MBB: Duke vs. Oregon, NCAAT R16 (Thur ~2200 EDT, TBS) PreGame and Ingame Thread

[hurleyfor3]

You people in the eastern time zone are suckers.

[Edouble]

Let's make cassoulet out of them!

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Anyone else notice someone behind the Oregon bench throwing confetti in the air after they won?

For Oregon, the Sweet 16 is a milestone.

For Duke, the Sweet 16 is a stepping stone.

I like our chances as the underdog.

[duke4ever19]

I think Plumlee can get in some good 9-to-5 work in the paint in this matchup.

We've played UNC and Virginia, both better teams than the Oregon squad I watched tonight.

[mattman91]

Looks like Friday may be a "sick" day.

[jacone21]

I didn't see anything that made me feel like Duke can't beat that team. Play solid D, execute and make some shots, and I think Duke has a really good chance to advance.

What wine pairs well with foie gras?

[Olympic Fan]

Duke will be going for its ninth straight NCAA Tournament win.

The school record is 13 straight (1991-93). Duke also got to eight straight NCAA wins in 2001-02 and 2010-11.

Both of those teams stumbled on win number nine.

[gofurman]

It's doable but Brooks and the freshman guard (name?) are tough matches. At least they are 6'5" guys and not 6'1 absolute speedsters like Cat Barber that we can't stay in front of. They remind me of Grayson Allen some. Tough and athletic and can shoot the three but not true PG quick. Those two will be a handful

Have to look more later. I wonder how well they rebound? What is their best strength? What is their big weakness?

Not a bad matchup but I was pulling fir St Joes

[Edouble]

FWIW, this evening Kenny Smith picked us to beat Oregon. Says we are the enemy, but he knows what we are capable of.

[Reilly]

Johnny and Stanford beat them ... JD's free to come help with the scouting report all week.

[Troublemaker]

It's doable but Brooks and the freshman guard (name?) are tough matches. At least they are 6'5" guys and not 6'1 absolute speedsters like Cat Barber that we can't stay in front of. They remind me of Grayson Allen some. Tough and athletic and can shoot the three but not true PG quick. Those two will be a handful

They struck me as plenty quick and bouncy. Maybe not Cat-quick, but quicker than the top ACC teams and quick enough to torch our defense. Dorsey, Cook, and Brooks at the 2-3-4 in particular are very athletic and can really get to the bucket. I think we might have to zone them. Brooks is going to get Brandon in foul trouble.

Almost as concerning is how all that quickness and bounciness combine to make a very effective defense. They are really good at helping and recovering; often, I thought a St. Joe's pass would lead to an open shot, but Oregon closed out so well and forced another pass. They have great shotblockers inside. We'll also have to be sharp against their zone press.

They deserve to be favorites and we'll have to play great to win.

[g-money]

As a superstitious Duke fan, I'm not a fan of playing the late game on a Thursday night in Anaheim. I still smart over Derrick Williams having the game of his life against us in 2011.

Other than that, it feels like we're playing with house money at this point, and I'm going to enjoy the ride. Oregon's slightly more athletic, but we are more skilled.
Looking forward to watching our guys let it fly on Thursday.

[KandG]

Almost as concerning is how all that quickness and bounciness combine to make a very effective defense. They are really good at helping and recovering; often, I thought a St. Joe's pass would lead to an open shot, but Oregon closed out so well and forced another pass. They have great shotblockers inside. We'll also have to be sharp against their zone press.

They deserve to be favorites and we'll have to play great to win.

Yeah, I was kind of pulling for St. Joe's because they felt like a more manageable opponent. Oregon is certainly beatable, but they're a tougher matchup *and* it will effectively be a road game for us in Anaheim.

I don't know how much Oregon presses but I would be surprised if they didn't pressure us for significant portions of Thursday's game given how vulnerable we've looked against pressure in our worst moments at Louisville and versus Yale the other day. We did handle pressure well in our opening game of the tournament, but UNC-Wilmington didn't have the athletes that Oregon has.

Should be a good game, hope health and foul trouble aren't issues and that everything's decided with the best players on the court.

[Blue KevIL]

"Historical Tournament Stats" OR "Stuff that has nothing to do with Thursday's outcome":


Duke is...

107-34 All-Time in NCAA Tournament (5-Time National Champions: 91, 92, 01, 10, 15) in 40 appearances (31 since 1985 / 21st consecutive appearance)
20-8 All-Time in Round of 16 (W-60, W-63, W-64, W-66, W-78, W-80, W-86, L-87, W-88, W-89, W-90, W-91, W-92, W-94, W-98, W-99, L-00, W-01, L-02, L-03, W-04, L-05, L-06, L-09, W-10, L-11, W-13, W-15)

9-5 All-Time against #1 Seeds (W-80, W-86, L-87, W-88, W-89, W-90, L-90, W-91, W-94, L-94, W-99, L-99, L-13, W-15)
4-1 All-Time as a #4 Seed (W-80, W-80, L-80, W-16, W-16)

3-1 All-Time against AP #5 (W-66, W-92, L-98, W-01)
2-0 All-Time as AP #19 (W-16, W-16)

7-5 All-Time in West Region
6-4 All-Time against PAC-12 (L-64, L-84, W-90, L-93, W-01, W-01, W-01, W-10, L-11, W-15)
0-2 All-Time in Anaheim, CA (L-03, L-11)



Oregon is...

18-12 All-Time in NCAA Tournament (1939 National Champions) in 14 appearances (10 since 1985 / 4th consecutive appearance)
3-1 All-Time in Round of 16 (W-60, W-02, W-07, L-13)

1-0 All-Time against #4 Seeds (W-13)
2-0 All-Time as a #1 Seed (W-16, W-16)

1-0 All-Time against AP #19 (W-07)
2-0 All-Time as AP #5 (W-16, W-16)

10-6 All-Time in West Region
1-0 All-Time against ACC (W-02)
0-0 All-Time in Anaheim, CA


Duke leads All-Time Series 1-0.
Only previous game between Duke & Oregon was NOV-27, 2010 at the Rose Garden in Portland, OR.
This was Kyle Singler's "homecoming" game. #1 Duke won 98-71.
Singler had 30 points, Nolan Smith had 18 points, Kyrie Irving had 16 points and Andre Dawkins had 14 points.
Mason Plumlee had 12 rebounds and Miles Plumlee had 10 rebounds.

[Devilwin]

I think Plumlee can get in some good 9-to-5 work in the paint in this matchup.

We've played UNC and Virginia, both better teams than the Oregon squad I watched tonight.

I agree. Didn't see anything there to be afraid of....

[wavedukefan70s]

You know what.i have no idea how we will respond playing in california.which may be a home game for oregon.no matter what happens.
I absolutely love the fight this team has.they are a resilient group. I wasnt sure we would be playing after this weekend.
I know they will be giving thier all.win or lose.you have to love this bunch.my hat is off to them.
Can they win of course they can.
I cant state enough the appreciation i have for this team.

[Indoor66]

You know what.i have no idea how we will respond playing in california.which may be a home game for oregon.no matter what happens.
I absolutely love the fight this team has.they are a resilient group. I wasnt sure we would be playing after this weekend.
I know they will be giving thier all.win or lose.you have to love this bunch.my hat is off to them.
Can they win of course they can.
I cant state enough the appreciation i have for this team.

It may be a home game for Oregon, but it is 958 miles between cities. Hardly a trip to Charlottsville or DC from Durham.

[DUKIE V(A)]

An aspect to this game that I find interesting: who will guard Plum and who will Plum guard? Duke may need to play zone to maximize the use of our best line-up. St. Joe's limited Oregon's second chance points, and I expect Plum will need to be a big part of that for us to do the same.

Hopefully, we will attack their pressure to score, and when there are not layups or good open looks early we are patient and make an effort to get the ball inside. The Ducks are small but athletic inside and will collapse on big guys inside. We ought to be able to hurt them throwing the ball from the inside back out to spot up shooters. It seemed that St. Joe's had good looks from 3 when they were patient, and we have better outside shooters.

My gut tells me that Duke will get out to a double digit lead, and Oregon is going to try to make a furious comeback ala Louisville, Notre Dame, and Yale. Hope we have learned and the outcome is more Yale than Louisville or ND. Better yet, let's just extend the lead so we don't need to sweat it out. Somehow Coach K and Duke will prevail but it will not be easy on our hearts down the stretch.

[budwom]

Anyone else notice someone behind the Oregon bench throwing confetti in the air after they won?

For Oregon, the Sweet 16 is a milestone.

For Duke, the Sweet 16 is a stepping stone.

I like our chances as the underdog.

I'm not even convinced we will be much of an underdog. A couple points maximum I would think.
Keep in mind that ducks do not like flying south in the Spring.

[Sluggo]

They struck me as plenty quick and bouncy. Maybe not Cat-quick, but quicker than the top ACC teams and quick enough to torch our defense. Dorsey, Cook, and Brooks at the 2-3-4 in particular are very athletic and can really get to the bucket. I think we might have to zone them. Brooks is going to get Brandon in foul trouble.

Almost as concerning is how all that quickness and bounciness combine to make a very effective defense. They are really good at helping and recovering; often, I thought a St. Joe's pass would lead to an open shot, but Oregon closed out so well and forced another pass. They have great shotblockers inside. We'll also have to be sharp against their zone press.

They deserve to be favorites and we'll have to play great to win.

I agree with this assessment. They play 9 guys to our 7. They will press us which could hurt. I do think we will have the opportunity to get them into foul trouble. I think it will be a physically demanding game. Definitely will need to earn this one.

[NM Duke Fan]

Possibly...lately we are the ones in foul trouble! However, in past years in terms of depth and how many players Coach is comfortable with, Seven is Sufficient. My main concern is avoiding periods of mental lapses, which tend to build a negative momentum. Perhaps the last game created a major teaching opportunity, and lessons have been sufficiently reinforced. IF once again BI, GA, and LK all are playing well, this is a really tough team to beat ... for anybody. Plumlee might have the opportunity to really do some damage inside as well, including rebounding. There have been worse matchups over the years at this stage of the game. Therefore I remain an Optimist.

[Mike Corey]

Tough matchup for us, but they all are at this point, and of all the 1 seeds this is the one I'd like to play right now.

Don't know nearly enough about Oregon to say anything intelligent other than that I believe we're more than capable of scoring more than them on Thursday night.

[kAzE]

What's up with the Odell Beckham hair style in this tournament? There's at least 1 guy on every team who's got it and I think Oregon has like 4 of them.

[devildeac]

What's up with the Odell Beckham hair style in this tournament? There's at least 1 guy on every team who's got it and I think Oregon has like 4 of them.

Nike-mandated colors?

Color coordinated with their unis?

[DukieInKansas]

I agree. Didn't see anything there to be afraid of...

Except the color of their uniforms? Will the team practice with bright lights in their eyes to similate playing against that brightness?

[uh_no]

Tough matchup for us, but they all are at this point, and of all the 1 seeds this is the one I'd like to play right now.

Don't know nearly enough about Oregon to say anything intelligent other than that I believe we're more than capable of scoring more than them on Thursday night.

judging by KP, I think we match up very well.

1) they don't rebound well overall. They're okay on the offensive side, but awful on the defensive end
2) they don't shoot 3s or defend the 3 well
3) they're not big. they're two centers are 6'9 and 6'10 (boucher and bell). bell isn't a zero on offense, but KP has him down on "role player" status.
4) their top offensive thread, brooks, is "only" 6'7...small enough that we don't have to worry about our lack of depth
5) their PG is rarely used (benson....jesus...all their players names start with B...they also play a benjamin). KP has him labeled as "nearly invisible"
6) dorsey and cook look like a really good combo. at 2 and 3. dorsey is their only 3 point threat.

So those 7 guys:
benson-dorsey-cook-brooks-bell

benjamin subbing for cook
boucher for bell

get almost all the minutes.

So long as they don't have an aberration and go nuts from three, I think we win this one.

[Indoor66]

judging by KP, I think we match up very well.

1) they don't rebound well overall. They're okay on the offensive side, but awful on the defensive end
2) they don't shoot 3s or defend the 3 well
3) they're not big. they're two centers are 6'9 and 6'10 (boucher and bell). bell isn't a zero on offense, but KP has him down on "role player" status.
4) their top offensive thread, brooks, is "only" 6'7...small enough that we don't have to worry about our lack of depth
5) their PG is rarely used (benson...jesus...all their players names start with B...they also play a benjamin). KP has him labeled as "nearly invisible"
6) dorsey and cook look like a really good combo. at 2 and 3. dorsey is their only 3 point threat.

So those 7 guys:
benson-dorsey-cook-brooks-bell

benjamin subbing for cook
boucher for bell

get almost all the minutes.

So long as they don't have an aberration and go nuts from three, I think we win this one.

How many Balls do they play with? :cool:

[Troublemaker]

What's up with the Odell Beckham hair style in this tournament? There's at least 1 guy on every team who's got it and I think Oregon has like 4 of them.

Also, I didn't realize there were so many Katniss Everdeen fans among college basketball players, most evident when someone hits a three and they pantomime drawing from the quiver and shooting.

[pfrduke]

judging by KP, I think we match up very well.

1) they don't rebound well overall. They're okay on the offensive side, but awful on the defensive end
2) they don't shoot 3s or defend the 3 well
3) they're not big. they're two centers are 6'9 and 6'10 (boucher and bell). bell isn't a zero on offense, but KP has him down on "role player" status.
4) their top offensive thread, brooks, is "only" 6'7...small enough that we don't have to worry about our lack of depth
5) their PG is rarely used (benson...jesus...all their players names start with B...they also play a benjamin). KP has him labeled as "nearly invisible"
6) dorsey and cook look like a really good combo. at 2 and 3. dorsey is their only 3 point threat.

So those 7 guys:
benson-dorsey-cook-brooks-bell

benjamin subbing for cook
boucher for bell

get almost all the minutes.

So long as they don't have an aberration and go nuts from three, I think we win this one.

Boucher may only be 6'10", but he's a long 6'10" and an elite shot blocker. He presents a problem for us driving the ball into the paint. This actually could be an opportunity for Marshall the lurker to come into play - spread four out around Marshall, have a wing drive, get Boucher chasing blocks and dump off to Plumlee. I think Oregon swarms pretty well, so Marshall will have to be ready to kick it out and not just take contested layups.

[Troublemaker]

An aspect to this game that I find interesting: who will guard Plum and who will Plum guard? Duke may need to play zone to maximize the use of our best line-up. St. Joe's limited Oregon's second chance points, and I expect Plum will need to be a big part of that for us to do the same.

An excellent point. If we thought UNC-W's 4-out offense was tough to guard, wait til we have to play Oregon's 5-out motion. Their center Boucher can hit threes and so they spread you 5-out and drive.

It makes a ton of sense to zone and hope that they miss shots. Otherwise, Oregon will probably spread and drive us to death. I'll eat crow if Duke ends up playing good m2m defense against Oregon. I definitely don't expect it.

[Dukehky]

Also, I didn't realize there were so many Katniss Everdeen fans among college basketball players, most evident when someone hits a three and they pantomime drawing from the quiver and shooting.

It's ridiculous. 3 pointers just aren't that hard to make, especially considering how many people take, the celebration after every single make is so annoying. Jamal Murray, the worst of the perpetrators, but we don't have to watch him anymore.

[DavidBenAkiva]

When you look into the stats, Oregon is a team that is solid in a lot of areas but excellent in few. Specifically, they are excellent at blocks and steals. Those are the only categories in which they are among the best (3rd by block percentage and 3rd in steals per play) in the country.

Most of the blocks are attributable to their 6'10" senior Chris Boucher. The swatter is an interesting player. He's tall, but he weighs in at a Brandon Ingram-esque 200 pounds and is pretty decent at the three point shot, connecting on 34.6% on 107 attempts this season. He's more of a Ryan Kelly than a Mason Plumlee, if you know what I mean. For his part, the youngest Plumlee has 2-3 inches and 50 pounds on Boucher. MP3 is going to struggle matching up against Boucher on the perimeter, but Boucher is going to struggle matching up against Plumlee down low.

Steals are more of a team effort. Senior Forward Elgin Cook leads the team with 1.4 steals per game, which is about as many Grayson Allen gets. Allen is a good player, but I don't think "ball thief" comes to mind when you think about Allen. Other terms come to mind, but that's a different story. It's more of a team effort with Oregon. Dillon Brooks, Dwayne Benjamin, and Jordan Bell all average 1.1 steals per game.

Blocks and steals appears to be the source of the Ducks defensive prowess. They don't rate among the top 25 in the country in any other statistical category on defense (or offense, for that matter). Opponents shoot the ball reasonably well against them (48.6%), a little better from 3-point range than inside the arc. That makes sense given the presence of Boucher around the rim. Also, the Ducks play zone defense, which leads to a lot of jump shots.

The Ducks offense is a little better than their defense, but nothing really jumps out at you. Their rebounding rate is OK (32.0%, 50th in the country). They do struggle a bit on defensive rebounding and giving up offensive boards. They rank 212th in the country in both categories. Given their lack of low-post girth, that makes sense. Plumlee and Jeter, who is showing real ability at getting offensive rebounds of late, should have some success getting 2nd and 3rd chance buckets. I hope Chase decides to pass out when he collects a rebound in traffic, but it's good that he's making his presence felt.

I've looked at their other stats and found Oregon to be good but not particularly great on either offense or defense. They also lack a true post player but make up for it with a bevy of wings. Four of their seven rotation players (Dillon Brooks, Elgin Cook, Dwayne Benjamin, and Jordan Bell) stand between 6'5" and 6'7" and between 190 and 206 pounds. Their guards have decent height, too, but none of them appear to be particularly quick from what I can tell. Brooks is the headliner among the group. He shoots it well from the floor, the 3-point line, and the free throw line. He really torched St. Joe's to the tune of 25 points on 4-7 shooting from three. He also shot 4-7 from 3 against Utah in the Pac-12 Final and 2-3 from deep against Arizona. He's done well in big games. Elgin Cook is a similar player to Brooks, if just a tick lower across the board. He averages slightly less in almost all categories. Among their other wings, Benjamin is similar in stats to Brooks and Cook if a tick less across the board (noticing a trend here?). A little more than half of Benjamin's shots come from behind the arc, where he connects on an OK 32.1% of attempts. Bell is a little different than the other three in that he doesn't take 3 point shots. He's an inside-the-arc player.

There are two guards among the top 7 players, Freshman Tyler Dorsey and Sophomore Casey Benson. Dorsey is the best shooter on the team, making 41.8% of his 4.5 3-point attempts per game. Benson is more of a distributor. He doesn't score much, but averages 3.0 assists per game against just 0.6 turnovers.

So that is Oregon for you. They are pretty good across the board, lack a true post player, but make up for it with a lot of wings and guards. They block the ball a lot and get some steals out of the zone with all those wings. It will be an interesting matchup for Duke.

On paper, Plumlee and Ingram will have some serious height and length advantages. Marshall shouldn't have to deal with a guy that can cause him foul trouble. Matt Jones will probably be on assignment against Dillon Brooks. That will leave Grayson and Luke to guard taller, more experienced players. There should be plenty of open looks from range when Duke has the ball. If the team can limit the turnovers through crisp passing and connect on 3 point shots, we should be in good shape. Grayson has been showing improved ability to get the ball to the rim with floaters and mid-range jump shots. He and Brandon will need those to fall to cope with Boucher's long arms around the basket.

[kAzE]

judging by KP, I think we match up very well.

1) they don't rebound well overall. They're okay on the offensive side, but awful on the defensive end
2) they don't shoot 3s or defend the 3 well
3) they're not big. they're two centers are 6'9 and 6'10 (boucher and bell). bell isn't a zero on offense, but KP has him down on "role player" status.
4) their top offensive thread, brooks, is "only" 6'7...small enough that we don't have to worry about our lack of depth
5) their PG is rarely used (benson...jesus...all their players names start with B...they also play a benjamin). KP has him labeled as "nearly invisible"
6) dorsey and cook look like a really good combo. at 2 and 3. dorsey is their only 3 point threat.

So those 7 guys:
benson-dorsey-cook-brooks-bell

benjamin subbing for cook
boucher for bell

get almost all the minutes.

So long as they don't have an aberration and go nuts from three, I think we win this one.

I'm much more worried than you. Check out this excerpt from an ESPN article: ". . . can Duke handle elite teams and advance to Houston with a subpar defense? Before its encounter with Duke, 13-seed UNC-Wilmington hadn't registered 85 points or more since its Feb. 11 win over Elon (86-82). Yale connected on 50 percent of its attempts inside the arc against the Blue Devils and finished with a higher points-per-possession rate (1.03) than it accrued in previous matchups against Harvard and Princeton."

Yale went 4-23 from 3, and several of those misses were of the wide open variety. If they hit 3 of those, we might be done. I wouldn't expect Oregon to shoot that poorly, and I wouldn't expect us to shoot as well as we did against Yale, either.

If we can't stop them from scoring in the paint, forget about 3s, they won't need them.

[duke79]

I think the strategy against the Ducks is very simple. Play like we did in the first half against Yale and we win (Hell, we should win the entire tournament!); play like we did in the second half against Yale and we lose.

We need to play smart and well for the ENTIRE 40 minutes of the game!! (some good D would help too)

[Troublemaker]

I think Plumlee can get in some good 9-to-5 work in the paint in this matchup.

We will definitely need MP3 to use his size to grab offensive rebounds. If Oregon has one weakness, it's giving up offensive boards. Which perhaps makes sense since their center Boucher is 190-lbs. And their other center Bell is only 6'9 225-lbs. And their PF Brooks is 6'7 225-lbs.

Also, props to MP3 for playing without the mask. He is taking on a higher risk of re-injury (unless I'm wrong about the purpose of the mask; not a doctor, only HI Express) in order to provide his teammates with a much better MP3. It's not Purple Heart stuff -- I would expect most power conference players to make the same sacrifice -- but it should be commended anyway.

[sammy3469]

An excellent point. If we thought UNC-W's 4-out offense was tough to guard, wait til we have to play Oregon's 5-out motion. Their center Boucher can hit threes and so they spread you 5-out and drive.

It makes a ton of sense to zone and hope that they miss shots. Otherwise, Oregon will probably spread and drive us to death. I'll eat crow if Duke ends up playing good m2m defense against Oregon. I definitely don't expect it.

If K decides to play man (which I sort of doubt), having Ingram on Boucher makes more sense than having him trying to be strong enough to Cook. Marshall can sag off Cook if need be to provide help in the pain as you'll gladly let Cook try to beat you from 3-point range (which he will try to do, he's just not that good of shooter out there). Cook's a lot like ND's Colson and Ingram had a lot of trouble with that matchup.

I do expect a ton of zone though. The 1-3-1 makes a ton of sense since Ingram's length at the top gives a bunch of cover, etc. Like you said, you'll let anyone not named Dorsey take 3s. They just don't shoot them that well, but love to take them. As long as you can rebound, they're an eminently beatable team.

[Troublemaker]

Current Vegas lines (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-basketball/odds/las-vegas/) for all Sweet 16 matchups:

Oregon -2 vs Duke
Oklahoma -1.5 vs TAMU

Kansas -6.5 vs Maryland
Villanova -4.5 vs Miami

UNC -5.5 vs Indiana
ND -1 vs Wisconsin

UVA -5.5 vs Iowa St
Gonzaga -4.5 vs Syracuse

Very tight.

[TruBlu]

You know what.i have no idea how we will respond playing in california.which may be a home game for oregon.no matter what happens.
I absolutely love the fight this team has.they are a resilient group. I wasnt sure we would be playing after this weekend.
I know they will be giving thier all.win or lose.you have to love this bunch.my hat is off to them.
Can they win of course they can.
I cant state enough the appreciation i have for this team.

As long as they don't redo the floor to look like that gawdawful real home court of theirs!

[Kfanarmy]

I didn't see anything that made me feel like Duke can't beat that team. Play solid D, execute and make some shots, and I think Duke has a really good chance to advance.

What wine pairs well with foie gras?

IDK St Joes made them work...but their defense is about 60 spots above Duke's at the moment.

[BandAlum83]

Also, I didn't realize there were so many Katniss Everdeen fans among college basketball players, most evident when someone hits a three and they pantomime drawing from the quiver and shooting.

Don't we all love us some Katniss?

[budwom]

If K decides to play man (which I sort of doubt), having Ingram on Boucher makes more sense than having him trying to be strong enough to Cook. Marshall can sag off Cook if need be to provide help in the pain as you'll gladly let Cook try to beat you from 3-point range (which he will try to do, he's just not that good of shooter out there). Cook's a lot like ND's Colson and Ingram had a lot of trouble with that matchup.

I do expect a ton of zone though. The 1-3-1 makes a ton of sense since Ingram's length at the top gives a bunch of cover, etc. Like you said, you'll let anyone not named Dorsey take 3s. They just don't shoot them that well, but love to take them. As long as you can rebound, they're an eminently beatable team.

Yeah, I think playing zone is a given...

[duke79]

As long as they don't redo the floor to look like that gawdawful real home court of theirs!

I HATE that court. IMHO, the ugliest court design in college B-ball. I can't even stand to watch one of their home games. Give me headaches.

I've often thought, we should have a thread (maybe during the slow off season) on the ugliest courts in the country.

[kAzE]

I HATE that court. IMHO, the ugliest court design in college B-ball. I can't even stand to watch one of their home games. Give me headaches.

I've often thought, we should have a thread (maybe during the slow off season) on the ugliest courts in the country.

Probably gives them a competitive advantage in all seriousness. How the hell are you supposed to tell where you are supposed to be on that floor?6125

Typical Dana Altman time out:

Okay guys, you spot up behind tree #4, and you set a screen by the 2nd rock near the river.

[duke79]

Probably gives them a competitive advantage in all seriousness. How the hell are you supposed to tell where you are supposed to be on that floor?6125

Typical Dana Altman time out:

Okay guys, you spot up behind tree #4, and you set a screen by the 2nd rock near the river.

Couldn't agree more.......what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

[BandAlum83]

Couldn't agree more....what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

I wonder if it's only that obnoxious from above on television. If you're standing on the court, is it not as noticeable?

[flyingdutchdevil]

Couldn't agree more....what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

Given that its Oregon, I'd say it's more likely to be a bad weed trip.

[kAzE]

Given that its Oregon, I'd say it's more likely to be a bad weed trip.

There's no such thing as "bad weed trip" . . . come on, FDD, you're from the Netherlands, you should know this ;)

But I'd say the court clearly has a purpose: to confuse opposing teams. If you aren't used to playing on that thing, in concert with staring at Oregon's ridiculous uniforms, you might not play as well as you normally can.

I went to Vanderbilt for my undergraduate degree. They have a normal looking court, but it's raised from the ground on an elevated platform. I can't tell you how much of a home court advantage we had just from that. Having a unique court is huge.

[flyingdutchdevil]

There's no such thing as "bad weed trip" . . . come on, FDD, you're from the Netherlands, you should know this ;)

There is definitely such thing as a bad weed trip. I'm from the Netherlands, I know this ;)

In truth, I haven't had a bad high. But I've been with friends on bad highs. It's a sight for sore eyes (not unlike Oregon's court).

[CDu]

This is a really interesting matchup. Strangely, it's one of the few times this year where we'll face a top-25 caliber team in which we actually have the size advantage.

C: Oregon starts Chris Boucher at center. Boucher (6'10", 200 lb) is a lanky, athletic big who rebounds decently but blocks shots really well. He also scores it well, and shoots okay from 3pt range for a big. Behind him, they bring Jordan bell (6'8", 225). Bell does a little bit of the same thing as Boucher (blocks shots, rebounds) minus the shooting touch and scoring ability. After that, they have a 6'10" Israeli (Sorkin) who rarely plays and is more of a stretch big than a post guy.

Forwards: Oregon plays most of the game without a PF. Sometimes Bell and Boucher will be in there together, but that's for maybe 5-10 minutes per game. Against a team like Duke, I'd expect them to use a big lineup no more than that. The primary forwards are Elgin Cook (6'6", 205) and Dillon Brooks (6'6", 225). Brooks and Cook are almost carbon copies of each other. Both are athletic and strong, both score and rebound solidly and shoot well from the FT line, neither is a particularly good shooter from the perimeter. Brooks is the better all around player pretty much across the board, and he's the more dangerous 3pt shooter of the two. They will be aggressive and tough matchups on the wings though. They'll also make it tough on Ingram, as they're plenty athletic enough to defend him on the perimeter and they are both stronger than than Ingram down low. The Ducks bring Dwayne Benjamin (6'7", 210) off the bench. He's sort of like a poor man's version of Cook, who is a not quite as good version of Brooks. As mentioned, Bell will play some at PF when one of these guys is sitting.

Guards: The top billing goes to Tyler Dorsey (6'4", 200). Dorsey is the primary shooting threat on the team. He is kind of a poor man's Grayson Allen, though he isn't quite as explosive off the dribble or as proficient getting to the line. But he can really shoot the 3 (41.8%). The other starter is Casey Benson (6'3", 185). Benson is purely a game manager type at PG, though he can hit the 3 a little (35.6%). The third guard is Kendall Small, but he rarely plays.

So Oregon is only very slightly deeper than us (and actually less deep at guard). They don't shoot well aside from Dorsey. They are athletic and defend okay. They don't have a true PG, so like us they run the offense through their wings. And they are undersized up front. They are better defensively than us, and if we aren't hitting our 3s (or if they shoot surprisingly well from 3) it will be a tough game for us to win. But it's a very winnable game for us. I'd put it at close to 50/50.

[itshoopsbabee]

Yeah, I think playing zone is a given...

I'm wondering if K doesn't go "off the menu" for at least some significant minority of minutes - say 10 mins - play without a "big" - let BI guard Oregon's stick-like center - pull him away from the basket to open up the lanes to the hoop.

Derryck/Grayson/Matt/Luke/Brandon - could we defend Oregon with that grouping on the floor? Because on the offensive end that is a dynamite combo if the opposing center has to respect BI's outside shot.

[Mike Corey]

(Without the ability to spork many of you, just wanted to say 'thanks' to those of you offering such great analysis of the Ducks' team.)

[uh_no]

I'm wondering if K doesn't go "off the menu" for at least some significant minority of minutes - say 10 mins - play without a "big" - let BI guard Oregon's stick-like center - pull him away from the basket to open up the lanes to the hoop.

Derryck/Grayson/Matt/Luke/Brandon - could we defend Oregon with that grouping on the floor? Because on the offensive end that is a dynamite combo if the opposing center has to respect BI's outside shot.

I'd be highly surprised if we went without marshall of chase on the floor for any significant portion of the game. Rebounding and defense are the issues for this team....the offense is one of the best in the land....there's no reason to further compromise a shaky defense for a sliver of efficiency on the other end.

[flyingdutchdevil]

This is a really interesting matchup. Strangely, it's one of the few times this year where we'll face a top-25 caliber team in which we actually have the size advantage.

C: Oregon starts Chris Boucher at center. Boucher (6'10", 200 lb) is a lanky, athletic big who rebounds decently but blocks shots really well. He also scores it well, and shoots okay from 3pt range for a big. Behind him, they bring Jordan bell (6'8", 225). Bell does a little bit of the same thing as Boucher (blocks shots, rebounds) minus the shooting touch and scoring ability. After that, they have a 6'10" Israeli (Sorkin) who rarely plays and is more of a stretch big than a post guy.

Forwards: Oregon plays most of the game without a PF. Sometimes Bell and Boucher will be in there together, but that's for maybe 5-10 minutes per game. Against a team like Duke, I'd expect them to use a big lineup no more than that. The primary forwards are Elgin Cook (6'6", 205) and Dillon Brooks (6'6", 225). Brooks and Cook are almost carbon copies of each other. Both are athletic and strong, both score and rebound solidly and shoot well from the FT line, neither is a particularly good shooter from the perimeter. Brooks is the better all around player pretty much across the board, and he's the more dangerous 3pt shooter of the two. They will be aggressive and tough matchups on the wings though. They'll also make it tough on Ingram, as they're plenty athletic enough to defend him on the perimeter and they are both stronger than than Ingram down low. The Ducks bring Dwayne Benjamin (6'7", 210) off the bench. He's sort of like a poor man's version of Cook, who is a not quite as good version of Brooks. As mentioned, Bell will play some at PF when one of these guys is sitting.

Guards: The top billing goes to Tyler Dorsey (6'4", 200). Dorsey is the primary shooting threat on the team. He is kind of a poor man's Grayson Allen, though he isn't quite as explosive off the dribble or as proficient getting to the line. But he can really shoot the 3 (41.8%). The other starter is Casey Benson (6'3", 185). Benson is purely a game manager type at PG, though he can hit the 3 a little (35.6%). The third guard is Kendall Small, but he rarely plays.

So Oregon is only very slightly deeper than us (and actually less deep at guard). They don't shoot well aside from Dorsey. They are athletic and defend okay. They don't have a true PG, so like us they run the offense through their wings. And they are undersized up front. They are better defensively than us, and if we aren't hitting our 3s (or if they shoot surprisingly well from 3) it will be a tough game for us to win. But it's a very winnable game for us. I'd put it at close to 50/50.

Thanks for the scouting report, CDu. I think it's safe to say that we match up well against these guys, unlike Kansas or UNC (although we play well against UNC). They aren't great at rebounding (Duke is terrible at rebounding), they aren't great at 3pt shooting or defending the 3 (Duke is pretty good at both), and they steal a lot (Duke doesn't turn the ball over much).

I think having at least 3 excellent 3pt shooters (and hopefully 4) on the court at all times will help, especially given that our drives may not be effective. I really think that Grayson, Ingram, Kennard, and Jones all play 32+ min (and wouldn't be surprised to see them play 35 min, barring injury). If Thornton comes on, he needs to be under control. I'm not sure what happened, but Thornton seems to have hit a pretty big wall lately.

I also think, despite having a size and height advantage, MP3 isn't going to be a factor on offense. Boucher is a legit defensive C, and he averages 3.0 blocks a game. The good news is that he also averages 4.2 fouls per 40/min, so hopefully our guards can take advantage if they do decide to drive.

Against a 1-seed (and given that I think we're more of a 5-seed than a 4-seed), I like our chances. Not saying it's 50/50 or even better, but I like em. I think we're a clear underdog against any other 1 - or even 2 - seed.

[BD80]

Because the Ducks have so many athletic wings, this will be a big game for Matt Jones. Defensively.

He can't get silly fouls, we can't afford them against these guys.

I see Luke getting in foul trouble quickly, so we need Matt to stay on the court nearly the whole game.

[BandAlum83]

Thanks for the scouting report, CDu. I think it's safe to say that we match up well against these guys, unlike Kansas or UNC (although we play well against UNC). They aren't great at rebounding (Duke is terrible at rebounding), they aren't great at 3pt shooting or defending the 3 (Duke is pretty good at both), and they steal a lot (Duke doesn't turn the ball over much).

I think having at least 3 excellent 3pt shooters (and hopefully 4) on the court at all times will help, especially given that our drives may not be effective. I really think that Grayson, Ingram, Kennard, and Jones all play 32+ min (and wouldn't be surprised to see them play 35 min, barring injury). If Thornton comes on, he needs to be under control. I'm not sure what happened, but Thornton seems to have hit a pretty big wall lately.

I also think, despite having a size and height advantage, MP3 isn't going to be a factor on offense. Boucher is a legit defensive C, and he averages 3.0 blocks a game. The good news is that he also averages 4.2 fouls per 40/min, so hopefully our guards can take advantage if they do decide to drive.

Against a 1-seed (and given that I think we're more of a 5-seed than a 4-seed), I like our chances. Not saying it's 50/50 or even better, but I like em. I think we're a clear underdog against any other 1 - or even 2 - seed.

It's REALLY hard to block dunks without fouling.

[subzero02]

It looks like Oregon is favored by 2.5 points across the board right now. They opened as 1.5 or 2 point favorites at most books.

[devildeac]

Because the Ducks have so many athletic wings, this will be a big game for Matt Jones. Defensively.

He can't get silly fouls, we can't afford them against these guys.

I see Luke getting in foul trouble quickly, so we need Matt to stay on the court nearly the whole game.

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)

[BD80]

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)

Whistle blows ... Fowl called.

[CDu]

As far as 1 seeds go, this was easily our best possible draw. If we are hitting our 3s, I have trouble seeing Oregon beat us. The downside is that if we are not hitting our 3s, we are very beatable. But that's true of any matchup the rest of the way. In terms of their strength against our strength, I think this is about as favorable a matchup as we could have hoped for against a 1 seed.

That being said, I definitely don't want to take them lightly. They are 12-3 against the RPI Top-50 and 22-4 against the RPI Top-100. Granted, 10 of those Top-50 wins came against the Pac-12, which may very well have been overrated by the RPI. They are clearly the class of the Pac-12 though, and they did destroy Utah (a common opponent that we lost to) and LBSU (who we also destroyed). Their athleticism can give us fits. But I'm happier facing them than any of the other possible #1 seeds we could have faced.

[Reilly]

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)


Whistle blows ... Fowl called.

You guys really think that sort of word-play will fly around here?

[DukieInKansas]

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)


Whistle blows ... Fowl called.


You guys really think that sort of word-play will fly around here?

Only on a wing and a prayer.

Let's go, Duke. Ducks may fly together but Blue Devils have a trident and can take them down 3 at a time.

[GGLC]

As a DBR thread goes longer, the probability of it degenerating into puns and wordplay approaches 1.

It's pretty daffy.

[cspan37421]

As a DBR thread goes longer, the probability of it degenerating into puns and wordplay approaches 1.

I agree, as the post count has gone up, the post quality has gone down.

[devildeac]

Because the Ducks have so many athletic wings, this will be a big game for Matt Jones. Defensively.

He can't get silly fouls, we can't afford them against these guys.

I see Luke getting in foul trouble quickly, so we need Matt to stay on the court nearly the whole game.


Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)


Whistle blows ... Fowl called.

Uh-oh, here we go again. I'm going to have to go hunting for a good response to your (inadvertent) whistle. Maybe a faulty (Duck) call?

I'll have to go hunting for any more responses.

Seriously, your point about their athleticism is well taken and that'd be one of my fears is that they take it to the rim effectively and often, getting us in serious foul/fowl trouble in the process.

[weezie]

Anyone else notice someone behind the Oregon bench throwing confetti in the air after they won?


Let's hope that's their last pitiful exhibition of pitifulness. Wankers.

[Reilly]

I agree, as the post count has gone up, the post quality has gone down.

By the standards of internet criticism, yours is a bit flighty, and soft.

[MChambers]

This game is the one where the rubber [duckies] hits the road.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Let's hope that's their last pitiful exhibition of pitifulness. Wankers.

Wow. That's aggressive.

Hope we beat em, but I don't have any hard feelings towards the Ducks (unlike UK, UNC, Maryland).

[SoCalDukeFan]

Anaheim is about an hour away but Duke's recent record in games I have attended is pretty bad.

Think I will watch on the new TV. May go to the open practice on Wednesday.

Last game for me was 2011 against AZ and it was not a good experience. Bad traffic, Duke loses, AZ fans all over the place.

SoCal

[Mike Corey]

Anyone else notice someone behind the Oregon bench throwing confetti in the air after they won?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqwkbcbFdy1qfqcmfo1_400.gif

[flyingdutchdevil]

Anaheim is about an hour away but Duke's recent record in games I have attended is pretty bad.

Think I will watch on the new TV. May go to the open practice on Wednesday.

Last game for me was 2011 against AZ and it was not a good experience. Bad traffic, Duke loses, AZ fans all over the place.

SoCal

I went to the Duke-Yale game this past weekend. Biggest heart attack of my life. It wasn't just the excitement of the game, but more a combination of a) the $$$ I paid for the tickets and I would have been gutted had we lost, b) the obnoxious non-Duke fans (Yale fans, Miami fans, Wichita St fans, random basketball fans) and some obnoxious Duke fans, c) the lack of booze (it really helps to calm the heart), and d) the weird atmosphere that is an NCAA game.

Not sure if I will ever go to a regional game again. If we have an awesome team and are in the FF, then that's a different question.

[Troublemaker]

I also think, despite having a size and height advantage, MP3 isn't going to be a factor on offense. Boucher is a legit defensive C, and he averages 3.0 blocks a game. The good news is that he also averages 4.2 fouls per 40/min, so hopefully our guards can take advantage if they do decide to drive.

I bet you most of Boucher's blocks are on drivers, not on the big man he is guarding. Besides, MP3's offense isn't really based on posting up. If our guards can drive and draw Boucher towards them and then make a dropoff pass to MP3, he will be a factor offensively if he finishes. Likewise, since Oregon's weak on the defensive boards and MP3 is a very good offensive rebounder, he can be a factor there.


I think it's safe to say that we match up well against these guys, unlike Kansas or UNC (although we play well against UNC).

Wha-what? Okay, I did a double-take here. If we play well against UNC, that means we match up well against them.

I think I know what you're trying to say here, which is that Duke matches up poorly against UNC but because of The Rivalry or something, we play above our heads against them. "When rivals play, throw out the records and the matchups. It's just about who wants it more." Or something.

But I don't think that's actually true. I think we need to re-examine some underlying assumptions about what kinds of teams Duke matches up well or poorly against.

Does anyone else find it curious that we just watched UNC-W carve up our defense with 4-out offense but now we're all gung-ho about playing Oregon who also spreads you out but with more talent?

Additionally, isn't it curious that Duke played great during the 4-game gauntlet of Louisville-UVA-UNC-Louisville consisting of "teams with size" and two traditional big men, and yet the conventional wisdom is still that Duke matches up poorly against those types of teams?

My take: what actually is a poor matchup for Duke are teams that emphasize driving (as opposed to emphasizing post play or emphasizing off-ball screens for shooters), particularly if they can spread you out with 4 shooters. Oregon fits this description and can even play 5-out.

[subzero02]

Something about that confetti image is deeply disturbing.

[devildeac]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqwkbcbFdy1qfqcmfo1_400.gif

Dang, that dude looks like a young Richard Brodhead.

[Troublemaker]

As a DBR thread goes longer, the probability of it degenerating into puns and wordplay approaches 1.

It's pretty daffy.

You're deshpicable!

[kAzE]

I think we need to re-examine some underlying assumptions about what kinds of teams Duke matches up well or poorly against.

Does anyone else find it curious that we just watched UNC-W carve up our defense with 4-out offense but now we're all gung-ho about playing Oregon who also spreads you out but with more talent?

Additionally, isn't it curious that Duke played great during the 4-game gauntlet of Louisville-UVA-UNC-Louisville consisting of "teams with size" and two traditional big men, and yet the conventional wisdom is still that Duke matches up poorly against those types of teams?

My take: what actually is a poor matchup for Duke are teams that emphasize driving (as opposed to emphasizing post play or emphasizing off-ball screens for shooters), particularly if they can spread you out with 4 shooters. Oregon fits this description and can even play 5-out.

I think you're right on the money with this post. We will need to outscore the Ducks. I don't envision us being able to defend them on the drive, and that is scary, because we cannot afford to get in foul trouble. The only good thing about this match up is that they might not be able to defend us very well either, and we may be able to get something going on the offensive boards, but I just don't see how we can stop them from putting up at least their average in scoring. I hope we saved some of that shooting touch from the first half against Yale.

[duke96]

What wine pairs well with foie gras?

Cold Duck!

[NM Duke Fan]

It's REALLY hard to block dunks without fouling.

I agree, and I believe Plumlee could actually have a monster game with such a distinct muscular advantage. Just look at a few of his recent games ...at times he is our most iimportant player, and here is a game where he has the potential to be a major difference maker.

[Troublemaker]

I think you're right on the money with this post. We will need to outscore the Ducks. I don't envision us being able to defend them on the drive, and that is scary, because we cannot afford to get in foul trouble. The only good thing about this match up is that they might not be able to defend us very well either, and we may be able to get something going on the offensive boards, but I just don't see how we can stop them from putting up at least their average in scoring. I hope we saved some of that shooting touch from the first half against Yale.

Oh, I think we can defend their drives. A hint below as to the strategy we should employ:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51N1aNCzS2L._SY355_.jpg

[Reilly]

Oregon versus ranked-at-the-time teams this year, by point differential:

+31 N Utah (#12)
+12 @ Ariz (#18)
+08 SoCal (#21)
+07 Baylor (#20)
+06 N Ariz (#15)

Undefeated at 5-0. #12 is the highest-ranked team they’ve played.


Duke versus ranked-at-the-time teams this year, by point differential:

+07 L’ville (#13)
+01 Virginia (#7)
+01 @ UNC (#5)
-------------------------------
-04 UNC (#8)
-07 @ L’ville (#18)
-11 N UK (#2)
-11 @ Miami (#15)

Duke is 3-4, played four top-8-at-the-time teams.

[kAzE]

Oh, I think we can defend their drives. A hint below as to the strategy we should employ:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51N1aNCzS2L._SY355_.jpg

So . . . bring loaded firearms? I'll have to check, but that might be against the rules.

On a serious note, I really hope that 1-3-1 does the job.

[Mike Corey]

As an aside:

There have been dramatic transformations of post players in years past under Coach K.

Abdelnaby went from averaging 8.9 ppg and 3.8 rpg to 15.1 ppg and 6.6 ppg from his junior to senior year.

Zoubek went from averaging 4.1 and 3.7 to 5.6 and 7.7. (The stat line isn't as impressive as I would have guessed, but I believe that's because the proverbial light went on in January or February rather than earlier in the season. Either way, his transformation was incredibly important to our team.)

But Marshall takes the cake.

He went from 2.2 ppg and 2.4 rpg to 8.2 ppg and 8.5 rpg.

That's just amazing.

I defer as ever to the great Jim Sumner for a post player whose leap in production was fourfold in scoring and rebounding from junior to senior year.

[robed deity]

I bet you most of Boucher's blocks are on drivers, not on the big man he is guarding. Besides, MP3's offense isn't really based on posting up. If our guards can drive and draw Boucher towards them and then make a dropoff pass to MP3, he will be a factor offensively if he finishes. Likewise, since Oregon's weak on the defensive boards and MP3 is a very good offensive rebounder, he can be a factor there.



Wha-what? Okay, I did a double-take here. If we play well against UNC, that means we match up well against them.

I think I know what you're trying to say here, which is that Duke matches up poorly against UNC but because of The Rivalry or something, we play above our heads against them. "When rivals play, throw out the records and the matchups. It's just about who wants it more." Or something.

But I don't think that's actually true. I think we need to re-examine some underlying assumptions about what kinds of teams Duke matches up well or poorly against.

Does anyone else find it curious that we just watched UNC-W carve up our defense with 4-out offense but now we're all gung-ho about playing Oregon who also spreads you out but with more talent?

Additionally, isn't it curious that Duke played great during the 4-game gauntlet of Louisville-UVA-UNC-Louisville consisting of "teams with size" and two traditional big men, and yet the conventional wisdom is still that Duke matches up poorly against those types of teams?

My take: what actually is a poor matchup for Duke are teams that emphasize driving (as opposed to emphasizing post play or emphasizing off-ball screens for shooters), particularly if they can spread you out with 4 shooters. Oregon fits this description and can even play 5-out.

Totally agree with this. Because they will spread Duke out and/or play against zone most of the game, they will probably get open shots. If they are hitting consistently, it will be tough to win. And the paranoid side of me thinks they are due for a good shooting game after the 6-24 against St Joes.

However, if Duke is playing well on offense, it's hard to see how Oregon will get stops consistently either. This may be a scorefest.I'm also wondering if Ingram will have a little more success finishing his drives than he has sometimes this year. They don't seem to have much heft to out strength him, but maybe I'm wrong.

As an aside, for the French speakers, Kennard is quite an appropriate name here.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I bet you most of Boucher's blocks are on drivers, not on the big man he is guarding. Besides, MP3's offense isn't really based on posting up. If our guards can drive and draw Boucher towards them and then make a dropoff pass to MP3, he will be a factor offensively if he finishes. Likewise, since Oregon's weak on the defensive boards and MP3 is a very good offensive rebounder, he can be a factor there.

I agree there is plenty of opportunity on rebounds, especially given that Boucher bites on every drive. If MP3 can catch a few for easy put-backs, that bodes well for Duke. Hopefully, Boucher can get into foul trouble early. Without him, this team loses a lot of their defensive identity.


Wha-what? Okay, I did a double-take here. If we play well against UNC, that means we match up well against them.

I think I know what you're trying to say here, which is that Duke matches up poorly against UNC but because of The Rivalry or something, we play above our heads against them. "When rivals play, throw out the records and the matchups. It's just about who wants it more." Or something.

But I don't think that's actually true. I think we need to re-examine some underlying assumptions about what kinds of teams Duke matches up well or poorly against.

Does anyone else find it curious that we just watched UNC-W carve up our defense with 4-out offense but now we're all gung-ho about playing Oregon who also spreads you out but with more talent?

Additionally, isn't it curious that Duke played great during the 4-game gauntlet of Louisville-UVA-UNC-Louisville consisting of "teams with size" and two traditional big men, and yet the conventional wisdom is still that Duke matches up poorly against those types of teams?

My take: what actually is a poor matchup for Duke are teams that emphasize driving (as opposed to emphasizing post play or emphasizing off-ball screens for shooters), particularly if they can spread you out with 4 shooters. Oregon fits this description and can even play 5-out.

You're right on my take on UNC. I think we played em so well and so hard because a) we have the better coach, b) we were more prepared, c) defensively, we played much better during that stretch than we do now (for whatever reason), and d) a little luck came our way. I mean, we barely beat UNC at home with Paige and Berry having awful nights (Paige and Berry didn't play well in the second game, either). Berry is now playing out of his mind (compared to his first half of the season) and Paige is...well...still not playing well. I don't think we match up well against UNC because you know Brice Johnson will tear up our post D and if 1-2 other players step up, it could be a long night.

UNC-W carved us up alright, but shooting 42% from 3pt land had a lot to do with that. Oregon collectively shoots at 34.9%, good for 163rd in the country. I like the match up on our offensive end, and I hadn't really thought about the defensive end (and I should have, given that I rip on our D a lot). You have a lot of valid points, but I hope our 3s fall and MP3/Ingram are able to grab a few offensive rebounds.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Totally agree with this. Because they will spread Duke out and/or play against zone most of the game, they will probably get open shots. If they are hitting consistently, it will be tough to win. And the paranoid side of me thinks they are due for a good shooting game after the 6-24 against St Joes.

However, if Duke is playing well on offense, it's hard to see how Oregon will get stops consistently either. This may be a scorefest.I'm also wondering if Ingram will have a little more success finishing his drives than he has sometimes this year. They don't seem to have much heft to out strength him, but maybe I'm wrong.

As an aside, for the French speakers, Kennard is quite an appropriate name here.

Oregon isn't a good 3pt shooting team, hitting only 35% of their 3s (163rd in the country). Given, that's better than the 25% they shot against St Joes, but it's nowhere near elite. I'm curious as to how Coach K will manage packing the paint vs guarding the 3.

[Olympic Fan]

As an aside:

There have been dramatic transformations of post players in years past under Coach K.

Abdelnaby went from averaging 8.9 ppg and 3.8 rpg to 15.1 ppg and 6.6 ppg from his junior to senior year.

Zoubek went from averaging 4.1 and 3.7 to 5.6 and 7.7. (The stat line isn't as impressive as I would have guessed, but I believe that's because the proverbial light went on in January or February rather than earlier in the season. Either way, his transformation was incredibly important to our team.)

But Marshall takes the cake.

He went from 2.2 ppg and 2.4 rpg to 8.2 ppg and 8.5 rpg.

That's just amazing.

I defer as ever to the great Jim Sumner for a post player whose leap in production was fourfold in scoring and rebounding from junior to senior year.

Not four-fold, but Mason Plumlee went from 11.1 ppg/9.3 rpg to 17.1/10.0 as a senior

And Miles went from 4.8/4.9 as a junior to 6.6/7.1 as a senior

Marty Nessley went from 1.7/1.9 to 4.3/2.9 as a senior

Erik Meek from 3.5/4.2 to 10.3/8.3 -- that's a three-fold jump in scoring, a two-fold jump on the boards

In the same class, Cherokee Parks went from 14.4/8.4 to 19.0/9.3

I can't wait to see the jump Chase Jeter makes in his senior year (2019)!

[uh_no]

Not four-fold, but Mason Plumlee went from 11.1 ppg/9.3 rpg to 17.1/10.0 as a senior

And Miles went from 4.8/4.9 as a junior to 6.6/7.1 as a senior

Marty Nessley went from 1.7/1.9 to 4.3/2.9 as a senior

Erik Meek from 3.5/4.2 to 10.3/8.3 -- that's a three-fold jump in scoring, a two-fold jump on the boards

In the same class, Cherokee Parks went from 14.4/8.4 to 19.0/9.3

I can't wait to see the jump Chase Jeter makes in his senior year (2019)!

for many duke big men, it seems the issue is simply staying on the floor...whether it be injuries, fouls, boneheaded plays leading to benchings, whatever. Z, for instance, had great per minute numbers....but fouled a lot. This is true of the plumlees a bit as well.

Whatever the exact mechanism, it's clear that these kids DO develop, if much of the development is learning to not do the things they can't do so they don't end up riding the bench. It seems chase is picking up quickly on this. He seems to have made a killing on put backs, and a few blocks here and there. Nothing fancy. Do what you CAN do, keep yourself out on the floor (as chase has done!) and learn the other things as you go.

[devildeac]

Oh, I think we can defend their drives. A hint below as to the strategy we should employ:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51N1aNCzS2L._SY355_.jpg

Heads would explode if Grayson showed up dressed in camouflage with a plastic shotgun. :rolleyes:

[BD80]

So . . . bring loaded firearms? I'll have to check, but that might be against the rules. ...

Rules? The game is in California, there are no rules!

Except hold the wine glass by the stem, lick the salt BEFORE downing the shot of Tequila, and pass to the left.

[duke79]

I don't recall but has Coach K played BOTH Jeter and Plumlee at the same time; i.e., the twin towers down low, both on offense and defense. Would this make any sense?

[camion]

So . . . bring loaded firearms? I'll have to check, but that might be against the rules.

On a serious note, I really hope that 1-3-1 does the job.

The second amendment trumps every other rule.

[wilson]

Heads would explode if Grayson showed up dressed in camouflage with a plastic shotgun. :rolleyes:This is the best gun for hunting ducks.
6127

[MChambers]

Does anyone else find it curious that we just watched UNC-W carve up our defense with 4-out offense but now we're all gung-ho about playing Oregon who also spreads you out but with more talent?

Additionally, isn't it curious that Duke played great during the 4-game gauntlet of Louisville-UVA-UNC-Louisville consisting of "teams with size" and two traditional big men, and yet the conventional wisdom is still that Duke matches up poorly against those types of teams?

My take: what actually is a poor matchup for Duke are teams that emphasize driving (as opposed to emphasizing post play or emphasizing off-ball screens for shooters), particularly if they can spread you out with 4 shooters. Oregon fits this description and can even play 5-out.
Excellent analysis, unfortunately. In general, teams that can spread Duke out and drive are trouble, not just this year, but most years.

[uh_no]

I don't recall but has Coach K played BOTH Jeter and Plumlee at the same time; i.e., the twin towers down low, both on offense and defense. Would this make any sense?

yes.... for a few minutes

[elvis14]

I don't recall but has Coach K played BOTH Jeter and Plumlee at the same time; i.e., the twin towers down low, both on offense and defense. Would this make any sense?

If you look at the Plus/Minus thread you can see all the times where MP3 and Jeter played together. It makes sense to me in at least two ways: 1) Ingram is in foul trouble and we want some size at the 4 so Jeter plays with MP3 and 3 guards. 2) We want to go big to put Ingram the 3 to create a mismatch if the Ducks have a smaller player at the 3 that Ingram will just shoot over.

A 2-3 zone with Jeter, MP3 and Ingram down low could be a good thing (or a 1-3-1 with Ingram MP3 and Jeter down the middle in I formation).

[sammy3469]

Oregon isn't a good 3pt shooting team, hitting only 35% of their 3s (163rd in the country). Given, that's better than the 25% they shot against St Joes, but it's nowhere near elite. I'm curious as to how Coach K will manage packing the paint vs guarding the 3.

And that's when you include Dorsey's 42%. If you can limit his looks and make the other guys shoot, one's chances of beating them go up a decent bit. UNC-W shoots about the same as them, but everyone is about the same percentage which makes it harder to guard. Oregon has some faults on offense that a good defense with a plan can exploit (i.e. funnel the shots to lower percentage shots) which is why they won't win the NC.

Whether K can construct some defense to do that with these guys is another matter. You don't want Plumlee chasing Boucher around the perimeter nor Ingram trying to guard the strong Cook. Both of those matchups favor Oregon (it's a lot like ND's setup in that respect, but tougher since Boucher can hit the 3 while Auguste can't). One of the few defensive strengths Duke has is Ingram's length which shows up at the point in the 1-3-1, which is something I'd expect to see a ton on Thursday.

[Eakane]

Nothing against Dana, but giving Coach K a week to prepare is a huge advantage for us.

You know he will draw something up not only to break the press, but to burn them for it. And a defensive scheme to counter their explosiveness.

We may lose, but it won't be for being unprepared. I like our chances...

[mgtr]

We may lose, but it won't be for being unprepared. I like our chances...

I believe this is the most important point made today.

[SoCalDukeFan]

Does anyone know how that works?

Game ticket? Special practice ticket?

Thanks

SoCal

[CDu]

As an aside:

There have been dramatic transformations of post players in years past under Coach K.

Abdelnaby went from averaging 8.9 ppg and 3.8 rpg to 15.1 ppg and 6.6 ppg from his junior to senior year.

Zoubek went from averaging 4.1 and 3.7 to 5.6 and 7.7. (The stat line isn't as impressive as I would have guessed, but I believe that's because the proverbial light went on in January or February rather than earlier in the season. Either way, his transformation was incredibly important to our team.)

But Marshall takes the cake.

He went from 2.2 ppg and 2.4 rpg to 8.2 ppg and 8.5 rpg.

That's just amazing.

I defer as ever to the great Jim Sumner for a post player whose leap in production was fourfold in scoring and rebounding from junior to senior year.

I don't think that's the appropriate way to look at it. I'd instead propose looking at it from a per-40 basis. Plumlee's per-40 numbers are a bit better across the board, but the only really huge jumps are in his minutes per game and his fouls per-40 (downward by ~40%, allowing him to play more minutes). His per-40 points and rebounds both went up only about 15-20% from junior to senior year. It was just that he more than tripled his minutes per game, which caused his ppg and rpg to almost quadruple his per-game production.

That's not intended in any way to badmouth Plumlee. He's had a great year, and he's been critical for the team's success. But he's not dramatically different statistically other than that he has dramatically cut down on fouling.

[kAzE]

I don't think that's the appropriate way to look at it. I'd instead propose looking at it from a per-40 basis. Plumlee's per-40 numbers are a bit better across the board, but the only really huge jumps are in his minutes per game and his fouls per-40 (downward by ~40%, allowing him to play more minutes). His per-40 points and rebounds both went up only about 15-20% from junior to senior year. It was just that he more than tripled his minutes per game, which caused his ppg and rpg to almost quadruple his per-game production.

That's not intended in any way to badmouth Plumlee. He's had a great year, and he's been critical for the team's success. But he's not dramatically different statistically other than that he has dramatically cut down on fouling.

Even then, his high foul rate last year could possibly be attributed to his role as an energy guy off the bench. If somehow Jahlil and Amile had both gone down with injuries for an extended period of time last year, thrusting MP3 into a starting role, you have to at least consider that he would have fouled less frequently just based on the need for him to stay on the floor.

[CDu]

Even then, his high foul rate last year could possibly be attributed to his role as an energy guy off the bench. If somehow Jahlil and Amile had both gone down with injuries for an extended period of time last year, thrusting MP3 into a starting role, you have to at least consider that he would have fouled less frequently just based on the need for him to stay on the floor.

Yeah, I mean, I was in the "he'll play about 20 mpg and average 5 ppg and 5 rpg" camp coming into the season. Which is basically what he would have done had he doubled his minutes last year, plus a tiny bit of improvement. Instead he more than tripled his minutes, which should have put him at around 7 ppg and 7.5 rpg, and he avoided fouling as much. And he showed about 15% improvement on his scoring and rebounding rates. It was a really good year from him and a strong improvement, but not wildly out of line with what would be expected from any player going from 9 mpg to 30 mpg.

[BandAlum83]

I went to the Duke-Yale game this past weekend. Biggest heart attack of my life. It wasn't just the excitement of the game, but more a combination of a) the $$$ I paid for the tickets and I would have been gutted had we lost, b) the obnoxious non-Duke fans (Yale fans, Miami fans, Wichita St fans, random basketball fans) and some obnoxious Duke fans, c) the lack of booze (it really helps to calm the heart), and d) the weird atmosphere that is an NCAA game.

Not sure if I will ever go to a regional game again. If we have an awesome team and are in the FF, then that's a different question.

the one and only NCAA game I attended was the 1986 Regional Final in the Meadowlands against Navy and David Robinson. That was a special team. I went with my then fiance, (will be married 30 years this year) and it was a good time all around.

So glad I went to that game.

[BandAlum83]

I agree there is plenty of opportunity on rebounds, especially given that Boucher bites on every drive.

Ducks have no teeth!

[rasputin]

Heads would explode if Grayson showed up dressed in camouflage with a plastic shotgun. :rolleyes:

Is it wabbit season or duck season?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-k5J4RxQdE

[BandAlum83]

Credit JD King for this one in the Sweet 16 preview article:

"Duke has Grayson Allen and Brandon Ingram, which is kind of like having the Terminator and the Predator on the same side"

Game over!

[Saratoga2]

Not four-fold, but Mason Plumlee went from 11.1 ppg/9.3 rpg to 17.1/10.0 as a senior

And Miles went from 4.8/4.9 as a junior to 6.6/7.1 as a senior

Marty Nessley went from 1.7/1.9 to 4.3/2.9 as a senior

Erik Meek from 3.5/4.2 to 10.3/8.3 -- that's a three-fold jump in scoring, a two-fold jump on the boards

In the same class, Cherokee Parks went from 14.4/8.4 to 19.0/9.3

I can't wait to see the jump Chase Jeter makes in his senior year (2019)!

Since these guys no doubt played far more minutes it would be more reasonable to quote the figures in Points and Rebounds per minute. Clearly Marshall was getting many fewer minutes last year.

[BD80]

Is it wabbit season or duck season?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-k5J4RxQdE

Aha! Pronoun trouble!

[RPS]

the one and only NCAA game I attended was the 1986 Regional Final in the Meadowlands against Navy and David Robinson. That was a special team. I went with my then fiance, (will be married 30 years this year) and it was a good time all around.

So glad I went to that game.
I was there too (along with many others in my case). "Nuke Duke" and "Abandon Ship!" we both highlights. It was one of my favorites.

I'm still hunting down tickets for Thursday...

[BigWayne]

Ducks have no teeth!

Right you are,
6131
as opposed to Cardinals
6130
and Hurricanes
6132
and Yellowjackets
6133

[BigWayne]

I was there too (along with many others in my case). "Nuke Duke" and "Abandon Ship!" we both highlights. It was one of my favorites.

I'm still hunting down tickets for Thursday...

If we can get past the Ducks, I am going to try to drive down for Saturday. Usually not hard to get tickets for the second day.

[Henderson]

I was born in Oregon and lived in Eugene as a kid. Went to high school in Oregon, and many of my friends went to U of O. My father attended U of O after the Korean War, and although he died in 2011, I still have a ton of his Oregon kit. He was a fan. He lived in Eugene and had season tickets to the football games. He took me to Mac Court in the 1960s to watch Oregon play UCLA -- my first college basketball game -- and I still remember the fear I felt as the wooden structure trembled when people got raucus. The last sporting event my dad watched was with me: Oregon lost to Auburn for the football natty on January 10, 2011, and Dad went the next morning. Cam Newton can kiss my donkey.

Go Duke.

[hsheffield]

from the other side:

"I'm not going to get much sleep tonight," Oregon coach Dana Altman after getting an early scouting report on Duke.


not sure if this is rote coach speak (along the lines of 'we beat a really good team tonight') but it's nice to imagine we might
be inspiring some fear

[RPS]

If we can get past the Ducks, I am going to try to drive down for Saturday. Usually not hard to get tickets for the second day.
Yup. The Sweet 16 is the much tougher ticket. But as much as I *love* this team, I don't want to have to bank on advancement to see them in action in person. We don't get games out here on the Left Coast all that often....

[fogey]

[QUOTE=RPS;871082]I was there too (along with many others in my case). "Nuke Duke" and "Abandon Ship!" we both highlights. It was one of my favorites.

I was also there at the Meadowlands for that game with my 3 sons, and Matt, the youngest, then age 6, just HAD to get to the Men's room during the action; while we were in there attending to his business, we heard a tremendous ROAR, lasting a good 20 seconds... we learned about Johnny's legendary block upon returning to our seats (plenty bummed out). When SI came out following the regionals, it included a great photo of that Johnny D block, and, in the background, the crowd with our 2 empty seats glaring at us...told him that "sometimes nature calls while opportunity knocks" and we still share a laugh about it.
Time flies, but amazing to think that Coach K has created a program that keeps cultivating thrills 30+ years later. (Matt now has 3 little Duke fans of his own)

[BigWayne]

Yup. The Sweet 16 is the much tougher ticket. But as much as I *love* this team, I don't want to have to bank on advancement to see them in action in person. We don't get games out here on the Left Coast all that often...

Well I have this little problem called the "end of the quarter" that gets in the way of that.

[Ultrarunner]

Couldn't agree more...what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

In person, the court design is . . . better. The facility itself is great. Got a tour of the place before it opened. The spaces for the players are mind-blowing, deliberately so, to attract recruits. Really an amazing building.

Side notes" After the tour, caught a the next-to-last game at Mac Court. Whole place was electric. The next year, came back and caught a game in the new Arena sitting right behind press row as the Ducks took on Arizona.

Still only the second best sports venue in Eugene, though.

[ncexnyc]

It appears that somewhere along the road to Anaheim the team has lost its wins over DaVille, UNC, and UVA.
I mean how else do you explain the lack of respect the media is showing Duke?
Hopefully the ducks will buy into the media narrative of our team and will show up on Thursday night expecting a cakewalk.

[Kedsy]

Nothing against Dana, but giving Coach K a week to prepare is a huge advantage for us.


Since the turn of this century, this is Duke's 13th trip to the Sweet 16 (in 17 seasons). We've won 5 and lost 7 of the previous 12 trips with a "week" to prepare.

In contrast, in that same time period, we won 4 out of 5 Elite Eight games, with a day to prepare.

[MChambers]

There you go again, Kedsy, inserting facts into an internet discussion. What's up with that?

It is interesting how K does better on a shorter turnaround.

[uh_no]

Still only the second best sports venue in Eugene, though.

Any chance you'll be out there in summer 2021?

[Ultrarunner]

Any chance you'll be out there in summer 2021?

Planning on it, and have tickets for the Trials in July. Not that I ever had the talent to compete on that track, mind you, but running at Hayward will get the goosebumps up. The ghosts keep pace . . .

[bluedev_92]

Is it wabbit season or duck season?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-k5J4RxQdE

Definitely DUCK season!

[BigWayne]

There you go again, Kedsy, inserting facts into an internet discussion. What's up with that?

It is interesting how K does better on a shorter turnaround.
I believe he also purposely schedules some games during the season two days apart to help prepare for the NCAA format.

[devildeac]

I believe he also purposely schedules some games during the season two days apart to help prepare for the NCAA format.

Or "allows" the ACC to do it for him...

[Kedsy]

There you go again, Kedsy, inserting facts into an internet discussion. What's up with that?

It is interesting how K does better on a shorter turnaround.

Sorry, my bad. ;) In that same period, we're also better in the second round, on short turnaround (13-1), than we are in the first round with a long break (14-3). Not as big a difference, though the way some people react to first round losses, perhaps it's even bigger.

[Newton_14]

Anaheim is about an hour away but Duke's recent record in games I have attended is pretty bad.

Think I will watch on the new TV. May go to the open practice on Wednesday.

Last game for me was 2011 against AZ and it was not a good experience. Bad traffic, Duke loses, AZ fans all over the place.

SoCal

Good plan. I have been banned from 1st Rd Duke games in NC by DU82/Devildeac and a host of others thanks to my first ever NCAA game in person (Lehigh) and my second ever NCAA game in person (Mercer). So... to the couch you go for Duke Sweet 16 games in California Mr SoCalDukeFan. Accept your ban like a gentlemen as I did kind sir.

Go Duke!

[BandAlum83]

Since the turn of this century, this is Duke's 13th trip to the Sweet 16 (in 17 seasons). We've won 5 and lost 7 of the previous 12 trips with a "week" to prepare.

In contrast, in that same time period, we won 4 out of 5 Elite Eight games, with a day to prepare.

I remember thinking Moore than on occasion after a sweet 16 victory "we're going to the final four!" Because it seemed we just don't lose elite 8 games anymore.

Of course, I try to be much more realistic these days.

[CDu]

Sorry, my bad. ;) In that same period, we're also better in the second round, on short turnaround (13-1), than we are in the first round with a long break (14-3). Not as big a difference, though the way some people react to first round losses, perhaps it's even bigger.

Given the difference in quality of opponent (we are always playing 11+ seeds), I would argue that is absolutely a big difference.

[DukieTiger]

Since the turn of this century, this is Duke's 13th trip to the Sweet 16 (in 17 seasons). We've won 5 and lost 7 of the previous 12 trips with a "week" to prepare.

In contrast, in that same time period, we won 4 out of 5 Elite Eight games, with a day to prepare.

Yup. Slightly different timeframe, but that super-dominant Duke stretch of 1998-2006 conditioned this fan to be more nervous for S16 games than E8 games. Duke made 9 straight Sweet 16s- among other impressive streaks during that stretch. It really did have that feel that if Duke could just get over the Sweet 16 hump, they'd be contending for the title. 4-5 in the Sweet 16, 3-1 in Elite 8, 3-2 in the Final Four.

Overall Duke has appeared in 12 Final Fours under K. Semi-finals record: 9-3. Finals record: 5-4. Granted, the level of competition is even higher, but still interesting to see that K has a better record on Saturday than Monday in the F4. Opposite from the regional finals weekend.

[Skitzle]

Since the turn of this century, this is Duke's 13th trip to the Sweet 16 (in 17 seasons). We've won 5 and lost 7 of the previous 12 trips with a "week" to prepare.

In contrast, in that same time period, we won 4 out of 5 Elite Eight games, with a day to prepare.

Went through the past 31 Tournaments (Since 64 Team expansion)

In that time Duke has only missed the Tournament once!

They have made the Sweet 16. 22 out of 30 Seasons. Insane.

Sweet 16 is our Greatest Nemisis.

Here is Dukes Winning Percentage by round. We really are better on a short turnaround both in the Elite Eight and in the Round of 32



Round 64 32 S16 E8 F4 NC
Wins 26 22 14 12 9 5
Losses 4 4 8 2 3 4
Win% 84% 85% 64% 86% 75% 56%

[OldPhiKap]

Overall Duke has appeared in 12 Final Fours under K.

Just stop and think about that one accomplishment. Wow.


(FTR, Wooden also had 12; Dean had 11; Roy, Izzo and Pitino have 7).

[kAzE]

Went through the past 31 Tournaments (Since 64 Team expansion)

In that time Duke has only missed the Tournament once!

They have made the Sweet 16. 22 out of 30 Seasons. Insane.

Sweet 16 is our Greatest Nemisis.

Here is Dukes Winning Percentage by round. We really are better on a short turnaround both in the Elite Eight and in the Round of 32



Round 64 32 S16 E8 F4 NC
Wins 26 22 14 12 9 5
Losses 4 4 8 2 3 4
Win% 84% 85% 64% 86% 75% 56%


4 national championships losses . . . . ugghh. 1999 . . . I will always hate Richard Hamilton.

[RepoMan]

Just stop and think about that one accomplishment. Wow.


(FTR, Wooden also had 12; Dean had 11; Roy, Izzo and Pitino have 7).

And 9 title games!

[sagegrouse]

Sorry, my bad. ;) In that same period, we're also better in the second round, on short turnaround (13-1), than we are in the first round with a long break (14-3). Not as big a difference, though the way some people react to first round losses, perhaps it's even bigger.

And in the Final Four, we are worse in the semis -- "only" 3-1 -- than in the finals, where we are 3-0.

[Henderson]

Just stop and think about that one accomplishment. Wow.


(FTR, Wooden also had 12; Dean had 11; Roy, Izzo and Pitino have 7).

Oooh, I feel a bell-ringing a-comin'. Maybe this year, but it's a-comin'.

[BLPOG]

It is interesting how K does better on a shorter turnaround.


And in the Final Four, we are worse in the semis -- "only" 3-1 -- than in the finals, where we are 3-0.

I think what's being missed here is that it's not that "K does better" on the short turnaround per se (in preparing the team), it's that the longer time frame allows the opposing coaches more time to close coaching talent/experience gap and prepare their teams well. On the quick turnaround, the better coach (or better-prepared team generally) should have the advantage. That's my theory, anyway.

[GoDucks349]

I was born in Oregon and lived in Eugene as a kid. Went to high school in Oregon, and many of my friends went to U of O. My father attended U of O after the Korean War, and although he died in 2011, I still have a ton of his Oregon kit. He was a fan. He lived in Eugene and had season tickets to the football games. He took me to Mac Court in the 1960s to watch Oregon play UCLA -- my first college basketball game -- and I still remember the fear I felt as the wooden structure trembled when people got raucus. The last sporting event my dad watched was with me: Oregon lost to Auburn for the football natty on January 10, 2011, and Dad went the next morning. Cam Newton can kiss my donkey.

Go Duke.

Wish you well. This should be one heck of a game. I love the fact that you got to go to games in the PIT. I played there when the high school AAA tourney was there and use to play some pick up games there when I was an undergrad. Cameron reminds me of the PIT atmosphere a bit. Student's next to the floor very close to the court, old building etc.

Lets hope it's a great game with no injuries and no questionable calls deciding the game. Go Ducks

[Billy Dat]

CBS' Gary Parrish just suggested that every college basketball pundit doing radio hits this week should have the following phrase loaded and ready for use:

"Two pros and a Plumlee"

Example:
"So, John, based on seed, Duke is the underdog but they've got K on the sidelines, do you give the Blue Devils a chance in this one?"
"Well, Boomani, as long as you have 2 pros and a Plumlee, you always have a shot!"

[TruBlu]

I think what's being missed here is that it's not that "K does better" on the short turnaround per se (in preparing the team), it's that the longer time frame allows the opposing coaches more time to close coaching talent/experience gap and prepare their teams well. On the quick turnaround, the better coach (or better-prepared team generally) should have the advantage. That's my theory, anyway.

Or, opposing coaches in the past usually knew that they only had to prepare for tight man-to-man defense.

This year, and last year, maybe not so much.

[DeBlueDevil]

:confused:

Ignoring seedings and obvious differences in team make ups, but for some reason this game reminds me of that elite 8 game in 2010 when Duke played Baylor. Baylor had been playing well and some would argue at the time they were thought of to be the better team and would likely end Duke's tournament.

Totally different circumstances with the amount of leadership we had on that 2010 team not to mention the players but for some reason I have a similar feeling about this game. Back then I felt that if we won that game then we had great shot at winning it all as the team would have passed a huge test in the tournament. This game for some reason has the same feeling for me. It was just a weird matchup with a team that I think most are considering to be better than us. Not sure if others felt the same but figured it might spark some conversation.

Remember?

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=204918036

[kAzE]

:confused:

Ignoring seedings and obvious differences in team make ups, but for some reason this game reminds me of that elite 8 game in 2010 when Duke played Baylor. Baylor had been playing well and some would argue at the time they were thought of to be the better team and would likely end Duke's tournament.

Totally different circumstances with the amount of leadership we had on that 2010 team not to mention the players but for some reason I have a similar feeling about this game. Back then I felt that if we won that game then we had great shot at winning it all as the team would have passed a huge test in the tournament. This game for some reason has the same feeling for me. It was just a weird matchup with a team that I think most are considering to be better than us. Not sure if others felt the same but figured it might spark some conversation.

Remember?

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=204918036

Probably same school colors/ugly uniforms? That was a great game, though. I'll never forget those 2 3s that Andre hit to keep us in the game, and Nolan was unstoppable.

[subzero02]

Probably same school colors/ugly uniforms? That was a great game, though. I'll never forget those 2 3s that Andre hit.

I won't forget Lance's and 1 rebound dunk down the stretch. Andre's deep 3s in the first half were a life raft. I agree about the uniforms.


We are 3 point underdogs across the board. I think we're going to have something for the Oregon ducks.

[GoDucks349]

Fun facts, he's only been playing organized basketball four years. He's played a lot more ice hockey than basketball.......

[DukieInKansas]

:confused:

Ignoring seedings and obvious differences in team make ups, but for some reason this game reminds me of that elite 8 game in 2010 when Duke played Baylor. Baylor had been playing well and some would argue at the time they were thought of to be the better team and would likely end Duke's tournament.

Totally different circumstances with the amount of leadership we had on that 2010 team not to mention the players but for some reason I have a similar feeling about this game. Back then I felt that if we won that game then we had great shot at winning it all as the team would have passed a huge test in the tournament. This game for some reason has the same feeling for me. It was just a weird matchup with a team that I think most are considering to be better than us. Not sure if others felt the same but figured it might spark some conversation.

Remember?

http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=204918036

We played Baylor in Houston and now we are playing Oregon to go to Houston. Is it a sign?

I'm already nervous about the game. Not sure how I can make it to Thursday evening.

Let's go, Duke.

[BandAlum83]

We played Baylor in Houston and now we are playing Oregon to go to Houston. Is it a sign?

I'm already nervous about the game. Not sure how I can make it to Thursday evening.

Let's go, Duke.

I need the game to be tonight, but so glad the guys are getting lots of rest and prep time!

[GoDucks349]

In person, the court design is . . . better. The facility itself is great. Got a tour of the place before it opened. The spaces for the players are mind-blowing, deliberately so, to attract recruits. Really an amazing building.

Side notes" After the tour, caught a the next-to-last game at Mac Court. Whole place was electric. The next year, came back and caught a game in the new Arena sitting right behind press row as the Ducks took on Arizona.

Still only the second best sports venue in Eugene, though.

I'd call it the third best, behind Hayward Field and Autzen.

[BD80]

I'd call it the third best, behind Hayward Field and Autzen.

Wherever the Oregon cheerleaders are appearing being the first.

[GoDucks349]

Planning on it, and have tickets for the Trials in July. Not that I ever had the talent to compete on that track, mind you, but running at Hayward will get the goosebumps up. The ghosts keep pace . . .

I was an undergrad while Pre was running for Oregon. Actually knew him on a casual basis, he was dating a friend of mine for a while. While taking PE classes at the U of O we ran at Hayward. Like you, I was a bit to slow for the college scene, my best mile was a 4:26 while in high school. One of my school mate held the U of O mile record till Pre showed up.

Hope you enjoy the Trials. It's a great event. If you aren't familiar with the area, I might have some insights that will help you enjoy your stay in Eugene.

[GoDucks349]

Wherever the Oregon cheerleaders are appearing being the first.
..

LOL....... Good Point!!

[CameronDuke]

Oregon is holding steady at a 3 point favorite today, FWIW.

[gurufrisbee]

American Airlines Flight 5979. One way from LAX to Eugene, Oregon on Friday March 25th at 2:30. Nike needs to get their team these tickets.

[Doria]

Oregon is holding steady at a 3 point favorite today, FWIW.

That line seems pretty fair to me, given that I've only seen them play a few times this season (granted, it was against the terrible PAC 12, so it's not like I was riveted by the games).

I do think we can win, but they probably will be tougher than many here who haven't seen them play except Saturday think. I mean, I hope they won't be, and I hope they have an equally awful shooting game and that we shoot more like first-half Yale than second-half.

Still, as others have said, this is by far the most favorable 1seed, to me, that we could be playing, and our coaches have had a week to prepare. I expect, at a minimum, they'll have a good game plan. Hope our guys can execute well for 40 minutes.

[Henderson]

Rules? The game is in California, there are no rules!

Except hold the wine glass by the stem, lick the salt BEFORE downing the shot of Tequila, and pass to the left.

Anaheim is in Orange County, CA, a bastion of conservative Republicans. Republicans rule in Orange County, and they like their rules. Not so much when it comes to taking bribes from defense contractors, of course, but mostly they like rules.

I've been thinking about the bad puns and hackneyed humor in this thread. Mostly tired canards.

But I predict Duke will roast the ducks in Orange County, CA by 7.

I call it: "Canard a l'Orange."

But I'm copyrighting the phrase, "Kennard a l'Orange" in case he goes off on them.

[Mike Corey]

In 2010, our Cerberic attack was a marvel. But we kept advancing and won it all thanks to role players stepping up (Dawkins' three; Zoubek's contested jump shot; etc.).

In 2016, we often have a Cerberic attack, and of late, Kennard's been the most likely to fill that role. Sometimes it's Plumlee, sometimes it's Jones, sometimes it's Thornton. I'd argue that the key is having that third person step up and produce; can we ensure punishment of a team that may want to key in on Allen and/or Ingram?

[COYS]

:confused:

Totally different circumstances with the amount of leadership we had on that 2010 team not to mention the players but for some reason I have a similar feeling about this game. Back then I felt that if we won that game then we had great shot at winning it all as the team would have passed a huge test in the tournament. This game for some reason has the same feeling for me.
http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=204918036

Not to rain on your optimistic way of thinking, but I do think there are some important differences. Duke was simply a better team in 2010. I think that team will be underrated by everyone. It was either the best or second best team (with Kansas) in the country basically all year. It's KenPom Adjusted Efficiency Differential was +30.5 points per 100 possessions (better than last year's 29.3)! The fact that the team played a slow pace masked just how dominant that team really was. Baylor was by far the best three seed that year (those who think Duke had an easy road are insane. Baylor was easily the best 2 seed that year and the fact that a number one seed had to play them in Texas in what was a semi-away game is crazy. Also, our second round opponent, Cal, was a 4-seed quality team masquerading as an 8 seed. The fact that we destroyed Cal and WVU, two excellent teams, should dispel any notion that the 2010 team wasn't dominant), so I definitely agree that beating them was a big accomplishment. The thing is, in many ways, that WAS the toughest opponent left on the schedule. WVU was a comparably good team, but we got to play them in a truly neutral environment. And while Butler essentially had home court advantage for the final, Duke was still a significantly better team on paper. This year, IF we get by Oregon (knock on wood) we will likely play an even better team next, in Oklahoma. Oregon is one of the weakest one seeds in history, so that is certainly slightly lucky for us, but it also turns out that Oklahoma is a particularly strong 2 seed. Unlike 2010 when we could say that there was at least a slight drop off in difficulty with the remaining games, I think the opposite is true for 2016, where we likely face Oklahoma and then perhaps nothing but the remaining number one seeds in the Final Four (all of which are really strong teams). Beating Baylor was awesome in 2010, but it was at worst a 50-50 game for Duke. After that, Duke was slightly favored in all remaining competitions. This year, the game against Yale is likely the last game Duke will be favored to win all season. Oregon is tough, Oklahoma is tougher, and the one seeds that likely await in the final four are the toughest. It will most likely take an effort on a truly impressive scale for Duke to string together a few more wins.

[OldPhiKap]

3 point 'dog sounds about right. Just where we want them Go Duke!

[cato]

Not to rain on your optimistic way of thinking, but I do think there are some important differences. Duke was simply a better team in 2010. I think that team will be underrated by everyone. It was either the best or second best team (with Kansas) in the country basically all year. It's KenPom Adjusted Efficiency Differential was +30.5 points per 100 possessions (better than last year's 29.3)! The fact that the team played a slow pace masked just how dominant that team really was. Baylor was by far the best three seed that year (those who think Duke had an easy road are insane. Baylor was easily the best 2 seed that year and the fact that a number one seed had to play them in Texas in what was a semi-away game is crazy. Also, our second round opponent, Cal, was a 4-seed quality team masquerading as an 8 seed. The fact that we destroyed Cal and WVU, two excellent teams, should dispel any notion that the 2010 team wasn't dominant), so I definitely agree that beating them was a big accomplishment. The thing is, in many ways, that WAS the toughest opponent left on the schedule. WVU was a comparably good team, but we got to play them in a truly neutral environment. And while Butler essentially had home court advantage for the final, Duke was still a significantly better team on paper. This year, IF we get by Oregon (knock on wood) we will likely play an even better team next, in Oklahoma. Oregon is one of the weakest one seeds in history, so that is certainly slightly lucky for us, but it also turns out that Oklahoma is a particularly strong 2 seed. Unlike 2010 when we could say that there was at least a slight drop off in difficulty with the remaining games, I think the opposite is true for 2016, where we likely face Oklahoma and then perhaps nothing but the remaining number one seeds in the Final Four (all of which are really strong teams). Beating Baylor was awesome in 2010, but it was at worst a 50-50 game for Duke. After that, Duke was slightly favored in all remaining competitions. This year, the game against Yale is likely the last game Duke will be favored to win all season. Oregon is tough, Oklahoma is tougher, and the one seeds that likely await in the final four are the toughest. It will most likely take an effort on a truly impressive scale for Duke to string together a few more wins.

Short version: 82-50.

[COYS]

Short version: 82-50.

Ah yes. Well put! One of the most satisfying basketball games I've ever watched.

[Henderson]

Not to rain on your optimistic way of thinking, but I do think there are some important differences. Duke was simply a better team in 2010. I think that team will be underrated by everyone. It was either the best or second best team (with Kansas) in the country basically all year. It's KenPom Adjusted Efficiency Differential was +30.5 points per 100 possessions (better than last year's 29.3)! The fact that the team played a slow pace masked just how dominant that team really was. Baylor was by far the best three seed that year (those who think Duke had an easy road are insane. Baylor was easily the best 2 seed that year and the fact that a number one seed had to play them in Texas in what was a semi-away game is crazy. Also, our second round opponent, Cal, was a 4-seed quality team masquerading as an 8 seed. The fact that we destroyed Cal and WVU, two excellent teams, should dispel any notion that the 2010 team wasn't dominant), so I definitely agree that beating them was a big accomplishment. The thing is, in many ways, that WAS the toughest opponent left on the schedule. WVU was a comparably good team, but we got to play them in a truly neutral environment. And while Butler essentially had home court advantage for the final, Duke was still a significantly better team on paper. This year, IF we get by Oregon (knock on wood) we will likely play an even better team next, in Oklahoma. Oregon is one of the weakest one seeds in history, so that is certainly slightly lucky for us, but it also turns out that Oklahoma is a particularly strong 2 seed. Unlike 2010 when we could say that there was at least a slight drop off in difficulty with the remaining games, I think the opposite is true for 2016, where we likely face Oklahoma and then perhaps nothing but the remaining number one seeds in the Final Four (all of which are really strong teams). Beating Baylor was awesome in 2010, but it was at worst a 50-50 game for Duke. After that, Duke was slightly favored in all remaining competitions. This year, the game against Yale is likely the last game Duke will be favored to win all season. Oregon is tough, Oklahoma is tougher, and the one seeds that likely await in the final four are the toughest. It will most likely take an effort on a truly impressive scale for Duke to string together a few more wins.

I'm not sure I even understood all that, let alone agree. But posting like that is like the guy at the dinner party whose story, filled with facts and figures, goes on so long that people lose interest and start asking for more sprouts or their coats.

If you need a paragraph marker, Amazon sells them.

[cato]

Ah yes. Well put! One of the most satisfying basketball games I've ever watched.

It is very interesting to re-read your post above. That Baylor team was good -- think of them in the field this year. And the WVU smack down was sooooo satisfying.

[BandAlum83]

Not to rain on your optimistic way of thinking, but I do think there are some important differences. Duke was simply a better team in 2010. I think that team will be underrated by everyone. It was either the best or second best team (with Kansas) in the country basically all year. It's KenPom Adjusted Efficiency Differential was +30.5 points per 100 possessions (better than last year's 29.3)! The fact that the team played a slow pace masked just how dominant that team really was. Baylor was by far the best three seed that year (those who think Duke had an easy road are insane. Baylor was easily the best 2 seed that year and the fact that a number one seed had to play them in Texas in what was a semi-away game is crazy. Also, our second round opponent, Cal, was a 4-seed quality team masquerading as an 8 seed. The fact that we destroyed Cal and WVU, two excellent teams, should dispel any notion that the 2010 team wasn't dominant), so I definitely agree that beating them was a big accomplishment. The thing is, in many ways, that WAS the toughest opponent left on the schedule. WVU was a comparably good team, but we got to play them in a truly neutral environment. And while Butler essentially had home court advantage for the final, Duke was still a significantly better team on paper. This year, IF we get by Oregon (knock on wood) we will likely play an even better team next, in Oklahoma. Oregon is one of the weakest one seeds in history, so that is certainly slightly lucky for us, but it also turns out that Oklahoma is a particularly strong 2 seed. Unlike 2010 when we could say that there was at least a slight drop off in difficulty with the remaining games, I think the opposite is true for 2016, where we likely face Oklahoma and then perhaps nothing but the remaining number one seeds in the Final Four (all of which are really strong teams). Beating Baylor was awesome in 2010, but it was at worst a 50-50 game for Duke. After that, Duke was slightly favored in all remaining competitions. This year, the game against Yale is likely the last game Duke will be favored to win all season. Oregon is tough, Oklahoma is tougher, and the one seeds that likely await in the final four are the toughest. It will most likely take an effort on a truly impressive scale for Duke to string together a few more wins.

I heard Laura Keely say on the News and Observer podcast this morning that in the last 20 years, Duke has played higher seeded teams only 3 times, losing each of them. Also in the K era, we have played on the west coast 4 times I. The tournament. Again, losing each time. One was an overlap to the prior group.

It is definitely time to reverse both of this streaks and start a new one :)

[duke79]

Hope our guys can execute well for 40 minutes.

I think this will be the key. Can we play well and play hard for the full (or most of the) 40 minutes?? At this stage of the tournament, we can't afford to have long stretches of lackluster basketball.

[duke79]

I heard Laura Keely say on the News and Observer podcast this morning that in the last 20 years, Duke has played higher seeded teams only 3 times, losing each of them. Also in the K era, we have played on the west coast 4 times I. The tournament. Again, losing each time. One was an overlap to the prior group.

It is definitely time to reverse both of this streaks and start a new one :)

Interesting stats....but I'm not sure that past statistics necessarily foretell the future! (and let's hope NOT)

[rsvman]

I think this will be the key. Can we play well and play hard for the full (or most of the) 40 minutes?? At this stage of the tournament, we can't afford to have long stretches of lackluster basketball.

Yep. Otherwise known as "non-slaughts." We seem prone to having 5, 6, even 7 or 8 minute periods without a field goal. If that happens on Thursday, we're gone.

[duke79]

Yep. Otherwise known as "non-slaughts." We seem prone to having 5, 6, even 7 or 8 minute periods without a field goal. If that happens on Thursday, we're gone.

Yea, I'm not sure if it is fatigue or lack of concentration or some other factor, but it seems like we have had quite a few games this season where we have had at least a few "non-slaughts" (interesting term!) during the game. I'm sure it frustrates the coaches (and players too). I know it must be hard, when you're playing really only 6 or 7 players for the entire game, for those players to maintain a high level of physical and mental intensity for the full 40 minutes. I hope we can avoid it this week!

[Henderson]

I heard Laura Keely say on the News and Observer podcast this morning that in the last 20 years, Duke has played higher seeded teams only 3 times, losing each of them. Also in the K era, we have played on the west coast 4 times I. The tournament. Again, losing each time. One was an overlap to the prior group.

It is definitely time to reverse both of this streaks and start a new one :)

None of those teams has any player overlap with any other of those other teams. It's not like saying, "The Yankees are batting .253 against Royals pitching this season." There the personnel is roughly the same. It's more like saying, "The Yankees batted .253 in 1947 in this ballpark."

Keeley's stats are of historical interest only. If she's trying to say they are interesting because they may have predictive value, she's wrong.

[dukelifer]

None of those teams has any player overlap with any other of those other teams. It's not like saying, "The Yankees are batting .253 against Royals pitching this season." There the personnel is roughly the same. It's more like saying, "The Yankees batted .253 in 1947 in this ballpark."

Keeley's stats are of historical interest only. If she's trying to say they are interesting because they may have predictive value, she's wrong.
Unless K makes worse decisions when he has the lower seeded team- then there is some predictive value.

[subzero02]

Yea, I'm not sure if it is fatigue or lack of concentration or some other factor, but it seems like we have had quite a few games this season where we have had at least a few "non-slaughts" (interesting term!) during the game. I'm sure it frustrates the coaches (and players too). I know it must be hard, when you're playing really only 6 or 7 players for the entire game, for those players to maintain a high level of physical and mental intensity for the full 40 minutes. I hope we can avoid it this week!

I think this has everything to do with the youth of our scorers. At this stage, we can't expect consistent bailout buckets from Kennard and Thornton if Ingram or Allen go cold or go to the bench with foul trouble. The team elders, Plumlee and Matt, are far from being offensive juggernauts. If Kennard had been more effective from 3 this season, we might have avoided some of those offensive blackouts.

[martydoesntfoul]

I heard Laura Keely say on the News and Observer podcast this morning that in the last 20 years, Duke has played higher seeded teams only 3 times, losing each of them. Also in the K era, we have played on the west coast 4 times I. The tournament. Again, losing each time. One was an overlap to the prior group.

It is definitely time to reverse both of this streaks and start a new one :)

I could be mistaken, but I believe this is the first Duke squad to ever beat three Top 15 teams in consecutive games (#13 Louisville, #7 UVA, #5 Cheats). So they've already broken new ground, and now have the chance to end these two unfortunate streaks in just one game. #LGD

[Billy Dat]

Interesting story on the movement of the Duke v Oregon betting line. I am no "sharp" so can someone explain the following in relation to the article...the line started Oregon -1 and moved to Oregon -3 which means tons of money came in on the Oregon side. Per the article, does that mean that the sharps (e.g. betting experts) are the ones moving the line for Oregon or are they coming in now that the line has moved? I take it to mean that the sharps recognized a good deal at -1 and put tons of money on Oregon which means the sharps thinks they are going to win. Is that right?

http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/15049633/2016-ncaa-tournament-las-vegas-bookmakers-discuss-biggest-line-moves-sharp-public-bets-sweet-16-games

[rasputin]

Interesting stats...but I'm not sure that past statistics necessarily foretell the future! (and let's hope NOT)

And, in any event she's cherry-picking data here. Only 3 times facing a higher-seeded team . . . a small sample size.

We beat higher-seeded teams in 1991 (UNLV, a 1 seed, Duke being a 2) and 1994 (Purdue, a 1 seed, Duke being a 2 again). If the data going back 20 years are meaningful, why not 25?

[OldPhiKap]

And, in any event she's cherry-picking data here. Only 3 times facing a higher-seeded team . . . a small sample size.

We beat higher-seeded teams in 1991 (UNLV, a 1 seed, Duke being a 2) and 1994 (Purdue, a 1 seed, Duke being a 2 again). If the data going back 20 years are meaningful, why not 25?

Temple '88, the first real NCAA giant slayed by K.

What Laura's stats tell me:

In the last 20 years, we are almost always the favorite to win an NCAA game (or at least even money).


I'm okay with that.

[Troublemaker]

Interesting story on the movement of the Duke v Oregon betting line. I am no "sharp" so can someone explain the following in relation to the article...the line started Oregon -1 and moved to Oregon -3 which means tons of money came in on the Oregon side. Per the article, does that mean that the sharps (e.g. betting experts) are the ones moving the line for Oregon or are they coming in now that the line has moved? I take it to mean that the sharps recognized a good deal at -1 and put tons of money on Oregon which means the sharps thinks they are going to win. Is that right?

http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/15049633/2016-ncaa-tournament-las-vegas-bookmakers-discuss-biggest-line-moves-sharp-public-bets-sweet-16-games

Correct.

Since the "sharps" make bigger wagers than the average bettor, this quote gives it away:


Fifty-eight percent of the point-spread tickets for the game and 87 percent of the total dollars wagered are on Oregon.

Duke backers comprise 42% of the bets placed but only 13% of the total money wagered.

[martydoesntfoul]

Temple '88, the first real NCAA giant slayed by K.

OPK-I went to a party at Alaa's apartment after the team got back from the Meadowlands, where they had just thrashed Temple 63-53. Everybody was going nuts, and the players took a moment to celebrate the Mark Macon shutdown (Billy King, Q and Air Brickey held the next Oscar Robertson to 6 for 29 shooting, including 8 air balls) by popping a bottle of champagne. Those were good times!!

[OldPhiKap]

OPK-I went to a party at Alaa's apartment after the team got back from the Meadowlands, where they had just thrashed Temple 63-53. Everybody was going nuts, and the players took a moment to celebrate the Mark Macon shutdown (Billy King, Q and Air Brickey held the next Oscar Robertson to 6 for 29 shooting, including 8 air balls) by popping a bottle of champagne. Those were good times!!

Billy King was THE MAN on Marc. I remember watching from North Myrtle Beach, it was spring break or a spring beach weekend.

Macon Bacon.

[duke79]

Interesting story on the movement of the Duke v Oregon betting line. I am no "sharp" so can someone explain the following in relation to the article...the line started Oregon -1 and moved to Oregon -3 which means tons of money came in on the Oregon side. Per the article, does that mean that the sharps (e.g. betting experts) are the ones moving the line for Oregon or are they coming in now that the line has moved? I take it to mean that the sharps recognized a good deal at -1 and put tons of money on Oregon which means the sharps thinks they are going to win. Is that right?

http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/15049633/2016-ncaa-tournament-las-vegas-bookmakers-discuss-biggest-line-moves-sharp-public-bets-sweet-16-games

i'm not a gambler but I thought that the point of moving the point spread was to try to even off the bets on each side, so that the bookie is net neutral on the outcome of the game and they make their money from the amount they collect from each bet? Otherwise, they would have a large exposure if the team with the most money bet on it fails to beat the spread?

[Kedsy]

I could be mistaken, but I believe this is the first Duke squad to ever beat three Top 15 teams in consecutive games (#13 Louisville, #7 UVA, #5 Cheats).

It's kind of an odd stat, since Duke has rarely played three top 15 teams in consecutive games. But in any event, we beat three top 15 teams in consecutive games in 1992 (#6 Kentucky, #5 Indiana, #15 Michigan).

[Billy Dat]

i'm not a gambler but I thought that the point of moving the point spread was to try to even off the bets on each side, so that the bookie is net neutral on the outcome of the game and they make their money from the amount they collect from each bet? Otherwise, they would have a large exposure if the team with the most money bet on it fails to beat the spread?

Correct, which is why when too much money started coming in for Oregon, they made them a bigger favorite by moving the line 2 points. What I didn't understand was whether or not the author meant that all the money coming in for Oregon was "sharp" money or "square" money. As Troublemaker pointed out, it was sharp money which means they thought Oregon was a huge bargain at -1.

[duke79]

Correct, which is why when too much money started coming in for Oregon, they made them a bigger favorite by moving the line 2 points. What I didn't understand was whether or not the author meant that all the money coming in for Oregon was "sharp" money or "square" money. As Troublemaker pointed out, it was sharp money which means they thought Oregon was a huge bargain at -1.

what exactly is "sharp" money? Bigger bets? (i.e., more serious and more knowledgeable?)

[Troublemaker]

i'm not a gambler but I thought that the point of moving the point spread was to try to even off the bets on each side, so that the bookie is net neutral on the outcome of the game and they make their money from the amount they collect from each bet? Otherwise, they would have a large exposure if the team with the most money bet on it fails to beat the spread?

It only sometimes works out that neatly. They will usually be rooting for one side or the other. Which means sometimes they get crushed, like opening weekend of the past NFL season (http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13653044/las-vegas-sportsbooks-lose-big-opening-nfl-sunday) if most of their sides lose.

[wilson]

...all the money coming in for Oregon was "sharp" money or "square" money. As Troublemaker pointed out, it was sharp money which means they thought Oregon was a huge bargain at -1.


what exactly is "sharp" money? Bigger bets? (i.e., more serious and more knowledgeable?)Does this count as sharp money?
6156

[OldPhiKap]

Can sharp money have rounding errors?

[duke79]

It only sometimes works out that neatly. They will usually be rooting for one side or the other. Which means sometimes they get crushed, like opening weekend of the past NFL season (http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13653044/las-vegas-sportsbooks-lose-big-opening-nfl-sunday) if most of their sides lose.
Seems like a crazy way to run that business. Obviously, who covers or doesn't cover a point spread is not really predictable on a consistent basis so why would a bookie have a large exposure to one side or another?

[DukeandMdFan]

I heard Laura Keely say on the News and Observer podcast this morning that in the last 20 years, Duke has played higher seeded teams only 3 times, losing each of them. Also in the K era, we have played on the west coast 4 times I. The tournament. Again, losing each time. One was an overlap to the prior group.

It is definitely time to reverse both of this streaks and start a new one :)

That is a remarkable statistic.

I found this site http://apps.washingtonpost.com/sports/apps/live-updating-mens-ncaa-basketball-bracket/schools/duke/ showing Duke tournament results since 1985.

From 1998-2011, Duke was a #1 seed ten times; #2 seed twice; #3 once; and #6 seed once.

I quickly went through and assessed what years Duke "over-achieved" by going further than would be expected based on seed and what years Duke "under-achieved" by not going as far as would be expected. I considered a #1 seeded team reaching the Final Four to met its expectations and did not factor in what happened at the Final Four.

Above Expectations: 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1994

Below Expectations: 1985, 1993, 1996, 1997, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2014

(Among other things, it explains why I did much better in the "everyone Xerox a bracket and manually score" era of basketball pools.)

(** When interpreting these results, it is important to note that Duke won FIVE National Championships during this time)

[Troublemaker]

Seems like a crazy way to run that business. Obviously, who covers or doesn't cover a point spread is not really predictable on a consistent basis so why would a bookie have a large exposure to one side or another?

Because of the house edge, the vigorish (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vigorish), which says to win $100, you have to bet $110. They may have a bad day here or there, but over the long run, they're going to win because of that house edge. There are also other ways they tilt things to their advantage.

[martydoesntfoul]

It's kind of an odd stat, since Duke has rarely played three top 15 teams in consecutive games. But in any event, we beat three top 15 teams in consecutive games in 1992 (#6 Kentucky, #5 Indiana, #15 Michigan).

Kedsy: Thanks for the excellent knowledge drop. As a result, I hereby amend my previous comment to refer to three teams in the top 13!!

[duke79]

Because of the house edge, the vigorish (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vigorish), which says to win $100, you have to bet $110. They may have a bad day here or there, but over the long run, they're going to win because of that house edge. There are also other ways they tilt things to their advantage.

Yea, I understand about the "vigorish" but if, for example, a total of $100,000 is bet on a particular game, with $70,000 bet on Team A, a 5 point favorite, and $30,000 bet on Team B AND Team B covers the spread, i.e., loses by less than 5 points (or wins) the bookie has a gross loss of $40,000. The vigorish will not cover this loss? Is my math right? That's why I thought the strategy of most bookies is to even out the bets on each side and make your money on the vigorish. And they adjust the point spread for each game as time goes on in response to the betting pattern, to achieve this balance? A little like what the specialists on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (in the old days) would do; i.e., adjust the price of a stock up or down constantly to balance out the buy and sell orders that were coming in.

[Atlanta Duke]

K responds to the stories on the 0-4 West Coast record

"It's interesting with ESPN, every time I look at the ticker, it's something we haven't done,"...

So it's our 23rd Sweet 16. We've been in 116 NCAA games, and we're honored like crazy to be in here. I really don't think it makes a damn bit of difference what we've done on the West Coast before. If we started to compete because of Mondays, Tuesdays and West Coast, I don't think we ever would have had five national championships and 12 Final Fours."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/23/coach-k-duke-national-championships-mike-krzyzewski/82183058/

[TKG]

K responds to the stories on the 0-4 West Coast record

"It's interesting with ESPN, every time I look at the ticker, it's something we haven't done,"...

So it's our 23rd Sweet 16. We've been in 116 NCAA games, and we're honored like crazy to be in here. I really don't think it makes a damn bit of difference what we've done on the West Coast before. If we started to compete because of Mondays, Tuesdays and West Coast, I don't think we ever would have had five national championships and 12 Final Fours."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/23/coach-k-duke-national-championships-mike-krzyzewski/82183058/

Watched the video of his answer and thought he was spot on. Love that he took a shot at ESPN. Obvious that there is no love lost between the two. Probably fed up with the shots the Worldwide Leader takes at his program and at Grayson.

[Troublemaker]

Yea, I understand about the "vigorish" but if, for example, a total of $100,000 is bet on a particular game, with $70,000 bet on Team A, a 5 point favorite, and $30,000 bet on Team B AND Team B covers the spread, i.e., loses by less than 5 points (or wins) the bookie has a gross loss of $40,000. The vigorish will not cover this loss?

I think the way you phrased it (Team B covers), the book actually wins money. But no matter, I get what you're saying. Yes, on some games, the book might lose 40K but it will be balanced out by another game where they win 40K. Except in both cases, they keep the 10% vigorish.


That's why I thought the strategy of most bookies is to even out the bets on each side and make your money on the vigorish. And they adjust the point spread for each game as time goes on in response to the betting pattern, to achieve this balance?

The balancing out occurs mostly in the long run (with the vigorish providing the net profits) because the books are actually very limited in how much they can balance out on one particular game if they've set a bad opening line.

Take the Oregon-Duke example. If the books were slammed with bets on Oregon -1, I think you're suggesting that the books can just move the line to Oregon -5 to take in a lot of bets on Duke and balance it out. Unfortunately, if they do that and Oregon wins by 2, 3, or 4, they would lose all the Oregon -1 bets AND all the Duke +5 bets. That's why the point spread never strays too far from the opening line.

[TKG]

As further evidence of ESPN's focus on what Duke hasn't done, in a preview of our game against Oregon, the ESPN talking head just mentioned that Duke hasn't made back-to-back Elite 8s since the 90s. Guess K nailed it.

[crimsondevil]

I heard Laura Keely say on the News and Observer podcast this morning that in the last 20 years, Duke has played higher seeded teams only 3 times, losing each of them.

Unless I missed something, it's just two losses: 2013 vs Louisville and 2003 vs Kansas (Oregon is the third). That's mostly a testament to how often we are a top seed. Since '85 Duke is (if I counted right) 5-5 against higher seeded teams. Duke is also 8-5 vs #1s over that span regardless of our seed.



That is a remarkable statistic.

I found this site http://apps.washingtonpost.com/sports/apps/live-updating-mens-ncaa-basketball-bracket/schools/duke/ showing Duke tournament results since 1985.

From 1998-2011, Duke was a #1 seed ten times; #2 seed twice; #3 once; and #6 seed once.

I quickly went through and assessed what years Duke "over-achieved" by going further than would be expected based on seed and what years Duke "under-achieved" by not going as far as would be expected. I considered a #1 seeded team reaching the Final Four to met its expectations and did not factor in what happened at the Final Four.

Above Expectations: 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1994

Below Expectations: 1985, 1993, 1996, 1997, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2014

(Among other things, it explains why I did much better in the "everyone Xerox a bracket and manually score" era of basketball pools.)

(** When interpreting these results, it is important to note that Duke won FIVE National Championships during this time)

<Sigh> This comes up just about every year. What is the best definition of "expected"? By your definition, a #1 cannot exceed expectations, putting teams that regularly get #1 seeds (Duke) at a disadvantage. Using the historical average of the number of wins by each seed or doing a regression analysis to determine a formula for each seed is probably better, although not without their own limitations as well. There's not really a perfect way to do this.

[sagegrouse]

Temple '88, the first real NCAA giant slayed by K.

What Laura's stats tell me:

In the last 20 years, we are almost always the favorite to win an NCAA game (or at least even money).


I'm okay with that.

We were underdogs against #1 Georgetown in 1989 regional finals and #1 UConn in 1990

[BD80]

As further evidence of ESPN's focus on what Duke hasn't done, in a preview of our game against Oregon, the ESPN talking head just mentioned that Duke hasn't made back-to-back Elite 8s since the 90s. Guess K nailed it.

Did they mention how many programs HAVE been to back-to-back Elite 8s?

Of course, the 90's in the case means 1999.

Off the top of my head, I'd say Calipari, Williams, Pitino, Donovan, and Izzo. Not too many, even given the cherry picking nature of the category.

[MChambers]

It's kind of an odd stat, since Duke has rarely played three top 15 teams in consecutive games. But in any event, we beat three top 15 teams in consecutive games in 1992 (#6 Kentucky, #5 Indiana, #15 Michigan).

Make that the first Duke team to beat three top 13 teams in consecutive games!

[Tripping William]

We were underdogs against . . . #1 UConn in 1990

<cue Dana Carvey voice> Isn't that "special"? <end Dana Carvey voice>. :D

[BandAlum83]

None of those teams has any player overlap with any other of those other teams. It's not like saying, "The Yankees are batting .253 against Royals pitching this season." There the personnel is roughly the same. It's more like saying, "The Yankees batted .253 in 1947 in this ballpark."

Keeley's stats are of historical interest only. If she's trying to say they are interesting because they may have predictive value, she's wrong.

No predictive value presented or implied. It's more a statement of how darn good Duke has been for an extended period of time that they have had high seeds and haven't been sent out west many times.

[jimsumner]

We were underdogs against #1 Georgetown in 1989 regional finals and #1 UConn in 1990

And 1988 Temple. Three years in a row Duke went into the East seeded No.2 and defeated the No. 1 seed in the finals.

The same thing happened in 1994 when two-seed Duke beat one-seed Purdue in the Elite eight.

And Vegas in '91.

It's tough to over-achieve when you're seeded No. 1.

[CDu]

Did they mention how many programs HAVE been to back-to-back Elite 8s?

Of course, the 90's in the case means 1999.

Off the top of my head, I'd say Calipari, Williams, Pitino, Donovan, and Izzo. Not too many, even given the cherry picking nature of the category.

And Butler, who made back to back Finals. And Maryland in 2001 and 2002. And UCLA a few times in the mid-2000s. I think Cal has done it with two different teams (Memphis and Cal), though one was of course vacated later. Pretty sure Kansas has as well. And Wisconsin in 2014 and 2015. Maybe UConn. I think it has happened quite a bit, actually.

[sagegrouse]

Jay Bilas has unleashed the Bilastrator to unravel the mysteries of the Sweet Sixteen. He ranks the teams from #1 to #16 and predicts the outcomes -- only the predicted outcomes don't really match his index.

Duke is #6 of the 16 teams, but loses to Oregon, which is only #9.

#4 Villanova loses either to #8 Miami in the S16 or #2 Kansas in the E8.

#5 Oklahoma loses to #11 Texas A&M -- but, if advancing, beats either #6 Duke or #9 Oregon to go to the Final Four.Jay, I know match-ups matter, but why rank the teams if the results are so different from the rankings?

FWIW, his top three teams are UNC, Kansas and Virginia.

[TNDukeFan]

So...tonight will be the first time I have to use my hoarded free non-CBS non-cable online viewing time. Has anyone had any experience this tournament using theirs? Is there an onscreen metric notifying one how much time remains of free viewing?

My terror, of course, is that my two hours or whatever will expire with five minutes to go in a tight game. (Logging out for halftime could help with that issue, with the golden bonus of sparing me the studio stuff.)

[fraggler]

So...tonight will be the first time I have to use my hoarded free non-CBS non-cable online viewing time. Has anyone had any experience this tournament using theirs? Is there an onscreen metric notifying one how much time remains of free viewing?

My terror, of course, is that my two hours or whatever will expire with five minutes to go in a tight game. (Logging out for halftime could help with that issue, with the golden bonus of sparing me the studio stuff.)

Do you or someone you know have cable? If you log into the march madness live website with a cable login, you won't have to worry about it.

[TNDukeFan]

Do you or someone you know have cable? If you log into the march madness live website with a cable login, you won't have to worry about it.

Excellent point! Time to find out who my friends are...:)

[flyingdutchdevil]

So. Excited. About. The. Game. Tonight.

A few beers, a few laughs, and hopefully a few hugs.

Go Devils!

[kmspeaks]

So...tonight will be the first time I have to use my hoarded free non-CBS non-cable online viewing time. Has anyone had any experience this tournament using theirs? Is there an onscreen metric notifying one how much time remains of free viewing?

My terror, of course, is that my two hours or whatever will expire with five minutes to go in a tight game. (Logging out for halftime could help with that issue, with the golden bonus of sparing me the studio stuff.)

Sign up for a one week free sling tv trial.

[NM Duke Fan]

Excellent point! Time to find out who my friends are...:)

We have cable, but our package does not include those extra channels, so from past experience I believe it will do me no good in loggin on online. I dislike this arrangment with the Turner group!

[rhcpflea99]

Waiting for Duke to snap the west coast tournament losing streak, hopefully tonight is the night. Minimum day today, then watch Batman vs Superman, then watch Duke, it's going to be a great day!!!!! Go Duke F9 F9 F9

[Billy Dat]

How about the fact that the NCAA put Duke up in a Disneyland family-infested hotel?

Forget the constant screaming, crying, over-indulged and under-disciplined nature of today's child, kids are veritable germ factories. Between the flight and this contagion exposure, we'll be lucky to field a starting 5. Aside from that, one of the great Disney hero's is a Duck - talk about advantages and bias Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?

Grayson and Matt don't seem to care:
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/duke-now/article67873552.html

[DukieInKansas]

We have cable, but our package does not include those extra channels, so from past experience I believe it will do me no good in loggin on online. I dislike this arrangment with the Turner group!

Does NCAA.com require a login? I can't remember if I logged in at some point and it just remembers or not. I know I have watched games on that website from various computers (work shhhh!, church, phone, and laptop) but can't remember if I had saved a login or not.

[Troublemaker]

Does NCAA.com require a login? I can't remember if I logged in at some point and it just remembers or not. I know I have watched games on that website from various computers (work shhhh!, church, phone, and laptop) but can't remember if I had saved a login or not.

Because the Duke game is on TBS instead of CBS, you probably will have to login to your cable provider to access the NCAA stream.

[flyingdutchdevil]

How about the fact that the NCAA put Duke up in a Disneyland family-infested hotel?

Forget the constant screaming, crying, over-indulged and under-disciplined nature of today's child, kids are veritable germ factories. Between the flight and this contagion exposure, we'll be lucky to field a starting 5. Aside from that, one of the great Disney hero's is a Duck - talk about advantages and bias Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?

Grayson and Matt don't seem to care:
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/duke-now/article67873552.html

Because between the Disney duck, the Oregon Ducks, and our duck with a French last name (Kennard the Canard), I'll take our Duck.

[TNDukeFan]

A DBR poster PMd me and offered his UVerse login. What a cool gesture. I'm tempted to out and thank him/her.

[devildeac]

How about the fact that the NCAA put Duke up in a Disneyland family-infested hotel?

Forget the constant screaming, crying, over-indulged and under-disciplined nature of today's child, kids are veritable germ factories. Between the flight and this contagion exposure, we'll be lucky to field a starting 5. Aside from that, one of the great Disney hero's is a Duck - talk about advantages and bias Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?

Grayson and Matt don't seem to care:
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/duke-now/article67873552.html


I'm just hoping that none of our 18 year old players get lost in the amusement park...

:rolleyes:;)

[budwom]

How about the fact that the NCAA put Duke up in a Disneyland family-infested hotel?

Forget the constant screaming, crying, over-indulged and under-disciplined nature of today's child, kids are veritable germ factories. Between the flight and this contagion exposure, we'll be lucky to field a starting 5. Aside from that, one of the great Disney hero's is a Duck - talk about advantages and bias Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?

Grayson and Matt don't seem to care:
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/duke-now/article67873552.html

At least rugrats are apt to stop screaming and hit the sack well before drunken conventioneers do.

[Billy Dat]

I'm just hoping that none of our 18 year old players get lost in the amusement park...
:rolleyes:;)

Very, very, very good!


At least rugrats are apt to stop screaming and hit the sack well before drunken conventioneers do.

Another excellent point. Plus, i think listening to Frozen's anthemic track "Let it Go!" on constant loop is just the tonic Grayson needs to stop worrying about being a well behaved choir boy in the wake of his tripping(s) and to let his inner demon out against Oregon. In addition, there is a decidedly green and bright yellow tinge to Maleficent's dragon eyes and fire breath as she meets her doom in "Sleeping Beauty" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmM-XX8atlQ - surely Marshall has been studying swordplay as part of his military training?

[GoDucks349]

How about the fact that the NCAA put Duke up in a Disneyland family-infested hotel?

Forget the constant screaming, crying, over-indulged and under-disciplined nature of today's child, kids are veritable germ factories. Between the flight and this contagion exposure, we'll be lucky to field a starting 5. Aside from that, one of the great Disney hero's is a Duck - talk about advantages and bias Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?

Grayson and Matt don't seem to care:
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/duke-now/article67873552.html

LOL and yes, the U of O had a verbal agreement with Walt Disney to use Donald Duck as a mascot. So yes we do have a nice link with Disney.

[BD80]

LOL and yes, the U of O had a verbal agreement with Walt Disney to use Donald Duck as a mascot. So yes we do have a nice link with Disney.

But a verbal agreement with a duck isn't what it is quacked up to be ...

[Troublemaker]

We're the late game. Whom are we rooting for in the early game -- OU or TAMU? Or maybe it doesn't matter?

[hallcity]

We're the late game. Whom are we rooting for in the early game -- OU or TAMU? Or maybe it doesn't matter?

That's easy. TAMU. Hield is scary good. Not that TAMU isn't a good team; it's just that OU is better.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I don't understand why everyone is so intent on cable subscriptions and passwords. I don't have cable and have been able to watch every game live via cbssports.com. Just go to the scores and select the link to "watch live." I've also downloaded the NCAA On Demand channel for Roku and it works great. I've never had to login with another password. What gives?

[Doria]

That's easy. TAMU. Hield is scary good. Not that TAMU isn't a good team; it's just that OU is better.

I've seen OK play probably around three or four games, but only seen TX A&M about twice, but for what it's worth I tend to agree with the above, though I am not certain that we don't match up better with Oklahoma than A&M. I think you could make a decent argument both ways. If we make it past Oregon, either one will be a tough game.

[Mike Corey]

But a verbal agreement with a duck isn't what it is quacked up to be ...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-P7-HIJ_2ehI/UpoNDqWrJAI/AAAAAAAABSU/c68wmeOXEEs/s1600/daffy_duck_angry.gif

[devildeac]

But a verbal agreement with a duck isn't what it is quacked up to be ...

Tweet! Flagrant fowl. Two shots and the bill, err, ball.

[GoDucks349]

But a verbal agreement with a duck isn't what it is quacked up to be ...

Almost was a problem a few years ago. The arrangement is now a written agreement. If I remember correctly, Oregon can use Donald Duck as long as they don't "sell" Donald Duck gear outside the state of Oregon. Thanks to the new uniforms (as many as their might be), Duck gear doesn't normally contain Donald anymore.

[kAzE]

That's easy. TAMU. Hield is scary good. Not that TAMU isn't a good team; it's just that OU is better.

I agree that Buddy is a scary player to go against, but at least we have a semi-answer for him in Matt Jones. I'm quite certain that we have nothing that can handle Tyler Davis inside. He'd likely dominate the boards on both ends like Brice Johnson. It sucks, but both teams look like bad match ups. But let's make sure we beat Oregon first . . .

[TNDukeFan]

I don't understand why everyone is so intent on cable subscriptions and passwords. I don't have cable and have been able to watch every game live via cbssports.com. Just go to the scores and select the link to "watch live." I've also downloaded the NCAA On Demand channel for Roku and it works great. I've never had to login with another password. What gives?

I'm really glad you asked that because I went to http://www.ncaa.com/march-madness-live/scores and clicked on the little "i" at top right next to "Select TV provider" and read this:

"Why should I sign in with my TV provider?
Sign in to stream all live games on almost any device AND gain access to stream live games from your mobile device to a TV using AirPlay and Chromecast. Fans can enjoy a complimentary live video pass before sign in is required."

"How do I know how much time I have remaining in my 3 hour ["THREE HOUR"!!!! I can watch the whole game!] live video pass?
Look out for alerts while you watch reminding you to sign in. Live games broadcast on CBS do not require login, except on Apple TV, Roku, Fire TV, Airplay, and Google Cast."

So you've solved my problem, DBA - thanks!

(Also, I'm guessing you've either watched everything on CBS or haven't watched three hours of non-CBS action.)

[FerryFor50]

I agree that Buddy is a scary player to go against, but at least we have a semi-answer for him in Matt Jones. I'm quite certain that we have nothing that can handle Tyler Davis inside. He'd likely dominate the boards on both ends like Brice Johnson. It sucks, but both teams look like bad match ups. But let's make sure we beat Oregon first . . .

It's not Hield that worries me with OU. It's that swarming defense and shot blocking and rebounding. Hield will score, regardless. But the rest of OU will be the concern.

[Tripping William]

I understand the motivation behind the discussion, but may I ever so gently and politely suggest that we might learn a thing or two from Coach Norman Dale (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p5LecBXZqQ)? Pretty please? We have a step to climb before thinking about OU or aTm, and maybe that ancillary discussion could occur in the West Regional thread?

[GoDucks349]

Boucher may only be 6'10", but he's a long 6'10" and an elite shot blocker. He presents a problem for us driving the ball into the paint. This actually could be an opportunity for Marshall the lurker to come into play - spread four out around Marshall, have a wing drive, get Boucher chasing blocks and dump off to Plumlee. I think Oregon swarms pretty well, so Marshall will have to be ready to kick it out and not just take contested layups.

I think it's a mistake to assume Boucher is the only shot blocker on the Ducks, if Boucher doesn't get the block, keep an eye out for Bell. Bell had 94 blocks last year and 48 this year, Boucher had 109 this year. Both get up and can swat with control.

Boucher is quite unique in that he doesn't look very physical and a big guy can move him around, but as a kid growing up playing ice hockey, he's not afraid of getting tough. Plus, if he gets started from the 3 point line he'll lite up the score board. Not many "bigs" defend well at the three point line and this makes for a difficult match up.

The other guy Duke doesn't want to get off to good start is Benjamin. If he has a good game things will be difficult for Duke.

Should be a great game.

[GoDucks349]

I didn't see anything that made me feel like Duke can't beat that team. Play solid D, execute and make some shots, and I think Duke has a really good chance to advance.

What wine pairs well with foie gras?

Probably champagne, possibly a full bodied red. Both good choices, just depends on what else is on the menu.

Oh, and I agree that if they play as badly as they played against St Joe, it could be a long night for the Ducks. Thankfully that's not the norm.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Probably champagne, possibly a full bodied red. Both good choices, just depends on what else is on the menu.

Oh, and I agree that if they play as badly as they played against St Joe, it could be a long night for the Ducks. Thankfully that's not the norm.

Typically a sweeter white wine, like Sauternes. But I prefer a dryer white wine. I can't do Sauternes or Ports or any ice wine. It's like drinking alcoholic maple syrup (I'm sure half on this board would love boozy syrup).

[sagegrouse]

I didn't see anything that made me feel like Duke can't beat that team. Play solid D, execute and make some shots, and I think Duke has a really good chance to advance.

What wine pairs well with foie gras?

The classic pairing is with Sauternes, which (as many of you know) is a white wine from Bordeaux which is sweet but has depth of flavor and balance. If you can afford Chateau d'Yquem, go for it!

[GoDucks349]

Typically a sweeter white wine, like Sauternes. But I prefer a dryer white wine. I can't do Sauternes or Ports or any ice wine. It's like drinking alcoholic maple syrup (I'm sure half on this board would love boozy syrup).


I'm not a fan of sweeter wines either. I prefer reds mostly, given that I live in Oregon, Pinot Noir tend to flow through my house. Also, I have been a pescetarian for about 6-7 years and as a result, might be a little rusty on parings with other meats.

Game time is getting close..... Damn nervous here. We need to play well.... Not like St Joe's but like against Utah and we'll be fine.

[sagegrouse]

Typically a sweeter white wine, like Sauternes. But I prefer a dryer white wine. I can't do Sauternes or Ports or any ice wine. It's like drinking alcoholic maple syrup (I'm sure half on this board would love boozy syrup).

That's your personal preference, which should be respected. Sauternes and other classic dessert wines like Tokay, while sweet, have good acidity and a lot of balance. "Alcoholic maple syrup" is hardly an apt description of wine made with care and costing $$$.

[GoDucks349]

Typically a sweeter white wine, like Sauternes. But I prefer a dryer white wine. I can't do Sauternes or Ports or any ice wine. It's like drinking alcoholic maple syrup (I'm sure half on this board would love boozy syrup).

Still think it's worth trying a different paring. A Cab might be nice.

[Troublemaker]

I understand the motivation behind the discussion, but may I ever so gently and politely suggest that we might learn a thing or two from Coach Norman Dale (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p5LecBXZqQ)? Pretty please? We have a step to climb before thinking about OU or aTm, and maybe that ancillary discussion could occur in the West Regional thread?

I hear you, but the game literally takes place before ours. I'm watching it on my TV right now, and Duke will play afterwards. I'm as superstitious as anyone, but this is one case where we can look ahead (behind) and pick a preference. It's true that I could've put it in the West region thread, though.

[burnspbesq]

Duke will win. The factor that jinxed Duke in both prior Sweet 16 maulings at the Honda Center--my presence in the stands--has been taken out of play.

LGD!

[DavidBenAkiva]

I think it's a mistake to assume Boucher is the only shot blocker on the Ducks, if Boucher doesn't get the block, keep an eye out for Bell. Bell had 94 blocks last year and 48 this year, Boucher had 109 this year. Both get up and can swat with control.

Boucher is quite unique in that he doesn't look very physical and a big guy can move him around, but as a kid growing up playing ice hockey, he's not afraid of getting tough. Plus, if he gets started from the 3 point line he'll lite up the score board. Not many "bigs" defend well at the three point line and this makes for a difficult match up.

The other guy Duke doesn't want to get off to good start is Benjamin. If he has a good game things will be difficult for Duke.

Should be a great game.

This is a good point. Boucher has a block percentage of 12.3 on the season. Bell, who averages 20 minutes a game, has a block percentage of 8.4. That's really good. By comparison, Marshall's rate is 4.9 and Brandon is at 3.7. So yeah, Boucher and Bell are both pretty active blocking shots. On the flip side, attempting so many blocks opens up a lot of offensive rebounding opportunities.

[fidel]

The classic pairing is with Sauternes, which (as many of you know) is a white wine from Bordeaux which is sweet but has depth of flavor and balance. If you can afford Chateau d'Yquem, go for it!

This is the right answer.

[brevity]

While not officially open, here is the link to DBR Chat:

http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/misc.php?do=cchatbox

[Bob Green]

While not officially open...

Chat is officially open.

[GoDucks349]

This is a good point. Boucher has a block percentage of 12.3 on the season. Bell, who averages 20 minutes a game, has a block percentage of 8.4. That's really good. By comparison, Marshall's rate is 4.9 and Brandon is at 3.7. So yeah, Boucher and Bell are both pretty active blocking shots. On the flip side, attempting so many blocks opens up a lot of offensive rebounding opportunities.

I agree that blocked shots are one aspect of the game and controlling the ball after the block is even more important. I'd give the advantage to the defense, 1. shot clock issues for the offense, 2. resetting the offense both favor the defensive team. Offensive team has the advantage in the possibility of the defense being out of position and them getting an easy put back or open shot.

[riverside6]

Live tempo-based stats for Duke/Oregon, starters posted...

http://www.scacchoops.com/duke-at-oregon-basketball-live-stats-3242016

[downeastdad]

Well, we did not need two fouls on the Lieutenant at this point in the game.

[gocanes0506]

Man 2 quickies on Marshall, both on the offensive end. That last call was bad. A big flop that got a call.

[rsvman]

really bad start by Marshall. the first foul on the pick has been a point of emphasis. He has to be smarter.

[jipops]

Looks like Oregon is about to blow this game open early.

[El_Diablo]

really bad start by Marshall. the first foul on the pick has been a point of emphasis. He has to be smarter.

That was Matt's fault for not waiting for Marshall to get set.

[DangerDevil]

Hey CBS, let's leave the Grayson is the next Blue Devil villain bit to ESPN.

And if you are going to play the Duke Villian, probably a few more villains than Laettner and Reddick.