admittedly some other players were more efficient, as Andre took the most shots of any player in this game as well.

It would be great if Andre could be completely focused and error-free in this tournament--it's obviously an important chance for him. But it may not be realistic to expect that he can transform his game to peak performance essentially overnight, playing with a team that has just been formed for these three days, with the pressure of knowing who is watching. The scouts will see what they see and decide what they decide. I feel confident Andre will play professional basketball somewhere. I hope it will be in the NBA, but that is far from certain.

It's hard to imagine the road Andre has walked over the last few years and the effects it may have had on his basketball game. What is nice to see, though, is that he gives every sign of being a genuinely gracious and thoughtful young man, as evidenced by your shirt experience.

Another recent example--Andre received a pretty rude tweet from someone whose kids had gone to the most recent barnstorming game hoping to see him ("tks for disappointing her"), but he was in Portsmouth and missed that game. Andre replied:
I'm actually up in Portsmouth trying to start my professional career at the Portsmouth Invitational Tournament. I apologize that I couldn't make it. Happily, the original tweeter thanked him for apologizing. But not every 22-year-old would respond with that patience and thoughtfulness.

Here is hoping Andre has a terrific all around game this afternoon. But here is hoping even more that, no matter what develops in his basketball career, he maintains his positive attitude and recognizes his own considerable worth as a person,.

rsvman
04-19-2014, 12:02 PM
My son and I were late and missed the first 11 or 12 minutes of he first half. He made some threes in the waning minutes of the game, but missed several in a row when the game was still tight. They looked just like the shots he missed against Mercer (halfway down and back out again). I suppose those painful memories made it seem like his shooting was worse than it actually was. He and Okaro White were pretty clearly the most important players on the team.

On D there were times when he worked really hard and was impressive. He wasn't really slacking at any time; lets just say that it seemed like sometimes he was conserving energy. At the end of the first half, with maybe 2 or 3 seconds to play, he didn't seem like he really was aware of time and situation, which I thought was a little odd. That's probably why it seemed to me that he was t as engaged as he could have been (even though the majority of the time he played hard).

MCFinARL
04-19-2014, 04:26 PM
Dawkins did not start in the third game today, but still scored the most of anyone in his game, with 23 points in 28 minutes on 8-17 shooting, 5-8 from 3. Elsewhere in his stat line he had 3 rebounds, 1 foul, 1 assist, 1 block, 1 steal, no turnovers. Non of the non-scoring numbers are especially noteworthy but at least they seem to show some game awareness and hustle all over the court. I did not see this game so can't say how he actually looked playing.

rsvman
04-19-2014, 08:25 PM
Dawkins did not start in the third game today, but still scored the most of anyone in his game, with 23 points in 28 minutes on 8-17 shooting, 5-8 from 3. Elsewhere in his stat line he had 3 rebounds, 1 foul, 1 assist, 1 block, 1 steal, no turnovers. Non of the non-scoring numbers are especially noteworthy but at least they seem to show some game awareness and hustle all over the court. I did not see this game so can't say how he actually looked playing.

Agreed. Unfortunately, I couldn't make it to today's game, but it sounds like he played well. He was the leading scorer on his team again today. Sherman, from Notre Dame, also apparently had a great game, and has had at least two really good games in this tournament.

MCFinARL
04-20-2014, 04:30 PM
Dawkins finished the Portsmouth Invitational with 64 points, 14-32 on 3-pointers, and was one of twelve players named to the all-tournament team.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-21-2014, 10:28 AM
I wholeheartedly agree with your final point. Once Andre got going after a slow start to the season, I was relieved then ecstatic. Great kid, great to see him back.

But on the defensive deficiencies, I say own it. Dont spend all season chasing the dragon. Eventually you have to maximize what you are really good at which is scoring. This Duke team should have gotten up and down, put up a ton of points, and maybe packed in the defense a little more to avoid giving up the easy buckets. Very few teams could have scored with this roster. Coach K should have dared them to try.

I have generally refrained for critiquing the coaching/defense choices over the season and in the off-season, but I totally agree. Our team might not have been optimized for a run-and-gun offense, but it certainly had the personnel to put some points on the board. Sort of the square peg, round hole idea.

I also enjoyed the idea of some pressure defense. We employed it a few times with decent success (no, I don't recall which game in particular). Partly, it's just more fun to watch a team with some good athletes get up and down the floor and score in bunches. Moreso than watching players get caught out of position on defense.

MCFinARL
04-21-2014, 11:45 AM
I have generally refrained for critiquing the coaching/defense choices over the season and in the off-season, but I totally agree. Our team might not have been optimized for a run-and-gun offense, but it certainly had the personnel to put some points on the board. Sort of the square peg, round hole idea.

I also enjoyed the idea of some pressure defense. We employed it a few times with decent success (no, I don't recall which game in particular). Partly, it's just more fun to watch a team with some good athletes get up and down the floor and score in bunches. Moreso than watching players get caught out of position on defense.

This is so true--at the beginning of this season I thought to myself that I didn't know how well the team would end up doing, but I was sure they would be fun to watch, because they would be running and there would be good athletes. That happened some, especially early on, but not nearly as much as I expected or hoped. And as we know all too well, sometimes the team turned out to be more excruciating than fun to watch.

Troublemaker
04-21-2014, 12:16 PM
This is so true--at the beginning of this season I thought to myself that I didn't know how well the team would end up doing, but I was sure they would be fun to watch, because they would be running and there would be good athletes. That happened some, especially early on, but not nearly as much as I expected or hoped. And as we know all too well, sometimes the team turned out to be more excruciating than fun to watch.

I'd have to scratch my head if Duke doesn't have an effective transition team next season. This season, we probably didn't have the point guard play. It was either Jabari had to take it coast to coast (which he wasn't that great at) or we would have to slow it down.

Tyus seems to be a natural on the break, though. (There are so many parts to his game to like!) I'm looking forward to a lot of rebound --> quick outlet to Tyus --> throwahead pass to a streaking wing sequences next year. Tyus can really play the longball game, and if needed, he can push down the court himself.

dcar1985
04-21-2014, 01:14 PM
I'd have to scratch my head if Duke doesn't have an effective transition team next season. This season, we probably didn't have the point guard play. It was either Jabari had to take it coast to coast (which he wasn't that great at) or we would have to slow it down.

Tyus seems to be a natural on the break, though. (There are so many parts to his game to like!) I'm looking forward to a lot of rebound --> quick outlet to Tyus --> throwahead pass to a streaking wing sequences next year. Tyus can really play the longball game, and if needed, he can push down the court himself.

Just curious how many other 6'9 pf/c did you see going coast to coast with the ball to finish this season to say Jabari wasn't that great at it?

CDu
04-21-2014, 01:25 PM
Just curious how many other 6'9 pf/c did you see going coast to coast with the ball to finish this season to say Jabari wasn't that great at it?

I don't want to put words in Troublemaker's mouth, but I suspect he (or she, don't want to be presumptuous) meant that, as an offensive strategy, Parker going end to end wasn't a great strategy.

For a PF, Parker was certainly a very good ballhandler. But in terms of going with an up-tempo style, I don't think Parker going end-to-end is what we want to base things on.

Now, as a secondary option whenever the PG can't get the ball? Sure, it's good once in a while.

Troublemaker
04-21-2014, 01:26 PM
Jabari going coast to coast was unique, not necessarily effective. Two different things. Turnovers and missed layups occurred just as often as points on the board when he tried it. It definitely was pretty exciting on the occasions when he successfully converted, though. There was one against Kansas that got a lot of airplay.

ETA: CDu types fast!

MCFinARL
04-21-2014, 06:03 PM
Andre Dawkins is a busy guy.

This photo was tweeted today by the U.S.G.A., which is having a media day at Pinehurst for the US Open.
4082

g-money
04-21-2014, 08:52 PM
Andre Dawkins is a busy guy.

This photo was tweeted today by the U.S.G.A., which is having a media day at Pinehurst for the US Open.

If his golf swing is anything like his jump shot, he'll be a pro in no time.

MCFinARL
05-08-2014, 12:55 PM
Not sure if this is the best thread for this, but it didn't seem worth starting a new one. Found this on a sports blog (http://msn.foxsports.com/ohio/story/nba-daily-roy-hibbert-nba-mvp-kevin-durant-draft-050614) by Sam Amico, who covers the NBA, mostly in Ohio, for Fox Sports:


A couple of quick pre-draft workout notes: Several scouts told me Duke guard Andre Dawkins has improved his stock recently by displaying NBA-ready skills. Dawkins is projected as a mid-second rounder, or maybe a late second rounder. But that could change as the draft nears.

superdave
05-08-2014, 01:19 PM
Check out the text about Dawkins at the PIT: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andre-Dawkins-5733/

Sounds like the shooting and athleticism is there. Andre will have to step things up and show more hustle to get drafted.

MCFinARL
05-08-2014, 04:00 PM
Check out the text about Dawkins at the PIT: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andre-Dawkins-5733/

Sounds like the shooting and athleticism is there. Andre will have to step things up and show more hustle to get drafted.

That's actually one of the reasons I found the item I posted interesting--it's far more recent (dated May 6) than Givorny's PIT analysis (which was based only on Andre's first game, though it seems clear his primary focus in the other two games was also on shooting/scoring) and claims to be based on conversations with actual scouts. Interestingly, this appeared in a column that was otherwise focused on Roy Hibbert, and noted only one other player that scouts had been mentioning--Elfrid Payton of Louisiana-Lafayette.

Of course we don't know who these scouts are or even if they are employed by NBA teams; they may just be pals of the writer with some "connections."