PDA

View Full Version : Duke basketball notes, 10-6-15



jimsumner
10-06-2015, 05:39 PM
Duke had a media availability today. They've only been practicing a few days, so not a lot of meat.

Injury update. Allen was held out for much of September with hamstring issues. Seems to be more nip-it-in-the-bud, then oh-no-he's-hurt. He's practicing now with no restrictions.

Obi has been out for a while but is back now.

Vrankovic has a foot in a boot. About a week out.

Some guys have been hitting the weight room. Ingram was 170 in July, 193 now. Jefferson is up to 228, Allen 205.

K says it's way too early to talk about starting lineups. But he did say that Duke has eight really good players and that Obi can be a situational ninth player. So, some confirmation that Obi isn't ready for prime time.

K also said that Ingram had separated himself by virtue of talent. 6-9, with a 7-3 wingspan and point-guard skills. He'll play everywhere.

The expectation is that Duke will run a lot, lots of motion offense, lots of interchangeable options. No low-post option in the Okafor/Parker/Plumlee category. More hit the glass, run the floor, target-of-opportunity kind of scorers.

That said, Amile Jefferson says he spent the summer lifting and working on his ball skills. I asked him what would happen this year when he finds himself with the ball 14 feet from the basket and a defender giving him room. His answer? "The ball is going up." He said he's had the shot just not the confidence to take it. This year he has the confidence.

We'll see. Some skepticism is in order. But recall that Jefferson had to sit out the summer of 2014 with a hip injury and he seemed very energized by having a healthy summer 2015 to work on his game.

Matt Jones has morphed into Grandpa Jones. The kids--there are seven freshmen--seem to gravitate him and he embraces the responsibility. He, Jefferson and Plumlee are the glue guys, charged with imparting the Duke culture. And all three can play, which comes in handy.

Kennard seems bigger and more mature than a typical freshman. You're gonna love him.

And you're gonna love Thornton. Knows K's history with freshmen point guards and calls it empowering. And he says that winning basketball starts on the defensive end of the court. That's been a priority for him for years and he loves shutting down opposing point guards.

Didn't get to talk to Ingram or Jeter. Jeter seems thinner than his listed weight of 240 pounds. But his teammates rave about his ability to run the court.

Talked to Nolan Smith a bit. He's working on getting his knee at 100 percent, is talking to NBA teams and plans on giving the NBA a shot in a couple of months. In the meanwhile, he's working for the program in a media capacity, so you may see him around for the next few months.

K says the rules changes will be big this season, he's just not sure how. Defenders will be allowed to use a forearm in the back, so that will be interesting. And I suspect K will miss the five-second count on the dribble.

Parking is going to be a challenge this season.

Troublemaker
10-06-2015, 06:15 PM
Thanks, Jim!

Here's the goduke link to Coach K's presser: http://www.goduke.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?id=4505492

sagegrouse
10-06-2015, 06:25 PM
Matt Jones has morphed into Grandpa Jones. The kids--there are seven freshmen--seem to gravitate him and he embraces the responsibility. He, Jefferson and Plumlee are the glue guys, charged with imparting the Duke culture. And all three can play, which comes in handy.



Re "Grandpa Jones:" There are only two players I recall who looked 30 years old as freshmen -- Matt Jones and Carlos Boozer (and Boozer was only 17 when he enrolled at Duke!). Matt may not earn Boozer's honors, but he will be a special Blue Devil by the time he graduates.

wilson
10-06-2015, 08:54 PM
The usual great stuff from you, Jim.
Boy, is it good to see quotidian basketball notes.

NYBri
10-06-2015, 09:06 PM
Many thanks, Jim.




Kennard seems bigger and more mature than a typical freshman. You're gonna love him.



I've just got a feeling that he is going to be great.

Is it November yet?

Troublemaker
10-06-2015, 09:25 PM
K also said that Ingram had separated himself by virtue of talent. 6-9, with a 7-3 wingspan and point-guard skills. He'll play everywhere.

This was nice to hear because Brandon looked "only" good, not great, in the open practice. But if he's a stud and then Grayson becomes a stud -- which I expect to happen -- then Duke can contend for the highest prizes. I expect the rest of the rotation to be terrific role players that will complement those two well, with Derryck having the physical upside to possibly make it three studs down the line.



K says it's way too early to talk about starting lineups. But he did say that Duke has eight really good players and that Obi can be a situational ninth player. So, some confirmation that Obi isn't ready for prime time.

Yeah, sounds like it's shaping up to be a somewhat routine 8-man rotation for Duke. 4 guards, 1 swing player in Ingram, and 3 bigs



Matt Jones has morphed into Grandpa Jones. The kids--there are seven freshmen--seem to gravitate him and he embraces the responsibility. He, Jefferson and Plumlee are the glue guys, charged with imparting the Duke culture. And all three can play, which comes in handy.


Coach seemed to rave about Matt's leadership the most out of the three captains. I'm expecting 25-30mpg from him even if he comes off the bench.



The expectation is that Duke will run a lot, lots of motion offense, lots of interchangeable options. No low-post option in the Okafor/Parker/Plumlee category. More hit the glass, run the floor, target-of-opportunity kind of scorers.


This jives with the open practice, in which the offense was heavy on the pick-n-roll and on fastbreaking. Big men will screen and then rim-run to either score if the pass is there or crash the offensive glass if the guard shoots.



And you're gonna love Thornton. Knows K's history with freshmen point guards and calls it empowering. And he says that winning basketball starts on the defensive end of the court. That's been a priority for him for years and he loves shutting down opposing point guards.

K says the rules changes will be big this season, he's just not sure how. Defenders will be allowed to use a forearm in the back, so that will be interesting. And I suspect K will miss the five-second count on the dribble.


Yeah, Coach talked about the abolishment of the 5-second-count being huge. With Thornton's cat quickness, I wonder how many 5-second calls we'll be missing out on due to this change.

uh_no
10-06-2015, 09:35 PM
Some guys have been hitting the weight room. Ingram was 170 in July, 193 now. Jefferson is up to 228, Allen 205.


That's incredible. didn't he come in at like 170-180?

sagegrouse
10-06-2015, 09:51 PM
The usual great stuff from you, Jim.
Boy, is it good to see quotidian basketball notes.

As the prayer says, "panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie." "Our daily bread...."

Kindly,
Sage

uh_no
10-06-2015, 09:57 PM
As the prayer says, "panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie." "Our daily bread...."

Kindly,
Sage

alle guten, alle bosen...

BD80
10-06-2015, 09:57 PM
... Some guys have been hitting the weight room. Ingram was 170 in July, 193 now. Jefferson is up to 228, Allen 205. ...

14% increase in 3 months is impressive, if its the right kind of weight

Kedsy
10-06-2015, 09:59 PM
But he did say that Duke has eight really good players and that Obi can be a situational ninth player. So, some confirmation that Obi isn't ready for prime time.

Thank you, Jim. It's a little disappointing about Obi but it's good to finally know the bottom line. I guess our little group can stop debating this particular point now and move on to whether Luke Kennard will have his number retired before or after he plays his first game.

jimsumner
10-06-2015, 10:13 PM
That's incredible. didn't he come in at like 170-180?

He came in at the 180-185 neighborhood. Which I believe is the Yankees' batting average since the beginning of August.

uh_no
10-06-2015, 10:21 PM
He came in at the 180-185 neighborhood. Which I believe is the Yankees' batting average since the beginning of August.

you won't find any sympathy here :)


llll
llll
VV

Wander
10-06-2015, 11:03 PM
Yeah, Coach talked about the abolishment of the 5-second-count being huge. With Thornton's cat quickness, I wonder how many 5-second calls we'll be missing out on due to this change.

How many 5-second calls (of a player while dribbling, not out of bounds stuff) get called in one season? I remember a giant anomaly where Greg Paulus forced two in a single game against NC State at home once, but other than that can't remember a single one ever by any team. I'm sure they've happened and I've forgotten, but I'm pretty sure at absolute most Duke forces this call a few times a season. Seems like a very minor change to me.

mo.st.dukie
10-06-2015, 11:56 PM
How many 5-second calls (of a player while dribbling, not out of bounds stuff) get called in one season? I remember a giant anomaly where Greg Paulus forced two in a single game against NC State at home once, but other than that can't remember a single one ever by any team. I'm sure they've happened and I've forgotten, but I'm pretty sure at absolute most Duke forces this call a few times a season. Seems like a very minor change to me.

Right, although you could argue that much of that was due to the offensive player being aware of the 5 seconds and therefore backing the ball out away from the defense. So even if the 5 second wasn't actually called it still had an impact because the offensive player couldn't just dribble around while closely guarded, he was forced to make a decision to actually do something with the ball, he either had to back the ball away or pass it off. That's probably where the biggest difference will be, guys can just stand there dribbling with no threat of turning the ball over on a 5 second call. However, that still doesn't negate the need for ball pressure as defenders can still cause ball handlers to commit turnovers and make poor decisions and bad plays.

MarkD83
10-07-2015, 02:33 AM
Right, although you could argue that much of that was due to the offensive player being aware of the 5 seconds and therefore backing the ball out away from the defense. So even if the 5 second wasn't actually called it still had an impact because the offensive player couldn't just dribble around while closely guarded, he was forced to make a decision to actually do something with the ball, he either had to back the ball away or pass it off. That's probably where the biggest difference will be, guys can just stand there dribbling with no threat of turning the ball over on a 5 second call. However, that still doesn't negate the need for ball pressure as defenders can still cause ball handlers to commit turnovers and make poor decisions and bad plays.

My first guess at the unintended consequence of this rule is when a team is playing man and the offense has a match-up advantage is for the other 4 players to assembly as far away from the paint as possible and let the man with the match-up advantage take 15-20 seconds to play one on one.

gam7
10-07-2015, 03:11 AM
My first guess at the unintended consequence of this rule is when a team is playing man and the offense has a match-up advantage is for the other 4 players to assembly as far away from the paint as possible and let the man with the match-up advantage take 15-20 seconds to play one on one.

"That offensive approach is overrated." - Andrew Harrison, April 4, 2015

BD80
10-07-2015, 06:48 AM
"That offensive approach is perfectly suited to my skillset ... no matter the result" - Andrew Harrison, April 4, 2015

FIFY

budwom
10-07-2015, 07:26 AM
for the past couple years I've tried to reconcile a number of the staff comments about who came in weighing so much and then gained X amount of weight, resulting in a new weight of Y.
Almost none of them were reconcilable, so I got dizzy and fell down. They're all over the map. I'll just conclude some guys gained some weight.

Maybe Dave Rubenstein can donate a really nice new scale for the team.

Indoor66
10-07-2015, 07:27 AM
"That offensive approach is overrated." - Andrew Harrison, April 4, 2015

Damn if I wasn't looking for his opinion on the subject. Now my thoughts are confirmed by an expert....:rolleyes:

Actually, I think the effect will be to take away the pressure on the ball handler to make a decision, make a play. That added pressure of the clock led, IMO, to many errant passes - a lot of air mail sent. That will be somewhat gone from the game - to my chagrin.

superdave
10-07-2015, 07:54 AM
Thank you, Jim. It's a little disappointing about Obi but it's good to finally know the bottom line. I guess our little group can stop debating this particular point now and move on to whether Luke Kennard will have his number retired before or after he plays his first game.

Yeah, I am a little surprised with Obi. Hopefully he puts in the work this season to get his body to high-level D1 standards and to learn the defense.

Now we can shift the majority of our speculation to Kennard and Jeter. What a relief!

tux
10-07-2015, 08:14 AM
I really think our 3 captains are the key to the season. Marshall, Amile, and Matt have to elevate their games for this team to do any real damage. They all need to be more consistently good. I don't see this freshman class stepping in and taking control like last year. They will need to be led to the promised land.

Troublemaker
10-07-2015, 08:17 AM
Yeah, I am a little surprised with Obi. Hopefully he puts in the work this season to get his body to high-level D1 standards and to learn the defense.

Now we can shift the majority of our speculation to Kennard and Jeter. What a relief!

Here's my Oct 7th stab at minutes, based on the open practice and the Media Day presser from Coach K





Starters



Rotation



in blowouts


30
Fr
DThornton

20
Fr
Kennard






30
So
Allen










30
Fr
Ingram

30
Jr
MJones


Fr
Robinson


25
Sr
Jefferson






Rs
Vrankovic


25
Sr
Marshall

10
Fr
Jeter


So
Obi





Brandon plays 20mpg at the 4 to open up minutes for all the other great perimeter talent we have.
Coach K loves Matt Jones. I just don't see him playing fewer minutes than any of the bigs.
Here, Chase is a little bit like Grayson last season after the Sheed dismissal. He's the 8th-man in an 8-man rotation but will hopefully continue to improve throughout the season and can make a big impact in March, perhaps becoming the starting center even.
When Coach K says Ob is "situational," perhaps he's thinking about occasions like if MP3 and Chase can't stop Meeks from UNC. Then, bring in Obi.


This stuff is so fluid. I'm sure I'll change a bunch around after CTC.

killerleft
10-07-2015, 08:18 AM
Damn if I wasn't looking for his opinion on the subject. Now my thoughts are confirmed by an expert....:rolleyes:

Actually, I think the effect will be to take away the pressure on the ball handler to make a decision, make a play. That added pressure of the clock led, IMO, to many errant passes - a lot of air mail sent. That will be somewhat gone from the game - to my chagrin.

Maybe. The combination of the lost five seconds on the shot clock and the lack of worry about a five-second call might result in the same mistakes being made anyway. The clock is no longer the friend of the procrastinator it once was, that's for sure. But the change will definitely benefit the team that leads in end-of-game situations. And so it goes.

flyingdutchdevil
10-07-2015, 08:19 AM
Awesome write-up, Jim. A few thoughts:

1) Ingram came into Duke at 170 lbs. He's 6'9". Think about that. Wow-za!

2) I fully expect backcourt domination from Grayson and Ingram. I think Ingram is a fairly known commodity (from the perspective that he's ELITE) and I feel that Grayson's "controlled bull in a china shop" will create the best wing combo at Duke since Smith-Singler (I view Jabari as a Duke PF).

3) Matt Jones was the glue guy last year, and I think he's the perfect glue-guy/leader that Lance Thomas was. I expect "Grandpa Jones" to guard the best wing for any team that we face. Between string bean Ingram's crazy length, Matt Jones's D, and Thornton's defensive mindset, how are teams going to score against us in the backcourt?

4) I think we all need to be super patient this year with Kennard, Jeter, and Obi on either the offensive end, the defensive end, or both. These guys aren't Okafor, T. Jones, or Winslow. And there is nothing wrong with that.

flyingdutchdevil
10-07-2015, 08:24 AM
Here's my Oct 7th stab at minutes, based on the open practice and the Media Day presser from Coach K





Starters



Rotation



in blowouts


30
Fr
DThornton

20
Fr
Kennard






30
So
Allen










30
Fr
Ingram

30
Jr
MJones


Fr
Robinson


25
Sr
Jefferson






Rs
Vrankovic


25
Sr
Marshall

10
Fr
Jeter


So
Obi





Brandon plays 20mpg at the 4 to open up minutes for all the other great perimeter talent we have.
Coach K loves Matt Jones. I just don't see him playing fewer minutes than any of the bigs.
Here, Chase is a little bit like Grayson last season after the Sheed dismissal. He's the 8th-man in an 8-man rotation but will hopefully continue to improve throughout the season and can make a big impact in March, perhaps becoming the starting center even.


This stuff is so fluid. I'm sure I'll change a bunch around after CTC.

TM - with all this new information, I think you and I are becoming more aligned on minutes! And that's saying something given that DBR was all over the map with minutes. My only disagreement is Thornton. Given that Thornton is our only true PG (and Kennard/Grayson still need a lot of work on their PG skills), I see Thornton averaging closer to 35 min. And that means that Kennard's or MP3's minutes get cut (Kennard's get cut due to fewer minutes in the backcourt and MP3's minutes get cut as the dominos fall - Jones at the 3, Ingram at the 4, Jefferson at the 5 in small ball).

tux
10-07-2015, 08:28 AM
Maybe. The combination of the lost five seconds on the shot clock and the lack of worry about a five-second call might result in the same mistakes being made anyway. The clock is no longer the friend of the procrastinator it once was, that's for sure. But the change will definitely benefit the team that leads in end-of-game situations. And so it goes.

I agree that the removal of the 5 second closely guarded call will help teams (especially with a good PG) manage end of game. The 5 second rule created a lot of "extra" passes and therefore more turnovers. But the 5 second reduction in the shot clock will also help the team that's behind.

Although Duke has had teams that really benefited from the 5 second rule, I think it's outlived its usefulness given the direction of the game. The effects of the rule changes will be an interesting thing to track as the season gets underway... kenpom is licking his chops.

MChambers
10-07-2015, 08:35 AM
AI think we all need to be super patient this year with Kennard, Jeter, and Obi on either the offensive end, the defensive end, or both. These guys aren't Okafor, T. Jones, or Winslow. And there is nothing wrong with that.

Jim's write-up got me excited, too!

Wonder if our bigs end up playing a similar role as in 2010, at least on offense. That worked out okay, as I recall.

Since Duke has lots of backcourt depth, I don't think our defense will be as compact as 2010, but after last year's defensive up, downs, and changes, I hesitate to predict anything. I'm just being cautiously optimistic.

tux
10-07-2015, 08:35 AM
TM - with all this new information, I think you and I are becoming more aligned on minutes! And that's saying something given that DBR was all over the map with minutes. My only disagreement is Thornton. Given that Thornton is our only true PG (and Kennard/Grayson still need a lot of work on their PG skills), I see Thornton averaging closer to 35 min. And that means that Kennard's or MP3's minutes get cut (Kennard's get cut due to fewer minutes in the backcourt and MP3's minutes get cut as the dominos fall - Jones at the 3, Ingram at the 4, Jefferson at the 5 in small ball).


I don't understand the appeal of forecasting the distribution of minutes per game.

And K must have tired of the DBR debate re: Obi ;)

Troublemaker
10-07-2015, 08:48 AM
I don't understand the appeal of forecasting the distribution of minutes per game.

I actually have this little text file on my computer where I've forecasted not just this team's minutes, but the minutes of the next 4 seasons of Duke MBB.

The 2019/20 will be led by So Tre Jones and Sr Javin DeLaurier, both averaging 30mpg, in case you're wondering.

flyingdutchdevil
10-07-2015, 08:59 AM
I actually have this little text file on my computer where I've forecasted not just this team's minutes, but the minutes of the next 4 seasons of Duke MBB.

The 2019/20 will be led by So Tre Jones and Sr Javin DeLaurier, both averaging 30mpg, in case you're wondering.

I assume that Javin is starting over Harry Giles at that point? And where do Wendell Carter's minutes fit in?

Kedsy
10-07-2015, 10:26 AM
I see Thornton averaging closer to 35 min.

I think it's likely both Derryck and Brandon will be closer to 35 mpg than 30mpg. Maybe Grayson, as well. Which should eat into both Luke's and Marshall's minutes. Still not sure how much Chase will push Marshall at this point. Whether Brandon plays primarily SF or PF will also have a lot to say about Chase's minutes.

flyingdutchdevil
10-07-2015, 10:48 AM
I think it's likely both Derryck and Brandon will be closer to 35 mpg than 30mpg. Maybe Grayson, as well. Which should eat into both Luke's and Marshall's minutes. Still not sure how much Chase will push Marshall at this point. Whether Brandon plays primarily SF or PF will also have a lot to say about Chase's minutes.

I'm gonna pull a Kedsy on this:

Freshman Duke PG minutes for top 20 PGs:
-Tyus Jones: 33.9 mpg
-Kyrie Irving: 27.5 mpg
-Greg Paulus: 32.3 mpg
-Jason Williams: 34.0 mpg

Tyus, Kyrie, and Greg all had some legit competition at the 1 (Cook, Nolan, Dockery) and they still managed that many minutes. Also, had Kyrie played ACC games, his minutes would definitely be above 30 and probably closer to 35. Thornton has little - if no - competition at the 1. He's gonna play as many minutes as he wants given that he adds value to the team. I really think 35 min for Thornton isn't out of the question.

Now, here are the freshman Duke wing minutes for top 20 wings:
-Justise Winslow: 29.1 mpg
-Jabari Parker: 30.7 mpg
-Rasheed Sulaimon: 29.2 mpg
-Austin Rivers: 33.2 mpg
-Luol Deng: 31.1 mpg

Only Austin Rivers is that close to the 35 min per game mark. You can certainly remove Sulaimon from that list (given that he wasn't the alpha dog unlike the other 4 players), but the numbers are still slightly less than Duke freshman PGs.

Given the decent depth at the 3/4 (M Jones, Grayson, Jefferson), I actually see Ingram playing a lot closer to 30 than 35.

arnie
10-07-2015, 10:54 AM
I think it's likely both Derryck and Brandon will be closer to 35 mpg than 30mpg. Maybe Grayson, as well. Which should eat into both Luke's and Marshall's minutes. Still not sure how much Chase will push Marshall at this point. Whether Brandon plays primarily SF or PF will also have a lot to say about Chase's minutes.

Of course all the minutes forecasting goes out the window when Admiral Junior grows to 7'1" by November 1. With or without shoes.

jipops
10-07-2015, 10:59 AM
Though I can only speculate based on what has been said on the boards and based on K's historical lineup philosophy... I'm going to bank on these 5 being the lineup that K leans on in the 2nd half of games:

Thornton
Allen
Jones
Ingram
Jefferson

There could very well be situations where K substitutes Marshall for Amile. But I have a hard time seeing K not going with a combination of Thornton, Allen, Jones, & Ingram to close out. Especially since it doesn't appear that post play is going to be a strength for this team.

Steven43
10-07-2015, 11:41 AM
Matt Jones has morphed into Grandpa Jones. The kids--there are seven freshmen--seem to gravitate him and he embraces the responsibility. He, Jefferson and Plumlee are the glue guys, charged with imparting the Duke culture. And all three can play, which comes in handy.
I have heard the term 'glue guy' bandied about fairly often over the years. David McClure and Lance Thomas were supposedly 'glue guys'. Now Matt Jones, Amile Jefferson, and Marshall Plumlee are being referred to as such. Does it mean guys who cannot shoot very well from beyond 10 feet and are not particularly good passers or ballhandlers?

flyingdutchdevil
10-07-2015, 11:48 AM
I have heard the term 'glue guy' bandied about fairly often over the years. David McClure and Lance Thomas were supposedly 'glue guys'. Now Matt Jones, Amile Jefferson, and Marshall Plumlee are being referred to as such. Does it mean guys who cannot shoot very well from beyond 10 feet and are not particularly good passers or ballhandlers?

By your definition, wouldn't Okafor match the definition of a glue guy?

IMO, a glue guy is someone who will never be a first, second, or even third banana on offense but provides a combination of invaluable qualities: leadership, team defense, individual defense, hustle, rebounding, etc. But there is one attribute that all glue guys have: toughness. I always think of a glue guy as, "if a fight breaks out, who is the first guy to stand by my side?" It's not a perfect definition, but it's the one I like the most. Guys like David McClure, Lance Thomas, Sean Dockery, Matt Jones, and Nate James fit that description. They are here for the team first and themselves second.

grad_devil
10-07-2015, 11:56 AM
Of course all the minutes forecasting goes out the window when Admiral Junior grows to 7'1" by November 1. With or without shoes.

This doesn't compute. Can you convert that to cinder blocks?

MChambers
10-07-2015, 11:58 AM
By your definition, wouldn't Okafor match the definition of a glue guy?

IMO, a glue guy is someone who will never be a first, second, or even third banana on offense but provides a combination of invaluable qualities: leadership, team defense, individual defense, hustle, rebounding, etc. But there is one attribute that all glue guys have: toughness. I always think of a glue guy as, "if a fight breaks out, who is the first guy to stand by my side?" It's not a perfect definition, but it's the one I like the most. Guys like David McClure, Lance Thomas, Sean Dockery, Matt Jones, and Nate James fit that description. They are here for the team first and themselves second.
Nah, Jah has a good handle and is a great passer. I otherwise agree with your definition. I'd also describe it as someone who helps you win without necessarily filling up the box score, other than minutes played.

Billy Dat
10-07-2015, 12:13 PM
Does it mean guys who cannot shoot very well from beyond 10 feet and are not particularly good passers or ballhandlers?

The attributes you describe often start a great high school player down the road to college-level glue guy status, but the role does also include...


...someone who helps you win without necessarily filling up the box score, other than minutes played....

Indeed, now we are getting warmer....


....someone who will never be a first, second, or even third banana on offense but provides a combination of invaluable qualities: leadership, team defense, individual defense, hustle, rebounding, etc. But there is one attribute that all glue guys have: toughness. I always think of a glue guy as, "if a fight breaks out, who is the first guy to stand by my side?" It's not a perfect definition, but it's the one I like the most. Guys like David McClure, Lance Thomas, Sean Dockery, Matt Jones, and Nate James fit that description. They are here for the team first and themselves second.

I think we're almost there. The only thing I haven't seen mentioned that I think is essential to getting the GLUE tag is selflessness. It doesn't mean that the player lacks ego, because all players need to have an ego, but it means that they do all of the above with only one goal in mind...WINNING. There is only one stat they care about, Ws. That selflessness usually rubs off on others, which also helps glue the team together.

tux
10-07-2015, 12:37 PM
Though I can only speculate based on what has been said on the boards and based on K's historical lineup philosophy... I'm going to bank on these 5 being the lineup that K leans on in the 2nd half of games:

Thornton
Allen
Jones
Ingram
Jefferson

There could very well be situations where K substitutes Marshall for Amile. But I have a hard time seeing K not going with a combination of Thornton, Allen, Jones, & Ingram to close out. Especially since it doesn't appear that post play is going to be a strength for this team.

I agree with this, and also see Marshall as a possible sub in there, either to replace Jefferson or maybe going bigger w/

Allen
Jones
Ingram (maybe as a point-forward)
Jefferson
Marshall

One thing we haven't seen is how the freshmen shoot FTs, which could be a factor as well.

And while I agree that post play probably isn't going to be the team's calling card, I think one of our bigs has to step up for this team to achieve all its goals. E.g., Marshall is a mobile 7-footer; if he makes a jump this year, I could see him really being a factor. He has to cut down on fouls, but he could be a real difference on the boards and in shoring up the D. Amile IMO was up and down last year; he'd lose confidence for several games and then come out and play great D on Kaminsky in the title game. He needs to be a more consistent performer as well.

Two players I think people are potentially too high on are Grayson and Brandon. Both great talents, but Ingram is a rail-thin wing from a relatively weak class; I expect him to be good, but not even in the class as Winslow was last year. Grayson is (justifiably) getting a lot of hype b/c of the title game, but I would expect him to go through some growing pains as well. It's not like he was playing a lot last year, and now he'll be dealing with a bunch of new expectations...

English
10-07-2015, 01:05 PM
Two players I think people are potentially too high on are Grayson and Brandon. Both great talents, but Ingram is a rail-thin wing from a relatively weak class; I expect him to be good, but not even in the class as Winslow was last year. Grayson is (justifiably) getting a lot of hype b/c of the title game, but I would expect him to go through some growing pains as well. It's not like he was playing a lot last year, and now he'll be dealing with a bunch of new expectations...

Wow, I sure hope you're wrong because, if Ingram and Allen are overrated, that really doesn't bode well for our chances to contend at the highest level. I supposed it depends on what you think the collective DBR expectations are that have everyone too high on BI and Grayson. I haven't heard anyone anointing these guys first team All-America, but rather that they'll be scoring leaders and the top-two options on the team. Everything I've heard about Brandon Ingram is that he's a matchup nightmare and can play all over the court (at 6'9), although perhaps I'm also too high on him, as are the consensus of college basketball analysts. If Ingram is "not even in the class with Winslow," that's trouble because it would suggest that the Duke team has a lot of complementary pieces but not necessarily any go-to guys.

Re: Glue Guy, I'd echo most of concepts already mentioned of valuable team player without stuffing the stat sheet--good at everything, not great at any one thing (especially scoring), embodies the cliche of "does the dirty work," etc. I don't really understand the thought that a glue guy is the first to stand by a teammate in a fight, though. That seems like a bizarre thought to me, mostly because when I think of those type of guys, I think of more enforcer types (e.g., Charles Oakley, Cap'n Jack, Bill Lambier) that have more adversarial personalities than the "consummate teammate" archetype I would associate with glue guy. I guess what I'm saying is that enforcers and glue guys aren't mutually exclusive, but that's not a defining characteristic of the glue guy, IMO.

jimsumner
10-07-2015, 01:05 PM
I have heard the term 'glue guy' bandied about fairly often over the years. David McClure and Lance Thomas were supposedly 'glue guys'. Now Matt Jones, Amile Jefferson, and Marshall Plumlee are being referred to as such. Does it mean guys who cannot shoot very well from beyond 10 feet and are not particularly good passers or ballhandlers?

I've also used the word "continuity" guys. Glue guys or continuity guys are the guys who stick around long enough to know the culture well enough to be able to teach it to the younger guys. Duke lost five recruited players after the 2014 season, four recruited players after the 2015 season. Five of those nine players had eligibility remaining.

Duke has three recruited players who have been around more than a season. These are the guys who understand what the coaches want, when they want it, how they want it. They are the guys who can impart their experiences on everything from classwork and papers to weight-training to sleep and nutrition, to more abstract concepts like embracing challenges, maximizing your opportunities and what "next play" really means.

Sure the coaches and staff can and do perform those duties. But some lessons are absorbed better when they come from one's peers. Duke likes having experienced players transmit its values, its culture, its work ethic to the younger players.

And glue guys can and do have talent; Matt Jones' shooting against Gonzaga, Amile Jefferson's rebounding and defense in the Final Four being examples. Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith were glue guys, IMO, albeit glue guys with way more talent than David McClure or Tyler Thornton.

Think glue in the sense of binding a team to the traditions that made it successful in the past. Pass the torch and all that.

I would think role player or complementary player describes a players contribution in games, glue guy describes their contributions in the program.

English
10-07-2015, 01:16 PM
I've also used the word "continuity" guys. Glue guys or continuity guys are the guys who stick around long enough to know the culture well enough to be able to teach it to the younger guys. Duke lost five recruited players after the 2014 season, four recruited players after the 2015 season. Five of those nine players had eligibility remaining.

Duke has three recruited players who have been around more than a season. These are the guys who understand what the coaches want, when they want it, how they want it. They are the guys who can impart their experiences on everything from classwork and papers to weight-training to sleep and nutrition, to more abstract concepts like embracing challenges, maximizing your opportunities and what "next play" really means.

Sure the coaches and staff can and do perform those duties. But some lessons are absorbed better when they come from one's peers. Duke likes having experienced players transmit its values, its culture, its work ethic to the younger players.

And glue guys can and do have talent; Matt Jones' shooting against Gonzaga, Amile Jefferson's rebounding and defense in the Final Four being examples. Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith were glue guys, IMO, albeit glue guys with way more talent than David McClure or Tyler Thornton.

Think glue in the sense of binding a team to the traditions that made it successful in the past. Pass the torch and all that.

I would think role player or complementary player describes a players contribution in games, glue guy describes their contributions in the program.

Glue guys for the program--I like that notion. Although, I think this might muddle what is a traditional team leader vs. what is a glue guy. Of course, you did re-phrase to continuity guy, so maybe your continuity guy is more a consistent presence in the program who assumes a leadership role, rather than a glue guy on the court. Semantics, and all that. Of course, arguing over semantics is like sitting in a rocking chair...#Offseason.

I do think, if you consider anyone who sticks around multiple years (including top dogs Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith) to be a glue guy, you might be limiting the concept to a program with high turnover like Duke--whereas it would require significant amendment in nearly every other D-1 program that doesn't have high attrition to the NBA. Or, for that matter, amendment needed for NBA teams. Is Carmelo Anthony a glue guy for the Knicks because he's been around the locker room for a long time?

ACCBBallFan
10-07-2015, 01:19 PM
Maybe because he had just learned about it earlier in the day, but coach K was very focused on the arm bar on defense, and how it will help Ingram defend bigs at the 4 when they are back to basket.

May be reading too much into coach K's comment on Obi "situational". I think he was referring to Obi still recovering from an injury and limited ability to practice in certain drills beyond the other 8 ACC caliber players.

However, given how strong Duke appears to be on perimeter, IMO, more time for Ingram at 4 means one of Jeter/Obi is odd man out this year once rotation gets down to 8. Currently it is at 8 due to Obi having been injured and that may be the case later on too due to Chase's potential.

Each of coach K, Amile, Grayson, Matt and MP3 spoke of potential for strong defensive effort, length and athleticism.

Apparently Thornton did not attend either summer session/ pick up and may not be as far along as he otherwise would be. He is quite a ball handler, so while the 5 second rule may hurt Duke's traditional pressure defense, it could help DT break some ankles.

Grayson in particular was impressed with Ingram length, and strong with the ball, despite being frail. He knows how to play to his strengths.

Coach K appears to value Matt Jones as much or more than be did Tyler Thornton. He said whether Matt or Derryck start, they will play a big role when they sub in. So has not annointed DT to starter by default yet.

Coach K expects bigs to play to their strengths with screens and getting to boards for pass or rebound with lots of perimeter oriented motion offense. IMO, the 3 best suited for that at Ingram, Allen and Thornton and Matt occasionally spotting up or breaking for a pass but highly valued for his leadership, maturity and defense.

Kennard and Jeter were barely mentioned across the 4 videos, with Ingram singled out by all and Thornton by some.

So top 6 appear to be Thornton, Allen, Jones, Ingram, Amile and MP3 with Ingram the only sure stater along with 4 of the other 5, and then get what you can in certain situations from Kennard, Jeter and maybe Obi.

When Ingram is at PF, one of MP3/Amile obviously sits.

When Ingram is at SF (or PG), any one of Jones, Allen and Thornton sits with both Amile/MP3 as bigs. Perhaps later in year Jeter and/or Kennard surfaces much like Allen did after Sheed dismissal.

As season evolves could go from 4 returnees and Ingram early to 4 frosh and Allen/Jones late as two extremes.
To much other experience for Kennard or Jeter to get beyond 7th in rotation early in the year.

Steven43
10-07-2015, 01:57 PM
I've also used the word "continuity" guys. Glue guys or continuity guys are the guys who stick around long enough to know the culture well enough to be able to teach it to the younger guys. Duke lost five recruited players after the 2014 season, four recruited players after the 2015 season. Five of those nine players had eligibility remaining.

Duke has three recruited players who have been around more than a season. These are the guys who understand what the coaches want, when they want it, how they want it. They are the guys who can impart their experiences on everything from classwork and papers to weight-training to sleep and nutrition, to more abstract concepts like embracing challenges, maximizing your opportunities and what "next play" really means.

Sure the coaches and staff can and do perform those duties. But some lessons are absorbed better when they come from one's peers. Duke likes having experienced players transmit its values, its culture, its work ethic to the younger players.

And glue guys can and do have talent; Matt Jones' shooting against Gonzaga, Amile Jefferson's rebounding and defense in the Final Four being examples. Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith were glue guys, IMO, albeit glue guys with way more talent than David McClure or Tyler Thornton.

Think glue in the sense of binding a team to the traditions that made it successful in the past. Pass the torch and all that.

I would think role player or complementary player describes a players contribution in games, glue guy describes their contributions in the program.
Excellent post, JS. Makes a lot of sense.

Edouble
10-07-2015, 02:07 PM
How many 5-second calls (of a player while dribbling, not out of bounds stuff) get called in one season? I remember a giant anomaly where Greg Paulus forced two in a single game against NC State at home once, but other than that can't remember a single one ever by any team. I'm sure they've happened and I've forgotten, but I'm pretty sure at absolute most Duke forces this call a few times a season. Seems like a very minor change to me.

I recall marveling at the Shane's defensive versatility when he picked up a 5 second call on Tech's point guard, Tony Akins, and also had a handful of blocks in the same game.

Billy Dat
10-07-2015, 02:08 PM
Two players I think people are potentially too high on are Grayson and Brandon. Both great talents, but Ingram is a rail-thin wing from a relatively weak class; I expect him to be good, but not even in the class as Winslow was last year. Grayson is (justifiably) getting a lot of hype b/c of the title game, but I would expect him to go through some growing pains as well. It's not like he was playing a lot last year, and now he'll be dealing with a bunch of new expectations...


Wow, I sure hope you're wrong because, if Ingram and Allen are overrated, that really doesn't bode well for our chances to contend at the highest level. I supposed it depends on what you think the collective DBR expectations are that have everyone too high on BI and Grayson. I haven't heard anyone anointing these guys first team All-America, but rather that they'll be scoring leaders and the top-two options on the team. Everything I've heard about Brandon Ingram is that he's a matchup nightmare and can play all over the court (at 6'9), although perhaps I'm also too high on him, as are the consensus of college basketball analysts. If Ingram is "not even in the class with Winslow," that's trouble because it would suggest that the Duke team has a lot of complementary pieces but not necessarily any go-to guys.

tux, I think, if you are interested, watching the K presser would give you some primary source material to parse. K was really high on both guys. BUT, he did have caveats for both the freshman class and the returnees:

-The freshmen
He said that last year's group was so special because of the USA Basketball seasoning they received. Because of that, in his words, they had already gotten used to not being "The Man" and were accustomed to extended playing experiences with players of equal stature where they had to find and fill a role. He feels like the current freshmen don't have that as much.

-The vets
K's point with these guys is that the challenge goes from being the guy who everyone says, 'Wow, look what he did in that one game" to bringing the effort and the results day in and day out. he cited Matt Jones as someone who, after Quinn Cook, was a highly consistent performer from game to game, where Amile was more up and down and Marshall just didn't get as much game time. He says that while Grayson's end of NCAAs production was amazing, he was a kid who had a healthy ego and was a big time practice performer...so it didn't come out of nowhere. His worry about Grayson is that he plays so hard all the time (practice, etc.) that he's afraid he's going to get hurt.

K also went out of his way to comment, overall, that it's a really hard working group.

flyingdutchdevil
10-07-2015, 02:19 PM
tux, I think, if you are interested, watching the K presser would give you some primary source material to parse. K was really high on both guys. BUT, he did have caveats for both the freshman class and the returnees:

-The freshmen
He said that last year's group was so special because of the USA Basketball seasoning they received. Because of that, in his words, they had already gotten used to not being "The Man" and were accustomed to extended playing experiences with players of equal stature where they had to find and fill a role. He feels like the current freshmen don't have that as much.

-The vets
K's point with these guys is that the challenge goes from being the guy who everyone says, 'Wow, look what he did in that one game" to bringing the effort and the results day in and day out. he cited Matt Jones as someone who, after Quinn Cook, was a highly consistent performer from game to game, where Amile was more up and down and Marshall just didn't get as much game time. He says that while Grayson's end of NCAAs production was amazing, he was a kid who had a healthy ego and was a big time practice performer...so it didn't come out of nowhere. His worry about Grayson is that he plays so hard all the time (practice, etc.) that he's afraid he's going to get hurt.

K also went out of his way to comment, overall, that it's a really hard working group.

I don't like that. And it's not surprising at all. Grayson plays with the toughness of Singler, but Grayson is smaller and quicker. All those combine for a player whose likeliness to get injured goes up pretty significantly. So, here's to a healthy Grayson and a healthy team.

Troublemaker
10-07-2015, 02:45 PM
Wow, I sure hope you're wrong because, if Ingram and Allen are overrated, that really doesn't bode well for our chances to contend at the highest level.

The extent that this team can replace lost star power from last season will be crucial, I agree. Duke 14-15 was star-studded! I mean, you could make the case for any one of 4 players -- Okafor, Winslow, TJones, Cook -- being Duke's best player last season. (I'm not saying that if we conducted a poll of DBR posters on which player was the best that they would each receive 25% of the vote share. But I AM saying whoever polled the lowest, the voters for that player could build a reasonable case for him being the best.)

So, is this year's team going to have another quartet of star players? Almost certainly not. But it IS a weaker year for college basketball, at least when compared to last season. I mean, last season's Final Four included one team that had statistically the best offense ever (Wisconsin) and another team that many believed had the best defense ever (Kentucky). And it was a third team, a star-studded Duke complemented by a quartet of great role players, that emerged with the trophy!

So, we probably don't need a quartet of stars to contend for the highest prizes this season. I'd feel comfortable that if we had just two stars emerge playing at the level of last year's quartet and surrounded by excellent role players, Duke can challenge for the conference and for another Final Four. Right now, Brandon and Grayson seem to be the best candidates to become those two stars.

rocketeli
10-07-2015, 03:08 PM
My first guess at the unintended consequence of this rule is when a team is playing man and the offense has a match-up advantage is for the other 4 players to assembly as far away from the paint as possible and let the man with the match-up advantage take 15-20 seconds to play one on one.

you mean the four corners?

Kedsy
10-07-2015, 03:12 PM
Now, here are the freshman Duke wing minutes for top 20 wings:
-Justise Winslow: 29.1 mpg
-Jabari Parker: 30.7 mpg
-Rasheed Sulaimon: 29.2 mpg
-Austin Rivers: 33.2 mpg
-Luol Deng: 31.1 mpg

Only Austin Rivers is that close to the 35 min per game mark. You can certainly remove Sulaimon from that list (given that he wasn't the alpha dog unlike the other 4 players), but the numbers are still slightly less than Duke freshman PGs.

Given the decent depth at the 3/4 (M Jones, Grayson, Jefferson), I actually see Ingram playing a lot closer to 30 than 35.

I agree with you about PGs. When it comes to "wings," I'd argue Jabari played C/PF ("big") for Duke, not wing. But I'd also argue that "freshman wing" is only one description for Brandon Ingram. The other would probably be "best player," (non-PG) regardless of class. Here are the mpg of each such player since the turn of the 21st century:

2015: Jahlil Okafor, 30.1 mpg
2014: Jabari Parker, 30.7
2013: Mason Plumlee, 34.7
2012: Austin Rivers, 33.2
2011: Kyle Singler/Nolan Smith, 34.8/34.0
2010: Kyle Singler/Nolan Smith/Jon Scheyer, 35.9/35.5/36.8
2009: Gerald Henderson, 29.7
2008: DeMarcus Nelson, 30.9
2007: Josh McRoberts, 35.3
2006: JJ Redick, 37.1
2005: JJ Redick, 37.3
2004: JJ Redick/Luol Deng, 31.1/31.1
2003: Dahntay Jones, 30.7
2002: Jason Williams, 33.6
2001: Shane Battier, 34.9
2000: Chris Carrawell/Shane Battier, 35.6/35.5

So there are some that are around 30 mpg, but more that are around 35 mpg. And the last two, Jahlil and Jabari, both had conditioning and/or foul issues that kept their minutes down. Obviously we'll see about Brandon, but assuming his conditioning is good and he stays out of foul trouble, I think he'll get all the minutes he can handle, at least in close and/or important games.

killerleft
10-07-2015, 03:27 PM
I've also used the word "continuity" guys. Glue guys or continuity guys are the guys who stick around long enough to know the culture well enough to be able to teach it to the younger guys. Duke lost five recruited players after the 2014 season, four recruited players after the 2015 season. Five of those nine players had eligibility remaining.

Duke has three recruited players who have been around more than a season. These are the guys who understand what the coaches want, when they want it, how they want it. They are the guys who can impart their experiences on everything from classwork and papers to weight-training to sleep and nutrition, to more abstract concepts like embracing challenges, maximizing your opportunities and what "next play" really means.

Sure the coaches and staff can and do perform those duties. But some lessons are absorbed better when they come from one's peers. Duke likes having experienced players transmit its values, its culture, its work ethic to the younger players.

And glue guys can and do have talent; Matt Jones' shooting against Gonzaga, Amile Jefferson's rebounding and defense in the Final Four being examples. Kyle Singler and Nolan Smith were glue guys, IMO, albeit glue guys with way more talent than David McClure or Tyler Thornton.

Think glue in the sense of binding a team to the traditions that made it successful in the past. Pass the torch and all that.

I would think role player or complementary player describes a players contribution in games, glue guy describes their contributions in the program.

I like your definition much better than the others bandied about. Matt has shown substantial improvement in his first two years, and may be ready to showcase some serious skills this year. I'm surprised that no one sees him as a potential 'star' for Duke.

Listen to Quants
10-07-2015, 04:06 PM
That's incredible. didn't he come in at like 170-180?


He came in at the 180-185 neighborhood. Which I believe is the Yankees' batting average since the beginning of August.

At the Nike Hoops Summit 'measurements' he was listed as 190 http://www.usab.com/mens/nike-hoop-summit/roster.aspx or 185 or ... IIRC, 196 lbs one place.

I'd imagine the staff would be careful/leery of trying to add 20-25 lbs, while 10-15 seems to be done routinely.

budwom
10-07-2015, 04:11 PM
yeah, good luck trying to make the math work. It rarely does.

Listen to Quants
10-07-2015, 04:18 PM
The extent that this team can replace lost star power from last season will be crucial, I agree. Duke 14-15 was star-studded! I mean, you could make the case for any one of 4 players -- Okafor, Winslow, TJones, Cook -- being Duke's best player last season. (I'm not saying that if we conducted a poll of DBR posters on which player was the best that they would each receive 25% of the vote share. But I AM saying whoever polled the lowest, the voters for that player could build a reasonable case for him being the best.)

So, is this year's team going to have another quartet of star players? Almost certainly not. But it IS a weaker year for college basketball, at least when compared to last season. I mean, last season's Final Four included one team that had statistically the best offense ever (Wisconsin) and another team that many believed had the best defense ever (Kentucky). And it was a third team, a star-studded Duke complemented by a quartet of great role players, that emerged with the trophy!

So, we probably don't need a quartet of stars to contend for the highest prizes this season. I'd feel comfortable that if we had just two stars emerge playing at the level of last year's quartet and surrounded by excellent role players, Duke can challenge for the conference and for another Final Four. Right now, Brandon and Grayson seem to be the best candidates to become those two stars.

Yes, yes, yes. There is only one ball. It's great to force teams to 'guard everybody' but you only need a couple of guys who can *beat* defenses even when well guarded. A caveat: if you have just two, they both better be want-the-ball guys when the big games arrive. Fairly sure of Allen on that score, of course.

Furniture
10-08-2015, 09:59 PM
I like your definition much better than the others bandied about. Matt has shown substantial improvement in his first two years, and may be ready to showcase some serious skills this year. I'm surprised that no one sees him as a potential 'star' for Duke.

So jealous of you avatar!!

MarkD83
10-08-2015, 11:55 PM
you mean the four corners?

I didn't want to use those words for fear of getting demerits but yeah the fo** cor****

subzero02
10-09-2015, 02:10 AM
My first guess at the unintended consequence of this rule is when a team is playing man and the offense has a match-up advantage is for the other 4 players to assembly as far away from the paint as possible and let the man with the match-up advantage take 15-20 seconds to play one on one.

Austin just petitioned the NCAA for 2 more years of eligibility.

Indoor66
10-09-2015, 07:23 AM
I didn't want to use those words for fear of getting demerits but yeah the fo** cor****

I heard uncheat called Phil to see if he wanted to play this year....:mad:

flyingdutchdevil
10-09-2015, 08:20 AM
I agree with you about PGs. When it comes to "wings," I'd argue Jabari played C/PF ("big") for Duke, not wing. But I'd also argue that "freshman wing" is only one description for Brandon Ingram. The other would probably be "best player," (non-PG) regardless of class. Here are the mpg of each such player since the turn of the 21st century:

2015: Jahlil Okafor, 30.1 mpg
2014: Jabari Parker, 30.7
2013: Mason Plumlee, 34.7
2012: Austin Rivers, 33.2
2011: Kyle Singler/Nolan Smith, 34.8/34.0
2010: Kyle Singler/Nolan Smith/Jon Scheyer, 35.9/35.5/36.8
2009: Gerald Henderson, 29.7
2008: DeMarcus Nelson, 30.9
2007: Josh McRoberts, 35.3
2006: JJ Redick, 37.1
2005: JJ Redick, 37.3
2004: JJ Redick/Luol Deng, 31.1/31.1
2003: Dahntay Jones, 30.7
2002: Jason Williams, 33.6
2001: Shane Battier, 34.9
2000: Chris Carrawell/Shane Battier, 35.6/35.5

So there are some that are around 30 mpg, but more that are around 35 mpg. And the last two, Jahlil and Jabari, both had conditioning and/or foul issues that kept their minutes down. Obviously we'll see about Brandon, but assuming his conditioning is good and he stays out of foul trouble, I think he'll get all the minutes he can handle, at least in close and/or important games.

If you dissect your dataset above between freshman and all other players, there is a difference:

Freshman (in bold): 31.3 mpg
Soph-Seniors: 34.3 mpg

Clearly, there is a trend here, and it makes sense. Freshman may be as talented (and often more talented than their teammates), but they are still freshman, or players who are new to the college game, the strategy, and the defensive requirements. As a result, they may make a few more silly mistakes, may be in foul trouble, and may have a shorter leash than their upperclassmen counterparts. Thus, their number of minutes is more around 30 whilst the upperclassmen's minutes are around 35. Hence, I think that Ingram - as the best player on the team - will still average closer to 30 min than 35 min.

Kedsy
10-09-2015, 09:31 AM
If you dissect your dataset above between freshman and all other players, there is a difference:

Freshman (in bold): 31.3 mpg
Soph-Seniors: 34.3 mpg

Clearly, there is a trend here, and it makes sense. Freshman may be as talented (and often more talented than their teammates), but they are still freshman, or players who are new to the college game, the strategy, and the defensive requirements. As a result, they may make a few more silly mistakes, may be in foul trouble, and may have a shorter leash than their upperclassmen counterparts. Thus, their number of minutes is more around 30 whilst the upperclassmen's minutes are around 35. Hence, I think that Ingram - as the best player on the team - will still average closer to 30 min than 35 min.

We'll see. I imagine being a freshman is part of it. More likely in my mind is a combination of (a) only four of the players on the list were freshmen and four is not a sufficient sample size to predict much; and (b) three of the four freshmen on the list were "bigs," rather than "wings," and the only wing averaged 33+ mpg. Clearly under Coach K there is a trend that freshman bigs don't play much more than 30 mpg (in fact, Luol, Jahlil and Jabari might be the only freshman bigs under Coach K to top 30 mpg; I haven't done a full analysis on that, but I did check the obvious candidates and all the other freshman bigs I checked got less than 30 mpg, most of them significantly less). Assuming Brandon is a wing, and is also our best player, I think your estimate will turn out to be low.

jldukie
10-09-2015, 09:45 AM
We'll see. I imagine being a freshman is part of it. More likely in my mind is a combination of (a) only four of the players on the list were freshmen and four is not a sufficient sample size to predict much; and (b) three of the four freshmen on the list were "bigs," rather than "wings," and the only wing averaged 33+ mpg. Clearly under Coach K there is a trend that freshman bigs don't play much more than 30 mpg (in fact, Luol, Jahlil and Jabari might be the only freshman bigs under Coach K to top 30 mpg; I haven't done a full analysis on that, but I did check the obvious candidates and all the other freshman bigs I checked got less than 30 mpg, most of them significantly less). Assuming Brandon is a wing, and is also our best player, I think your estimate will turn out to be low.


I also think that Ingram's physical ability to play minutes could come into play. Winslow, for example, was supremely conditioned with a college-ready body and Ingram is definitely talented, but also quite thin and young (if I am not mistaken) which might limit to some extent his minutes.

53n206
10-09-2015, 10:08 AM
"college-ready body" Goodness, how about pro-ready?

ChillinDuke
10-09-2015, 12:54 PM
We'll see. I imagine being a freshman is part of it. More likely in my mind is a combination of (a) only four of the players on the list were freshmen and four is not a sufficient sample size to predict much; and (b) three of the four freshmen on the list were "bigs," rather than "wings," and the only wing averaged 33+ mpg. Clearly under Coach K there is a trend that freshman bigs don't play much more than 30 mpg (in fact, Luol, Jahlil and Jabari might be the only freshman bigs under Coach K to top 30 mpg; I haven't done a full analysis on that, but I did check the obvious candidates and all the other freshman bigs I checked got less than 30 mpg, most of them significantly less). Assuming Brandon is a wing, and is also our best player, I think your estimate will turn out to be low.

But the only wing that averaged 33+ mpg was pretty clearly the best player on the team. No one else could create on their own on that team that year.

Statistics are great and all. And I generally subscribe to a good Kedsalysis (bam! made a word). But context matters too.

As we're all speculating, I tend to agree with the Dutchman of Flight that Ingram will probably clock in closer to 30 than 35 by both the nature of freshmen (FDD's point) as well as the context of this team (a talented, versatile lineup that has theoretical offensive (and defensive!) punch). No need for 33+ mpg from Ingram.

To be clear, I'll still take 33+ if he can offer it in quality / it's needed.

- Chillin

Kedsy
10-09-2015, 01:33 PM
But the only wing that averaged 33+ mpg was pretty clearly the best player on the team.

And that's exactly my point. The consensus seems to be shaping up that Brandon Ingram will be pretty clearly the best player on the team. If that's true, and he's playing primarily on the wing, then I think he'll get more minutes.

If he plays big (i.e., PF), that would probably be much more tiring for someone of his lack of girth, and he'd also probably have more chance to get in foul trouble. In that case, I'd guess the lower end of the range makes more sense.

killerleft
10-09-2015, 02:28 PM
So jealous of you avatar!!

Me, too! If I were a Chelsea fan, though...

Saratoga2
10-10-2015, 07:53 AM
And that's exactly my point. The consensus seems to be shaping up that Brandon Ingram will be pretty clearly the best player on the team. If that's true, and he's playing primarily on the wing, then I think he'll get more minutes.

If he plays big (i.e., PF), that would probably be much more tiring for someone of his lack of girth, and he'd also probably have more chance to get in foul trouble. In that case, I'd guess the lower end of the range makes more sense.

You are one of the few guys who are close enough to the team to have any real feel for who is doing well. A lot of folks are grasping at tid bits of information and drawing conclusions. Ingram probably is the most difficult guy to defend on the team and seems to be a perfect fit at wing. The position of starting center is probably still up in the air, with Marshall getting first look, but people may be reading too much into coach K's comments about Sean and he could be better than they expect. I am awaiting the first games and look forward to a great season.

Troublemaker
10-10-2015, 09:34 AM
Preseason DraftExpress scouting videos for Ingram

Strengths - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JexQRwN4HEs

Weaknesses - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAvLdfr-yZI

flyingdutchdevil
10-10-2015, 01:23 PM
Preseason DraftExpress scouting videos for Ingram

Strengths - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JexQRwN4HEs

Weaknesses - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAvLdfr-yZI

Man....Ingram is going to be so fun to watch this year. His potential is off the charts. What he could do in those videos with a 170 lb frame is incredible. Imagine what he can do with 25 lb of extra weight.

If the Ingram-Allen tandem is anything close to how I envision it in my head, this may be a more fun team to watch than last year, which set the barometer for college basketball excitement, IMO.

Bay Area Duke Fan
10-10-2015, 04:51 PM
If the Ingram-Allen tandem is anything close to how I envision it in my head, this may be a more fun team to watch than last year, which set the barometer for college basketball excitement, IMO.

Only if they play on Monday night.

Pghdukie
10-10-2015, 04:54 PM
And win their last game !

MarkD83
10-10-2015, 05:59 PM
Just remember to enjoy the journey. There may be bumps in the road like last year at NCSU and home against Miami but the growth of this year's team will be fun to watch.

JPtheGame
10-11-2015, 09:26 AM
The key to this year team is Thornton. There's no reason to devote special attention to amile or MP3 so we need Thornton to beat people off the dribble and attack. If that happens, our bigs become assets on o, our good shooters become great, and Ingram (durant?) gets all the space he'll need to operate. The good news is that all indications are that DT is just that type of player.

plimnko
10-11-2015, 02:39 PM
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/rebuild-is-welcome-advantageous-challenge-for-blue-devils/14961652/

oreorudy
10-11-2015, 03:52 PM
Does anyone know for sure if CTC is going to be aired on BDN? The basketball schedule shows that it will, but
The BDN is not showing it. I have watched online the last 2 years and will be unhappy if I can't do so this year! Thanks!

gumbomoop
10-11-2015, 04:12 PM
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/rebuild-is-welcome-advantageous-challenge-for-blue-devils/14961652/

Some surprises in this article.

(1) Without quoting Krzyzewski, writer says K mentions Jones along with Thornton at PG. I've not seen Matt either as possessing PG vision or playing there his first two seasons.

(2) Says "Coack K expects to see as many as nine strong players in a starting rotation and contributing significant minutes."

(3) Biggest surprise: the 9th guy might be Justin Robinson. Huh? Writer says Justin "may be in the mix with veterans Amile Jefferson and Marshall Plumlee to contend for time at different big man spots."

westwall
10-11-2015, 04:47 PM
Some surprises in this article.

(1) Without quoting Krzyzewski, writer says K mentions Jones along with Thornton at PG. I've not seen Matt either as possessing PG vision or playing there his first two seasons.

(2) Says "Coack K expects to see as many as nine strong players in a starting rotation and contributing significant minutes."

(3) Biggest surprise: the 9th guy might be Justin Robinson. Huh? Writer says Justin "may be in the mix with veterans Amile Jefferson and Marshall Plumlee to contend for time at different big man spots."


I have not heard of Marilyn Payne before, but perhaps the "surprises" are simply due to jumbled note taking. After all, she IS from the UNC School of Journalism.

Edouble
10-11-2015, 07:05 PM
I can't make it past the spacing, or lack thereof, in this article. I trust it's not a must-read.

lotusland
10-11-2015, 08:27 PM
Some surprises in this article.

(1) Without quoting Krzyzewski, writer says K mentions Jones along with Thornton at PG. I've not seen Matt either as possessing PG vision or playing there his first two seasons.

(2) Says "Coack K expects to see as many as nine strong players in a starting rotation and contributing significant minutes."

(3) Biggest surprise: the 9th guy might be Justin Robinson. Huh? Writer says Justin "may be in the mix with veterans Amile Jefferson and Marshall Plumlee to contend for time at different big man spots."

Yeah I did not expect for Justin to crack the rotation as a freshman recruited walk-on. The article says the hope is that Obi can work up to a contributing role. So maybe Justin is considered 9th on the depth chart at this point. I guess we'll find out pretty early if coaches want to keep a red-shirt option available for JR. I wonder what specifically Sean needs to work on In order to earn a contributing role?

JPtheGame
10-12-2015, 01:07 AM
Yeah I did not expect for Justin to crack the rotation as a freshman recruited walk-on. The article says the hope is that Obi can work up to a contributing role. So maybe Justin is considered 9th on the depth chart at this point. I guess we'll find out pretty early if coaches want to keep a red-shirt option available for JR. I wonder what specifically Sean needs to work on In order to earn a contributing role?

No idea about Obi specifically but based on years of listening to K, im going to go with some combination of communication, conditioning, and/or defense.

tux
10-12-2015, 11:18 AM
No idea about Obi specifically but based on years of listening to K, im going to go with some combination of communication, conditioning, and/or defense.

I'm on record as thinking of Obi as more of a project than a major contributor. I've read a lot of folks here say that Duke only takes impact transfers, therefore Obi must be in that same mold. But, past transfers have mostly been in the wing/guard role and guys who were either proven athletes/scorers or shooters. Obi does have one potentially useful skill already, which is as a tough rebounder. But, I think Duke was interested in Obi as a practice/backup/insurance option when they were recruiting Okafor, not based on extrapolating some decent stats at Rice against bad teams into major minutes in the ACC.

kAzE
10-12-2015, 11:34 AM
I talked myself into Amile transforming his offensive game last year after seeing some photos of him looking extra swoll and hearing positive feedback from early practices, so I'll remain a skeptic until I see him hit 2-3 mid range jumpers in a game. However, if he can hit that shot, he immediately becomes the best big man on the team.

Also, I think these notes reaffirm that MP3 SHOULD be the starter at center at least to begin the season. I'm hoping he makes the jump in productivity that both Mason and Miles made in their final seasons.

Kedsy
10-12-2015, 12:31 PM
Also, I think these notes reaffirm that MP3 SHOULD be the starter at center at least to begin the season. I'm hoping he makes the jump in productivity that both Mason and Miles made in their final seasons.

I hope he follows his own path. If you look at the statistics for the junior seasons of all three Plumlees, it is quite clear that MP1 and MP2 were significantly better players as juniors than MP3 was. Even if he continues his advancement, it isn't fair to expect him to have anywhere close to the senior seasons that either of his brothers had.

slower
10-12-2015, 12:55 PM
I talked myself into Amile transforming his offensive game last year after seeing some photos of him looking extra swoll and hearing positive feedback from early practices, so I'll remain a skeptic until I see him hit 2-3 mid range jumpers in a game.

Absolutely. But I'll believe it when I see it.

kAzE
10-12-2015, 01:30 PM
I hope he follows his own path. If you look at the statistics for the junior seasons of all three Plumlees, it is quite clear that MP1 and MP2 were significantly better players as juniors than MP3 was. Even if he continues his advancement, it isn't fair to expect him to have anywhere close to the senior seasons that either of his brothers had.

Well, MP2 was 2nd team AA and first team all-ACC as a senior. I obviously don't expect anything like that from MP3, just something similar in terms of improvement from last year to this year. Even Mason was once a stone-handed klutz at one point in his career, but he improved dramatically over the final 2 seasons of his career. Big men tend to develop more slowly than guards, so I think there's a good chance that MP3, now in his 5th year at Duke, could be an above average to very good starting center in the ACC. We don't need him to score much, just play great defense without fouling and clean the glass on both ends. He's got all the physical tools to do it, and I think he'll be great this year.

flyingdutchdevil
10-12-2015, 01:38 PM
Well, MP2 was 2nd team AA and first team all-ACC as a senior. I obviously don't expect anything like that from MP3, just something similar in terms of improvement from last year to this year. Even Mason was once a stone-handed klutz at one point in his career, but he improved dramatically over the final 2 seasons of his career. Big men tend to develop more slowly than guards, so I think there's a good chance that MP3, now in his 5th year at Duke, could be an above average starting center in the ACC.

I don't buy it, unfortunately. Mason averaged the following per 40 min as a junior: 15.7ppg, 12.9 rpg, and 2.3 bpg. Marshall averaged 9.3ppg, 9.8 rpg, and 2.3 bpg per 40 min as a red shirt junior (ie his 4th year in the program). Their rebounding and block numbers are similar, but MP3's offense is significantly well below that of MP2 as a junior. This year, MP3 will always be the 5th option on offense when he's on the floor; he has showed very little offensively when he's on the floor.

I can see MP3 being a solid and above-average defensive big man in the ACC, but I just don't see how he gets it done offensively.

Olympic Fan
10-12-2015, 01:43 PM
Well, MP2 was 2nd team AA and first team all-ACC as a senior. I obviously don't expect anything like that from MP3, just something similar in terms of improvement from last year to this year. Even Mason was once a stone-handed klutz at one point in his career, but he improved dramatically over the final 2 seasons of his career. Big men tend to develop more slowly than guards, so I think there's a good chance that MP3, now in his 5th year at Duke, could be an above average to very good starting center in the ACC. We don't need him to score much, just play great defense without fouling and clean the glass on both ends. He's got all the physical tools to do it, and I think he'll be great this year.

Mason clearly made a significant jump between his junior and sophomore seasons.

Miles might be a better analogue for Marshall. And even he was a more significant player as a junior than Marshall was last season.

Miles averaged 4.8 ppg and 4.9 rpg in 17.0 mpg as a junior

Marshall averaged 2.2 ppg and 2.4 rpg in 9.6 mph as a junior

As a senior, Miles improved to 6.6 ppg and 7.3 rpg in 20.5 mpg.

I don't know what that portends for Marshall, but I suspect his senior numbers will be a lot closer to Miles' stats -- and maybe his junior stats -- than anything Mason did.

PS Interesting fact. I was going to note that unlike Mason and Miles, Marshall redshirted as a freshman. But then I remembered that Miles also essentially redshirted -- only he did it while in high school. Mason was the only brother who was never held back or repeated a year.

kAzE
10-12-2015, 02:04 PM
Mason clearly made a significant jump between his junior and sophomore seasons.

Miles might be a better analogue for Marshall. And even he was a more significant player as a junior than Marshall was last season.

Miles averaged 4.8 ppg and 4.9 rpg in 17.0 mpg as a junior

Marshall averaged 2.2 ppg and 2.4 rpg in 9.6 mph as a junior

As a senior, Miles improved to 6.6 ppg and 7.3 rpg in 20.5 mpg.

I don't know what that portends for Marshall, but I suspect his senior numbers will be a lot closer to Miles' stats -- and maybe his junior stats -- than anything Mason did.

PS Interesting fact. I was going to note that unlike Mason and Miles, Marshall redshirted as a freshman. But then I remembered that Miles also essentially redshirted -- only he did it while in high school. Mason was the only brother who was never held back or repeated a year.

That's about what I'm expecting from Marshall. He just needs to play around 20 mins a game and be an effective rim protector and garbage man on the glass. He'll probably be on the receiving end of more than a few alley oops as well. For the remaining 20 minutes, I'd probably expect to see Jeter and some Obi at the 5, and even a little Jefferson at the 5 with Ingram sliding up to the 4.

tux
10-12-2015, 02:10 PM
I don't buy it, unfortunately. Mason averaged the following per 40 min as a junior: 15.7ppg, 12.9 rpg, and 2.3 bpg. Marshall averaged 9.3ppg, 9.8 rpg, and 2.3 bpg per 40 min as a red shirt junior (ie his 4th year in the program). Their rebounding and block numbers are similar, but MP3's offense is significantly well below that of MP2 as a junior. This year, MP3 will always be the 5th option on offense when he's on the floor; he has showed very little offensively when he's on the floor.

I can see MP3 being a solid and above-average defensive big man in the ACC, but I just don't see how he gets it done offensively.


I don't think he needs to get it done offensively for Duke to be good offensively with him in there. He proved that last year; recall all that analysis of Duke being more efficient offensively with Marshall in for Okafor? I really think Duke's ceiling hinges on one (probably two) of our three captains taking at least a decent jump in terms of contribution. All the focus will be on the freshmen and Grayson, but I'll be watching to see if Duke's veterans can elevate their game this year.

Kedsy
10-12-2015, 02:30 PM
That's about what I'm expecting from Marshall. He just needs to play around 20 mins a game and be an effective rim protector and garbage man on the glass. He'll probably be on the receiving end of more than a few alley oops as well. For the remaining 20 minutes, I'd probably expect to see Jeter and some Obi at the 5, and even a little Jefferson at the 5 with Ingram sliding up to the 4.

We can always hope, but based on Miles's progression (your theory), your expectations are fairly high for Marshall.

In his junior year, Miles averaged 11.4 pts per 40 and 11.5 rebs per 40. His OffReb% was 13.4%; his DefReb% was 17.8%; and his usage rate was 15.5%.

In his junior year, Marshall averaged 9.3 pts per 40 and 9.8 rebs per 40. His OffReb% was 13.1%; his DefReb% was 15.6%; and his usage rate was 9.8%.


So, other than in offensive rebounding, junior Miles was a fair bit better than junior Marshall in both scoring and rebounding. Assuming a similar progression, we should expect senior Marshall to produce less than senior Miles, even if Marshall manages to get up to the 20.5 mpg that Miles played (and in my opinion 20.5 mpg is an ambitious goal for Marshall this season).

For example, junior Marshall scored only 81% of Miles's points per minute, and 85% of Miles's rebounds per minute. If Marshall's minutes go up not to 20 mpg but only to 15 mpg, and he keeps the same straight line progression rate as Miles, then we should expect something along the lines of 4 ppg and 4.7 rpg from Marshall. Expecting 6.6 and 7.3 would be very optimistic.

MChambers
10-12-2015, 02:50 PM
We can always hope, but based on Miles's progression (your theory), your expectations are fairly high for Marshall.

In his junior year, Miles averaged 11.4 pts per 40 and 11.5 rebs per 40. His OffReb% was 13.4%; his DefReb% was 17.8%; and his usage rate was 15.5%.

In his junior year, Marshall averaged 9.3 pts per 40 and 9.8 rebs per 40. His OffReb% was 13.1%; his DefReb% was 15.6%; and his usage rate was 9.8%.


So, other than in offensive rebounding, junior Miles was a fair bit better than junior Marshall in both scoring and rebounding. Assuming a similar progression, we should expect senior Marshall to produce less than senior Miles, even if Marshall manages to get up to the 20.5 mpg that Miles played (and in my opinion 20.5 mpg is an ambitious goal for Marshall this season).

For example, junior Marshall scored only 81% of Miles's points per minute, and 85% of Miles's rebounds per minute. If Marshall's minutes go up not to 20 mpg but only to 15 mpg, and he keeps the same straight line progression rate as Miles, then we should expect something along the lines of 4 ppg and 4.7 rpg from Marshall. Expecting 6.6 and 7.3 would be very optimistic.
It's October, so what better time to be optimistic?

But I agree, and don't expect Marshall to have a big jump statistically this year. Hope his defense continues to improve, however. I thought he made pretty good strides on defense last year, at least to my eye.

superdave
10-12-2015, 03:13 PM
Zoubek might be a good comp for Marshall. His senior year, Zoubek averaged 12.0 points and 16.6 rebounds per 40 minutes.

If Marshall replicates that in 20 minutes per game, he would average 6 points and 8 boards. I think we would all be pleasantly surprised, but not shocked if that's how this coming season played out for Marshall. The two things we need the most from him are setting screens and providing energy on defense. I expect he will do a lot of both, I just hope he does them both well.

Kedsy
10-12-2015, 03:33 PM
Zoubek might be a good comp for Marshall. His senior year, Zoubek averaged 12.0 points and 16.6 rebounds per 40 minutes.

If Marshall replicates that in 20 minutes per game, he would average 6 points and 8 boards. I think we would all be pleasantly surprised, but not shocked if that's how this coming season played out for Marshall. The two things we need the most from him are setting screens and providing energy on defense. I expect he will do a lot of both, I just hope he does them both well.

Why would you think Brian Zoubek would be a good comparison for Marshall? Zoubek was a voracious rebounder his entire career at Duke, and statistically at least, rebounding has been one of Marshall's biggest deficiencies in comparison to his height.

Putting that aside, in Z's junior season, he scored 13.7 points per 40 and pulled down 12.5 rebs per 40. Those numbers are way better than Marshall's 9.3 pts per 40 and 9.8 rebs per 40. Again, assuming Marshall has a straight line progression similar to Zoubek's, we would reasonably expect Marshall in 20 mpg to have averages around 4.1 ppg and 6.5 rpg; and in 15 mpg to have averages around 3.1 ppg and 4.9 rpg. Approximately the same sort of averages we should expect if Marshall follows Miles's progression.

As I said before, we can always hope, but personally I will be shocked if Marshall averages 6 and 8. That would exceed any reasonable expectation by a lot.

Edouble
10-12-2015, 04:00 PM
Zoubek might be a good comp for Marshall. His senior year, Zoubek averaged 12.0 points and 16.6 rebounds per 40 minutes.

If Marshall replicates that in 20 minutes per game, he would average 6 points and 8 boards. I think we would all be pleasantly surprised, but not shocked if that's how this coming season played out for Marshall. The two things we need the most from him are setting screens and providing energy on defense. I expect he will do a lot of both, I just hope he does them both well.

I think you are selling Zoubek short, if you think that Marshall replicating Z's senior year PP/RP40 would be nothing less than shocking.

Kedsy
10-12-2015, 08:01 PM
I think you are selling Zoubek short, if you think that Marshall replicating Z's senior year PP/RP40 would be nothing less than shocking.

Totally agree. Especially when it comes to rebounding. I'm pretty sure Brian Zoubek's senior season represented the best offensive rebounding percentage and the best rebounding per minute of any Duke player in the Coach K era. Marshall is a good offensive rebounder, but nothing close to Zoubek. And Marshall's defensive rebounding percentage so far in his career has been closer to your average small forward than your average center. The chance that Marshall will go from where he is as a rebounder to basically the best Duke rebounder of the last 35 years is remote, to say the very least.

Oriole Way
10-13-2015, 09:12 AM
Two players I think people are potentially too high on are Grayson and Brandon. Both great talents, but Ingram is a rail-thin wing from a relatively weak class; I expect him to be good, but not even in the class as Winslow was last year. Grayson is (justifiably) getting a lot of hype b/c of the title game, but I would expect him to go through some growing pains as well. It's not like he was playing a lot last year, and now he'll be dealing with a bunch of new expectations...

Funny. Those are the two players I expect to lead the team in scoring, and to be All-ACC good. So I might be one of those people you mentioned who is too high on them. But I feel good about their chances of being great scorers for this team. They each possess a level talent that is rare to find in the college game. Size, length, shooting skill, and versatility in Ingram, and good shooting, athleticism, and an explosive first step with Allen.

Even if my expectations of them are too high or misplaced, I'm extremely excited to see what they're going to do.

COYS
10-13-2015, 09:50 AM
Funny. Those are the two players I expect to lead the team in scoring, and to be All-ACC good. So I might be one of those people you mentioned who is too high on them. But I feel good about their chances of being great scorers for this team. They each possess a level talent that is rare to find in the college game. Size, length, shooting skill, and versatility in Ingram, and good shooting, athleticism, and an explosive first step with Allen.

Even if my expectations of them are too high or misplaced, I'm extremely excited to see what they're going to do.

I don't want to be responsible for putting unrealistic expectations on a freshman, but while this high school class is generally regarded as relatively weak, Brandon is still projected as a top 3 pick. He has more scoring potential than Justise, significantly more length, and probably similar quickness and leaping ability. He certainly isn't as strong as Justise was/is (who is?), but his game is also completely different. Also, you could make a convincing argument that ALL of college basketball lacks the elite level talent of last year. That's part of the reason why a UNC team that has lost double digit games each of the past few years can be talked about as a title favorite. Analysts have looked at the landscape and just see a slightly down year in general. If that proves to be true, even if Brandon isn't the equal of Jahlil or Jabari, we might not notice because relative to the rest of college basketball, he should still be one of the top talents.

I would also add that part of why Justise was able to shine offensively last year is because he didn't have to carry the team on offense. There were times when he powered our offense, but a lot of that had to do with the attention that defenses had to give to slowing Jahlil and limiting Tyus. Justise was excellent on open three pointers and could use his strength and athletic ability to get to the hoop, but he was an absolute non-factor on midrange shots, which limited his ability to create his own offense. This isn't intended as a serious criticism of Justise, who is one of my favorite Devils ever even after one season, but rather an honest account of the holes in his game.

Brandon will be able to create his own shot with ease. He can get to the hoop like Justise, shoot threes, AND create offense inside the arc. It's hard to say if he will be as good as Jabari or Jahlil, but he is a very talented player who might not HAVE to be as good as those guys to put up points. Like any freshman, he will struggle in spots (all three of our freshman last year went through rough patches). But I don't think we are being overly optimistic in thinking that he will be one of our top two players next season.

yancem
10-13-2015, 09:57 AM
We can always hope, but based on Miles's progression (your theory), your expectations are fairly high for Marshall.

In his junior year, Miles averaged 11.4 pts per 40 and 11.5 rebs per 40. His OffReb% was 13.4%; his DefReb% was 17.8%; and his usage rate was 15.5%.

In his junior year, Marshall averaged 9.3 pts per 40 and 9.8 rebs per 40. His OffReb% was 13.1%; his DefReb% was 15.6%; and his usage rate was 9.8%.


So, other than in offensive rebounding, junior Miles was a fair bit better than junior Marshall in both scoring and rebounding. Assuming a similar progression, we should expect senior Marshall to produce less than senior Miles, even if Marshall manages to get up to the 20.5 mpg that Miles played (and in my opinion 20.5 mpg is an ambitious goal for Marshall this season).

For example, junior Marshall scored only 81% of Miles's points per minute, and 85% of Miles's rebounds per minute. If Marshall's minutes go up not to 20 mpg but only to 15 mpg, and he keeps the same straight line progression rate as Miles, then we should expect something along the lines of 4 ppg and 4.7 rpg from Marshall. Expecting 6.6 and 7.3 would be very optimistic.

One thing to bare in mind when comparing MP3's junior year to his brothers' junior years is that neither MP1 or MP2 had to fight for playing time with a 1st team AA in Okafor. Now I'm not saying that MP3 would have been a star last year had Okafor not been on the team but his numbers would have been at least slightly better, no?

Kedsy
10-13-2015, 10:15 AM
I would also add that part of why Justise was able to shine offensively last year is because he didn't have to carry the team on offense. There were times when he powered our offense, but a lot of that had to do with the attention that defenses had to give to slowing Jahlil and limiting Tyus. Justise was excellent on open three pointers and could use his strength and athletic ability to get to the hoop, but he was an absolute non-factor on midrange shots, which limited his ability to create his own offense. This isn't intended as a serious criticism of Justise, who is one of my favorite Devils ever even after one season, but rather an honest account of the holes in his game.

Justise Winslow went through a four game stretch when he averaged 3.0 ppg. A part of that presumably had to do with his various injuries, but it reinforces your point that he didn't have to carry our offense. What Justise did carry for much of the season was our defense. In my opinion that was what made him a special player, not his offense at all.

And, to me, that's the main question about Brandon. He has the length and quickness to be a plus defender on the wing. Maybe even better than "plus." Whether he actually becomes a plus defender (or better) is something we can't know until the games start.

Jeffrey
10-13-2015, 10:29 AM
One thing to bare in mind when comparing MP3's junior year to his brothers' junior years is that neither MP1 or MP2 had to fight for playing time with a 1st team AA in Okafor. Now I'm not saying that MP3 would have been a star last year had Okafor not been on the team but his numbers would have been at least slightly better, no?

Do you think MP3 is as good as MP1 or MP2? Do you think MP3 is a first round NBA pick?

Kedsy
10-13-2015, 10:37 AM
One thing to bare in mind when comparing MP3's junior year to his brothers' junior years is that neither MP1 or MP2 had to fight for playing time with a 1st team AA in Okafor. Now I'm not saying that MP3 would have been a star last year had Okafor not been on the team but his numbers would have been at least slightly better, no?

That's why I was citing per minute and tempo-free stats. I suppose you could argue his per minute stats would be better with more minutes, because he'd have more opportunity to get into the flow of the game and all that, and in some cases I guess that might be true, but based on watching his play I'd say no for Marshall. In my opinion, more minutes would have given him more counting stats, but his per minute and tempo-free stats (as well as his counting stats) would still have been inferior to both his brothers.

Now, having said all that, what Marshall brought to the team last season was energy, good defense, and the team played well with him in the game. Compare his win shares per 40 and "box plus minus (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/bpm.html)" (a completely different stat from the plus/minus that Kenpom has supposedly discredited) to his brothers' junior seasons:

junior MP1: .159 ws/40; 5.6 bpm
junior MP2: .170 ws/40; 8.5 bpm
junior MP3: .189 ws/40; 11.3 bpm

Now, I'm not entirely sure how comparable box plus minus is across seasons, but in theory it should be comparable, and fewer minutes should actually depress the stat a little, making Marshall's performance in that area even more impressive. I'm also not entirely sure how much shooting percentages play into these stats (Marshall's eFG% and true shooting percentage were both around 77%, which is pretty amazing but would have undoubtedly gone down if he'd played more minutes and/or participated more in the offense). But even with those disclaimers, Marshall's win shares per 40 and box plus minus were really good as a junior, and better than both brothers. What I draw from that is we should be happy when Marshall in the game but he's still not going to score or rebound as well as his brothers did as seniors.

Jeffrey
10-13-2015, 10:46 AM
What I draw from that is we should be happy when Marshall in the game but he's still not going to score or rebound as well as his brothers did as seniors.

If Marshall had equal potential, then why did he already make a military commitment? Make substantial NBA money, pay substantial taxes to the USA, then serve the USA.

Kedsy
10-13-2015, 10:56 AM
If Marshall had equal potential, then why did he already make a military commitment?

If the sky is blue, why do birds fly?

Also, nothing in my post suggested Marshall had equal "potential" to anybody. I stated strongly in several posts that he's not likely to reach his brothers' statistical profile, either in counting stats or in per-minute or tempo free. I predicted he'd only play 15 or so mpg, and that he wouldn't get close to averaging 6 and 8, even if he played 20 mpg. I also said that the team played well with him in the game, and I cited certain stats that bear that out.

So what, exactly, are you talking about?

Jeffrey
10-13-2015, 11:05 AM
If the sky is blue, why do birds fly?

Also, nothing in my post suggested Marshall had equal "potential" to anybody. I stated strongly in several posts that he's not likely to reach his brothers' statistical profile, either in counting stats or in per-minute or tempo free. I predicted he'd only play 15 or so mpg, and that he wouldn't get close to averaging 6 and 8, even if he played 20 mpg. I also said that the team played well with him in the game, and I cited certain stats that bear that out.

So what, exactly, are you talking about?

I was fully agreeing with you and saying his military commitment probably implies he does also. If Marshall expected to have a similar senior season and have a serious chance of being a 1st round NBA pick, then I do not think he would have already made a military commitment.

Sorry, I should have wrote "Agreed" and then everything else I wrote.

wk2109
10-13-2015, 11:21 AM
I was fully agreeing with you and saying his military commitment probably implies he does also. If Marshall expected to have a similar senior season and have a serious chance of being a 1st round NBA pick, then I do not think he would have already made a military commitment.

Sorry, I should have wrote "Agreed" and then everything else I wrote.

Marshall has said that while he's committing to the Army, he still wants to play in the NBA after he leaves Duke. It's not an either/or situation with the Army/NBA. http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=210168393


Plumlee did not have as much experience with ROTC as his fellow cadets, but said he is more than ready to serve. He hopes to play for the NBA as well as become an Army officer and work in field artillery. But as passionate as he is about the Army, Plumlee is anxious about summer training and the challenges it brings.

Jeffrey
10-13-2015, 11:34 AM
Marshall has said that while he's committing to the Army, he still wants to play in the NBA after he leaves Duke. It's not an either/or situation with the Army/NBA. http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=210168393

I'm sure "he hopes to play for the NBA". Marshall has a great advisory network and, IMO, his military commitment is revealing. I think he is prudently giving himself a solid alternative.

Do you think he's a 1st round NBA pick like his two brothers? Do you think he has their potential?

wk2109
10-13-2015, 12:17 PM
I'm sure "he hopes to play for the NBA". Marshall has a great advisory network and, IMO, his military commitment is revealing. I think he is prudently giving himself a solid alternative.

Do you think he's a 1st round NBA pick like his two brothers? Do you think he has their potential?

My answers right now would be no and no, but I reserve the right to change my answers after his senior season. I don't believe Miles was on anyone's mock drafts before (or maybe even right after) his senior season -- Marshall might not be the athlete Miles is, but he's still a good athlete for his size, even compared to NBA players. Any legitimate 7-footer who can run the floor will get a look from NBA teams.

Saratoga2
10-13-2015, 12:31 PM
My answers right now would be no and no, but I reserve the right to change my answers after his senior season. I don't believe Miles was on anyone's mock drafts before (or maybe even right after) his senior season -- Marshall might not be the athlete Miles is, but he's still a good athlete for his size, even compared to NBA players. Any legitimate 7-footer who can run the floor will get a look from NBA teams.

Marshall is close to 7 feet tall and is a reasonably good athlete. That said, he really hasn't shown a comfort with any phase of offense other than the dunk and doesn't seem to have the feel for the game to play top level defense or rebound that well. He may be the best we have at center this year. The main alternatives of Sean and Chase are unproven and Antonio may be another Marshall like player with perhaps less athleticism. I don't see Marshall making a substantial improvement as he has been in the program for 3 years and progress has been slow to date.

tux
10-13-2015, 01:00 PM
Funny. Those are the two players I expect to lead the team in scoring, and to be All-ACC good. So I might be one of those people you mentioned who is too high on them. But I feel good about their chances of being great scorers for this team. They each possess a level talent that is rare to find in the college game. Size, length, shooting skill, and versatility in Ingram, and good shooting, athleticism, and an explosive first step with Allen.

Even if my expectations of them are too high or misplaced, I'm extremely excited to see what they're going to do.

I'm excited as well. Saying that I think folks are expecting too much is not the same as saying Grayson and Brandon won't be really good.

There's not a lot of precedent for a player to play so few minutes as a freshman (Grayson) become a primary option as a sophomore. But college basketball has changed a lot so maybe we'll see exactly that.

Re: Brandon. I just think some folks see the top-5 ranking and think he's in the same class as last year's freshmen. Of course, no one knows exactly how things will shake out, but I think Brandon will struggle more than some are expecting. He's not going to post many people up -- he'll want to put the ball on the floor, but the players defending him will be much stronger than he's used to.

Of the freshmen, I see Thornton as an obvious contributor just because he has a highly needed skill set for this team. Luke is the sleeper IMO. K likes shooters, so I'll be interested to see how he scores relative to our other wings. Grayson can obviously shoot, but we have a small sample size. Matt has been inconsistent, to say the least. The question for Luke, if he turns out to be Redick 2.0, is how much of a liability on defense is he compared to the returning players.


Our best defensive lineup IMO would be:

Derryck
Matt
Grayson
Amile
Marshall

I can't even guess what our best offensive lineup would be.

But, just for fun, I'll say:

Matt
Luke
Grayson
Brandon
Chase

Kedsy
10-13-2015, 01:13 PM
I can't even guess what our best offensive lineup would be.

But, just for fun, I'll say:

Matt
Luke
Grayson
Brandon
Chase

Interesting that you would propose a "best offensive lineup" that doesn't contain a point guard. I understand he's a freshman, but I would think Derryck would have to be included in any "best" lineup, on either side of the ball.

flyingdutchdevil
10-13-2015, 01:19 PM
Interesting that you would propose a "best offensive lineup" that doesn't contain a point guard. I understand he's a freshman, but I would think Derryck would have to be included in any "best" lineup, on either side of the ball.

Also interesting that Ingram isn't in the best "defensive" line-up. He may be thin for a 3, but he is huge (6'9" height, 7'3" wingspan). I don't think he's gonna get pushed around that much for a college 3 (college 4, probably).

I agree that Ingram and Thornton need to be on both best offensive and defensive teams, as Ingram is our most talented player and Thornton is our only real PG.

tux
10-13-2015, 01:20 PM
Interesting that you would propose a "best offensive lineup" that doesn't contain a point guard. I understand he's a freshman, but I would think Derryck would have to be included in any "best" lineup, on either side of the ball.

Yes, I have zero clue what the best lineup on offense is going to be.

That said, someone will have to play PG when Derryck is on the bench. Who is that going to be?

Apparently Coach K is saying that could be Matt. Before we landed Derryck, that person was (supposedly) going to be Luke. Both of those guys are in that lineup, so I'm going to give myself a C+. What I don't know yet is how much Derryck is going to score the ball... but, I understand your point in that having a pure PG on the floor may be much better for the O than adding more scoring...

Olympic Fan
10-13-2015, 01:51 PM
Yes, I have zero clue what the best lineup on offense is going to be.

That said, someone will have to play PG when Derryck is on the bench. Who is that going to be?

Apparently Coach K is saying that could be Matt. Before we landed Derryck, that person was (supposedly) going to be Luke. Both of those guys are in that lineup, so I'm going to give myself a C+. What I don't know yet is how much Derryck is going to score the ball... but, I understand your point in that having a pure PG on the floor may be much better for the O than adding more scoring...

Is he saying that? Where -- aside from one ill-informed article by Marilyn Payne on WRAL's website.

I watched his press conference last week and I didn't see any hint that Matt was in the PG rotation (I also didn't see or hear any hint that Justin Robinson was likely to be in the rotation -- both of these observations come from Ms. Payne, who heard stuff at this press conference that nobody else did -- go back and check out Jim Sumner's original post).

I have heard Coach Capel suggest that Luke Kennard is the likely No. 2 option at the point, but that Brandon Ingram could handle it in a pinch. I know that when Tyus declared for the draft and before it was clear that Derryck was coming a year early, that the coaches visited Luke and talked to him about preparing himself to play the point. I never heard Coach Capel mention Matt as a point guard

House P
10-13-2015, 07:17 PM
Totally agree. Especially when it comes to rebounding. I'm pretty sure Brian Zoubek's senior season represented the best offensive rebounding percentage and the best rebounding per minute of any Duke player in the Coach K era.

Based on the goduke.com stats archive, Kedsy appears to be correct with respect to Zoubek's per minute rebounding rate. While it certainly doesn't surprise me that Kedsy is correct about a Duke statistical leader, what does surprise bit is how far Zoubek's 2010 rate outpaced everyone else.

Consider the following.

- Zoubek's 2010 per minute rebounding rate (16.6 reb/40 min) is not only the highest in the Coach K era, it is 20% higher than anything recorded by any Duke player since the 1974-75 season (when Duke started recording minutes played).

- Zoubek's 2010 per minute rebounding rate also appears to the highest recorded in the entire ACC since at least the 2001-2 season (the most distant season ACC leaderboards are listed on ESPN.com).

So, with a tip of my cap to Barry Jacobs, who has probably already posted a similar list somewhere, the table below lists the 25 best per minute rebounding seasons since 1974-5 by a Duke player with more than 200 minutes played.



Rank
Player
Year
Min/
Game
Reb/
Game
Reb/
40 min


1
Brian Zoubek
2010
18.7
7.7
16.57


2
Miles Plumlee
2012
20.5
7.1
13.89


3
Elton Brand
1999
29.3
9.8
13.39


4
Shelden Williams
2005
33.6
11.2
13.31


5
Brian Zoubek
2008
10.5
3.4
13.13


6
Shelden Williams
2004
26.0
8.5
13.04


7
Mason Plumlee
2011
25.6
8.4
13.02


8
Mason Plumlee
2012
28.4
9.2
12.95


9
Christian Laettner
1990
29.9
9.6
12.83


10
Shelden Williams
2006
33.3
10.7
12.82


11
Mike Gminski
1978
31.6
10.0
12.62


12
Elton Brand
1998
23.5
7.3
12.49


13
Brian Zoubek
2009
11.9
3.7
12.46


14
Mike Gminski
1977
34.7
10.7
12.32


15
Shelden Williams
2003
19.2
5.9
12.32


16
Carlos Boozer
2002
28.4
8.7
12.21


17
Taymon Domzalski
1999
9.9
3.0
12.16


18
Bob Fleischer
1975
34.5
10.5
12.16


19
Mike Gminski
1980
35.9
10.9
12.13


20
Brian Zoubek
2007
7.3
2.2
12.09


21
Amile Jefferson
2014
22.7
6.9
12.06


22
Miles Plumlee
2010
16.4
4.9
12.05


23
Erik Meek
1994
13.9
4.2
11.98


24
Greg Newton
1995
11.4
3.4
11.79


25
Casey Sanders
2003
17.8
5.2
11.75



A couple notes:

- Not only does Zoubek’s 2010 season rank #1, his three other seasons also rank in the top 20 (#5, #13, #20). This probably makes him Duke's best rebounder since perhaps Randy Denton or Mike Lewis, who both played before minute played were recorded.

- While Miles and Mason appear multiple times in the top 25, Marshall’s best rate (10.24 reb/40 min in 2013-14) is #50 on the list.

- The only name I don't recognize in top 100 is Bob Fleischer, who ranks #18. A quick web search revealed the following:
- He was drafted in the 4th round of the NBA draft, but never played.
- He was an academic All-American who later became a urologist.
- According to a 2013 DBR article by Al Featherston, Fleischer was a “burly power forward with bushy hair” who appears to have been one of the few people willing to make “an eloquent public plea for [Duke's] administration to keep Neil McGeachy, despite his 10-16 season”.


Sounds like an interesting guy. Anyone with a longer memory care to share any stories about Bob Fleischer?

Atldukie79
10-13-2015, 07:38 PM
Bob Fleischer was a very good player on some bad teams. He also played for 3 different head coaches in his 3 years on the varsity.

Indoor66
10-14-2015, 07:32 AM
Bob Fleischer was a very good player on some bad teams. He also played for 3 different head coaches in his 3 years on the varsity.

He was very strong and was more of a banger rather than a finesse player.

Listen to Quants
10-14-2015, 02:33 PM
He was very strong and was more of a banger rather than a finesse player.

True. But, he was a fair finesse player ... just an even better banger. Large, played strong. If his knees had held up (in the days before good-as-new knee surgery) I think he would have been a NBA player.

Listen to Quants
10-14-2015, 02:38 PM
Based on the goduke.com stats archive, Kedsy appears to be correct with respect to Zoubek's per minute rebounding rate. While it certainly doesn't surprise me that Kedsy is correct about a Duke statistical leader, what does surprise bit is how far Zoubek's 2010 rate outpaced everyone else.

Consider the following.

- Zoubek's 2010 per minute rebounding rate (16.6 reb/40 min) is not only the highest in the Coach K era, it is 20% higher than anything recorded by any Duke player since the 1974-75 season (when Duke started recording minutes played).

- Zoubek's 2010 per minute rebounding rate also appears to the highest recorded in the entire ACC since at least the 2001-2 season (the most distant season ACC leaderboards are listed on ESPN.com).

So, with a tip of my cap to Barry Jacobs, who has probably already posted a similar list somewhere, the table below lists the 25 best per minute rebounding seasons since 1974-5 by a Duke player with more than 200 minutes played.



Rank
Player
Year
Min/
Game
Reb/
Game
Reb/
40 min


1
Brian Zoubek
2010
18.7
7.7
16.57


2
Miles Plumlee
2012
20.5
7.1
13.89


3
Elton Brand
1999
29.3
9.8
13.39


4
Shelden Williams
2005
33.6
11.2
13.31


5
Brian Zoubek
2008
10.5
3.4
13.13


6
Shelden Williams
2004
26.0
8.5
13.04


7
Mason Plumlee
2011
25.6
8.4
13.02


8
Mason Plumlee
2012
28.4
9.2
12.95


9
Christian Laettner
1990
29.9
9.6
12.83


10
Shelden Williams
2006
33.3
10.7
12.82


11
Mike Gminski
1978
31.6
10.0
12.62


12
Elton Brand
1998
23.5
7.3
12.49


13
Brian Zoubek
2009
11.9
3.7
12.46


14
Mike Gminski
1977
34.7
10.7
12.32


15
Shelden Williams
2003
19.2
5.9
12.32


16
Carlos Boozer
2002
28.4
8.7
12.21


17
Taymon Domzalski
1999
9.9
3.0
12.16


18
Bob Fleischer
1975
34.5
10.5
12.16


19
Mike Gminski
1980
35.9
10.9
12.13


20
Brian Zoubek
2007
7.3
2.2
12.09


21
Amile Jefferson
2014
22.7
6.9
12.06


22
Miles Plumlee
2010
16.4
4.9
12.05


23
Erik Meek
1994
13.9
4.2
11.98


24
Greg Newton
1995
11.4
3.4
11.79


25
Casey Sanders
2003
17.8
5.2
11.75



A couple notes:

- Not only does Zoubek’s 2010 season rank #1, his three other seasons also rank in the top 20 (#5, #13, #20). This probably makes him Duke's best rebounder since perhaps Randy Denton or Mike Lewis, who both played before minute played were recorded.

- While Miles and Mason appear multiple times in the top 25, Marshall’s best rate (10.24 reb/40 min in 2013-14) is #50 on the list.

- The only name I don't recognize in top 100 is Bob Fleischer, who ranks #18. A quick web search revealed the following:
- He was drafted in the 4th round of the NBA draft, but never played.
- He was an academic All-American who later became a urologist.
- According to a 2013 DBR article by Al Featherston, Fleischer was a “burly power forward with bushy hair” who appears to have been one of the few people willing to make “an eloquent public plea for [Duke's] administration to keep Neil McGeachy, despite his 10-16 season”.


Sounds like an interesting guy. Anyone with a longer memory care to share any stories about Bob Fleischer?








Would love to see this list pinned at the top for a while. Bolded comment is the answer to the too-oft assertion that Zoubek somehow found it his senior year. He was always a great rebounder. His senior year he 'found' a way to stay healthy and the refs found a way to actually look at his feet to call travelling instead of looking at his sometimes awkward, but not travelling, movements. So say I.

Listen to Quants
10-14-2015, 02:39 PM
Oh, and another interesting point in the list above. Jefferson last year. Impressive.

Listen to Quants
10-14-2015, 04:04 PM
Oh, and another interesting point in the list above. Jefferson last year. Impressive.

Oops, 2014 is not 'last year' except ... you know. Last year Jefferson avg was 10.9, still very good.

vick
10-14-2015, 04:04 PM
Would love to see this list pinned at the top for a while. Bolded comment is the answer to the too-oft assertion that Zoubek somehow found it his senior year. He was always a great rebounder. His senior year he 'found' a way to stay healthy and the refs found a way to actually look at his feet to call travelling instead of looking at his sometimes awkward, but not travelling, movements. So say I.

Yep, I cringe when I hear that someone needs to (or worse, will) break out like Zoubek as a senior. Zoubek's just a huge positive outlier in terms of rebounding prowess (and if anything, rebounds/40, though better than raw RPG, understates his excellence because 1) Duke '10 was a relatively slow-paced team and 2) Zoubek was even more effective on the offensive glass than defensive, and offensive rebounds are less likely to have been "taken away" from a teammate).

Kedsy
10-14-2015, 04:38 PM
Yep, I cringe when I hear that someone needs to (or worse, will) break out like Zoubek as a senior. Zoubek's just a huge positive outlier in terms of rebounding prowess (and if anything, rebounds/40, though better than raw RPG, understates his excellence because 1) Duke '10 was a relatively slow-paced team and 2) Zoubek was even more effective on the offensive glass than defensive, and offensive rebounds are less likely to have been "taken away" from a teammate).

Well, using tempo free stats, Zoubek's offensive rebound percentage (21.5%) in 2009-10 was either the best or the second best of any Division I college player in the 21st century. His defensive rebound percentage (24.6%) was good, one of the best marks we've had at Duke in a long while, but still pales besides guys like Kenneth Faried (36.8% and 31.4% his junior and senior season) or Sean Obi (30.2% his freshman season at Rice). Overall, I think Zoubek should be considered the best rebounder at Duke under Coach K.

phaedrus
10-14-2015, 04:43 PM
Yep, I cringe when I hear that someone needs to (or worse, will) break out like Zoubek as a senior. Zoubek's just a huge positive outlier in terms of rebounding prowess (and if anything, rebounds/40, though better than raw RPG, understates his excellence because 1) Duke '10 was a relatively slow-paced team and 2) Zoubek was even more effective on the offensive glass than defensive, and offensive rebounds are less likely to have been "taken away" from a teammate).

This is true in a sense and not quite as true in a different sense. Yes, Zoubek was a great per-minute rebounder most or all of his career. But he still "found it" his senior year - he traveled less, fumbled fewer passes, his kick-outs after offensive boards became a key part of the offense, and he fouled less. And because he fouled less, he gave us quite effective rim protection, for a substantial part of games.

As you point out, '10 was a slow-paced team, and this undoubtedly helped him to contribute in these ways. So yes, he didn't become a great rebounder as a senior, but he found a way (several ways, in fact) to contribute much more as a senior.

Turning to this year: as you will agree, Zoubek's trajectory doesn't portend that Marshall will become a significantly better rebounder or develop a jump-shot. But, like Zoubek, it is not too much to hope for Marshall to use the skills and attributes he has already demonstrated - energy, athleticism, size - to become a more effective all-around basketball player. Whether his per-minute averages change much is secondary.

Kedsy
10-14-2015, 04:52 PM
...and he fouled less. And because he fouled less, he gave us quite effective rim protection, for a substantial part of games.

Brian Zoubek, Fouls per 40 minutes:

freshman: 6.3
sophomore: 6.6
junior: 6.7
senior: 7.4

So actually, he fouled more. Although it is true that for the last 16 games, as a starter (beginning with his breakout game against Maryland), he only averaged 6.0 fouls per 40. Even using that figure, it's not nearly enough of a reduction from his first three years to justify the myth that he suddenly "found it" the second half of his senior year. It's probably more accurate to say that Coach K just played him for more minutes.

vick
10-14-2015, 04:53 PM
Well, using tempo free stats, Zoubek's offensive rebound percentage (21.5%) in 2009-10 was either the best or the second best of any Division I college player in the 21st century. His defensive rebound percentage (24.6%) was good, one of the best marks we've had at Duke in a long while, but still pales besides guys like Kenneth Faried (36.8% and 31.4% his junior and senior season) or Sean Obi (30.2% his freshman season at Rice). Overall, I think Zoubek should be considered the best rebounder at Duke under Coach K.

Certainly.


This is true in a sense and not quite as true in a different sense. Yes, Zoubek was a great per-minute rebounder most or all of his career. But he still "found it" his senior year - he traveled less, fumbled fewer passes, his kick-outs after offensive boards became a key part of the offense, and he fouled less. And because he fouled less, he gave us quite effective rim protection, for a substantial part of games.

As you point out, '10 was a slow-paced team, and this undoubtedly helped him to contribute in these ways. So yes, he didn't become a great rebounder as a senior, but he found a way (several ways, in fact) to contribute much more as a senior.

Agree with this as well. And it's not as if his rebounding percentage didn't go up significantly as a senior, it's just that it was a jump from an already very high place. More important was, as you say, being able to actually stay on the floor due to the other factors you mention (less fouling doesn't show up so much in the stats, but my memory is that he wasn't making as many bad fouls by his senior year).

wilson
10-14-2015, 04:56 PM
...it's not nearly enough of a reduction from his first three years to justify the myth that he suddenly "found it" the second half of his senior year. It's probably more accurate to say that Coach K just played him for more minutes.He was also much more of a defensive focal point in his senior season than at any other point in his career, presenting more opportunities for him to foul.

phaedrus
10-14-2015, 09:32 PM
It's probably more accurate to say that Coach K just played him for more minutes.

Is it seriously your contention that Coach K had a player on his bench for three years who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek, but that Coach K just decided not to play him? Even though those teams were alarmingly undersized?

wilson
10-14-2015, 09:35 PM
Is it seriously your contention that Coach K had a player on his bench for three years who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek, but that Coach K just decided not to play him? Even though those teams were alarmingly undersized?...not to be confused with alarmingly unathletic.

Kedsy
10-14-2015, 10:04 PM
Is it seriously your contention that Coach K had a player on his bench for three years who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek, but that Coach K just decided not to play him? Even though those teams were alarmingly undersized?

I would say nearly as good, certainly not just as good. He definitely improved from year to year. But his tempo-free and per minute stats were always very good. That said, I believe there were many reasons why he wasn't able to play big minutes prior to the second half of his senior year, including injuries, conditioning, and the pace of play. Duke in 2009 and especially in 2008 played a much faster pace than the 2010 team. Brian Zoubek's style of play was not conducive to a fast-paced game. In addition, I'm sure there were other reasons for Coach K to limit Zoubek's minutes of which I'm not aware.

That said, I was merely responding to your contention that he fouled less during his senior season, a statement which is demonstrably untrue. He also scored fewer points per minute during his senior season than in any of his previous seasons, and his turnovers per minute were pretty much exactly the same as the average of his sophomore and junior seasons. So whether or not you believe that Coach K just played him more his senior season, most (or all) of the reasons you state for him "getting it" his senior year are simply not borne out by the stats.

Now, having said all that, it's possible that his defensive abilities and positioning were significantly better his senior year than in his earlier years. There really isn't a stat for that, and his defense was certainly outstanding his senior season. Maybe that's why he played more? Although I personally thought his defense was very good his junior year as well, so I don't know if that was it or not. I'm only saying it wasn't because of fewer fouls or fewer turnovers or better offense or significantly better rebounding ability. It's a lot more subtle than that.

Kedsy
10-14-2015, 11:12 PM
Is it seriously your contention that Coach K had a player on his bench for three years who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek, but that Coach K just decided not to play him? Even though those teams were alarmingly undersized?

Incidentally, even in Brian Zoubek's senior year, a great many of the people here at DBR thought he was playing too much. Certainly before his big breakout game against Maryland that was the case. After the big game, the amount of posters calling for one or both of the Plumlees to take Zoubek's (and Thomas's) minutes thinned, but it was still a vocal minority right up until the Elite Eight. I spent much of that season defending Zoubek from those calling for him to be shown the end of the bench.

My point is it wasn't so obvious to all that many people here that the player "who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek" was worthy of playing time, even when he was a senior. It was only after we won the natty and he was obviously a big part of the championship that the legend of Brian Zoubek was born. Had we lost to California in the second round of the 2010 tournament, you probably wouldn't have made the above shocked statement, even though Zoubek's contribution his senior year wouldn't have been any different.

Indoor66
10-15-2015, 07:25 AM
Incidentally, even in Brian Zoubek's senior year, a great many of the people here at DBR thought he was playing too much. Certainly before his big breakout game against Maryland that was the case. After the big game, the amount of posters calling for one or both of the Plumlees to take Zoubek's (and Thomas's) minutes thinned, but it was still a vocal minority right up until the Elite Eight. I spent much of that season defending Zoubek from those calling for him to be shown the end of the bench.

My point is it wasn't so obvious to all that many people here that the player "who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek" was worthy of playing time, even when he was a senior. It was only after we won the natty and he was obviously a big part of the championship that the legend of Brian Zoubek was born. Had we lost to California in the second round of the 2010 tournament, you probably wouldn't have made the above shocked statement, even though Zoubek's contribution his senior year wouldn't have been any different.

Maybe all this noise is explained by the (to me) fact that K is the best coach and evaluater and motivator and we are all just fans. He seems to make the right call, almost all of the time.

ChillinDuke
10-15-2015, 08:32 AM
Agree with this as well. And it's not as if his rebounding percentage didn't go up significantly as a senior, it's just that it was a jump from an already very high place. More important was, as you say, being able to actually stay on the floor due to the other factors you mention (less fouling doesn't show up so much in the stats, but my memory is that he wasn't making as many bad fouls by his senior year).

Agree with Vick. I also highlighted a relevant snippet that I particularly liked.

Stats are great for certain purposes, but they don't capture context. While it's hard to argue with the numbers, I definitely believe that Zoubek "found it" his senior year in the sense that the quality of his play was much improved. Said differently, a rebound at the end of a half on a buzzer beater half-court chuck is obviously not as good as a contested, traffic crunch time rebound. Stats won't show you that distinction, though.

While I agree with Kedsy that Zoubek "always had it in him" (my term), I particularly agree with Vick in that I don't think Zoubek brought it "out of him" (my term) until his senior year, the Maryland game being his coming "out" party.

- Chillin

PS - Most distinctively, I remember early in Zoubek's career consistently watching games with my dad where as soon as Zoubs got the ball, we'd mutter "travel." Seconds later, the whistle...

flyingdutchdevil
10-15-2015, 09:15 AM
Agree with Vick. I also highlighted a relevant snippet that I particularly liked.

Stats are great for certain purposes, but they don't capture context. While it's hard to argue with the numbers, I definitely believe that Zoubek "found it" his senior year in the sense that the quality of his play was much improved. Said differently, a rebound at the end of a half on a buzzer beater half-court chuck is obviously not as good as a contested, traffic crunch time rebound. Stats won't show you that distinction, though.

While I agree with Kedsy that Zoubek "always had it in him" (my term), I particularly agree with Vick in that I don't think Zoubek brought it "out of him" (my term) until his senior year, the Maryland game being his coming "out" party.

- Chillin

PS - Most distinctively, I remember early in Zoubek's career consistently watching games with my dad where as soon as Zoubs got the ball, we'd mutter "travel." Seconds later, the whistle...

I completely agree with you. I really do. That Maryland game changed the outlook for that Duke team. I also agree that something clicked for Zoubek his senior year. And I also agree that Zoubek's first three years were filled with me yelling at the TV. But I just looked at the stats, and they make zero sense.

Zoubek's junior year (per 40 min): 13.7 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 2.7 bpg, 2.3 TOpg, 6.7 PFpg
Zoubek's senior year (per 40 min): 12.0 ppg, 17.2 rpg, 1.7 bpg, 2.7 TOpg, 7.7 PFpg

With the exception of rebounding, where he improved an insane ~40% from his junior to senior year, all the key bigmen stats went down. I think stats would paint a different picture if we had Zoub's pre-Maryland and post-Maryland breakdown, but I'm not sure we do. Basically, Zoubek was so good at rebounding and a decent rim protector that his low block numbers, high turnovers, and high rate of fouling was masked. Pretty impressive.

Olympic Fan
10-15-2015, 09:35 AM
I completely agree with you. I really do. That Maryland game changed the outlook for that Duke team. I also agree that something clicked for Zoubek his senior year. And I also agree that Zoubek's first three years were filled with me yelling at the TV. But I just looked at the stats, and they make zero sense.

Zoubek's junior year (per 40 min): 13.7 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 2.7 bpg, 2.3 TOpg, 6.7 PFpg
Zoubek's senior year (per 40 min): 12.0 ppg, 17.2 rpg, 1.7 bpg, 2.7 TOpg, 7.7 PFpg

With the exception of rebounding, where he improved an insane ~40% from his junior to senior year, all the key bigmen stats went down. I think stats would paint a different picture if we had Zoub's pre-Maryland and post-Maryland breakdown, but I'm not sure we do. Basically, Zoubek was so good at rebounding and a decent rim protector that his low block numbers, high turnovers, and high rate of fouling was masked. Pretty impressive.

If you want to take the time, you can get Zoubek's game-by-game stats at http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/players/logs.php?playerid=520&season=2009-10

I'm not going to figure out game-by-game, but before Maryland, his only double figure performances came in blowouts against UNC Greensboro (14 pts, 7 rebs in 16 minutes), Gardner Webb (13/8 in 15 minutes), Long Beach State (10/12 in 25 minutes) and in a slightly more competitive game (a 9-point win) against St. John's (11/7 in 18 minutes).

On the other hand, he was scoreless in nine minutes at Wisconsin (mostly late in a blowout loss). He was scoreless in two minutes in a tough road loss at Georgetown and in 10 minutes in a tough road win at UNC.

The point is that his pre-Maryland numbers were almost all compiled in blowouts or in garbage time against our weaker opposition and often against our opponents' scrubs. From Maryland on, he was playing key minutes against the best our opponents had to offer. That's the limitation of raw stats. They need to be fitted into some context.

Kedsy
10-15-2015, 10:53 AM
The point is that his pre-Maryland numbers were almost all compiled in blowouts or in garbage time against our weaker opposition and often against our opponents' scrubs. From Maryland on, he was playing key minutes against the best our opponents had to offer. That's the limitation of raw stats. They need to be fitted into some context.

I disagree with your assessment. My recollection is that Zoubek did not compile his stats in garbage time; a good number of his minutes always came in the first half. And most of the 2009-10 team's games were blowouts, so not including those games doesn't make much sense. You talk about double-figure points, but that's hard to do when you don't get so many minutes. For example, Z's 5 points and 7 rebounds in 13 minutes against #21 Georgia Tech on February 4 might have been a double-double if he'd received the same number of minutes that he did after his "breakout."

Citing his 0 points in 2 minutes against Georgetown is hardly a knock on Zoubek. Coach K barely let him in the game. And despite going scoreless in 9 minutes against Wisconsin, he still had 17.8 rebounds per 40 minutes in that game.

I went to the two games in New York in November that season, against Connecticut and Arizona State, and I remember Zoubek playing in the important moments of those games and being a key defensive contributor. In fact, he and Lance stood out to me as the players of the games, despite many DBR posters demanding they both be benched in favor of the Plumlees. Statistically, Zoubek averaged 19.4 rebounds per 40 minutes during those two relatively close wins. Which is almost other-worldly, and goes against your theory. And that's the limitation of creating a non-statistical context to fit your narrative.

Jeffrey
10-15-2015, 10:57 AM
Incidentally, even in Brian Zoubek's senior year, a great many of the people here at DBR thought he was playing too much. Certainly before his big breakout game against Maryland that was the case. After the big game, the amount of posters calling for one or both of the Plumlees to take Zoubek's (and Thomas's) minutes thinned, but it was still a vocal minority right up until the Elite Eight. I spent much of that season defending Zoubek from those calling for him to be shown the end of the bench.

My point is it wasn't so obvious to all that many people here that the player "who was just as good, or nearly as good, as senior Brian Zoubek" was worthy of playing time, even when he was a senior. It was only after we won the natty and he was obviously a big part of the championship that the legend of Brian Zoubek was born. Had we lost to California in the second round of the 2010 tournament, you probably wouldn't have made the above shocked statement, even though Zoubek's contribution his senior year wouldn't have been any different.

Very true! Mason's displayed athletic skills would have most likely earned him a 1st round NBA pick if he had declared after his freshman season. If we had gone out early in the tourney and Mason had turned pro, then many would have been critical of K's decision.

Kedsy
10-15-2015, 10:58 AM
I think stats would paint a different picture if we had Zoub's pre-Maryland and post-Maryland breakdown, but I'm not sure we do.

For what it's worth, in 2009-10, Zoubek averaged 12.8 pp40 and 16.2 rp40 in his first 24 games and 11.1 pp40 and 16.9 rp40 in the 16 final games (starting with and including the Maryland breakout). More points per minute before the "breakout," and almost the same rebounds per minute before and after.

So I don't think those stats paint so much of a different story.

cato
10-15-2015, 11:27 AM
For what it's worth, in 2009-10, Zoubek averaged 12.8 pp40 and 16.2 rp40 in his first 24 games and 11.1 pp40 and 16.9 rp40 in the 16 final games (starting with and including the Maryland breakout). More points per minute before the "breakout," and almost the same rebounds per minute before and after.

So I don't think those stats paint so much of a different story.

Of course, the competition was a bit different before and after the MD game. Nevertheless, a very interesting picture based on the stats.

Jeffrey
10-15-2015, 11:29 AM
Wasn't Zoubek the only 2009-10 starter who did not make an All-ACC team? IIRC, Jon and Kyle were 1st team, Nolan was 2nd, and Lance was All-D. And, IIRC, other ACC coaches were saying Mason may have been the best pro prospect on that team.

mgtr
10-15-2015, 11:41 AM
I sure am happy that the season is about to start. I think we are running out of room on the head of that pin!:D

Kedsy
10-15-2015, 11:47 AM
Of course, the competition was a bit different before and after the MD game. Nevertheless, a very interesting picture based on the stats.

Well, yes, since the "before" picture includes November and December patsy games and 9 of our final 16 games came either in the ACC or NCAA tournaments. That said, we faced 7 ranked teams in the first 24 games of that season (29.2%) and 5 ranked teams in the 16 games (31.3%) after and including that Maryland game (including the final four games of the NCAAT), so the distribution at the top wasn't so different in the two periods. And non-ranked early season opponents Arizona State (#63 in Pomeroy) Iowa State (#74), Charlotte (#92), Long Beach (#153), Radford (#162), and Coastal Carolina (#166) weren't entirely cupcakes. But yeah, the competition was a little stiffer in the latter phase. Nevertheless, the interesting picture (as you put it) of Zoubek's before-and-after stats doesn't really show a guy who "broke out" as much as a guy who got (and took advantage of) an opportunity of more playing time.

JPtheGame
10-15-2015, 01:54 PM
Overall, I think Zoubek should be considered the best rebounder at Duke under Coach K.
Shelden Williams says hello.

flyingdutchdevil
10-15-2015, 03:24 PM
Shelden Williams says hello.

I actually agree with you. Zoubek had a better rebounding rate, but Zoubek had issues staying on the floor all 4 years (his foul per 40 mins was pretty crazy). Shelden was more than just a rebounder and hence was on the floor a ton during his tenure at Duke. A player who rebounds at the utmost elite level but can't get on the floor is not as valuable as a player who stays on the floor and rebounds at an elite level.

House P
10-15-2015, 03:27 PM
PS - Most distinctively, I remember early in Zoubek's career consistently watching games with my dad where as soon as Zoubs got the ball, we'd mutter "travel." Seconds later, the whistle...


I completely agree with you. I really do. That Maryland game changed the outlook for that Duke team. I also agree that something clicked for Zoubek his senior year. And I also agree that Zoubek's first three years were filled with me yelling at the TV. But I just looked at the stats, and they make zero sense.

Zoubek's junior year (per 40 min): 13.7 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 2.7 bpg, 2.3 TOpg, 6.7 PFpg
Zoubek's senior year (per 40 min): 12.0 ppg, 17.2 rpg, 1.7 bpg, 2.7 TOpg, 7.7 PFpg



While the junior and senior year stats you list don't really align with the bolded comments, Zoubek's freshman year stats tell a different story.

Despite playing only 235 minutes as a freshman, Zoubek managed to commit 37 turnovers. That's a rate of 6.3 TO per 40 minutes. As far as I can tell, this is the highest rate for any Duke player with at least 150 minutes played in a season since 1975-76.

Zoubek committed "only" 3.05 TO/40 min as a sophomore. That's more in line with his junior and senior years, but still fairly high for a post player.

Here's a list of the Duke's top 25 "leaders" in turnovers per 40 minutes since 1975-76 (the first year Duke recorded turnovers).





Rank
Player
Year
Min/G
TO/40 min


1
Brian Zoubek
2007
7.3
6.30


2
Steve Gray
1977
22.0
5.94


3
Quin Snyder
1986
8.7
5.49


4
Bobby Hurley
1990
33.4
5.24


5
Tom Emma
1980
6.4
5.06


6
Jason Williams
2001
31.8
4.97


7
Jeff Capel
1995
29.5
4.95


8
Miles Plumlee
2009
6.9
4.85


9
Bruce Bell
1977
12.2
4.83


10
Jason Williams
2000
34.0
4.81


11
Steve Gray
1978
12.0
4.78


12
Kevin Strickland
1986
7.6
4.77


13
Brian Davis
1989
8.4
4.75


14
Gene Banks
1978
33.4
4.72


15
Corey Maggette
1999
17.7
4.63


16
Daniel Meagher
1983
14.0
4.50


17
Bobby Hurley
1991
34.7
4.46


18
Jason Williams
2002
33.6
4.46


19
Kenny Blakeney
1993
10.2
4.33


20
David Henderson
1985
23.6
4.30


21
Bobby Hurley
1992
33.6
4.18


22
David Henderson
1983
24.9
4.13


23
Alaa Abdelnaby
1988
9.4
4.13


24
Joe Cook
1988
6.6
4.12


25
Christian Laettner
1992
32.2
4.11


















































A couple notes:

- Not surprisingly, the list is dominated by guards (Hurley, Jason Williams). However, it also contains a couple excellent non-guards: Gene Banks in 1978, Christian Laettner in 1992.

- The Duke player with the fewest turnovers per 40 minutes? Matt Jones in 2014. In 2014, Matt committed only 4 turnover in 235 minutes, or 0.68 TO/40 min. Proving that this wasn't a fluke, Matt only committed only 1.35 TO/40 min last year, the 11 fewest at Duke since 1976. FWIW, Quin Cook also committed only 1.35 TO/40 min last year.

- Keeping this post somewhat on topic, I'd also like to point out that Marshall Plumlee has committed relatively few turnovers for a player who is often regarded as having "bad hands". Marshall committed only 1.57 TO/40 min in 2014 and 1.49 TO/40 min in 2015. Those are the 28th and 23rd fewest TO/40 min of the 350 Duke players who have played at least 150 minutes in a season since 1976.

Steven43
10-15-2015, 03:57 PM
Does anyone have the message written by the DBR poster (forgot his name) who went into great detail essentially explaining reasons why Brian Zoubek was one of the greatest players--not just in Duke history, but in all of basketball? I remember being basically flabbergasted upon reading it. Almost as if I had entered an alternate universe in which none of the things I had ever learned about the center position were still applicable. It was an incredible read.

cato
10-15-2015, 04:03 PM
Does anyone have the message written by the DBR poster (forgot his name) who went into great detail essentially explaining reasons why Brian Zoubek was one of the greatest players--not just in Duke history, but in all of basketball? I remember being basically flabbergasted upon reading it. Almost as if I had entered an alternate universe in which none of the things I had ever learned about the center position were still applicable. It was an incredible read.

Was his beard grey?

Kedsy
10-15-2015, 04:21 PM
Shelden Williams says hello.


I actually agree with you. Zoubek had a better rebounding rate, but Zoubek had issues staying on the floor all 4 years (his foul per 40 mins was pretty crazy). Shelden was more than just a rebounder and hence was on the floor a ton during his tenure at Duke. A player who rebounds at the utmost elite level but can't get on the floor is not as valuable as a player who stays on the floor and rebounds at an elite level.

Shelden Williams was a much better player than Brian Zoubek. He was, to use FDD's phrase, a more valuable player. He certainly played more minutes. But here are their respective tempo-free and minute independent rebounding stats:

REBOUNDS PER MINUTE

Brian Zoubek
------------
Peak: 16.6
Career: 14.4

Shelden Williams
----------------
Peak: 13.3
Career: 12.9


OFFENSIVE REBOUND %

Brian Zoubek
------------
Peak: 21.5%
Career: 18.9%

Shelden Williams
----------------
Peak: 14.7%
Career: 13.5%


DEFENSIVE REBOUND %

Brian Zoubek
------------
Peak: 24.6%
Career: 21.8%

Shelden Williams
----------------
Peak: 23.4%
Career: 22.2%


So, Shelden may say hello, but I think it's pretty clear that Brian Zoubek was a better overall rebounder when he was on the floor than Shelden Williams was when he was on the floor.

Jeffrey
10-15-2015, 04:33 PM
Was his beard grey?

Was his brain grey?

cato
10-15-2015, 05:31 PM
Was his brain grey?

Does Feldenkrais help with that?

gep
10-16-2015, 12:22 AM
If I recall correctly, Coach K said in interviews that Zoubs was always good. He was hampered by injuries during his first 3 years... and his senior year was the first season he played injury-free. To me, then, Zoubs played himself into his breakout game at Maryland... and the rest is history.:cool:

Jeffrey
10-16-2015, 09:09 AM
Does Feldenkrais help with that?

If the beard is grey, then ECT is the preferred approach.

RepoMan
10-16-2015, 09:49 AM
Does Feldenkrais help with that?

Damn. I miss that guy.

BD80
10-16-2015, 10:37 AM
Was his brain grey?

Grey is the new gold

Clay Feet POF
10-16-2015, 11:18 AM
Damn. I miss that guy.


Plus Tax Man Plus Tax

JPtheGame
10-16-2015, 08:18 PM
So, Shelden may say hello, but I think it's pretty clear that Brian Zoubek was a better overall rebounder when he was on the floor than Shelden Williams was when he was on the floor.

This will be unresovable, as most good debates are, but I stick with Shelden because he had 700 more rebounds at duke than Zoubek. Part of being good at something is being on the floor to do it. Some of that is Z's fault, and some of that is not but all the advanced stats don't mean much if a guy goes out and more than doubles your total.
I also deduct points for the supporting cast around z. They were so good at most everything else that all z had to do was think about rebounding anytime he was out there. Plus with total minutes played, you have to assume that Shelden fought fatigue more often than z which is a huge factor in most anything basketball related.
I appreciate your point and your use of the word "clearly". I just think you applied it to the wrong guy.

Kedsy
10-16-2015, 09:32 PM
This will be unresovable, as most good debates are, but I stick with Shelden because he had 700 more rebounds at duke than Zoubek. Part of being good at something is being on the floor to do it. Some of that is Z's fault, and some of that is not but all the advanced stats don't mean much if a guy goes out and more than doubles your total.
I also deduct points for the supporting cast around z. They were so good at most everything else that all z had to do was think about rebounding anytime he was out there. Plus with total minutes played, you have to assume that Shelden fought fatigue more often than z which is a huge factor in most anything basketball related.
I appreciate your point and your use of the word "clearly". I just think you applied it to the wrong guy.

Whatever. You focused on "clear," but not "when he was on the floor." Shelden Williams may have had twice as many rebounds as Brian Zoubek, but played almost two and half times as many minutes. And I don't think the supporting cast or fatigue arguments are particularly strong, quite the contrary. And being on the floor is a function of many things. Mr. Williams was better at almost everything else, which earned him the extra minutes (well, that and Z's injuries) but he was not as good at rebounding as Mr. Zoubek.

JPtheGame
10-17-2015, 12:00 AM
We could take your format and make a case for Marshall plumlee as the best 3pt shooter in Duke history. When he was on the floor and allowed to shoot them, he did great and his percentages can't be beaten. I'll still go with JJ.
Its your right to waive aside my role on the team and fatigue arguments as not "particularly strong". I just wish you had given at least one reason why you felt that way.
Side note, don't start replies with "whatever". It makes you sound like a dismissive jerk and from all your other posts, I just think you have more to offer

Kedsy
10-17-2015, 07:32 AM
We could take your format and make a case for Marshall plumlee as the best 3pt shooter in Duke history. When he was on the floor and allowed to shoot them, he did great and his percentages can't be beaten. I'll still go with JJ.
Its your right to waive aside my role on the team and fatigue arguments as not "particularly strong". I just wish you had given at least one reason why you felt that way.

OK. When he played in the 90s, Dennis Rodman's role on his several teams was solely to rebound and play defense. That didn't keep anybody from acknowledging that he was the best rebounder in the NBA. Saying Player A is a better rebounder than Player B because Player A scores more seems like a non-sequitur to me.

And we at DBR have discussed the supposed effects of fatigue brought on by "too many minutes" with regard to 20-year-olds playing two games a week way too many times to rehash it here, especially regarding someone like Shelden Williams, who only averaged 28 mpg for his career. But if you really wanted to press this argument, I think a stronger argument could be made that Brian Zoubek's various injuries depressed his overall rebounding numbers by a much larger amount than fatigue suppressed Shelden Williams's numbers.

Your Marshall Plumlee argument also falls flat, in my opinion. A sample size of 1 is statistically insignificant. Which is certainly not the case for a sample size of 1670 (number of minutes in Brian Zoubek's career) or 599 (number of rebounds in that career).

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-17-2015, 07:53 AM
While the junior and senior year stats you list don't really align with the bolded comments, Zoubek's freshman year stats tell a different story.

Despite playing only 235 minutes as a freshman, Zoubek managed to commit 37 turnovers. That's a rate of 6.3 TO per 40 minutes. As far as I can tell, this is the highest rate for any Duke player with at least 150 minutes played in a season since 1975-76.

Zoubek committed "only" 3.05 TO/40 min as a sophomore. That's more in line with his junior and senior years, but still fairly high for a post player.

Here's a list of the Duke's top 25 "leaders" in turnovers per 40 minutes since 1975-76 (the first year Duke recorded turnovers).

....






A couple notes:

- Not surprisingly, the list is dominated by guards (Hurley, Jason Williams). However, it also contains a couple excellent non-guards: Gene Banks in 1978, Christian Laettner in 1992.

- The Duke player with the fewest turnovers per 40 minutes? Matt Jones in 2014. In 2014, Matt committed only 4 turnover in 235 minutes, or 0.68 TO/40 min. Proving that this wasn't a fluke, Matt only committed only 1.35 TO/40 min last year, the 11 fewest at Duke since 1976. FWIW, Quin Cook also committed only 1.35 TO/40 min last year.

- Keeping this post somewhat on topic, I'd also like to point out that Marshall Plumlee has committed relatively few turnovers for a player who is often regarded as having "bad hands". Marshall committed only 1.57 TO/40 min in 2014 and 1.49 TO/40 min in 2015. Those are the 28th and 23rd fewest TO/40 min of the 350 Duke players who have played at least 150 minutes in a season since 1976.

Wow, there are some gosh darned good players on that list. I you could argue that to make lots of turnovers, you have to be on the floor a lot. And to be on the floor that much, you have to show the promise and skill to make up for your TOs. To bring this page of the thread full circle, I'll bet you would see a wildly different crowd on this list if you posted the top turnover guys per 40 minutes.

Kedsy
10-17-2015, 11:39 AM
To bring this page of the thread full circle, I'll bet you would see a wildly different crowd on this list if you posted the top turnover guys per 40 minutes.

I thought the list he gave was the list of top turnover guys per 40 minutes (for a single season).

Kedsy
10-17-2015, 11:44 AM
OK. When he played in the 90s, Dennis Rodman's role on his several teams was solely to rebound and play defense. That didn't keep anybody from acknowledging that he was the best rebounder in the NBA. Saying Player A is a better rebounder than Player B because Player A scores more seems like a non-sequitur to me.

And we at DBR have discussed the supposed effects of fatigue brought on by "too many minutes" with regard to 20-year-olds playing two games a week way too many times to rehash it here, especially regarding someone like Shelden Williams, who only averaged 28 mpg for his career. But if you really wanted to press this argument, I think a stronger argument could be made that Brian Zoubek's various injuries depressed his overall rebounding numbers by a much larger amount than fatigue suppressed Shelden Williams's numbers.

Your Marshall Plumlee argument also falls flat, in my opinion. A sample size of 1 is statistically insignificant. Which is certainly not the case for a sample size of 1670 (number of minutes in Brian Zoubek's career) or 599 (number of rebounds in that career).

At the risk of arguing against myself, a better argument than "role on the team" would be that Shelden Williams was a far superior shot blocker than Brian Zoubek, and when you attempt to block a shot you often put yourself into poor rebounding position. Big shotblockers often get fewer rebounds than you'd expect. But in my opinion even that argument doesn't win the day. The best I think we can say about Williams is that he may have had the potential to be a better rebounder than Zoubek, if Williams had concentrated most of his efforts to rebounding (as Zoubek appeared to do). But he didn't, so he wasn't.