PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Duke 70, Stanford 59 Post-Game Thread



JBDuke
11-22-2014, 11:38 PM
Put your post-game thoughts here.

SilkyJ
11-22-2014, 11:46 PM
Well we have our answer to the annual question of will we go to a 7-8 man rotation. Only took til Nov 22nd this year, haha.

DaleDuke7
11-22-2014, 11:51 PM
I like everything I'm seeing from this team.... Well, almost everything. The one thing I HATE about this team is free throw shooting. We are mediocre at best and I think even that is a stretch. I know it can and hopefully will be improved, but it sure is frustrating to watch.

roywhite
11-22-2014, 11:51 PM
Duke Defense is back!

Pressured the ball, contested shots, clogged the passing lanes, made Stanford take difficult attempts, and then worked the defensive boards. Great to see.

dairedevil
11-22-2014, 11:51 PM
Do they hang the Coaches v. Cancer 2014 banner in Cameron?

Glad to see the victory. After all of the giddiness over the depth of our bench, only 7 players got into the game tonight. I don't know what to think about that, but I will trust K's judgment. It's going to be fun watching this season play out, lots of potential for Duke to be really good.

kAzE
11-22-2014, 11:52 PM
Quinn will get the headlines for his hot shooting, but I thought Winslow was actually by far the best player. He was flat out getting it done on both ends, and the box score was impressive: 14 points, 9 rebounds, 4 assists, 1 steal, 1 block, and just 1 turnover. He was absolutely everywhere on defense, and he also got to the free throw line TEN TIMES. That's insane, he needs to work on his shooting from the foul line, that will give us such a huge advantage, especially in the NCAA tournament if he can consistently get to the free throw line and convert. It's unlikely to happen, but this guy has the tools to get a triple double (very underrated ball handler/passer) or even a 5x5 game. Okafor is the best NBA prospect without question, but Winslow might be the most dynamic guy on this team.

JBDuke
11-22-2014, 11:52 PM
Interesting stat mentioned in the post-game - Duke is really preventing the 3 point shot well. Quinn has more 3 point makes than all of our opponents combined.

GDuke_03
11-22-2014, 11:52 PM
I'm surprised the rotation was so short, especially in the second game of a back to back. Have to wonder if it was to make a point about playing tired

Furniture
11-22-2014, 11:59 PM
With last years team it would have been much closer. The win was never in doubt after the first few mins..

uh_no
11-23-2014, 12:00 AM
Do they hang the Coaches v. Cancer 2014 banner in Cameron?

Glad to see the victory. After all of the giddiness over the depth of our bench, only 7 players got into the game tonight. I don't know what to think about that, but I will trust K's judgment. It's going to be fun watching this season play out, lots of potential for Duke to be really good.

8

starters
marshall
matt
sheed

duketaylor
11-23-2014, 12:01 AM
FT shooting, especially late, is a concern.

"only 7 players got into the game tonight."

I didn't see Marshall, 'Sheed or Matt start, so it was at least 8.

Much improved D and better balance on O. So far!!

uh_no
11-23-2014, 12:02 AM
FT shooting, especially late, is a concern.

"only 7 players got into the game tonight."

I didn't see Marshall, 'Sheed or Matt start, so it was at least 8.

Much improved D and better balance on O. So far!!

only one drought...which raised an eyebrow...but it turns out the game was EXTREMELY slowly paced....we still put up a 113...which is pretty good.

Billy Dat
11-23-2014, 12:05 AM
Quinn will get the headlines for his hot shooting, but I thought Winslow was actually by far the best player. He was flat out getting it done on both ends, and the box score was impressive: 14 points, 9 rebounds, 4 assists, 1 steal, 1 block, and just 1 turnover. He was absolutely everywhere on defense, and he also got to the free throw line TEN TIMES. That's insane, he needs to work on his shooting from the foul line, that will give us such a huge advantage, especially in the NCAA tournament if he can consistently get to the free throw line and convert. It's unlikely to happen, but this guy has the tools to get a triple double (very underrated ball handler/passer) or even a 5x5 game. Okafor is the best NBA prospect without question, but Winslow might be the most dynamic guy on this team.

I agree with this nearly completely. I think Winslow's play was the best on the team, but not "by far" as Quinn had a great 2 days, too. I am very excited about our defense. Stanford is not an easy team to play as that zone was way funky and they are long - Nastic was really tough - and they can shoot, but we shut them down. Matt Jones gave us a big lift in early scoring, I thought T.Jones did a nice job playing "within himself" for lack of a better term. This team takes many fewer bad shots than recent squads.

I want to shout out Amile a little. If anyone has accepted his role, its Amile and he really battles when he's in the game. He needs to look at the hoop a little more, they weren't within 4 feet of him when he was catching it at the foul line - he needs to take that shot with confidence or even drive it. It seemed like he got in the doghouse a little in the second half, he got a quick hook at one point and didn't play as much in the second half.

5-0, we haven't played great yet, we are an unselfish team that gets lots of assists, plays defense, and has weapons inside, outside, and can put it on the deck and go to the hole. Great start to the year.

Billy Dat
11-23-2014, 12:13 AM
"Justise Winslow" is trending on Twitter, largely because of this

https://vine.co/v/O1aI2xIBePH

Chasson Randle getting Freddie Weissed - kind of.

dairedevil
11-23-2014, 12:15 AM
8

starters
marshall
matt
sheed


I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing out my error...

FireOgilvie
11-23-2014, 12:20 AM
Great game against a very solid and experienced opponent. I was particularly impressed with the way Okafor stepped up his interior defense, especially in the second half. He started playing very tough and didn't let anyone move him around. Matt Jones made some really nice scoring plays; it was more than just spot up 3s. I also love the way Tyus runs the offense; we looked out of sync when he wasn't on the court.

Plus/Minus (from SCACCHoops):

T Jones: +17
Q Cook: +13
J Okafor: +12
A Jefferson: +5
J Winslow: +3
M Plumlee: +1
M Jones: -1
R Sulaimon: -10

roywhite
11-23-2014, 12:20 AM
Duke is making it hard for opponents to run their offense, while Duke does a good job of sharing the ball.

Last night, Temple (admitted an offensively challenged group) had 6 assists while Duke had 14. The best offense Temple could produce was guard Will Cummings taking the ball to the hoop and scoring 18.

In unofficial stats tonight, Stanford had only 5 assists while Duke had 16. Again, the best offense by our opponent was the one-on-one play by Chasen Randle who scored 22.

To contrast these team assist numbers, Vermont last year had 21 assists against Duke.

subzero02
11-23-2014, 12:25 AM
This team is still learning how to play together... With teams focusing on Okafor so intensely, we need to do a better job of moving the ball and slashing to the basket. Winslow does this very well but Sulaimon should/could be making a living in this facet of the game. Sulaimon a -10... That's a trend that can't continue.

AncientPsychicT
11-23-2014, 12:32 AM
8

starters
marshall
matt
sheed

To be fair, Marshall only played 5 minutes. So while 8 players technically did play tonight, we effectively went only 7 deep.

Kedsy
11-23-2014, 12:36 AM
Stanford is huge. Quinn was consistently guarding someone 3 to 5 inches taller than he is. And Stanford couldn't take advantage of the height difference, which I think bodes well for Duke's defensive future.

I didn't expect this year's Duke team to be a grind 'em out sort of team, but that's what we've been for the past three games.

Jahlil seemed a bit intimidated to challenge Stanford's big guys in that zone, and then all of a sudden when our lead dropped to 8, he just seemed to say, the heck with it, and got aggressive, fouled Nastic out, and iced the game.

Justise never seems to be intimidated, he took it right into them, time and time again.

jipops
11-23-2014, 12:55 AM
This was a really good defensive effort all around. And huge props to Jah for not being bogged down on little offensive output in the 1st half. He played great D in the 2nd. This team was noticeably tired in the 2nd as evidenced by the ft shooting yet still never let up on D against a very good offensive team. You have to feel good about this one.

Kfanarmy
11-23-2014, 01:06 AM
Great game, good D. Guys were a bit fatigued, justifiably so. I think that had a significant impact on shooting all the way around. even more so for Stanford.

Olympic Fan
11-23-2014, 01:39 AM
Solid defensive effort. I think the defensive numbers so far -- defensive FG%, TOs forced and especially opponents' 3-pt pct. -- are excellent.

Love the balance.

Watching the Stanford game reminded me of what it means to have a big guy in the lane -- even when he doesn't block shots (and Jahlil doesn't block a lot), he bothers tons of shots. Everybody we've played has missed a bunch in the lane. I would like to compare opponents shooting percentage on shots in the paint between last year and this year. I'll bet it's significantly lower.

I heard that Stanford led for 11 seconds ... I guess that means we've trailed for something like 23 seconds so far this season -- never in the second half. In fact, we've been in double figures in the second half for all but a few minutes against Michigan State and about a minute against Stanford.

It got me thinking about the stat that the College Football Committee is so in love with -- game control. It's the reason that Jeff Long said that Alabama and Oregon with one loss are ranked ahead of unbeaten FSU. He cited that stat.

I think if you used that stat in basketball, then Duke would have to rank ahead of Kentucky. After all, they trailed Buffalo for most of the first 30 minutes of their game and struggled late to break away from Bucknell.

I'm not exactly sure how game control is calculated -- I don't think anybody does -- but I would think that Duke, which has been in control almost all the way in its five wins, would rank well ahead of Kentucky in that area.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am NOT arguing that Duke should rank ahead of Kentucky, merely using the early basketball results to suggest what a bogus measure that "game control" is (as another illustration, Duke football was ranked 12 places higher than FSU in the committee's game control rankings than FSU heading into this weekend).

kAzE
11-23-2014, 02:14 AM
Okafor might actually not be getting enough credit for what he's doing defensively. It's been 5 games now, and he hasn't really been foul trouble once. (Knock on wood) It's one thing to limit opponents FG% in the paint, but doing that AND keeping off of the free throw line ... That's how you win games. The combo of okafor down and Winslow on the wings makes this team very tough to score on. We're also doing such a good job guarding the 3 ball, it's just so hard to make a run on us.

Duke3517
11-23-2014, 06:46 AM
Okafor might actually not be getting enough credit for what he's doing defensively. It's been 5 games now, and he hasn't really been foul trouble once. (Knock on wood) It's one thing to limit opponents FG% in the paint, but doing that AND keeping off of the free throw line ... That's how you win games. The combo of okafor down and Winslow on the wings makes this team very tough to score on. We're also doing such a good job guarding the 3 ball, it's just so hard to make a run on us.

I thought Okafor was fantastic last night. Sure it didn't show on fg percentage and points but he was a tremendous presence inside with rebounds and what kaze said Opponent fg percentage in the paint. The difference between the two teams last night is while Stanford played really hard, Duke just has too much talent collectively.

Saratoga2
11-23-2014, 07:23 AM
The change from last year is primarily due to the buy in on defense. This team is solid and deep even though the bench played limited minutes last night. Our foul shooting is an area that could use improvement. Whether that is due to people being tired or just that they need to work on shooting is debatable. Shooting from the field might have been due to tired legs but also was probably impacted by the size and athleticism of Stanford.

Going forward, I hope that the total bench will get more time to work into the games when opponents are not as difficult. It could help should we experience injuries or foul trouble during the season.

Love Quinn's leadership this year. He is not hanging his head this year but instead showing the young guys how to approach the game.

BD80
11-23-2014, 07:24 AM
I think this teams fortunes will rise and fall with Quinn. He appears to me to be our emotional leader, and as long as his energy is up, the team's energy is high. I expect to see a floor slap from him at some crucial point during the season. Quinn has responded well to coaching, he seems much less prone to sulking, and his shot selection is improving. That said, I'm pretty sure the coaches will discuss with him whether a turn-around three attempt from the top of the key is what we were looking for in that specific situation.

Was there a period during the last few minutes when we were letting the air out of the ball that Coach K had Tyus on the bench and let Quinn dribble the shot clock down? Interesting choice.

I think Johnny D did us a great favor by playing a variety of defenses, for which his team had been well-coached. Maybe, now that the game is over, Coach K can spend some time with his former pupil and pick up some tips on coaching D. Particularly that free-throw defense - Johnny's Cardinal held us under 60% !!!!!

Furniture
11-23-2014, 07:27 AM
The previous Duke teams to last years that I have followed had been really good at getting the opposing team in foul trouble. It looks like this year they are doing the same. That's got to be good! Is that an asset of a good defense or another type of asset?

porkpa
11-23-2014, 07:33 AM
Justise Winslow is arguably the best freshman in the country not named Okafor.

mgtr
11-23-2014, 07:43 AM
I have been critical of Matt this season, but last night he showed why he should be the the first player off the bench. Nice game.

Furniture
11-23-2014, 08:11 AM
I have been critical of Matt this season, but last night he showed why he should be the the first player off the bench. Nice game.

The line up with Matt in looked really nice. I think they pulled away from Stanford after a little run from them.

Devilwin
11-23-2014, 08:35 AM
Stanford is huge. Quinn was consistently guarding someone 3 to 5 inches taller than he is. And Stanford couldn't take advantage of the height difference, which I think bodes well for Duke's defensive future.

I didn't expect this year's Duke team to be a grind 'em out sort of team, but that's what we've been for the past three games.

Jahlil seemed a bit intimidated to challenge Stanford's big guys in that zone, and then all of a sudden when our lead dropped to 8, he just seemed to say, the heck with it, and got aggressive, fouled Nastic out, and iced the game.

Justise never seems to be intimidated, he took it right into them, time and time again.

Great post, and I agree with you. This team is growing and finding itself, but I am pleased so far. Work on free throw shooting, and I want to see G Allen play more.
Okafor needs to be a bit more aggressive.

sagegrouse
11-23-2014, 08:44 AM
"OK guards -- you listen to me. This here's my man. His name is Jahlil Okafor. If you don't get him the ball, you're going to be sitting on the bench right next to me."

Ten shots? That's not good enough -- Jah needs 20 per game.

Kindly, Sage
'Substitute A-A center "Len Chappell" for JO and "Billy Packer" for "guards"'

77devil
11-23-2014, 09:03 AM
I think this teams fortunes will rise and fall with Quinn. He appears to me to be our emotional leader, and as long as his energy is up, the team's energy is high. I expect to see a floor slap from him at some crucial point during the season. Quinn has responded well to coaching, he seems much less prone to sulking, and his shot selection is improving. That said, I'm pretty sure the coaches will discuss with him whether a turn-around three attempt from the top of the key is what we were looking for in that specific situation.

Was there a period during the last few minutes when we were letting the air out of the ball that Coach K had Tyus on the bench and let Quinn dribble the shot clock down? Interesting choice.


I agree re: Quinn being key to Duke's success but was not surprised he had the ball down the stretch. As Flying Dutch Devil demonstrated in another thread, Quinn takes care of the ball (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?34588-Quinn-Jones-Taking-Care-of-the-Ball[/url)and will likely finish his career with the best assist to turnover ratio in Duke history.

I wonder if Tyus was a little under the weather or just fatigued from back to back games. He only played 25 minutes and was on the bench down the stretch while Quinn played all but the last minute.

There are plenty of posters that have been overly critical of Quinn in the past IMO. More than a few were certain before the season started that he would come off the bench behind Matt Jones. That was never going to happen. It's clear now that Quinn is the glue of this team and not only will he log the most minutes, but he will run the team during crunch time.

Brockt10
11-23-2014, 09:22 AM
It's nice to have a defense where a 10 point lead feels like a lock. As previously mentioned, free throws are killing us and keeping us from really blowing games out. In every game against decent competition we have the same tendency to work a lead to 15 points, miss some free throws, get a little sloppy, and let them bring the lead back to 6 or 8 points. Last night we seemed to be scratching the 20 point lead (death margin) but Jah and Winslow would go 1 for 2 from the line or miss the front end of a 1 and 1 and Stanford would make a shot for a nice 3 or 4 point swing. We need to learn to keep up the intensity throughout the whole game. This team is still young and will hopefully develop this killer instinct.

Ggallagher
11-23-2014, 09:25 AM
The announcers last night threw out an interesting stat after the game. No one on this Duke team has scored twenty points in a game this year. I looked at last year's stats, and in the first eighteen games, sixteen of them had at least one twenty point scorer. And they already had four losses.
It says a lot about how well they're sharing the ball without any twenty point scoring - and we're still rated the #1 offensive team by Kenpom.

roywhite
11-23-2014, 09:32 AM
It's nice to have a defense where a 10 point lead feels like a lock. As previously mentioned, free throws are killing us and keeping us from really blowing games out. In every game against decent competition we have the same tendency to work a lead to 15 points, miss some free throws, get a little sloppy, and let them bring the lead back to 6 or 8 points. Last night we seemed to be scratching the 20 point lead (death margin) but Jah and Winslow would go 1 for 2 from the line or miss the front end of a 1 and 1 and Stanford would make a shot for a nice 3 or 4 point swing. We need to learn to keep up the intensity throughout the whole game. This team is still young and will hopefully develop this killer instinct.

The good news is that this team shows an ability to get to the free throw line.

It's not unusual to see some free throw shooting problems early in the season, particularly when the team is playing against good competition or a number of games in a short period of time, both of which were the case this weekend. The players get fatigued and don't have the normal mechanics at the line; it's hard to simulate in practice, so it's new territory for some, esp. the younger guys. They'll get more used to shooting free throws in game situations and generally hit a higher percentage. That said, Winslow and Jefferson are two guys who can get to the line, but just may not be good free throw shooters; Amile, we know about from his struggles last year, Justise not so sure.

Yes, the offense can get considerably better and hitting free throws is important; what is likely making Coach K smile today is reflecting on how far along the defense is.

dukelifer
11-23-2014, 09:36 AM
The line up with Matt in looked really nice. I think they pulled away from Stanford after a little run from them.

Once Matt gets his confidence - he will be hard to keep off the floor - his length is disruptive and he is crafty around the hoop. He was key to the win. Winslow is really good. He has an NBA game and will likely be an all-star some day.

Brockt10
11-23-2014, 09:52 AM
The good news is that this team shows an ability to get to the free throw line.

It's not unusual to see some free throw shooting problems early in the season, particularly when the team is playing against good competition or a number of games in a short period of time, both of which were the case this weekend. The players get fatigued and don't have the normal mechanics at the line; it's hard to simulate in practice, so it's new territory for some, esp. the younger guys. They'll get more used to shooting free throws in game situations and generally hit a higher percentage. That said, Winslow and Jefferson are two guys who can get to the line, but just may not be good free throw shooters; Amile, we know about from his struggles last year, Justise not so sure.

Yes, the offense can get considerably better and hitting free throws is important; what is likely making Coach K smile today is reflecting on how far along the defense is.

Completely agree. This is the best defense we have had since the Zoubek enlightenment and we all know what happened that season. How nice would it be is Amile could hit a 12 footer? Teams are daring him to take the shot.

Billy Dat
11-23-2014, 09:56 AM
I didn't expect this year's Duke team to be a grind 'em out sort of team, but that's what we've been for the past three games.


This is a great observation, despite all the glitzy talent, they are kind of blue collar and workmanlike. If the shots aren't falling, they'll get stops, offensive boards and get to the line and manufacture points.

davekay1971
11-23-2014, 10:16 AM
A couple of coaching related points:

1) Kedsy pointed out upthread that, at some point in the 2nd half, when the lead was down to 8, Jahlil seemed to just go for it. If I recall correctly, that occurred right after a timeout, when Duke put the ball directly into Okafor. I have no doubt that was a called play. We were struggling to get baskets at that point, and I could very easily imagine K making two points of emphasis in that timeout: (1) to Okafor - get active off the ball and establish position; (2) to everyone else - when he establishes position GET HIM THE BALL.

2) Amile got benched in the 2nd half following a series of offensive possessions where he got the ball in the high post and seemed really unsure of what to do. I love the idea of having him at the high post with Okafor on the low post. He's a smart player who is unlikely to make a poor pass from that position, and I think he'll do well as the season goes on in that offensive set. But he needs to get confident with a shot from that position (IIRC, he was about 12 feet from the basket) when defenders don't challenge him. Even if he misses, a soft shot will come off in a way that Okafor would have a legitimate shot at an offensive rebound. If defenders close on him, he needs to make quicker, sharper decisions, hopefully getting the ball down to Okafor if Jahlil is able to get position. I love what Amile brings to the team - he's a great glue guy, a solid defender, and just a fantastic rebounder. He's really the perfect power forward to compliment Jahlil. But I bet he gets some dedicated practice time working on that high post position.

tbyers11
11-23-2014, 10:26 AM
A couple of coaching related points:

1) Kedsy pointed out upthread that, at some point in the 2nd half, when the lead was down to 8, Jahlil seemed to just go for it. If I recall correctly, that occurred right after a timeout, when Duke put the ball directly into Okafor. I have no doubt that was a called play. We were struggling to get baskets at that point, and I could very easily imagine K making two points of emphasis in that timeout: (1) to Okafor - get active off the ball and establish position; (2) to everyone else - when he establishes position GET HIM THE BALL.

2) Amile got benched in the 2nd half following a series of offensive possessions where he got the ball in the high post and seemed really unsure of what to do. I love the idea of having him at the high post with Okafor on the low post. He's a smart player who is unlikely to make a poor pass from that position, and I think he'll do well as the season goes on in that offensive set. But he needs to get confident with a shot from that position (IIRC, he was about 12 feet from the basket) when defenders don't challenge him. Even if he misses, a soft shot will come off in a way that Okafor would have a legitimate shot at an offensive rebound. If defenders close on him, he needs to make quicker, sharper decisions, hopefully getting the ball down to Okafor if Jahlil is able to get position. I love what Amile brings to the team - he's a great glue guy, a solid defender, and just a fantastic rebounder. He's really the perfect power forward to compliment Jahlil. But I bet he gets some dedicated practice time working on that high post position.

Both good points.

To #1, after that timeout when we were only up 8, K ran an out-of-bounds play and the next time down, an offensive set that were determined to get Okafor the ball. Both times Quinn delivered well-timed and well-placed passes that let Okafor do his thing.

To #2, Amile did get benched when he seemed very indecisive with what to do the ball in the high post. Stanford's D was daring him to shoot by basically dropping his man down to double Okafor in the post. K brought in Matt Jones (I think it was him in this particular instance) and moved Winslow to the high post on offense and basically forced Stanford to adjust their zone because Winslow is either going to take that shot or make a decisive drive to the basket.

CajunDevil
11-23-2014, 10:48 AM
Okafor's presence in the middle on both ends, Amile's rebounding, Quinn's shooting and passing, Winslow's athleticism, skill, aggression and game-face, Tyus's calm and passing... I love this team!

The only thing that seems "off" about this team is Rasheed. He seems to be trying too hard... forcing things, especially on offense. Factor in the -10 +/- and I'd rather see Grayson take those minutes until Rasheed figures it out, assuming he does.

YmoBeThere
11-23-2014, 10:58 AM
Any thoughts on the amount of 3 points shots we've taken so far this year? I wasn't able to see the first couple of games, so can't comment. Against MSU we only took 14. Last night, we took 25. I know you take what the game tends to give you, but I always thought particularly with last year's team that the large numbers of threes were because we weren't scoring well in the post(or even trying) and weren't able to create good shots in the lane off the dribble. I think we are doing both of those much better so far this year.

DBFAN
11-23-2014, 11:00 AM
FT shooting, especially late, is a concern.

"only 7 players got into the game tonight."

I didn't see Marshall, 'Sheed or Matt start, so it was at least 8.

Much improved D and better balance on O. So far!!

I'm not too worried about FT. thru the first exhibition games and first couple of reg season games the FT shooting wasn't bad at all. I just think fatigue really hit the guys in this tourney. Especially tough on Freshman to have this many games in a short stretch. And once your legs start going so does your shot.

I am just excited about this team yeah I would have loved one good offensive explosion this weekend but the fact that the D just kept on going is awesome. So excited and proud of Cook. He is playing not just talking, like a captain. Outside of a couple of mins last night his decision making has been excellent. Told the Mrs last night that I find myself wanting him to have the ball in his hands. His first 3 years I got nervous everytime he had it, but now I completely trust him. I think a lot of that is because he belives he can do it. The mental approach we all have is a huge factor in how we actually perform. And good Lawd we are just gonna have to make mix tapes consisting only Winslow. He manages to make my mouth drop at least once a game. And the one block he had, not the one where he jumped over the guy, but the one that counted in the lane where he just jumped up like he was on a trampoline, was unreal

DBFAN
11-23-2014, 11:03 AM
Okafor's presence in the middle on both ends, Amile's rebounding, Quinn's shooting and passing, Winslow's athleticism, skill, aggression and game-face, Tyus's calm and passing... I love this team!

The only thing that seems "off" about this team is Rasheed. He seems to be trying too hard... forcing things, especially on offense. Factor in the -10 +/- and I'd rather see Grayson take those minutes until Rasheed figures it out, assuming he does.

I kinda a agree but I thought he looked a little better tonight. Hitting some shots that were the right shots to take. The only time he bothers me is when he dribble drives in the lane. His dribble is so high it gets taken easily. But too be honest I worried about that with Nolan Smith as well, and that turned out alright 😎

tbyers11
11-23-2014, 11:16 AM
Okafor's presence in the middle on both ends, Amile's rebounding, Quinn's shooting and passing, Winslow's athleticism, skill, aggression and game-face, Tyus's calm and passing... I love this team!

The only thing that seems "off" about this team is Rasheed. He seems to be trying too hard... forcing things, especially on offense. Factor in the -10 +/- and I'd rather see Grayson take those minutes until Rasheed figures it out, assuming he does.

I understand what you are saying about Rasheed and agree to a large extent. But I don't understand how is Rasheed going to figure things out if those minutes are given to Grayson? I think that his previous body of work has earned Rasheed a longer, but not infinite, leash on playing time. I also think that if Rasheed gets it together he has a higher "ceiling" on how important his performance can be to the overall team in big-time games. I also think that there will be plenty of minutes for both to get PT in the games against lesser opponents over the next month.

moonpie23
11-23-2014, 11:16 AM
Justise Winslow is arguably the best freshman in the country not named Okafor.

this could actually be another thread......

CajunDevil
11-23-2014, 11:49 AM
I understand what you are saying about Rasheed and agree to a large extent. But I don't understand how is Rasheed going to figure things out if those minutes are given to Grayson? I think that his previous body of work has earned Rasheed a longer, but not infinite, leash on playing time. I also think that if Rasheed gets it together he has a higher "ceiling" on how important his performance can be to the overall team in big-time games. I also think that there will be plenty of minutes for both to get PT in the games against lesser opponents over the next month.

Rasheed's D could be very important to the team's success, however I wish he'd just play within himself on offense and not force dribble-drives that result in turnovers. It's almost like he's a freshman and the game/he is moving too fast... It is really odd.

Faison1
11-23-2014, 12:04 PM
That's the first game I've had a chance to really watch. My thoughts:

1. Very impressed with Winslow. Not only from a talent perspective, but he seems so even-keeled all the time. A few things didn't go his way last night, yet he never got emotionally rattled. (as an aside, I bet Arizona wished they had that guy, if only for the name, let alone his talent.)

2. As mentioned earlier, we're already down to an 8-man rotation. I feel badly for Semi. Grayson will get his time eventually, but I wonder what's holding Semi back.

3. This team looks like it could be really, really good.....I wish they would stick together for a few years....can you imagine these guys as juniors or seniors....WOW!

4. Stanford looked pretty solid. They seem to have a good amount of talent on their squad. If they're not ranked, they should be. Their mid-range game in particular was pretty impressive, especially considering how well they shot against UNLV. I was expecting them to miss absolutely everything last night.

5. I'm liking the Uni's. I really hope we go back to the Blue Road Uni's instead of the Black ones.....unless of course we start losing in the Blue's.

DukeDevil
11-23-2014, 12:18 PM
It's nice to have a defense where a 10 point lead feels like a lock.

I agree with this. There was also a post by Olympic Fan about game control. I see game control as the statistic that reflects how comfortable you feel in a game. There are teams where a 15 point lead just feels like nothing, and you just feel it in your bones that it's going to get whittled away to nothing. On the other hand there are teams, like this one in this game, where there was never an insurmountable lead just by the numerical value, but I just never feel that sense of panic or fear that they aren't in control of the game. The only times I saw Stanford start to make a run I could tell our guys collectively started to phone it in with a couple minutes left, and a quick TO after 2 standford scores resulted in a lockdown to settle the game.

This is a fun team to watch.

And because this clip can't be shown enough:

https://vine.co/v/O1aI2xIBePH

gep
11-23-2014, 01:00 PM
This "game control" feeling is what I had with the 2010 team. Hopefully ends up in the same place ;-)

Potato Head
11-23-2014, 01:10 PM
Amile is a great defender. Not a traditional shot-blocker, but he can stay in front of and challenge people a lot smaller than himself. I could see that becoming a good defensive option against talented offensive wings.

CDu
11-23-2014, 01:37 PM
My thoughts on the game:

1. In a challenging game, Coach K went with a 7.5 man rotation. Where have I seen that before???

2. Well, as good as Okafor has looked, he does appear to at least be mortal. Back-to-back games shooting 40% or lower from the field (11-30 over the past two games). He's going to be really really good, but it does appear that the first three games (against overmatched post players - even true of MSU) may have been deceivingly awesome. That being said, his second half was absolutely terrific, and was critical in sealing the game. Good coaching by the staff to tell the guys to get him the ball in a good spot and let him go to work. He got it done for sure.

3. It appears that our backup PF (and perhaps our crunchtime PF) will be Justise Winslow. He has been terrific this year. I think he got a little too 3-ball happy (I don't really want to see him taking 7 3s in a game again), but he just does so many different things well. He's so physical and so talented, and he doesn't seem afraid of the moment at all.

4. I am LOVING the two-headed PG monster we have. Last night was a really tough game for Tyus Jones. For most teams, when your starting PG goes 0-6 with just 2 assists, you're likely to lose. For us? All that means is that we turn to our senior All-ACC captain, who went for 18 points (on 5-12 shooting) and 5 assists to just 1 turnover. And even on that 1 turnover, he immediately made amends by stealing the ball right back. Cook has been absolutely terrific so far this year. Let's hope it keeps rolling.

5. How about this team defense? It says something good when you can shoot under 40% from the field and under 60% from the FT line and still win the game by double digits. There's a toughness about this team that wasn't there last year.

6. I loved the way Matt Jones played. He got one steal, just missed one more, and then got his hands on another but stepped out of bounds. And he showed a very solid offensive game. I can see why Coach K had him playing often with the first team this Fall. He appears to be a player. And he's a nice fit in that he doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective.

7. It was a bit of a mixed bag for Sulaimon, as has been the case a bunch this year. Like last year, he seems to be struggling to find his role on this team. He's clearly not a natural PG, but that's the role he's being asked to play at times (when both Cook and T. Jones sit). He's still figuring out when to drive and when to just move the ball. Work to be done for sure.

Olympic Fan
11-23-2014, 01:39 PM
Interesting take by John Gas-bag on ESPN's front page right now. It's insider so I can't link.

The headline, however, says "Duke Undefeated, But Vulnerable"

So what makes them vulnerable? According to Gas-bag (actually its Gasaway), it's because Duke is holding opponents to 17 percent 3-point shooting.

His logic is that nobody holds opponents to that low a 3-point percentage, so it's got to be a fluke and therefore Duke's defense isn't as good as it looks.

So does anybody like that logic?

Later in the article, Gas-bag suggests that the ACC is not really that deep because VPI, Clemson, Wake and FSU have suffered bad home losses. He points those out and makes a sneering reference to the "so-called best league in America" He doesn't mention that four ACC teams are in the top 10, plus borderline top 25 teams in Syracuse, Miami and maybe even NC State (hard to tell with their weak opponents -- but they are smashing them)

Listen to Quants
11-23-2014, 02:17 PM
Interesting take by John Gas-bag on ESPN's front page right now. It's insider so I can't link.

The headline, however, says "Duke Undefeated, But Vulnerable"

So what makes them vulnerable? According to Gas-bag (actually its Gasaway), it's because Duke is holding opponents to 17 percent 3-point shooting.

His logic is that nobody holds opponents to that low a 3-point percentage, so it's got to be a fluke and therefore Duke's defense isn't as good as it looks.

So does anybody like that logic?

Later in the article, Gas-bag suggests that the ACC is not really that deep because VPI, Clemson, Wake and FSU have suffered bad home losses. He points those out and makes a sneering reference to the "so-called best league in America" He doesn't mention that four ACC teams are in the top 10, plus borderline top 25 teams in Syracuse, Miami and maybe even NC State (hard to tell with their weak opponents -- but they are smashing them)


Early in the year, stats are wildly unstable do to low repetitions. Anybody with a lot of stats available who wants to write about "How team X is vulnerable" can have a field day as some stats will way lower (or higher) than sensible end-of-year possibilities. If one stat is so 'cherry picked' then it seems weak. If, say, team X's FT% made is lower than expected and their opponents 3FG% is also lower than expected (below even with good D numbers) then that balances. With little data the only thing to look at is the total average (e.g., who you beat/lost-to and by how much) and even those stats are poor. Eyeball testing is recommended in most statistics bibles :)

slower
11-23-2014, 02:53 PM
To #2, Amile did get benched when he seemed very indecisive with what to do the ball in the high post. Stanford's D was daring him to shoot by basically dropping his man down to double Okafor in the post. K brought in Matt Jones (I think it was him in this particular instance) and moved Winslow to the high post on offense and basically forced Stanford to adjust their zone because Winslow is either going to take that shot or make a decisive drive to the basket.

Not to belabor a point I made in an earlier thread, but I'm concerned about this point. If Amile can't make those shots, I still think we'll start playing up a position, with Winslow at the 4 and Matt/Sheed/Grayson at the 3.

Oh, and Winslow may or may not be bound by the same physical laws as the rest of us. Man crush.

Edouble
11-23-2014, 03:03 PM
It appears that our backup PF (and perhaps our crunchtime PF) will be Justise Winslow. He has been terrific this year. I think he got a little too 3-ball happy (I don't really want to see him taking 7 3s in a game again), but he just does so many different things well. He's so physical and so talented, and he doesn't seem afraid of the moment at all.

Just some thoughts off of this...

Shooting

Coach K mentioned in his post game comments that if Justise had made 6-7 of his 10 free throws (instead of 4) and if he had made a few more threes, that he could have had 26 points or so. Sounds like he doesn't mind him taking that many shots. It will be interesting to see if Justise takes that many shots from beyond the arc in a game again.

Coach K also mentioned that he would have liked Quinn to have gotten a few more shots, as he was shooting the ball so well. I recall after the Temple game that he mentioned that he liked Jahlil taking 20 shots in a game also.

Field Goal Attempts against Stanford:

Cook: 12
Okafor: 10
Winslow: 10
M. Jones: 7
T. Jones: 6
Jefferson: 6
Sulaimon: 5
Plumlee: 0

Out of 56 FGA, 25 of those were 3s, which seems a bit high, considering Okafor's abilities in the post and Justise's ability to drive. I would not be surprised to see Cook, Okafor, and Justise continue as our top three shooters, although not necessarily in that order, going forward.

Power Forward

Yeah, teams are gonna force Amile to shoot the 12-15 footer, or drive from the 12-15 foot area, particularly teams that zone. Rodney was excellent in that role last year, and Justise looks like he may have to operate from that area when we go against zones this year. Amile didn't even pivot to the basket the first time Quinn threw the ball into him at that position when Stanford first when zone last night. Tyus gave it right back to him and Amile banked it in, which I do not think that he meant to do. :p

We did run with a lineup of Tyus, Quinn, Rasheed, Matt, and Amile for a few minutes at the end of the Temple game, so it is possible that Amile could play some five in end of game situations. But overall, Justise is the one who is showing Dunleavy-esque versatility.

bbosbbos
11-23-2014, 03:03 PM
Why should I care about what he said? Most BB analysts have never received good education and not intelligent. If they do not say something to highlight their Duke hate, they probably have lost their jobs.



Interesting take by John Gas-bag on ESPN's front page right now. It's insider so I can't link.

The headline, however, says "Duke Undefeated, But Vulnerable"

So what makes them vulnerable? According to Gas-bag (actually its Gasaway), it's because Duke is holding opponents to 17 percent 3-point shooting.

His logic is that nobody holds opponents to that low a 3-point percentage, so it's got to be a fluke and therefore Duke's defense isn't as good as it looks.

So does anybody like that logic?

Later in the article, Gas-bag suggests that the ACC is not really that deep because VPI, Clemson, Wake and FSU have suffered bad home losses. He points those out and makes a sneering reference to the "so-called best league in America" He doesn't mention that four ACC teams are in the top 10, plus borderline top 25 teams in Syracuse, Miami and maybe even NC State (hard to tell with their weak opponents -- but they are smashing them)

Wheat/"/"/"
11-23-2014, 03:16 PM
This is a good/balanced Duke team. Lots of talent at every position.

So far, I've only seen the last two full games and part of a third,(MSU).

The one area I see early on that has surprised me is that Duke has not run any screens along the baseline on a set play to free Okafor. All the screens I've seen are on the perimeter, not inside for Okafor.

Interior screens are used help post players get the space operate, but Okafor is unique, he has the feel/size inside where it's not all that necessary. And he's working hard for his real estate down low.

Coach K ... so far...is content to let him post up on his own and let him turn to score or kick it out...leaving the wings to hunt 3pt shots or look to dribble drive, (mostly by Winslow).

Since he's usually around the elbow, or wide baseline, not using him to screen for Okafor is leaving Jefferson free to crash the boards as soon as the ball goes in to Okafor, or look for an interior pass from him. That's really helping on the offensive boards, and resulted in some nice finishes by Jefferson at the rim.

It's early in the season and we may still see some set plays involving screens set for him as we go along, but I find it's interesting that's how coach K has set up the offense to this point for his AA.

gep
11-23-2014, 03:27 PM
My thoughts on the game:
7. It was a bit of a mixed bag for Sulaimon, as has been the case a bunch this year. Like last year, he seems to be struggling to find his role on this team. He's clearly not a natural PG, but that's the role he's being asked to play at times (when both Cook and T. Jones sit). He's still figuring out when to drive and when to just move the ball. Work to be done for sure.

Hopefully Rasheed finds his role like he did last year. I'm pulling for him :cool:

Des Esseintes
11-23-2014, 05:11 PM
Interesting take by John Gas-bag on ESPN's front page right now. It's insider so I can't link.

The headline, however, says "Duke Undefeated, But Vulnerable"

So what makes them vulnerable? According to Gas-bag (actually its Gasaway), it's because Duke is holding opponents to 17 percent 3-point shooting.

His logic is that nobody holds opponents to that low a 3-point percentage, so it's got to be a fluke and therefore Duke's defense isn't as good as it looks.

So does anybody like that logic?

Later in the article, Gas-bag suggests that the ACC is not really that deep because VPI, Clemson, Wake and FSU have suffered bad home losses. He points those out and makes a sneering reference to the "so-called best league in America" He doesn't mention that four ACC teams are in the top 10, plus borderline top 25 teams in Syracuse, Miami and maybe even NC State (hard to tell with their weak opponents -- but they are smashing them)
I think Gasaway's point about three defense sounds valid. (I haven't read the article, not having Insider.) 17% is overwhelmingly likely to be unsustainable. If that's the case, we need to get better elsewhere to compensate when the inevitable reversion to the mean occurs. Duke has a great chance to find that area of improvement, but saying our D has benefited from good luck to this point is hardly unfair. If we were hitting an abnormal percentage from deep instead, I think people would understand that number would come down eventually. Same thing here, in reverse. Doesn't mean our D is bad; it's just not quite as solid as first impressions might suggest.

MChambers
11-23-2014, 05:17 PM
I think Gasaway's point about three defense sounds valid. (I haven't read the article, not having Insider.) 17% is overwhelmingly likely to be unsustainable. If that's the case, we need to get better elsewhere to compensate when the inevitable reversion to the mean occurs. Duke has a great chance to find that area of improvement, but saying our D has benefited from good luck to this point is hardly unfair. If we were hitting an abnormal percentage from deep instead, I think people would understand that number would come down eventually. Same thing here, in reverse. Doesn't mean our D is bad; it's just not quite as solid as first impressions might suggest.
Without having read the article, I think it's valid to point out that the three point defense isn't really that good, but I don't take from it that Duke is vulnerable. Maybe the article has more nuance than the headline.

Saratoga2
11-23-2014, 05:21 PM
Hopefully Rasheed finds his role like he did last year. I'm pulling for him :cool:

What's keeping Rasheed in the games is his perceived potential, based on previous play. He is not playing well now, and not hitting shots, even from the foul line. He may be a better defender than Grayson but I don't see his athleticism or offensive game better at this point in time. Grayson is a good shooter and is deadly from the foul line. I think a good argument can be made for giving both Matt and Grayson additional PT is the relatively easy stretch of games coming up.

Neals384
11-23-2014, 05:28 PM
I agree with all the good things said about Winslow - he is amazing. But, his jump shot / free throw form seems awkward. Maybe it's just that he's left handed and it just looks weird.

weezie
11-23-2014, 05:38 PM
....he's left handed and it just looks weird.

Hey! I'm a lefty! :cool:

DukeDevil
11-23-2014, 06:04 PM
Hey! I'm a lefty! :cool:

He's a witch!!!!


yeah...my buddy and I were repeatedly saying "if only someone would teach him to shoot free throws." I agree that I'm not sure if it's being a lefty or if it's truly an awkward form, but give how much he'll likely get to the line this year he needs to clean that up.

Bay Area Duke Fan
11-23-2014, 06:09 PM
I feel badly for Semi. Grayson will get his time eventually, but I wonder what's holding Semi back.


Too much talent ahead of him.

vick
11-23-2014, 06:18 PM
What's keeping Rasheed in the games is his perceived potential, based on previous play. He is not playing well now, and not hitting shots, even from the foul line. He may be a better defender than Grayson but I don't see his athleticism or offensive game better at this point in time. Grayson is a good shooter and is deadly from the foul line. I think a good argument can be made for giving both Matt and Grayson additional PT is the relatively easy stretch of games coming up.

I think Grayson will get playing time in the upcoming easier stretch of games, but it seems like a stretch to say we have evidence that he's equal to Rasheed offensively. Grayson has scored a grand total of one field goal against high-major competition. Meanwhile, while his sophomore year perhaps did not meet very high expectations, Rasheed has been an effective offensive player at the ACC level for the past two seasons. I'd need to see a good bit more against quality opponents to rate Grayson's offense next to Rasheed's.

Kedsy
11-23-2014, 06:54 PM
I think Grayson will get playing time in the upcoming easier stretch of games, but it seems like a stretch to say we have evidence that he's equal to Rasheed offensively. Grayson has scored a grand total of one field goal against high-major competition. Meanwhile, while his sophomore year perhaps did not meet very high expectations, Rasheed has been an effective offensive player at the ACC level for the past two seasons. I'd need to see a good bit more against quality opponents to rate Grayson's offense next to Rasheed's.

I agree. If Grayson was anywhere close to supplanting Rasheed in the rotation, I think we'd see Grayson playing at least a few minutes, and Rasheed probably less than the 19 minutes he played against Stanford.

And please don't take the above as a knock on Grayson -- I was very impressed with his play in limited minutes against Temple. It's just that he's clearly the 9th guy right now and under Coach K the 9th guy doesn't play much (if at all) in close games against decent opponents.

That said, Rasheed seems to be playing at a different speed than everyone else, except his speed is too frenetic, with too much wasted motion. I agree with others who've said he seems to be trying too hard to make something happen, instead of letting the game come to him.

jimsumner
11-23-2014, 07:34 PM
I agree with all the good things said about Winslow - he is amazing. But, his jump shot / free throw form seems awkward. Maybe it's just that he's left handed and it just looks weird.

Didn't look weird when Jack Marin, Johnny Dawkins, Thomas Hill or Rodney Hood were stroking it. :)

Henderson
11-23-2014, 10:21 PM
If you haven't seen Amile interviewing Quinn after the Stanford game on Duke Blue Planet, it's worth a look. Grayson Allen's trophy cameo is worth the 3 minutes all by itself.

Brockt10
11-23-2014, 10:30 PM
I agree with all the good things said about Winslow - he is amazing. But, his jump shot / free throw form seems awkward. Maybe it's just that he's left handed and it just looks weird.

This is actually one of his weaknesses according to scouts. He has an awkward motion and inconsistent release point (sometimes releases on his way down) but as long as he keeps shooting upper 30's % from deep it's okay with me.

Henderson
11-23-2014, 10:37 PM
This is actually one of his weaknesses according to scouts. He has an awkward motion and inconsistent release point (sometimes releases on his way down) but as long as he keeps shooting upper 30's % from deep it's okay with me.

Here's a fun clip on point (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz-T30WZKo8). Red Auerbach sez, "Do it the way you can make it."

SilkyJ
11-23-2014, 11:12 PM
Okafor might actually not be getting enough credit for what he's doing defensively. It's been 5 games now, and he hasn't really been foul trouble once. (Knock on wood) It's one thing to limit opponents FG% in the paint, but doing that AND keeping off of the free throw line ... That's how you win games. The combo of okafor down and Winslow on the wings makes this team very tough to score on. We're also doing such a good job guarding the 3 ball, it's just so hard to make a run on us.

Agree a lot with this. Okafor's feel for the game is incredible, and it translates on defense. Jabari had similar feel on the offensive end, but was nowhere near that on defense. And that's not unusual for a freshman, so it makes Okafor's feel all the more impressive. He's not an elite athlete and shotblocker, but he can play good D and affect shots without fouling, which is what we need. He's also been very good on pick and rolls and affecting smaller guards/slashers, but again without fouling. I've been very pleased with our D this year and he's a big piece of it.


I agree re: Quinn being key to Duke's success but was not surprised he had the ball down the stretch. As Flying Dutch Devil demonstrated in another thread, Quinn takes care of the ball (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?34588-Quinn-Jones-Taking-Care-of-the-Ball[/url)and will likely finish his career with the best assist to turnover ratio in Duke history.

I wonder if Tyus was a little under the weather or just fatigued from back to back games. He only played 25 minutes and was on the bench down the stretch while Quinn played all but the last minute.

There are plenty of posters that have been overly critical of Quinn in the past IMO. More than a few were certain before the season started that he would come off the bench behind Matt Jones. That was never going to happen. It's clear now that Quinn is the glue of this team and not only will he log the most minutes, but he will run the team during crunch time.

Quinn, as our best senior, is the key. I admit that I softened on QC after a junior year in which Quinn didn't improve much, which was all the more disappointing after a tough end to his soph year...especially after his MVP performance in the bahamas that year. And I used to drive the bandwagon (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?26400-Quinn-Cook-start&highlight=Quinn+Cook+Start). I just didn't know what we were going to get from him this year, tho I obviously hoped he'd make a jump. He seems to have taken the senior leap is playing at a high level, and most importantly is the leader on the floor. Late in the season Quinn will have the ball in his hands, as he should, and we'll need him to make plays when it matters most. If Quinn keeps playing at an All-ACC level, I believe we are a final four team.


I would not be surprised to see Cook, Okafor, and Justise continue as our top three shooters, although not necessarily in that order, going forward.


Justise's play has probably been the biggest surprise for me. I certainly didn't expect him to be third on our list of top shot takers (he, Quinn and Okafor are our top 3 by far and account for 56% of our shots) and his defense, rebounding, versatility and driving ability are all sensational. He's also our leading FT shooter by far, nearly doubling Amile in 2nd place. He's a very complete player.


3. It appears that our backup PF (and perhaps our crunchtime PF) will be Justise Winslow. He has been terrific this year. I think he got a little too 3-ball happy (I don't really want to see him taking 7 3s in a game again), but he just does so many different things well. He's so physical and so talented, and he doesn't seem afraid of the moment at all.


This may be Winslow's one gap, but we'll see. Jury is still out on his jump shot. I guess I don't want him taking 7 threes every game, but if he's getting wide open looks, for now, I'm ok if that happens and my guess is there will be several games where he shoots 5-7 3s. He's shooting 39% so, for now, that warrants a green light and with Okafor commanding double teams we need our wing players to shoot and hit off those doubles. In our starting lineup, Winslow is actually the 2nd best shooter...

That said, my gut says he'll be a 30-35% 3pt shooter at the end of the year, which is where a lot of freshman with decent (but not great) jumpers end up as they make the transition to college. If that ends up being the case, then we probably don't want him taking 7 3s in a game in March.

Related, Tyus' jumper definitely seems to be a question mark in his game. We have a lot of weapons and so can mask a lot of weaknesses, but it would go a long way if one of Winslow and Tyus can be a reliable 3pt option on the wing...otherwise its just Quinn out there to punish zone and double teams on Okafor, both of which we are likely to see a decent amount of this year. Of course, if Matt and Sheed continue to hit at a high clip, then we have options. I'm looking forward to watching K put together all these weapons.

CajunDevil
11-24-2014, 04:43 AM
Justise has excellent form on his jumper. Don't mistake a few misses due to playing 5 games in 8 days for bad form. He is a very solid shooter with proper mechanics (elbow straight, nice follow through) and the whole "Justise has a questionable shot" narrative is off-base, imo.

flyingdutchdevil
11-24-2014, 08:58 AM
Without having read the article, I think it's valid to point out that the three point defense isn't really that good, but I don't take from it that Duke is vulnerable. Maybe the article has more nuance than the headline.

The title is incredibly misleading. The article is solid with talk how Duke's opposing 3pt% is just too low to be sustainable, which is accurate. Okafor shot 83% for this first three games; this is obviously not correct.

Also in the article, Gasaway talks about Amile Jefferson as one of the most underrated players in the country. Nice.

Troublemaker
11-24-2014, 09:22 AM
I woke up this morning and while drinking my coffee, a smile came across my face.

I just realized how utterly satisfied I am with this team. We just have guys who know how to play basketball, you know?

For all the talk about having good size, icing screens, being more prepared for the freedom-of-movement officiating, I think the biggest upgrade we made over last season was just a mass infusion of basketball IQ.

I didn't quite realize what a problem that was for last year's team until Coach K's postseason presser. I'm paraphrasing here, but Coach said that last year's team had great difficulty with recognizing what the opponent was trying to do on the court and making the proper on-the-spot corrections without having to call a timeout. I mean, that's just a euphemistic way of saying poor basketball IQ, right? And Coach said he had to play Thornton more minutes than he wanted to because Tyler was the best at recognizing what was happening.

This season, no such issues. The freshmen all came in with high IQs and the experienced players have aged like fine wine. Our ball movement has been fantastic against both man and zone. Whatever defense or offense the opponent throws out there, our guys have been ready for it. We just have a bunch of players who have great court vision and awareness, and that has been translating to very good help defense and great passing on offense (including knowing where the ball eventually needs to go on re-location, i.e. hockey assists).

It's just been a beautiful basketball team to watch this season. Kind of like the college version of the Spurs with spottier shooting so far.

I'm happy.

Mike Corey
11-24-2014, 09:28 AM
I woke up this morning and while drinking my coffee, a smile came across my face.

I just realized how utterly satisfied I am with this team. We just have guys who know how to play basketball, you know?

For all the talk about having good size, icing screens, being more prepared for the freedom-of-movement officiating, I think the biggest upgrade we made over last season was just a mass infusion of basketball IQ.

I didn't quite realize what a problem that was for last year's team until Coach K's postseason presser. I'm paraphrasing here, but Coach said that last year's team had great difficulty with recognizing what the opponent was trying to do on the court and making the proper on-the-spot corrections without having to call a timeout. I mean, that's just a euphemistic way of saying poor basketball IQ, right? And Coach said he had to play Thornton more minutes than he wanted to because Tyler was the best at recognizing what was happening.

This season, no such issues. The freshmen all came in with high IQs and the experienced players have aged like fine wine. Our ball movement has been fantastic against both man and zone. Whatever defense or offense the opponent throws out there, our guys have been ready for it. We just have a bunch of players who have great court vision and awareness, and that has been translating to very good help defense and great passing on offense (including knowing where the ball eventually needs to go on re-location, i.e. hockey assists).

It's just been a beautiful basketball team to watch this season. Kind of like the college version of the Spurs with spottier shooting so far.

I'm happy.

Sporks are insufficient in response to this post.

alteran
11-24-2014, 09:43 AM
I woke up this morning and while drinking my coffee, a smile came across my face.

I just realized how utterly satisfied I am with this team. We just have guys who know how to play basketball, you know?

For all the talk about having good size, icing screens, being more prepared for the freedom-of-movement officiating, I think the biggest upgrade we made over last season was just a mass infusion of basketball IQ.

I didn't quite realize what a problem that was for last year's team until Coach K's postseason presser. I'm paraphrasing here, but Coach said that last year's team had great difficulty with recognizing what the opponent was trying to do on the court and making the proper on-the-spot corrections without having to call a timeout. I mean, that's just a euphemistic way of saying poor basketball IQ, right? And Coach said he had to play Thornton more minutes than he wanted to because Tyler was the best at recognizing what was happening.

This season, no such issues. The freshmen all came in with high IQs and the experienced players have aged like fine wine. Our ball movement has been fantastic against both man and zone. Whatever defense or offense the opponent throws out there, our guys have been ready for it. We just have a bunch of players who have great court vision and awareness, and that has been translating to very good help defense and great passing on offense (including knowing where the ball eventually needs to go on re-location, i.e. hockey assists).

It's just been a beautiful basketball team to watch this season. Kind of like the college version of the Spurs with spottier shooting so far.

I'm happy.

Great post.

I also think you've captured why this team is so fun, and is NOT frustrating to watch.

They're by no means perfect (they are damn good, though), but they seem to "get it." We will not see the same problems in March that we're seeing in November. This team will not have reached its potential in December, and spend the next three months watching everyone else close the gap.

Speaking of which, has anyone else looked over our home/away ACC schedule this year? We play all the ranked teams on their home floors-- the only ones we play in Cameron are the Cuse and the Cheats. Virginia and Louisville both get us at their home without returning the favor.

This would make me so much more annoyed with another team.

Totally loving this season.

devildeac
11-24-2014, 09:48 AM
Sporks are insufficient in response to this post.

I concur with the esteemed Mr. Corey. Great perspective to have. (But I'll spork anyway;).)

ACCBBallFan
11-24-2014, 10:03 AM
Justise's play has probably been the biggest surprise for me. I certainly didn't expect him to be third on our list of top shot takers (he, Quinn and Okafor are our top 3 by far and account for 56% of our shots) and his defense, rebounding, versatility and driving ability are all sensational. He's also our leading FT shooter by far, nearly doubling Amile in 2nd place. He's a very complete player.


Before Quinn supplanted Matt and the starters were the Duke Blue J-Crew, not as surprising. Offense runs through Jah, but Jones, T is pass first and Jones M and Amile only take shots when wide open. sometimes not even then for Jefferson. So Justise #2 shot taker by default.

The 5 man substitution had both Sheed and Quinn to take shots, did not expect Semi to have quite as quick a trigger finger, MP3 is not a dominant offensive player just put backs and did not expect Grayson to take it to the rim so easily albeit after game was decided.

But yes, Justise's willingness and ability top take sots and draw fouls is a pleasant surprise.

duke blue brewcrew
11-24-2014, 10:04 AM
I have been critical of Matt this season, but last night he showed why he should be the the first player off the bench. Nice game.

It's nice to see MJones finally make some shots. During his recruitment, he was billed as a great shooter. However, until now I was wondering what the heck those scouts were talking about. It's nice to see some offensive promise from Matt and I hope it continues to improve. That said, I hope it doesn't impact the playing time for Grayson and Sheed.

ACCBBallFan
11-24-2014, 10:19 AM
So many posters are so consumed with lack of PT for Grayson and for Semi that they fail to realize these guys along with MP3, Sheed and Matt deserve a lot of the credit for Duke's defensive improvement.

Not only is MP3 a 100% accurate 3 point shooter (cough) but he is surrounded by 4 guys who are probably a better shooting team than almost anybody Duke faces in real games. So Grayson, Semi, Sheed and Matt present the challenge and the Duke starters respond, making it almost easier to play 3-point defense when the real games occur.

In addition Sheed and Grayson help the Duke combo guards learn to stay in front of good penetrators and against taller guards, knowing that big Jah, Jefferson and Justise have their backs.

What surprises me the most is that with constant banging from MP3 and presumably from Sean Obi in practice, that Jah is not more used to man handling from opposing centers. He is a good passer out of double teams but does have quite a few turnovers when he errs by dribbling in traffic.

ACCBBallFan
11-24-2014, 10:42 AM
The title is incredibly misleading. The article is solid with talk how Duke's opposing 3pt% is just too low to be sustainable, which is accurate. Okafor shot 83% for this first three games; this is obviously not correct.

Also in the article, Gasaway talks about Amile Jefferson as one of the most underrated players in the country. Nice.Big Jah shot 9-10 agianst Presbyterian and 8-10 versus both Fairfield and Michigan State. So 25 for 30 os 83.3% for first 3 games.

How else could he be shooting 60% YTD after his low stats versus Temple and Stanford 11 for 30 and 36.7% for a total of 36 for 60?

Duke3517
11-24-2014, 11:16 AM
Justise Winslow is arguably the best freshman in the country not named Okafor.

Karl Anthony Towns is not to shabby either.

Mal
11-24-2014, 11:54 AM
Speaking of which, has anyone else looked over our home/away ACC schedule this year? We play all the ranked teams on their home floors-- the only ones we play in Cameron are the Cuse and the Cheats. Virginia and Louisville both get us at their home without returning the favor.

This would make me so much more annoyed with another team.

Right on. I also get the sense this group would learn more and come out stronger after losing 3 or 4 games in conference than last year's, where adversity seemed to lead to more adversity, and weaknesses exposed were never cleaned up. For that reason, as well as increased confidence in the team's ability to handle a hostile location, I'm not that concerned about schedule inequities. I mean, I want to win the ACC, but being battle tested going into the postseason is welcomed more this season than the past few.

CDu
11-24-2014, 11:58 AM
Interesting take by John Gas-bag on ESPN's front page right now. It's insider so I can't link.

The headline, however, says "Duke Undefeated, But Vulnerable"

So what makes them vulnerable? According to Gas-bag (actually its Gasaway), it's because Duke is holding opponents to 17 percent 3-point shooting.

His logic is that nobody holds opponents to that low a 3-point percentage, so it's got to be a fluke and therefore Duke's defense isn't as good as it looks.

So does anybody like that logic?

Later in the article, Gas-bag suggests that the ACC is not really that deep because VPI, Clemson, Wake and FSU have suffered bad home losses. He points those out and makes a sneering reference to the "so-called best league in America" He doesn't mention that four ACC teams are in the top 10, plus borderline top 25 teams in Syracuse, Miami and maybe even NC State (hard to tell with their weak opponents -- but they are smashing them)

I mean, he's right. We aren't going to hold teams to 17% 3pt shooting for the season. So our defensive efficiency is certainly somewhat inflated. How much it is inflated we just don't know (some of those extra misses went for offensive rebounds and second chances, of course). But I think it's fair to say that the defense is probably not as good as it has looked in these first few games.

And his comments about the conference are probably also relatively fair. Just like we used to complain about the pundits lauding the Big East (in spite of having as many as 7 or 8 terrible teams), the bottom half of the ACC looks to be pretty bad. Yes, we'll have 4 elite teams and anywhere from 1 to 3 more pretty good teams. But after that? It looks pretty rough. So it's just a question of what one considers to be a top conference. Do you look at the top tier? The top half? The percentage of teams that are decent? He seems to be focusing on the latter with his comments here.

And again, ultimately, who really cares what he thinks? It's not going to amount to a hill of beans either way. The games will decide everything in due time.

DukieTiger
11-24-2014, 12:38 PM
I mean, he's right. We aren't going to hold teams to 17% 3pt shooting for the season. So our defensive efficiency is certainly somewhat inflated. How much it is inflated we just don't know (some of those extra misses went for offensive rebounds and second chances, of course). But I think it's fair to say that the defense is probably not as good as it has looked in these first few games.

And his comments about the conference are probably also relatively fair. Just like we used to complain about the pundits lauding the Big East (in spite of having as many as 7 or 8 terrible teams), the bottom half of the ACC looks to be pretty bad. Yes, we'll have 4 elite teams and anywhere from 1 to 3 more pretty good teams. But after that? It looks pretty rough. So it's just a question of what one considers to be a top conference. Do you look at the top tier? The top half? The percentage of teams that are decent? He seems to be focusing on the latter with his comments here.

And again, ultimately, who really cares what he thinks? It's not going to amount to a hill of beans either way. The games will decide everything in due time.

Agree that he is right in principle. However, many teams are going to have artificially inflated stats at this point in the season- for any team that starts the year playing well, with a small sample size, and a few games against cupcakes- this is just a fact of life. Gasaway (whom I like) made the point that the best full-season 3pt defense in the KenPom era (Since 2002) is a full 10% higher than Duke is currently allowing. So it does stand to reason that Duke will regress toward the mean. Of course, Kentucky's 2pt defense is in the exact same situation, and will likely regress. But there are tons of other factors for both teams. Kentucky is defensively dominant in several other areas that suggest they will have an elite defense even when opponents start making over 30% of their 2's. I would argue that Duke has at least shown potential to have a very good defense. I think Duke could improve in several categories as their 3pt defense regresses to the mean. So I would agree that this "concern" will just work itself out on the court.

I do think that it will be fascinating to watch Duke's defense develop this year though. Statistically, we are much better than last year so far- and yes, some of that does depend on the high amount of missed 3's so far. But there are a few other things worth watching as we move forward:

-Duke has looked much better at forcing turnovers than last year
-Duke has been keeping opponents off the FT line more than last year
-Duke has so far allowed more 3pt attempts than normal
-Duke's 2pt defense and defensive rebounding are ok, maybe slight improvements from last year, but still room to improve. Really, just the MSU game is affecting those numbers so far.

It will definitely be interesting to see how all of this develops as the team continues to gel on the defensive end.

superdave
11-24-2014, 01:23 PM
Interesting take by John Gas-bag on ESPN's front page right now. It's insider so I can't link.

The headline, however, says "Duke Undefeated, But Vulnerable"

So what makes them vulnerable? According to Gas-bag (actually its Gasaway), it's because Duke is holding opponents to 17 percent 3-point shooting.

His logic is that nobody holds opponents to that low a 3-point percentage, so it's got to be a fluke and therefore Duke's defense isn't as good as it looks.

So does anybody like that logic?

Later in the article, Gas-bag suggests that the ACC is not really that deep because VPI, Clemson, Wake and FSU have suffered bad home losses. He points those out and makes a sneering reference to the "so-called best league in America" He doesn't mention that four ACC teams are in the top 10, plus borderline top 25 teams in Syracuse, Miami and maybe even NC State (hard to tell with their weak opponents -- but they are smashing them)

Of course Gasaway thinks Duke is vulnerable. Duke plays Wisconsin on December 3 and that game is a tossup for us. If Wisco wins, Gasaway gloats. If Duke wins, Gasaway gets to write about how the freshmen are growing rapidly. Either way he gets clicks by writing about Duke. Gasway is merely setting up an article for next Thursday.

Does that make me cynical?

Kedsy
11-24-2014, 01:59 PM
Agree that he is right in principle. However, many teams are going to have artificially inflated stats at this point in the season- for any team that starts the year playing well, with a small sample size, and a few games against cupcakes- this is just a fact of life. Gasaway (whom I like) made the point that the best full-season 3pt defense in the KenPom era (Since 2002) is a full 10% higher than Duke is currently allowing. So it does stand to reason that Duke will regress toward the mean. Of course, Kentucky's 2pt defense is in the exact same situation, and will likely regress. But there are tons of other factors for both teams. Kentucky is defensively dominant in several other areas that suggest they will have an elite defense even when opponents start making over 30% of their 2's. I would argue that Duke has at least shown potential to have a very good defense. I think Duke could improve in several categories as their 3pt defense regresses to the mean. So I would agree that this "concern" will just work itself out on the court.

I do think that it will be fascinating to watch Duke's defense develop this year though. Statistically, we are much better than last year so far- and yes, some of that does depend on the high amount of missed 3's so far. But there are a few other things worth watching as we move forward:

-Duke has looked much better at forcing turnovers than last year
-Duke has been keeping opponents off the FT line more than last year
-Duke has so far allowed more 3pt attempts than normal
-Duke's 2pt defense and defensive rebounding are ok, maybe slight improvements from last year, but still room to improve. Really, just the MSU game is affecting those numbers so far.

It will definitely be interesting to see how all of this develops as the team continues to gel on the defensive end.

These are all good points. I would go further and say that if our opponent's 3-point percentage will almost have to go up (which I agree it will), then our opponents' 2-point percentage will almost have to come down -- our current unadjusted 2-point FG% (47.8%) would be Duke's 2nd worst over an entire season going back more than 20 years (last season was Duke's worst).

Our defensive rebounding percentage (69.6%) would (over the course of a season) be our best since they started keeping the offensive rebound stat, but considering the low sample size of games includes two 50-point blowouts, it's hard to say whether our defensive rebounding is better or worse than usual. Our current defensive free-throw rate (how well we've kept opponents off the line) would be by far the best Duke performance in at least 18 years; this is worth watching but again hard to evaluate considering the low sample size. Our defensive turnover percentage is our best since 2009, but is a pretty middling number if you look at the past 18 years.

Also, if you're going to predict our defensive efficiency is going to get worse, you have to take into account that so will everyone else's. We're currently 8th in the country, according to Pomeroy, with a defensive efficiency of 88.7. At the end of last season, 8th in the country (Cincinnati) had a DefEff of 91.3 (the same as Oklahoma State has right now, Pomeroy's 25th ranked defensive team). So our raw numbers could drop precipitously and we could still be a top ten defense.

BD80
11-24-2014, 02:51 PM
Karl Anthony Towns is not to shabby either.

But he's only going to play 20 minutes per game

mr. synellinden
11-24-2014, 02:52 PM
I would go further and say that if our opponent's 3-point percentage will almost have to go up (which I agree it will), then our opponents' 2-point percentage will almost have to come down -- our current unadjusted 2-point FG% (47.8%) would be Duke's 2nd worst over an entire season going back more than 20 years (last season was Duke's worst).


I agree with this - it lines up with what my observation has been during the last three games - that MSU, Temple (to a lesser extent) and Stanford seemed to hit a high percentage of long and/or contested-difficult two point jump shots. That's probably just a luck factor over a small sample size. I think our defense has been much better than 48% shooting would suggest.

On a related note, I was very impressed with Stanford - particularly Randle, Brown and Nastic. Randle was outstanding and hit some very tough shots. I think he has a good chance to win the PAC-12 player of the year. Stanford is a very good team. If Travis develops more confidence on the offensive end and the other freshmen can contribute, they will be a tough matchup in the NCAA tournament.

ACCBBallFan
11-24-2014, 03:04 PM
I agree with this - it lines up with what my observation has been during the last three games - that MSU, Temple (to a lesser extent) and Stanford seemed to hit a high percentage of long and/or contested-difficult two point jump shots. That's probably just a luck factor over a small sample size. I think our defense has been much better than 48% shooting would suggest.

On a related note, I was very impressed with Stanford - particularly Randle, Brown and Nastic. Randle was outstanding and hit some very tough shots. I think he has a good chance to win the PAC-12 player of the year. Stanford is a very good team. If Travis develops more confidence on the offensive end and the other freshmen can contribute, they will be a tough matchup in the NCAA tournament.My understanding of icing on pick and roll is that is exactly the risk you take, giving up the worst shot in Babll the long 2.

Better than giving up a three or an uncontested roll to the basket.

So a planned risk.

CDu
11-24-2014, 03:08 PM
Stanford's biggest problem appears to be that they don't have anyone setting up the offense. Randle is a fabulous scorer. He averaged almost 19ppg while shooting over 47% from the field (almost unheard of for a small guard). However, he has never averaged even 3 apg, and this year his A:TO ratio is about 0.5. That's right, he's averaging almost twice as many turnovers as assists. And it isn't like they have a lot of shot creators. So without a PG, they really a lot on hitting tough, contested shots.

The only other quibble I have is that they really only have two big men (Nastic and Travis). Rosco Allen is tall but appears to be fairly soft/perimeter-oriented. So when Nastic or Travis gets tired or in foul trouble, the Cardinal get pretty small. As we Duke fans know all to well, it's really nice to have 3 capable big men to eat up the vast majority of the PF/C minutes. Right now, Stanford has just two of those guys.

I agree that they actually have a pretty good team. If they just had a PG that would allow them to move Randle up to SG and Brown up to SF and bring Rosco Allen off the bench, and if they had one more big man to give Nastic and Travis some rest, I think they'd be in terrific shape.

MChambers
11-24-2014, 03:50 PM
-Duke has so far allowed more 3pt attempts than normal
I wonder if our newfound size has anything to do with that? I think teams are far less likely to make a short two pointer against a team with Okafor and MP3 at the 5 and Jefferson at the 4.

Kedsy
11-24-2014, 04:28 PM
I wonder if our newfound size has anything to do with that? I think teams are far less likely to make a short two pointer against a team with Okafor and MP3 at the 5 and Jefferson at the 4.

For what it's worth, here are Duke's seasons with the most opponents' three-point attempts:

(1) 1999 (635)
(2) 2001 (602)
(3) 2010 (560)
(4) 2002 (555)
(5T) 2013 (551)
(5T) 2000 (551)

Here are Duke's seasons with the highest percentage of opponents' three-point attempts out of overall attempts:

(1) 1996 (37.0%)
(2) 2013 (36.8%)
(3) 2002 (35.6%)
(4) 2009 (35.1%)
(5) 1999 (34.3%)
(6) 2010 (34.1%)

Finally, here are Duke's lowest (best) opponents' three-point percentage:

(1) 2010 (28.2%)
(2) 1993 (28.9%)
(3) 2013 (29.0%)
(4) 1994 (29.7%)
(5) 1999 (30.1%)
(6) 2002 (30.3%)

Interesting that four of the five Duke teams that gave up the most three-point attempts also are on the lowest three-point percentage list. Probably a big reason why those teams were successful.

Philadukie
11-24-2014, 05:11 PM
For what it's worth, here are Duke's seasons with the most opponents' three-point attempts:

(1) 1999 (635)
(2) 2001 (602)
(3) 2010 (560)
(4) 2002 (555)
(5T) 2013 (551)
(5T) 2000 (551)

Here are Duke's seasons with the highest percentage of opponents' three-point attempts out of overall attempts:

(1) 1996 (37.0%)
(2) 2013 (36.8%)
(3) 2002 (35.6%)
(4) 2009 (35.1%)
(5) 1999 (34.3%)
(6) 2010 (34.1%)

Finally, here are Duke's lowest (best) opponents' three-point percentage:

(1) 2010 (28.2%)
(2) 1993 (28.9%)
(3) 2013 (29.0%)
(4) 1994 (29.7%)
(5) 1999 (30.1%)
(6) 2002 (30.3%)

Interesting that four of the five Duke teams that gave up the most three-point attempts also are on the lowest three-point percentage list. Probably a big reason why those teams were successful.

Very interesting. Good stuff. Is the corollary to this that we give up potentially more offensive rebounds with strong three-point defense? In other words, in theory at least, doesn't taking away the three mean we're in worse position to grab defensive rebounds? Do you have any data on opponents' OffReb% for the years that have the lowest opponents' three point percentage? (Not to add to your work load). ;)

Philadukie
11-24-2014, 05:17 PM
One observation that I've made (and I don't how accurate this is), is that our starting perimeter players (Tyus, Quinn, and Winslow) seem to have very quick hands on defense. In other words, while Tyus and Quinn may not have the quickest feet relative to stopping penetration, I've seen a number of times where they've picked the pocket of an opposing guard or stripped the ball from a big with a really quick reach-in. If they can keep doing this effectively without fouling, it may offset some of their lateral quickness issues.

Saratoga2
11-24-2014, 07:05 PM
1 John Davis III Guard Freshman 5-10 160 Beachwood, Ohio / Beachwood High School
3 Geoff Beans Forward Freshman 6-7 210 Toledo, Ohio / Ottawa Hills High School
4 T.K. Hayes Guard Sophomore 6-1 175 Chester, N.J. / Mendham High School
5 Aaron O'Neill Guard Senior 6-0 180 Cincinnati, Ohio / Cincinnati Hills Christian Academy
10 Gene Langan Forward Freshman 6-6 195 Greenville, S.C. / St. Joseph's High School
12 Devin Sibley Guard Freshman 6-2 175 Knoxville, Tenn. / Karns High School
14 Stephen Croone Guard Junior 6-0 170 Covington, Ga. / Newton High School
15 Isaiah Watkins Forward Sophomore 6-8 220 Toronto, Onatario / St. Benedict's Prep
21 Kris Acox Forward Sophomore 6-6 215 Reykjavik, Iceland / Kvennaskolinn I Reykjavik School
22 William Gates Jr. Guard Sophomore 6-1 180 Schertz, Texas / Clemens High School
24 Larry Wideman Guard Junior 6-4 190 Loris, S.C. / Oakbrook Prep
30 Kendrec Ferrara Forward Junior 6-9 235 Cape Coral, Fla. / Mariner High School
35 Daniel Fowler Guard Freshman 6-4 195 Acworth, Ga. / Allatoona High School
42 Kevin Chuisseu Forward Junior 6-8 230 Douala, Cameroon / Woodberry Forest School

Sometimes I wonder why after player at such a high level, we play a school as weak as Furman.

Henderson
11-24-2014, 07:53 PM
1 John Davis III Guard Freshman 5-10 160 Beachwood, Ohio / Beachwood High School
3 Geoff Beans Forward Freshman 6-7 210 Toledo, Ohio / Ottawa Hills High School
4 T.K. Hayes Guard Sophomore 6-1 175 Chester, N.J. / Mendham High School
5 Aaron O'Neill Guard Senior 6-0 180 Cincinnati, Ohio / Cincinnati Hills Christian Academy
10 Gene Langan Forward Freshman 6-6 195 Greenville, S.C. / St. Joseph's High School
12 Devin Sibley Guard Freshman 6-2 175 Knoxville, Tenn. / Karns High School
14 Stephen Croone Guard Junior 6-0 170 Covington, Ga. / Newton High School
15 Isaiah Watkins Forward Sophomore 6-8 220 Toronto, Onatario / St. Benedict's Prep
21 Kris Acox Forward Sophomore 6-6 215 Reykjavik, Iceland / Kvennaskolinn I Reykjavik School
22 William Gates Jr. Guard Sophomore 6-1 180 Schertz, Texas / Clemens High School
24 Larry Wideman Guard Junior 6-4 190 Loris, S.C. / Oakbrook Prep
30 Kendrec Ferrara Forward Junior 6-9 235 Cape Coral, Fla. / Mariner High School
35 Daniel Fowler Guard Freshman 6-4 195 Acworth, Ga. / Allatoona High School
42 Kevin Chuisseu Forward Junior 6-8 230 Douala, Cameroon / Woodberry Forest School

Sometimes I wonder why after player at such a high level, we play a school as weak as Furman.

I hope no one here really needs a tutorial on how when and why Duke schedules are developed.

Duvall
11-24-2014, 07:56 PM
I hope no one here really needs a tutorial on how when and why Duke schedules are developed.

I guess I could use one, because beating a team like Furman is worse for your NCAA Tournament resume than taking the night off.

Henderson
11-24-2014, 08:06 PM
I guess I could use one, because beating a team like Furman is worse for your NCAA Tournament resume than taking the night off.

Taking the time off doesn't get your team another game of experience. How about that for starters? But I don't seriously believe you don't understand balanced, years-in-advanced scheduling.

Duvall
11-24-2014, 08:09 PM
Taking the time off doesn't get your team another game of experience. How about that for starters? But I don't seriously believe you don't understand scheduling.

I don't understand scheduling Furman, a team that was 9-21 the year and doesn't look to be better this year. Don't play teams at the bottom of Division I, play teams in that 150-200 range. You still get the easy win, and your strength of schedule takes a smaller hit.

Edouble
11-24-2014, 08:17 PM
I guess I could use one, because beating a team like Furman is worse for your NCAA Tournament resume than taking the night off.

Seth Greenberg is holding on line 2 for you.

Kedsy
11-24-2014, 08:29 PM
Very interesting. Good stuff. Is the corollary to this that we give up potentially more offensive rebounds with strong three-point defense? In other words, in theory at least, doesn't taking away the three mean we're in worse position to grab defensive rebounds? Do you have any data on opponents' OffReb% for the years that have the lowest opponents' three point percentage? (Not to add to your work load). ;)

I do happen to have that information, bolded in the quote below:



Finally, here are Duke's lowest (best) opponents' three-point percentage:

(1) 2010 (28.2%) opponents' offensive rebounding percentage: 32.5%
(2) 1993 (28.9%) opponents' offensive rebounding percentage: 38.5%
(3) 2013 (29.0%) opponents' offensive rebounding percentage: 31.3%
(4) 1994 (29.7%) opponents' offensive rebounding percentage: 38.6%
(5) 1999 (30.1%) opponents' offensive rebounding percentage: 34.9%
(6) 2002 (30.3%) opponents' offensive rebounding percentage: 34.1%


2013 and 2010 are two of Duke's best five defensive rebounding teams since they've kept the stat. 1993 and 1994 are the two worst Duke defensive rebounding teams since they've kept the stat. 1999 and 2002 are about in the middle. So I don't see a correlation here.

Henderson
11-24-2014, 08:37 PM
I don't understand scheduling Furman, a team that was 9-21 the year and doesn't look to be better this year. Don't play teams at the bottom of Division I, play teams in that 150-200 range. You still get the easy win, and your strength of schedule takes a smaller hit.

There's a regional issue. Duke schedules regional schools and takes pride in doing so, and the schools consistently praise Duke for the opportunity. And Duke didn't schedule Furman at the end of last year. That's not how it works.

Frankly, I don't think K loses sleep at night worrying about how lesser competition affects his team's RPI. It's more about a balanced schedule that best prepares the team for March.

MartyClark
11-24-2014, 08:47 PM
I hope no one here really needs a tutorial on how when and why Duke schedules are developed.

I'm probably stating the obvious but I think:

1. It's a home game. There are financial benefits to playing a team like this;

2. Duke needs to get easy wins, pre-ACC season to bolster their NCAA tournament portfolio;

3. If you care about the academics, and I think Duke does, it makes sense to limit/control the travel prior to the ACC season.

Having said this, I'd love to see Duke get a more ambitious in its pre ACC schedule. I live in Colorado and follow the Buffs. There is no doubt that the University of Colorado would travel to Duke twice in exchange for a single Duke visit to Boulder. There are lot of teams that fall in this category.

Kedsy
11-24-2014, 08:48 PM
Frankly, I don't think K loses sleep at night worrying about how lesser competition affects his team's RPI. It's more about a balanced schedule that best prepares the team for March.

I don't know. For years, K successfully gamed the system, playing the best low majors (plus a few strong high majors) which generally gave us one of the top "schedule strengths" in the country.

This year, for whatever reason (or reasons), our non-conference schedule strength is pretty awful. Hopefully the lousy non-con ss and resulting lower RPI (we're currently 18th in the RPI, despite being 5-0) will not cost us a #1 seed in March (and frankly, I think going for a better seed is as much or more a part of "preparing" for March as any other factor).

ACCBBallFan
11-24-2014, 09:01 PM
Reordered by stats accomplished YTD rather than uniform #.

Prior to Duke game only 1 guy Acox even committed 4 fouls in a game 8 total in 3 games, no one DQ'd. Fowler also has committed 8 total fouls with everybody else about 5 fouls in 3 games.

The second biggest guy is terrible on FT's.

Only 3 guys at least 200 pounds not a recipe for success.

Jah vs guy two inches shorter and 35 pounds lighter
Jefferson vs. guy three inches shorter about same weight.
Justise vs. guy two inches shorter and 25 pounds or more lighter.
Even Duke's guards are as tall and weigh more.





14 Stephen Croone Guard Junior 6-0 170 28.0 MPG 13.5 PPG 4.0 Assists per game, 3.0 Turnovers per game 5 of 13 3 pt
21 Kris Acox Forward Sophomore 6-6 215 26.7 MPG 09.3 PPG 8.0 Rebounds per game 9 of 12 FG, 10 of 14 FT
35 Daniel Fowler Guard Freshman 6-4 195 27.0 MPG 09.0 PPG 2.7 Turnovers per game, 7 of 11 FT
30 Kendrec Ferrara Forward Junior 6-9 235 21.0 MPG 07.3 PPG 7 of 13 FT
01 John Davis III Guard Freshman 5-10 160 26.3 MPG 06.3 PPG 9 of 12 FT

22 William Gates Jr. Guard Sophomore 6-1 180 20.3 MPG 04.7 PPG
42 Kevin Chuisseu Forward Junior 6-8 230 20.7 MPG 04.7 PPG 06.3 rebounds 4 of 12 FT's
12 Devin Sibley Guard Freshman 6-2 175 12.7 MPG 04.3 PPG 02.3 turnovers per game
24 Larry Wideman Guard Junior 6-4 190 23.3 MPG 04.0 PPG

05 Aaron O'Neill Guard Senior 6-0 180 6.0 MPG 3.0 PPG
04 T.K. Hayes Guard Sophomore 6-1 175 2.0 MPG
10 Gene Langan Forward Freshman 6-6 195 2.0 MPG

15 Isaiah Watkins Forward Sophomore 6-8 220 Toronto, Onatario / St. Benedict's Pre

03 Geoff Beans Forward Freshman 6-7 210 Toledo, Ohio / Ottawa Hills High School


Sometimes I wonder why after player at such a high level, we play a school as weak as Furman.

Simple answer after playing 5 games in 8 days, need a couple laughers around Thanksgiving holiday before Wisc game.

Army is deceptively 5-0 by time of Duke game, then 5-1.

Henderson
11-24-2014, 09:04 PM
I don't know. For years, K successfully gamed the system, playing the best low majors (plus a few strong high majors) which generally gave us one of the top "schedule strengths" in the country.

This year, for whatever reason (or reasons), our non-conference schedule strength is pretty awful. Hopefully the lousy non-con ss and resulting lower RPI (we're currently 18th in the RPI, despite being 5-0) will not cost us a #1 seed in March (and frankly, I think going for a better seed is as much or more a part of "preparing" for March as any other factor).

I get that. But in the first place, it's hard to judge who'll be good and who won't when you schedule them. You don't even know how good your team will be. Being a "mid-major" doesn't mean you'll have a good team when the game is played years down the line. There are a lot of bad mid-majors too.

And then there's the regional thing: Duke likes to play regional teams out of conference. And those teams love it. Good for PR, good for regional relationships.

There is also the schedule thing. Duke played 5 games in 8 days, including Michigan State, Temple, and Stanford. With Wisconsin coming up. Then conference play. Furman and Army in between? During the holidays? Is that so bad?

I say cut 'em some slack for having scheduled Furman in that slot 2-3 years ago.

It's a long season, and the RPI will work itself out if Duke keeps winning.

Kedsy
11-24-2014, 09:27 PM
I get that. But in the first place, it's hard to judge who'll be good and who won't when you schedule them. You don't even know how good your team will be. Being a "mid-major" doesn't mean you'll have a good team when the game is played years down the line. There are a lot of bad mid-majors too.

All I can say to this is for years, Coach K managed to schedule the vast majority of his non-marquee non-con games against low-major teams who ended up with really good records. Personally, I don't think it was luck. Because low- and mid-major teams don't generally lose their players early to the NBA, you sort of can tell who's going to be good two or three years down the line. You don't always guess right, but K has a pretty good track record. I don't know what happened this season.

bob blue devil
11-24-2014, 09:44 PM
There's a regional issue. Duke schedules regional schools and takes pride in doing so, and the schools consistently praise Duke for the opportunity. And Duke didn't schedule Furman at the end of last year. That's not how it works.

Frankly, I don't think K loses sleep at night worrying about how lesser competition affects his team's RPI. It's more about a balanced schedule that best prepares the team for March.

well, furman's pomeroy rank for the past 10 years has been 340, 342, 246, 150, 233, 322, 289, 194, 224, 192 - so it really doesn't matter a whole lot when the game was scheduled, it was a safe bet to be a softy.

i don't understand how playing "a balanced schedule" best prepares the team for march - i think most would agree that playing a tough schedule best prepares the team for march. perhaps balanced between elite mid-majors and good major conference teams is valuable, but i doubt playing awful teams does us a whole lot of good (and can be problematic if bad habits are reinforced by a weak opponent's inability to take advantage of them). perhaps it gives us the chance to work on stuff live without as much game pressure. :confused:

Olympic Fan
11-24-2014, 10:32 PM
Look, Duke has always played some very weak teams every year. You need games like that to play everybody and to experiment with lineups and the like.

Kentucky just played Montana State at home, which is going to have a worse RPI than anything we will play.

As Aaron Rodgers famously said to worried Packer fans "Relax"

Duke's schedule will end up very solid.

Duvall
11-24-2014, 11:03 PM
All I can say to this is for years, Coach K managed to schedule the vast majority of his non-marquee non-con games against low-major teams who ended up with really good records. Personally, I don't think it was luck. Because low- and mid-major teams don't generally lose their players early to the NBA, you sort of can tell who's going to be good two or three years down the line. You don't always guess right, but K has a pretty good track record. I don't know what happened this season.

Well, the Fairfield and Presbyterian games were scheduled by the Coaches vs. Cancer tournament, so those games are on them. But the Furman game is an odd unforced error by a program that rarely makes such errors.

Duvall
11-24-2014, 11:20 PM
Look, Duke has always played some very weak teams every year. You need games like that to play everybody and to experiment with lineups and the like.

Kentucky just played Montana State at home, which is going to have a worse RPI than anything we will play.

As Aaron Rodgers famously said to worried Packer fans "Relax"

Duke's schedule will end up very solid.

And if "solid" puts Duke at 5th on the mythical S-curve and placed in the same region as Kentucky due to "geography," we'll regret this game.

dball
11-24-2014, 11:36 PM
1 John Davis III Guard Freshman 5-10 160 Beachwood, Ohio / Beachwood High School
3 Geoff Beans Forward Freshman 6-7 210 Toledo, Ohio / Ottawa Hills High School
4 T.K. Hayes Guard Sophomore 6-1 175 Chester, N.J. / Mendham High School
5 Aaron O'Neill Guard Senior 6-0 180 Cincinnati, Ohio / Cincinnati Hills Christian Academy
10 Gene Langan Forward Freshman 6-6 195 Greenville, S.C. / St. Joseph's High School
12 Devin Sibley Guard Freshman 6-2 175 Knoxville, Tenn. / Karns High School
14 Stephen Croone Guard Junior 6-0 170 Covington, Ga. / Newton High School
15 Isaiah Watkins Forward Sophomore 6-8 220 Toronto, Onatario / St. Benedict's Prep
21 Kris Acox Forward Sophomore 6-6 215 Reykjavik, Iceland / Kvennaskolinn I Reykjavik School
22 William Gates Jr. Guard Sophomore 6-1 180 Schertz, Texas / Clemens High School
24 Larry Wideman Guard Junior 6-4 190 Loris, S.C. / Oakbrook Prep
30 Kendrec Ferrara Forward Junior 6-9 235 Cape Coral, Fla. / Mariner High School
35 Daniel Fowler Guard Freshman 6-4 195 Acworth, Ga. / Allatoona High School
42 Kevin Chuisseu Forward Junior 6-8 230 Douala, Cameroon / Woodberry Forest School

Sometimes I wonder why after player at such a high level, we play a school as weak as Furman.

Furman (and Davidson) are other schools who benefit from the Duke endowment. There is long history between the two universities.

Duvall
11-24-2014, 11:43 PM
I mean, Kentucky doesn't have to worry about strength of schedule - there's no team in their conference that can stay within 10 points of them on a neutral court, maybe 20. Duke doesn't have that luxury.

SilkyJ
11-25-2014, 03:38 AM
Look, Duke has always played some very weak teams every year. You need games like that to play everybody and to experiment with lineups and the like.

Kentucky just played Montana State at home, which is going to have a worse RPI than anything we will play.

As Aaron Rodgers famously said to worried Packer fans "Relax"

Duke's schedule will end up very solid.

Seriously. Much adoo about nothing.

5 games in 8 days for a freshman laden team so a cupcake would seem to be just what the doctor ordered. All is well (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDAmPIq29ro).

SilkyJ
11-25-2014, 03:41 AM
And if "solid" puts Duke at 5th on the mythical S-curve and placed in the same region as Kentucky due to "geography," we'll regret this game.

Win the ACC regular season and tournament and I don't expect that will be an issue. Quinn hasn't won either, so I'm banking he goes for broke.

Furniture
11-25-2014, 07:15 AM
I agree with all the good things said about Winslow - he is amazing. But, his jump shot / free throw form seems awkward. Maybe it's just that he's left handed and it just looks weird.

The few times I have seen Justise taking the ball on a run up court to the basket makes me think of Jabari doing the same thing last year. Then I can't help thinking how much better, how much more controlled he is at it vs Jabari.

Philadukie
11-25-2014, 09:14 AM
I do happen to have that information, bolded in the quote below:



2013 and 2010 are two of Duke's best five defensive rebounding teams since they've kept the stat. 1993 and 1994 are the two worst Duke defensive rebounding teams since they've kept the stat. 1999 and 2002 are about in the middle. So I don't see a correlation here.

Thanks for that. So it seems accurate to say then that having a great three-point defense does not necessarily mean having a bad defensive rebounding team. In fact, this data, albeit a small sample, seems to say that you can do both. It also says that you do not need to do both in order to have a successful season, as these teams demonstrated.

ChillinDuke
11-25-2014, 09:18 AM
Win the ACC regular season and tournament and I don't expect that will be an issue. Quinn hasn't won either, so I'm banking he goes for broke.

Couldn't agree more. Much ado about nothing.

Duke's schedule is tougher in the new-look ACC with the additions of Pitt, Cuse, Notre Dame, and now Louisville. Scheduling a pre-Thanksgiving game against Furman hardly gives me pause.

Said differently, if we don't win the ACC season or tourney, I don't think we're a #1 regardless of Furman. Now, if you wanna debate the relative benefits of being a #2 vs a #3 (etc), then have at it.

Win and we're fine.

- Chillin

lotusland
11-25-2014, 09:44 AM
The few times I have seen Justise taking the ball on a run up court to the basket makes me think of Jabari doing the same thing last year. Then I can't help thinking how much better, how much more controlled he is at it vs Jabari.

Hmmm, my memory of Parker in the open court was that he was pretty much unstoppable. Somtimes his perimeter shooting was off and he took some bad shots and his defense was suspect but if you are defending Jabari in the open court you are in trouble. Not that the NBA matters much to our discussion but Parker's ability to handle the ball and get to the basket is elite for a 6'9 guy. 6'6 ball handling slasher types are a dime a dozen in the NBA. I love Justise but I don't see him being superior to Parker in the open court.

mr. synellinden
11-25-2014, 09:51 AM
Hmmm, my memory of Parker in the open court was that he was pretty much unstoppable. Somtimes his perimeter shooting was off and he took some bad shots and his defense was suspect but if you are defending Jabari in the open court you are in trouble. Not that the NBA matters much to our discussion but Parker's ability to handle the ball and get to the basket is elite for a 6'9 guy. 6'6 ball handling slasher types are a dime a dozen in the NBA. I love Justise but I don't see him being superior to Parker in the open court.

I completely agree with this.

flyingdutchdevil
11-25-2014, 10:13 AM
Hmmm, my memory of Parker in the open court was that he was pretty much unstoppable. Somtimes his perimeter shooting was off and he took some bad shots and his defense was suspect but if you are defending Jabari in the open court you are in trouble. Not that the NBA matters much to our discussion but Parker's ability to handle the ball and get to the basket is elite for a 6'9 guy. 6'6 ball handling slasher types are a dime a dozen in the NBA. I love Justise but I don't see him being superior to Parker in the open court.

I don't see Justise being superior to Parker in any offensive measure. Parker is arguably the best offensive freshman to play at Duke. He was incredible to watch on that end!

The problem is that Parker was arguably one of the worst defensive freshman ever to play for Duke. The value that Justise brings on both sides of the ball (positive and very positive) certainly eclipses Parker's (very positive and very negative).

jv001
11-25-2014, 10:18 AM
I don't see Justise being superior to Parker in any offensive measure. Parker is arguably the best offensive freshman to play at Duke. He was incredible to watch on that end!

The problem is that Parker was arguably one of the worst defensive freshman ever to play for Duke. The value that Justise brings on both sides of the ball (positive and very positive) certainly eclipses Parker's (very positive and very negative).

Duke University is blessed to have had them. I agree Jabari was a fantastic offensive player and a very good rebounder as well. Justise seems to be both a good offensive player and is able to defend against the 1-4 positions. GoDuke!

Kedsy
11-25-2014, 11:23 AM
The problem is that Parker was arguably one of the worst defensive freshman ever to play for Duke. The value that Justise brings on both sides of the ball (positive and very positive) certainly eclipses Parker's (very positive and very negative).

"Certainly eclipses"? Jabari was a first-team All American. Justise has played five games for us. Yes, Jabari had some defensive deficiencies, but are we really saying that if he was playing SF right now instead of Justise we'd have a worse team?

The way people around here disparage the best players on our teams that lost in the first round (McRoberts, Rivers, Parker) gets a little ridiculous sometimes.

azzefkram
11-25-2014, 12:11 PM
... Yes, Jabari had some defensive deficiencies, but are we really saying that if he was playing SF right now instead of Justise we'd have a worse team? ...

I think it's possible we would have a worse team. I really enjoyed Jabari's season at Duke (the end, not so much, but on balance) and he is an exceptional offensive player, but I wouldn't swap him for Justise. It's not that I think Justise is a better player, I just think he fits better. With Jabari we would have a better offense but I'm not sure by how much. I'm fairly confident we would have a worse defense. I don't think the increased offense would overcome the decreased defense.

flyingdutchdevil
11-25-2014, 12:24 PM
"Certainly eclipses"? Jabari was a first-team All American. Justise has played five games for us. Yes, Jabari had some defensive deficiencies, but are we really saying that if he was playing SF right now instead of Justise we'd have a worse team?

The way people around here disparage the best players on our teams that lost in the first round (McRoberts, Rivers, Parker) gets a little ridiculous sometimes.

I don't think it's ridiculous to comment to how much of a liability Jabari really was on defense. If Jabari scores 8 points in a row, great! But if the opposition targets Jabari on D and scores 8 points back (which would happen during the game), it has really negated Jabari's impact on the game.

It's not farfetched to call Jabari an offensive juggernaut. It's because he is. But he is a downright liability on defense, and that showed all year.

So, while I agree with you that certain players get unfair raps on DBR (McBob being the tops), Jabari's impact on the game on BOTH sides of the court really needs to be assessed because of his horrific D.

If Jabari is a 95 on offense and a 10 on defense, and Justise is a 60 on offense and a 75 on defense, wouldn't Justise certainly eclipse Jabari if we hold offense and defense as equal weight? It would for me.

flyingdutchdevil
11-25-2014, 12:31 PM
I think it's possible we would have a worse team. I really enjoyed Jabari's season at Duke (the end, not so much, but on balance) and he is an exceptional offensive player, but I wouldn't swap him for Justise. It's not that I think Justise is a better player, I just think he fits better. With Jabari we would have a better offense but I'm not sure by how much. I'm fairly confident we would have a worse defense. I don't think the increased offense would overcome the decreased defense.

Agree with everything in this post. Also, saying Jabari had "some defensive deficiencies" is akin to saying that UNC athletics has "some integrity issues".

tux
11-25-2014, 01:42 PM
Agree with everything in this post. Also, saying Jabari had "some defensive deficiencies" is akin to saying that UNC athletics has "some integrity issues".

To be fair, the coaching staff evaluated their performance last year and decided to start coaching defense differently. I.e., simplify and coach more fundamentals. The scheme was too complicated for a young team last year and probably required a level of communication and coordination that was hard to establish with a new bunch. So, maybe under this season's schemes, Jabari would have been more serviceable on that end of the court.

That said, I think Jabari is like Kyrie --- such an offensive prodigy that they tend to lose interest on defense. Can have short bursts of good D, but make them work over the span of a shot clock and they are bound to get turned around...

lotusland
11-25-2014, 02:05 PM
Agree with everything in this post. Also, saying Jabari had "some defensive deficiencies" is akin to saying that UNC athletics has "some integrity issues".oo

Parker was out of position too often on Defense but he was a good shot-blocker and a good defensive rebounder which are both important defensive skills.

UrinalCake
11-25-2014, 02:13 PM
You guys are talking like Jabari was the worst defensive player ever, and I just don't agree. It's not like we saw the and-1 mix tour out there. First off, he rebounded really well. Secondly, he was playing out of position much of the time. Thirdly, his defense was greatly magnified by having a poor defense around him, particularly in the paint. We had no center, and I personally felt that Hood's defense was even worse than Jabari's. Our guards were like a sieve as well. But mostly, consider the fact that he was a freshman who not only had to learn Coach K's defense (which takes time for almost everyone) but also had to be the focal point of the offense from day one. That's a lot to ask.

Contrast that with Shane's environment as a freshman - he came in surrounded by other highly touted scorers and experienced leaders. He could focus all of his energy on roaming the perimeter on D and taking charges. I'm not saying Shane wasn't a great defender, because obviously he was, but it's a lot easier to excel in that role when you don't have other responsibilities.

Kedsy
11-25-2014, 02:40 PM
I think it's possible we would have a worse team. I really enjoyed Jabari's season at Duke (the end, not so much, but on balance) and he is an exceptional offensive player, but I wouldn't swap him for Justise. It's not that I think Justise is a better player, I just think he fits better. With Jabari we would have a better offense but I'm not sure by how much. I'm fairly confident we would have a worse defense. I don't think the increased offense would overcome the decreased defense.

This is all reasonable. And I agree Justise fits better with this year's team than Jabari would, and also think Justise is the key to our new, good and exciting, defense. But saying something is possible (as you have) and saying it is certain (as FDD did) are two very different things.


If Jabari is a 95 on offense and a 10 on defense, and Justise is a 60 on offense and a 75 on defense, wouldn't Justise certainly eclipse Jabari if we hold offense and defense as equal weight? It would for me.

Well, if we're making up numbers with nothing to back them except our own feelings, then I imagine we could make any number of definitive statements.

Look, I'm not trying to call you out on this, but I repeat that Jabari Parker was a first-team All-American and Justise Winslow has played five games. During last season, people were (with a straight face) asking if Jabari was the best player ever to put on a Duke uniform. Now, after Duke's team lost to Mercer in the NCAAT first round, we're discussing whether his defense was so "horrific" that he was a net negative on the court?

If Duke had gone to the Final Four last season, I can almost guarantee that nobody would be saying the sorts of things about Jabari that we seem to hear all the time these days on DBR. Same with Austin Rivers in 2012 and Josh McRoberts in 2007.

flyingdutchdevil
11-25-2014, 03:00 PM
You guys are talking like Jabari was the worst defensive player ever, and I just don't agree. It's not like we saw the and-1 mix tour out there. First off, he rebounded really well. Secondly, he was playing out of position much of the time. Thirdly, his defense was greatly magnified by having a poor defense around him, particularly in the paint. We had no center, and I personally felt that Hood's defense was even worse than Jabari's. Our guards were like a sieve as well. But mostly, consider the fact that he was a freshman who not only had to learn Coach K's defense (which takes time for almost everyone) but also had to be the focal point of the offense from day one. That's a lot to ask.

Contrast that with Shane's environment as a freshman - he came in surrounded by other highly touted scorers and experienced leaders. He could focus all of his energy on roaming the perimeter on D and taking charges. I'm not saying Shane wasn't a great defender, because obviously he was, but it's a lot easier to excel in that role when you don't have other responsibilities.

I really do think that Jabari was that bad of a defender.

1) He did rebound well, and that is important for preventing second-chance points. But for those first-chance points, he was not good at all. Rebounding doesn't really matter when the opposing team scores a lot on first chance opportunities. And they did.

2) Everyone says that Jabari was playing out of position. Really? Jabari played the 4 at 6'8" and 235 pounds. That's great size for a 4. What position would you say is ideal for Jabari to defend? He did defend some 5, but I recall him guarding 4s more often.

3) Completely agree on the third point. But remember that, of our 8 rotation players this year, 5 played last year (and 3 were heavily involved in the rotation). Hood, Jabari, and Thornton were the only rotation players who left our program. Our defense looks muuuuch better due to an injection of better defenders and large bodies, but also possibly because of addition-by-subtraction. I do agree that, last year, we had no center and our guards were sieves. But that doesn't at all mean that Jabari was better than we thought on defense. Rather, it shows how inept the whole team was, and Jabari was a big part of that.

4) Coach K gave Hood the "Best Defender" award last year. That's not saying much, but it is suggesting that Hood was better than we thought. I too thought Hood didn't look great, and I'm very surprised that he got the award. But Coach K knows more than I do.

Was our team awful at D last year? Yup. Was it a team effort to be that bad? Yup. But I believe that Jabari was a big part of the reason for that.

tux
11-25-2014, 03:08 PM
I really do think that Jabari was that bad of a defender.

1) He did rebound well, and that is important for preventing second-chance points. But for those first-chance points, he was not good at all. Rebounding doesn't really matter when the opposing team scores a lot on first chance opportunities. And they did.

2) Everyone says that Jabari was playing out of position. Really? Jabari played the 4 at 6'8" and 235 pounds. That's great size for a 4. What position would you say is ideal for Jabari to defend? He did defend some 5, but I recall him guarding 4s more often.

3) Completely agree on the third point. But remember that, of our 8 rotation players this year, 5 played last year (and 3 were heavily involved in the rotation). Hood, Jabari, and Thornton were the only rotation players who left our program. Our defense looks muuuuch better due to an injection of better defenders and large bodies, but also possibly because of addition-by-subtraction. I do agree that, last year, we had no center and our guards were sieves. But that doesn't at all mean that Jabari was better than we thought on defense. Rather, it shows how inept the whole team was, and Jabari was a big part of that.

4) Coach K gave Hood the "Best Defender" award last year. That's not saying much, but it is suggesting that Hood was better than we thought. I too thought Hood didn't look great, and I'm very surprised that he got the award. But Coach K knows more than I do.

Was our team awful at D last year? Yup. Was it a team effort to be that bad? Yup. But I believe that Jabari was a big part of the reason for that.


I'm repeating myself here, but: If Hood and Jabari were the issue, why would the coaching staff need to change their approach to coaching defense?

flyingdutchdevil
11-25-2014, 03:11 PM
Look, I'm not trying to call you out on this, but I repeat that Jabari Parker was a first-team All-American and Justise Winslow has played five games.

Do you actually think voters care about defense when voting for All-Americans? You think the media praised James Harden's D when he got 1st Team All-NBA? Jabari's O got him that award.


During last season, people were (with a straight face) asking if Jabari was the best player ever to put on a Duke uniform. Now, after Duke's team lost to Mercer in the NCAAT first round, we're discussing whether his defense was so "horrific" that he was a net negative on the court?

Many of us, including myself, were talking about Jabari's terrible D well before Mercer. Also, I never mentioned Mercer in this post. But thank you for making the conclusion on my behalf that "Player-X-loses-in-first-round" and "Player-X-is-overrated" for me. I have, for a long time, argued that Jabari is one of Duke's great offensive freshman but also a huge liability on D. That hasn't changed.

Also, who said that he's net negative on the court? I only suggested that his offense was amazing and that his defense was appalling versus Winslow, who makes positive contributions on either end. Both players are net positive, but Winslow is more net positive. Not sure where you're coming up with these conclusions on my behalf that I haven't come to.

flyingdutchdevil
11-25-2014, 03:27 PM
I'm repeating myself here, but: If Hood and Jabari were the issue, why would the coaching staff need to change their approach to coaching defense?

Extremely fair point, but I'd also argue whether you think it's solely the system and not a combination of system and personnel. In 2006-2007, our rotation was composed of 2 juniors, 2 sophomores, and 3 freshman (minimum 10 min/game). Our D, according to Kenpom, was ranked 7th. In 2013-2014, our rotation was composed of 1 RS senior, 1 senior, 1 junior, 1 RS sophomore, 2 sophomores, and 1 freshman (minimum 10 min/game). And our D was ranked 116.

Gthoma2a
11-25-2014, 04:18 PM
I'm repeating myself here, but: If Hood and Jabari were the issue, why would the coaching staff need to change their approach to coaching defense?

It had gotten to a point that it was so bad that you had to burn the whole thing. Oddly enough, the way they were doing defense was really effective the year before, though. Jabari and Hood can be seen on film standing around on defense, though. It was a pretty common thing. I think we are still doing a lot of the things we wanted to do last year on defense, though. We are pressuring the ball like we wanted to last year.

Are you arguing that they were adequate defenders? Rodney, at times, did well, but Jabari was really bad on that end. He missed his assignments regularly, and he didn't switch well either. He wasn't fast enough that we could have used him against the 3 and he wasn't strong/attentive enough to play post defense.

Saratoga2
11-25-2014, 04:49 PM
I'm probably stating the obvious but I think:

1. It's a home game. There are financial benefits to playing a team like this;

2. Duke needs to get easy wins, pre-ACC season to bolster their NCAA tournament portfolio;

3. If you care about the academics, and I think Duke does, it makes sense to limit/control the travel prior to the ACC season.

Having said this, I'd love to see Duke get a more ambitious in its pre ACC schedule. I live in Colorado and follow the Buffs. There is no doubt that the University of Colorado would travel to Duke twice in exchange for a single Duke visit to Boulder. There are lot of teams that fall in this category.

I understand starting with weaker teams to get the new team grounded and I understand coach K's connection with Army, but Furman? We could get better competition than them.

tux
11-25-2014, 05:43 PM
Extremely fair point, but I'd also argue whether you think it's solely the system and not a combination of system and personnel. In 2006-2007, our rotation was composed of 2 juniors, 2 sophomores, and 3 freshman (minimum 10 min/game). Our D, according to Kenpom, was ranked 7th. In 2013-2014, our rotation was composed of 1 RS senior, 1 senior, 1 junior, 1 RS sophomore, 2 sophomores, and 1 freshman (minimum 10 min/game). And our D was ranked 116.

Yes, all facets of the game are a combination of system and personnel. And K has been great at tweaking his system to match the talents of his group. No denying that. Last year was odd; K has admitted that he himself struggled with his brother's death. The team lacked a rim protector, which can correct for a lot of defensive breakdowns, especially if your scheme is as aggressive as K's.

IMO, offenses have changed quite a bit over the past two decades. Much more screen and roll action now than when Knight and K were developing their man-to-man principles. Many of those principles work regardless, but IMO offenses have learned how to attack those uber-aggressive defenses, and K has been slow to counter. I know many would disagree with that, but I think that's also part of the story of Duke's struggles on defense over the past 5 years.

A defense that pushes an offense away from the basket by denying every pass runs the risk of getting killed with dribble penetration, especially if the O can force a mismatch via a switch or a screen and roll.


It had gotten to a point that it was so bad that you had to burn the whole thing. Oddly enough, the way they were doing defense was really effective the year before, though. Jabari and Hood can be seen on film standing around on defense, though. It was a pretty common thing. I think we are still doing a lot of the things we wanted to do last year on defense, though. We are pressuring the ball like we wanted to last year.

Are you arguing that they were adequate defenders? Rodney, at times, did well, but Jabari was really bad on that end. He missed his assignments regularly, and he didn't switch well either. He wasn't fast enough that we could have used him against the 3 and he wasn't strong/attentive enough to play post defense.

Fair points. I thought the team as a whole rotated and recovered a step too slow. If Jabari/Hood rotated to stop penetration, their man would often be open for a pass or a rebound. It wasn't entirely those guys' fault --- the whole team was bad defensively. I'm just pointing out that our coaching staff, in retrospect, would have coached the defensive much differently.

Troublemaker
11-26-2014, 12:36 PM
Agree that he is right in principle. However, many teams are going to have artificially inflated stats at this point in the season- for any team that starts the year playing well, with a small sample size, and a few games against cupcakes- this is just a fact of life.

Agreed completely. UVA is an example, as they currently lead the country in 2-pt FG defense at 28.7% (just like Duke currently leads in 3-pt FG defense). Now I expect UVA to defend 2s very well because their defense is geared towards doing that (and they have good coaching and talent to execute), but last season, the national leader in 2-pt FG defense was Irvine at 39.2%. And a great UVA defense last season was at 42.1%.

Clearly UVA will suffer some regression to the mean here, but there are no ESPN headlines suggesting that their defense is vulnerable. (Criticism should go to the headline writer and not Gasaway, obviously)

Listen to Quants
11-26-2014, 03:01 PM
You guys are talking like Jabari was the worst defensive player ever, and I just don't agree. It's not like we saw the and-1 mix tour out there. First off, he rebounded really well. Secondly, he was playing out of position much of the time. Thirdly, his defense was greatly magnified by having a poor defense around him, particularly in the paint. We had no center, and I personally felt that Hood's defense was even worse than Jabari's. Our guards were like a sieve as well. But mostly, consider the fact that he was a freshman who not only had to learn Coach K's defense (which takes time for almost everyone) but also had to be the focal point of the offense from day one. That's a lot to ask.

< snip> .

Oh yes. Worst ever is an exaggeration. However the part I bolded is disputable if you count blocking out as part of rebounding. I watched him for his specifically on some occasions and he seemed to simply forget and not even look for a block out opportunity most of the time.