PDA

View Full Version : Starting 5 and rotation for 2016-17 Season



Pages : [1] 2

CarmenWallaceWade
04-06-2016, 12:17 PM
Now that we have another piece to the puzzle, and because it's fun to speculate, here is who I believe will be our starting 5 next year.

pg - Jackson
sg - Allen
sf - Tatum
pf - Jefferson
c - Giles

Technically, we don't have positions in the traditional sense. But call me old fashioned.

Would love to hear other views.

westwall
04-06-2016, 12:19 PM
Now that we have another piece to the puzzle, and because it's fun to speculate, here is who I believe will be our starting 5 next year.

pg - Jackson
sg - Allen
sf - Tatum
pf - Jefferson
c - Giles

Technically, we don't have positions in the traditional sense. But call me old fashioned.

Would love to hear other views.

This thread became inevitable about half an hour ago. Sigh!

cato
04-06-2016, 12:20 PM
Now that we have another piece to the puzzle, and because it's fun to speculate, here is who I believe will be our starting 5 next year.

pg - Jackson
sg - Allen
sf - Tatum
pf - Jefferson
c - Giles

Technically, we don't have positions in the traditional sense. But call me old fashioned.

Would love to hear other views.

When is the last time Coach K did not start a rising senior who started the past two years, including in a Final Four? I'm still trying to find that precedent.

scottdude8
04-06-2016, 12:20 PM
Darn, I just started a similar thread but seems like someone beat me too it! :p

Mods, feel free to move my thread here!

OZZIE4DUKE
04-06-2016, 12:21 PM
Now that we have another piece to the puzzle, and because it's fun to speculate, here is who I believe will be our starting 5 next year.

pg - Jackson
sg - Allen
sf - Tatum
pf - Jefferson
c - Giles

Technically, we don't have positions in the traditional sense. But call me old fashioned.

Would love to hear other views.
I'll replace Jackson with Thornton at pg. with a year under his belt Derryck will shine next year!

Jackson
04-06-2016, 12:21 PM
Bolden
Giles
Tatum
Allen
Jackson

Jefferson/Kennard 6th man

GGLC
04-06-2016, 12:24 PM
Bolden
Giles
Tatum
Allen
Jackson

Jefferson/Kennard 6th man

Zero chance of this.

jv001
04-06-2016, 12:25 PM
Bolden
Giles
Tatum
Allen
Jackson

Jefferson/Kennard 6th man

Jefferson will start over Bolden and don't count Derryck out until we hear he's out. He's one heck of an on the ball defender. GoDuke!

GGLC
04-06-2016, 12:25 PM
Amile is never not starting. Will be tough to push a healthy Matt Jones out of the starting lineup too.

CarmenWallaceWade
04-06-2016, 12:28 PM
When is the last time Coach K did not start a rising senior who started the past two years, including in a Final Four? I'm still trying to find that precedent.

I struggled with this, but I have a hunch that Jackson starts from day 1, and I don't see any of the other 4 coming off the bench.

CDu
04-06-2016, 12:29 PM
With the roster as it currently stands, I'd guess this:

Jackson/Jones
Allen
Tatum
Giles
Jefferson

I am still quite on the fence about whether Jackson (who is more talented) or Jones (who is more experienced and more ready defensively) will start. But that hardly matters to me, as the following 7 will all play significant minutes:
Jackson
Jones
Allen
Kennard
Tatum
Giles
Jefferson

Then, we'll see what the rest of the roster looks like in a month or two before deciding who else is in or out of the rotation.

Troublemaker
04-06-2016, 12:30 PM
This thread became inevitable about half an hour ago. Sigh!

Don't fight it! At least now there's a collector thread for when starters/minutes discussions interrupt other threads.


Now that we have another piece to the puzzle, and because it's fun to speculate, here is who I believe will be our starting 5 next year.

pg - Jackson
sg - Allen
sf - Tatum
pf - Jefferson
c - Giles



That is how I would bet as well. However, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if any of MJones, Kennard, or Thornton replaces Jackson.

Also, I think point guard will be a timeshare with Grayson leading the team in assists again.

Edouble
04-06-2016, 12:31 PM
When is the last time Coach K did not start a rising senior who started the past two years, including in a Final Four? I'm still trying to find that precedent.

Jeff Capel.

Capel started as a freshman on a Final Four team. Continued on as a starter over the next two seasons, but lost his starting spot for an extended period during his senior year. He got his spot back when Greg Newton went to the dog house and we went small.

dukelion
04-06-2016, 12:31 PM
Myron Medcalf ESPN Staff Writer

"Duke is so loaded in 2016-17 that Grayson Allen could be the fourth scoring option for the Blue Devils. On the surface, it's a bizarre idea. But Harry Giles, Jayson Tatum and Frank Jackson are three of the most talented freshmen we've seen in the one-and-done era. Duke is a monster."


Can't say I agree with this but with so much talent anything can happen. However, I do fully expect Allen's scoring to decline somewhat.

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 12:34 PM
Jeff Capel.

Capel started as a freshman on a Final Four team. Continued on as a starter over the next two seasons, but lost his starting spot for an extended period during his senior year. He got his spot back when Greg Newton went to the dog house and we went small.

Greg Paulus only started five games his senior year.

Jackson
04-06-2016, 12:34 PM
Zero chance of this.

No chance Bolden comes if he isn't starting. He is one-and-done. No way he comes off the bench if he shows up in Durham. Nate James came off the bench his senior year when Duhon started at the point.

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 12:35 PM
Myron Medcalf ESPN Staff Writer

"Duke is so loaded in 2016-17 that Grayson Allen could be the fourth scoring option for the Blue Devils. On the surface, it's a bizarre idea. But Harry Giles, Jayson Tatum and Frank Jackson are three of the most talented freshmen we've seen in the one-and-done era. Duke is a monster."


Can't say I agree with this but with so much talent anything can happen. However, I do fully expect Allen's scoring to decline somewhat.

He may take fewer shots, but I would expect that more of them are open. How do you defend that group?

BeachBlueDevil
04-06-2016, 12:36 PM
Jefferson isn't getting a redshirt to come off the bench. He could leave now and make a nice living overseas.

PG- Allen (he's coming back to work on this facet of his game)

SG- Jackson (Will share time handling the ball)

SF- Tatum

PF- Jefferson

C- Giles

Order off the bench

Kennard
Jones
Bolden(?)
Thronton(?)
Jeter

A note about Jeter, this year is going to be huge for him. Banging with guys like Giles and Bolden in practice is going to make him a BEAST for the future.

theschwartz
04-06-2016, 12:36 PM
My guess would be:

G: Allen & Jones
F: Jefferson, Tatum & Giles

With Allen assuming primary ballhandling responsibilities as he prepares to transition to PG in his post-college career. I also expect a ridiculously deep rotation in the backcourt, with Kennard, Jackson & Thornton all getting significant minutes (15-20 mpg), and Jeter spelling the big men up front 10-15 mpg.

Monmouth77
04-06-2016, 12:37 PM
When is the last time Coach K did not start a rising senior who started the past two years, including in a Final Four? I'm still trying to find that precedent.

That precedent does not exist, and I am sure speculation concerning Matt's role on the 2017 team will be a Top-3 offseason hot potato here.

But let me offer the example of Nate James -- who, like Matt, is the kind of glue guy Coach K loves, and whose "3 and D" game was stylistically somewhat similar to Matt's (though Nate played in the frontcourt more and could rebound better).

Nate was a rotation player (not a starter) on the '99 Final Four Team as a sophomore, and his line from that season is almost identical to Matt's from 2014-15.

Matt Jones SO G 6-5 6.0 Pts, 2.3 Reb, 1.0 Ast
Nate James SO F 6-6 5.0 Pts, 2.6 Reb, 0.9 Ast

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1999.html
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html

Yet Nate James as a 5th year senior was the 6th man on the 2001 National Championship team-- because our freshmen and sophomores (Dunleavy, Duhon, Williams) were impossible to sit.

That is the potential precedent here.

RepoMan
04-06-2016, 12:37 PM
Bolden
Giles
Tatum
Allen
Jackson

Jefferson/Kennard 6th man

Is this a joke?

CarmenWallaceWade
04-06-2016, 12:37 PM
No chance Bolden comes if he isn't starting. He is one-and-done. No way he comes off the bench if he shows up in Durham. Nate James came off the bench his senior year when Duhon started at the point.

It is between us and KY for Bolden, and I highly doubt he starts in either of those lineups. He certainly hasn't been promised a starting position at Duke, and yet the vibe seems to be we are edging out KY.

DukeTrinity11
04-06-2016, 12:39 PM
Matt Jones is starting guys, a rising senior who's perhaps the best wing defender on the team isn't coming off the bench unless he's not fully healthy.

Here's my prediction for a starting 5:

Allen
Jones
Tatum
Jefferson
Giles

Duke will play a lot of position less basketball with multiple capable ball handlers next year so don't get too shocked if you don't see Thornton or Frank Jackson starting.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 12:40 PM
No chance Bolden comes if he isn't starting. He is one-and-done. No way he comes off the bench if he shows up in Durham. Nate James came off the bench his senior year when Duhon started at the point.

If Bolden will only come if he is guaranteed a starting spot, then he isn't coming.

A healthy Amile Jefferson is never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever coming off the bench.

BigZ
04-06-2016, 12:40 PM
Jones will start but not player starter minutes.

Jackson
04-06-2016, 12:41 PM
He may take fewer shots, but I would expect that more of them are open. How do you defend that group?

I expect Grayson's scoring may decline somewhat as well. That may depend in large part how Jackson does scoring the ball. I always thought during the season that Bolden coming to Duke was based on the idea that Jefferson would not be back. Jefferson's redshirt has changed that. It seems that Duke still has a 50/50 chance with Bolden.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 12:41 PM
My guess would be:

G: Allen & Jones
F: Jefferson, Tatum & Giles

With Allen assuming primary ballhandling responsibilities as he prepares to transition to PG in his post-college career. I also expect a ridiculously deep rotation in the backcourt, with Kennard, Jackson & Thornton all getting significant minutes (15-20 mpg), and Jeter spelling the big men up front 10-15 mpg.

This would be my guess as well, with Jackson as instant offense off the bench.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 12:44 PM
Oh boy, I feel like this thread starts earlier every year. I think the most talented and most difficult match up for opponents is Grayson, Frank, Amile, Jayson, and Harry. But I don't think there's any scenario that could occur where Matt doesn't at least begin the year as a starter. He will surely play starters minutes whether he starts or comes off the bench, and I believe the same is true of Luke. That top 7 is already a final four contender, and I haven't even mentioned Derryck or Chase, who I expect to be MUCH improved in their 2nd year, or possibly even Marques Bolden.

Is this team going to rival 1999 in terms of pure talent? I think this could very possibly be the most talent on one Duke basketball team. (Not best overall team, just the most talent)

Jackson
04-06-2016, 12:47 PM
[QUOTE=RepoMan;877425]Is this a joke?[/QU


Would Jones start in place of Jackson and Jefferson in place of Bolden? Maybe Thronton over Jackson, but I think Jackson would get the nod over either.

theschwartz
04-06-2016, 12:53 PM
This would be my guess as well, with Jackson as instant offense off the bench.

Don't forget Kennard's instant offense!

While I do think Jones will start, I'm guessing he's not gonna play HUGE minutes. It'll probably be in the ~20 mpg area, maybe high-20's in games we need him to shut down the opposing team's high-scoring guard or wing. In many games though, I expect Jones to be the first guy subbed out after the first TV timeout w/ Kennard being the first guy in. So many lineup possibilities, I imagine the coaching staff is giddy at all the potential matchup problems we can give our opponents. More importantly, it gives us a huge cushion if our guys get into foul trouble or get hurt. We had zero cushion this year.

dukelifer
04-06-2016, 12:54 PM
Oh boy, I feel like this thread starts earlier every year. I think the most talented and most difficult match up for opponents is Grayson, Frank, Amile, Jayson, and Harry. But I don't think there's any scenario that could occur where Matt doesn't at least begin the year as a starter. He will surely play starters minutes whether he starts or comes off the bench, and I believe the same is true of Luke. That top 7 is already a final four contender, and I haven't even mentioned Derryck or Chase, who I expect to be MUCH improved in their 2nd year, or possibly even Marques Bolden.

Is this team going to rival 1999 in terms of pure talent? I think this could very possibly be the most talent on one Duke basketball team. (Not best overall team, just the most talent)

That is a scary lineup on paper- maybe in reality. Maybe not the best ball handlers but that team will rebound and drive. If Kennard gets his three-ball more consistent- you can insert him in there as well. Kennard, Jones, Thornton (if he stays), Jeter will be off the bench. I expect Giles will be foul prone for a while- so depth will be needed up front.

jimsumner
04-06-2016, 12:57 PM
There are a couple of things--IMO--that need to be considered. Actually three.

A starting lineup in November isn't necessarily the starting lineup in March.

Look at Elliott Williams in 2009, Miles Plumlee and Brian Zoubek in 2010, Matt Jones and Amile Jefferson in 2015, Danny Ferry and Jay Bilas in 1986. The entire 1991 season.
Other examples abound.

I strongly suspect we will see lots of lineup experiments before the season ends.

Secondly, just because you start doesn't mean you finish. David Henderson didn't start in 1984 or 1985 but he was darn tootin' on the court at the end of any competitive game.

Thirdly, just because you start doesn't mean you'll be in the top five in minutes played. See Henderson.

My best guess for opening day starting lineup is Allen/Jones/Tatum/Giles/Jefferson, with Kennard getting major minutes off the bench and Jackson and Bolden having a real chance to move up the charts, with a bullet.

And, yes, you can read between the lines here. Just don't rumor monger. :)

luburch
04-06-2016, 12:59 PM
I'll have to wait for the rest of the roster to shakeout before I make any predictions, still too much unknown.

Edouble
04-06-2016, 01:03 PM
That precedent does not exist, and I am sure speculation concerning Matt's role on the 2017 team will be a Top-3 offseason hot potato here.

Posted this once already, but I think Jeff Capel is a pretty strong precedent.

Freshman Year: 28 starts (Final Four starter)
Sophomore Year: 29 starts
Junior Year: 31 starts
Senior Year: 18 starts*

*13 of these starts came in the last 13 games, after Coach K went small, pulling Greg Newton from the starting lineup and the rotation for the rest of the season. Had Newton played better basketball up until that point in the year, it is most likely that Capel would not have gotten his starting spot back, leaving him with only 5 starts for the year.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 01:05 PM
There are a couple of things--IMO--that need to be considered. Actually three.

A starting lineup in November isn't necessarily the starting lineup in March.

Look at Elliott Williams in 2009, Miles Plumlee and Brian Zoubek in 2010, Matt Jones and Amile Jefferson in 2015, Danny Ferry and Jay Bilas in 1986. The entire 1991 season.
Other examples abound.

I strongly suspect we will see lots of lineup experiments before the season ends.

Secondly, just because you start doesn't mean you finish. David Henderson didn't start in 1984 or 1985 but he was darn tootin' on the court at the end of any competitive game.

Thirdly, just because you start doesn't mean you'll be in the top five in minutes played. See Henderson.

My best guess for opening day starting lineup is Allen/Jones/Tatum/Giles/Jefferson, with Kennard getting major minutes off the bench and Jackson and Bolden having a real chance to move up the charts, with a bullet.

And, yes, you can read between the lines here. Just don't rumor monger. :)

This actually makes me realize how many players we'll have next season that could be gone, whether through graduation or leaving early, the season after that. We're going to need another huge (both in terms of numbers and quality) recruiting class for 2017-18 to make up for it. That's the cost of the OAD era, I suppose.

wilson
04-06-2016, 01:06 PM
...My best guess for opening day starting lineup is Allen/Jones/Tatum/Giles/Jefferson, with Kennard getting major minutes off the bench and Jackson and Bolden having a real chance to move up the charts, with a bullet...No mention of Chase Jeter here. I thought he made clear strides down the stretch this season. Do you envision 2016-17 being another "building for the future" kind of campaign for him?

johnb
04-06-2016, 01:07 PM
Giles, Tatum, Jackson, and Bolden haven't played a game against college-level competition, and we know Jefferson and Jones are high level, quintessential 4/5 year glue guys. Their experience and skills should put the seniors in the starting lineup to start the season, plus both should be especially motivated after lengthy injury rehabs. K may have a soft spot for guys who stick around for a few years, and he may want to balance the team with a couple of defensive minded leaders, but if he thinks the 2016-7 team is best when 3 freshmen are on the floor, then he's likely to use the new guys a lot. Having said that, guys often improve a lot between years, and it's possible that Thornton and Jeter (and possibly somebody else) will surprise to the upside; if they don't start next year, they'll be primed to be real team leaders after the presumed exodus of next year's frosh.

If Bolden's primary goal is the NBA after 1 year, I really don't think he'd be down to KY and Duke; there is simply too much competition for front court pt at both these schools. It seems like it would be great if he'd come, but it's hard to imagine K would guarantee him a spot when he didn't even guarantee Ingram a spot when we had an opening at his position.

cato
04-06-2016, 01:08 PM
Jeff Capel.

Capel started as a freshman on a Final Four team. Continued on as a starter over the next two seasons, but lost his starting spot for an extended period during his senior year. He got his spot back when Greg Newton went to the dog house and we went small.

Excellent. I've been looking for a comparison to Matt other than Nate James.

In 96/97, Capel started 18 of 33 games (55%), playing 26.7 minutes a game. Competition in the backcourt included:

Name (starts)

Langdon (33)
Wojo (33)
Carrawell (12)
Price (11)
Wallace (3)
Chappell (2)
Nate MF James (1)

As I vaguely recall, Wojo, Chris and Nate all had the edge on defense over Capel. Capel was a better scorer and distributor.

Rolls will be a bit different next year. Like modern day K teams, the issue will likely be defense, not offensive efficiency. If Matt Jones can regain his speed and continue to improve his consistency from 3, his knowledge and ability on D will make it hard to keep him out of the starting line up. I would not be shocked to see him end up at 6th man, but I will be surprised if he comes of the bench in November and December.

gurufrisbee
04-06-2016, 01:10 PM
Obviously it's a little premature because a couple of major issues to be answered:

* Is Bolden coming?
* Is Giles 100%?

I see several possibilities:

A) Bolden comes and Giles is 100%:
Starters: Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Giles, Amile

B) Bolden comes and Giles is not 100%:
Starters: Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Amile, Bolden

C) Bolden does not come and Giles is 100%:
Starters: Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Giles, Amile

D) Bolden does not come and Giles is not 100%:
Starters: Jackson, Kennard, Allen, Tatum, Amile

The only other thing I could possibly see is that neither Jackson or Thornton shows they can be a full time starting PG (like we saw a lot of this season). Then it becomes:

Allen, Kennard, Tatum, Giles, Amile

Matt Jones is not starting. He might be the 8th best player on the team next year.

MChambers
04-06-2016, 01:11 PM
This will be the season the 8th and 9th players in the rotation get major minutes!

Of course, some of us thought that last year. And other years.

Having said that, no way Jones, Allen, and Jefferson don't get start and get major minutes. Tatum and Giles (if he's healthy) will too. And it's hard to see Kennard and Thornton not getting at least 20 mpg.

After that, you've got Jackson and Jeter, maybe Bolden.

I don't see White, Vrankovic, or Obi getting much playing time, unless they improve significantly.

Maybe we should have this discussion next month, when the roster is set, more or less.

cato
04-06-2016, 01:13 PM
Matt Jones is not starting. He might be the 8th best player on the team next year.

Do you mean not starting in November, or not starting in March?

JNort
04-06-2016, 01:16 PM
PG: DT

SG: Grayson

SF: Tatum

PF: Amile

C: Giles

Bench: Luke

Bench: Matt

Bench: Jackson

8.5 guy: Chase

gurufrisbee
04-06-2016, 01:18 PM
Do you mean not starting in November, or not starting in March?

Yes.

cato
04-06-2016, 01:22 PM
Yes.

Oh my. I look forward to seeing how your confidence plays out.

jv001
04-06-2016, 01:27 PM
There are a couple of things--IMO--that need to be considered. Actually three.

A starting lineup in November isn't necessarily the starting lineup in March.

Look at Elliott Williams in 2009, Miles Plumlee and Brian Zoubek in 2010, Matt Jones and Amile Jefferson in 2015, Danny Ferry and Jay Bilas in 1986. The entire 1991 season.
Other examples abound.

I strongly suspect we will see lots of lineup experiments before the season ends.

Secondly, just because you start doesn't mean you finish. David Henderson didn't start in 1984 or 1985 but he was darn tootin' on the court at the end of any competitive game.

Thirdly, just because you start doesn't mean you'll be in the top five in minutes played. See Henderson.

My best guess for opening day starting lineup is Allen/Jones/Tatum/Giles/Jefferson, with Kennard getting major minutes off the bench and Jackson and Bolden having a real chance to move up the charts, with a bullet.

And, yes, you can read between the lines here. Just don't rumor monger. :)

Now I can at least make an educated guess as to the rotation for next season. :cool: Thanks Jim. GoDuke!

JNort
04-06-2016, 01:28 PM
My guess would be:

G: Allen & Jones
F: Jefferson, Tatum & Giles

With Allen assuming primary ballhandling responsibilities as he prepares to transition to PG in his post-college career. I also expect a ridiculously deep rotation in the backcourt, with Kennard, Jackson & Thornton all getting significant minutes (15-20 mpg), and Jeter spelling the big men up front 10-15 mpg.

Grayson will be a shooting guard in the NBA without a doubt.

JNort
04-06-2016, 01:30 PM
Yes.

Lol I loved that response and I also think it's correct for the question.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 01:30 PM
No mention of Chase Jeter here. I thought he made clear strides down the stretch this season. Do you envision 2016-17 being another "building for the future" kind of campaign for him?

I don't think so. But I'll admit that I'm on a shrinking island with Chase. Bolden is the new sexy, and most people seem to think he's going to be higher on the depth chart if he commits to Duke.

But by all accounts, Chase is one of the the hardest workers on the team. That coupled with his awesome size, length, and agility makes me believe in him more than most probably would. I would be surprised if he isn't SIGNIFICANTLY better next year. The possibility of getting Bolden is intriguing. Bolden looks very talented, but I would still throw my hat in Chase's corner over Bolden. Chase is just as talented, and he's been here for a year.

I would expect him to get much stronger over the summer and really work on his footwork and hands. All of the Plumlees had significant improvement between seasons, and became major contributors once they learned how to defend without fouling and develop soft hands. If Chase does that over this summer, then he's the first big man off the bench next year, and a strong contender to become a permanent starter in his junior season.

COYS
04-06-2016, 01:30 PM
That precedent does not exist, and I am sure speculation concerning Matt's role on the 2017 team will be a Top-3 offseason hot potato here.

But let me offer the example of Nate James -- who, like Matt, is the kind of glue guy Coach K loves, and whose "3 and D" game was stylistically somewhat similar to Matt's (though Nate played in the frontcourt more and could rebound better).

Nate was a rotation player (not a starter) on the '99 Final Four Team as a sophomore, and his line from that season is almost identical to Matt's from 2014-15.

Matt Jones SO G 6-5 6.0 Pts, 2.3 Reb, 1.0 Ast
Nate James SO F 6-6 5.0 Pts, 2.6 Reb, 0.9 Ast

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1999.html
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html

Yet Nate James as a 5th year senior was the 6th man on the 2001 National Championship team-- because our freshmen and sophomores (Dunleavy, Duhon, Williams) were impossible to sit.

That is the potential precedent here.

Someone also astutely mentioned Jeff Capel, who spent some time coming off the bench his senior year after starting in the '94 Final Four.

To throw out the somewhat arbitrary bar of having started on a Final Four team, Greg Paulus fits as another recent example, in my opinion. The 2006 team didn't make it to the Final Four, but Greg was an instant starter (over senior Sean Dockery) at PG who led the ACC in assists that season. Of course, by his senior year he came off the bench for Nolan before regaining his starting spot for a game or two before Elliot Williams replaced both of them in the starting lineup.

So, Capel, Nate James, and Paulus are all guys who started and played important roles earlier in their careers before moving to the bench by their senior seasons in favor of talented youngsters.

A slightly different scenario but also applicable to Matt Jones is Jon Scheyer moving to a sixth man role going into the '07-'08 season after starting and scoring over 12ppg as a freshman. K and the staff thought that Jon was better suited coming off the bench than Gerald Henderson. They were right. Jon had a heck of a sophomore season while also helping Gerald improve by accepting the responsibility of starting. For the sake of chemistry, Jon coming off the bench made sense. I could potentially see similar reasoning next year. It is entirely possible that Matt is equally effective getting plenty of minutes off the bench while one of Luke/Frank/Derryck(?) performs better as a starter next to Grayson.

For the record, in crunch time, I fully expect to see liberal offensive and defensive substitutions. Coach K has always been big on this, but I definitely see Matt and Amile switching off with our more offensively minded guards with every stoppage in a tight game.

Troublemaker
04-06-2016, 01:38 PM
No mention of Chase Jeter here. I thought he made clear strides down the stretch this season. Do you envision 2016-17 being another "building for the future" kind of campaign for him?

It's really nothing against Chase, who I agree improved towards the end of the season and could make a significant jump his sophomore year with weight-training. It's just that if Bolden comes, Chase looks like he's the 9th man for a coach that historically has played 8 guys in the rotation.

If, as kAzE suggests above, Chase can beat out Marques, then Chase will be in the rotation.

JNort
04-06-2016, 01:40 PM
I don't think so. But I'll admit that I'm on a shrinking island with Chase. Bolden is the new sexy, and most people seem to think he's going to be higher on the depth chart if he commits to Duke.

But by all accounts, Chase is one of the the hardest workers on the team. That coupled with his awesome size, length, and agility makes me believe in him more than most probably would. I would be surprised if he isn't SIGNIFICANTLY better next year. The possibility of getting Bolden is intriguing. Bolden looks very talented, but I would still throw my hat in Chase's corner over Bolden. Chase is just as talented, and he's been here for a year.

I would expect him to get much stronger over the summer and really work on his footwork and hands. All of the Plumlees had significant improvement between seasons, and became major contributors once they learned how to defend without fouling and develop soft hands. If Chase does that over this summer, then he's the first big man off the bench next year, and a strong contender to become a permanent starter in his junior season.


I'm with you. Not sure why people think Bolden will play next year over Chase. I would think that unless multiple injuries occur then Bolden will get muuuucchhhh less PT than Chase did this year. Chase showed a lot the last couple of months and bigs usually take time to develop so he will be way ahead come next season.

jv001
04-06-2016, 01:42 PM
Someone also astutely mentioned Jeff Capel, who spent some time coming off the bench his senior year after starting in the '94 Final Four.

To throw out the somewhat arbitrary bar of having started on a Final Four team, Greg Paulus fits as another recent example, in my opinion. The 2006 team didn't make it to the Final Four, but Greg was an instant starter (over senior Sean Dockery) at PG who led the ACC in assists that season. Of course, by his senior year he came off the bench for Nolan before regaining his starting spot for a game or two before Elliot Williams replaced both of them in the starting lineup.

So, Capel, Nate James, and Paulus are all guys who started and played important roles earlier in their careers before moving to the bench by their senior seasons in favor of talented youngsters.

A slightly different scenario but also applicable to Matt Jones is Jon Scheyer moving to a sixth man role going into the '07-'08 season after starting and scoring over 12ppg as a freshman. K and the staff thought that Jon was better suited coming off the bench than Gerald Henderson. They were right. Jon had a heck of a sophomore season while also helping Gerald improve by accepting the responsibility of starting. For the sake of chemistry, Jon coming off the bench made sense. I could potentially see similar reasoning next year. It is entirely possible that Matt is equally effective getting plenty of minutes off the bench while one of Luke/Frank/Derryck(?) performs better as a starter next to Grayson.

For the record, in crunch time, I fully expect to see liberal offensive and defensive substitutions. Coach K has always been big on this, but I definitely see Matt and Amile switching off with our more offensively minded guards with every stoppage in a tight game.

I believe that comparing Matt to Jon is not slightly different but way different. Jon was a better scorer, more athletic and just a better player than Matt. Jon was clutch, just ask Jumbo(boy I miss him). :cool: GoDuke!

But it does show that a very good player can be removed from the starting lineup but get big important minutes. GoDuke!

brlftz
04-06-2016, 01:43 PM
Posted this in another thread that is about to be buried in the "Grayson is back!" tsunami...

I think this next year will look a lot like '99. With so much talent we'll go deeper in routine situations. When it gets serious, though, I see K sticking with experience and toughness beyond what fans might expect.

My take, assuming Bolden comes, Allen stays, and that Bolden earns more time than Jeter:

Pre- through early-season. Yay, everyone plays!


Perimeter
Minutes
Swing
Minutes
Interior
Minutes


Allen
28
Tatum
28
Bolden
20


Jackson
20


Jeter
12


Kennard
20


Giles
28


Jones
20


Jefferson
24



Stuff's getting real, conference play:


Perimeter
Minutes
Swing
Minutes
Interior
Minutes


Allen
32
Tatum
32
Bolden
12


Jackson
12


Jeter
6


Kennard
22


Giles
32


Jones
20


Jefferson
32



Oh crap, win or die!


Perimeter
Minutes
Swing
Minutes
Interior
Minutes


Allen
36
Tatum
36
Bolden
4


Jackson
4


Giles
36


Kennard
20


Jefferson
36


Jones
28

CDu
04-06-2016, 01:44 PM
I don't think so. But I'll admit that I'm on a shrinking island with Chase. Bolden is the new sexy, and most people seem to think he's going to be higher on the depth chart if he commits to Duke.

But by all accounts, Chase is one of the the hardest workers on the team. That coupled with his awesome size, length, and agility makes me believe in him more than most probably would. I would be surprised if he isn't SIGNIFICANTLY better next year. The possibility of getting Bolden is intriguing. Bolden looks very talented, but I would still throw my hat in Chase's corner over Bolden. Chase is just as talented, and he's been here for a year.

I would expect him to get much stronger over the summer and really work on his footwork and hands. All of the Plumlees had significant improvement between seasons, and became major contributors once they learned how to defend without fouling and develop soft hands. If Chase does that over this summer, then he's the first big man off the bench.

I'm a bit ambivalent on this one right now, mainly because I haven't seen enough of either player. Jeter certainly has comparable size, and he'll have the advantage of an added year of development at Duke. On the other hand, Bolden seems to be further along currently than Jeter was at this time last year. And Bolden is more athletic. So it's hard to say how it would play out. I could certainly see Jeter making marked improvements and forcing a bigger role. I could also see him struggling to compete with the length and athleticism of Giles and Bolden and getting squeezed out.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 01:44 PM
Once again, people seem to think Matt's performance on two bad ankles in a six-man rotation is reflective of what he brings to this team when healthy in terms of leadership, intelligence, experience, on-court communication, stellar defense, lack of turnovers, and three-point shooting.

Having a non-ball-dominant guard in the starting lineup who fits those criteria is super-valuable. There's only one basketball to go around.

COYS
04-06-2016, 01:48 PM
I believe that comparing Matt to Jon is not slightly different but way different. Jon was a better scorer, more athletic and just a better player than Matt. Jon was clutch, just ask Jumbo(boy I miss him). :cool: GoDuke!

But it does show that a very good player can be removed from the starting lineup but get big important minutes. GoDuke!

If Jumbo was president in the Jon Scheyer fan club, I was VP. I agree that they are vastly different players (I fully believe that if Jon had been given the keys to the offense on day one he'd have his number retired), but the fact that Jon was a superior player in every way to Matt and STILL moved to the bench only emphasizes my point, more. If a player of Jon's quality can move to the bench to help the team, I can easily see the same thing happening with Matt.

cato
04-06-2016, 01:49 PM
Lol I loved that response and I also think it's correct for the question.

You actually believe that Matt Jones will not start a single game in either November or March?

JNort
04-06-2016, 01:50 PM
Once again, people seem to think Matt's performance on two bad ankles in a six-man rotation is reflective of what he brings to this team when healthy in terms of leadership, intelligence, experience, on-court communication, stellar defense, lack of turnovers, and three-point shooting.

Having a non-ball-dominant guard in the starting lineup who fits those criteria is super-valuable. There's only one basketball to go around.

Look I'll be the first admit that Matt as a basketball player is my least favorite guy on the team. However if I was given the reigns to coach for next season he would be starting and playing decent minutes because of the things you stated above. Solid on defense, good spot up shooter and knows his role and accepts it which is hard to find among all the egos in sports.

jimsumner
04-06-2016, 01:50 PM
Someone also astutely mentioned Jeff Capel, who spent some time coming off the bench his senior year after starting in the '94 Final Four.

To throw out the somewhat arbitrary bar of having started on a Final Four team, Greg Paulus fits as another recent example, in my opinion. The 2006 team didn't make it to the Final Four, but Greg was an instant starter (over senior Sean Dockery) at PG who led the ACC in assists that season. Of course, by his senior year he came off the bench for Nolan before regaining his starting spot for a game or two before Elliot Williams replaced both of them in the starting lineup.

So, Capel, Nate James, and Paulus are all guys who started and played important roles earlier in their careers before moving to the bench by their senior seasons in favor of talented youngsters.

A slightly different scenario but also applicable to Matt Jones is Jon Scheyer moving to a sixth man role going into the '07-'08 season after starting and scoring over 12ppg as a freshman. K and the staff thought that Jon was better suited coming off the bench than Gerald Henderson. They were right. Jon had a heck of a sophomore season while also helping Gerald improve by accepting the responsibility of starting. For the sake of chemistry, Jon coming off the bench made sense. I could potentially see similar reasoning next year. It is entirely possible that Matt is equally effective getting plenty of minutes off the bench while one of Luke/Frank/Derryck(?) performs better as a starter next to Grayson.

For the record, in crunch time, I fully expect to see liberal offensive and defensive substitutions. Coach K has always been big on this, but I definitely see Matt and Amile switching off with our more offensively minded guards with every stoppage in a tight game.

Nate James wasn't the sixth man in 2001 because the freshmen were too good to sit. James started all season, along with Battier, Williams, Dunleavy and Boozer.

Until Boozer suffered a broken foot in the home finale against Maryland. K decided to start Sanders in place of Boozer. That suggested a quick, shock-and-awe staring lineup which suggested replacing James with Duhon.

For a few minutes. Then James replaced Sanders and Duke moved Battier to the 5 and Dunleavy to the 4.

James continued to play major minutes. He played 20 against Southern Cal in the Elite Eight, 30 against Maryland in the Final Four, 20 in the title game against Arizona.

There is no reason to think K makes this switch if Boozer remains un-injured.

James had his best season in 2001, averaging 12.3 ppg and making third-team All-ACC. In conference play, he averaged 13.6 points and 5.6 rebounds per game.

There are plenty of examples of players starting earlier in their Duke careers and not playing much less as seniors, going back to Mike Tissaw who got all of 46 minutes in 1983. Doug McNeely, John Smith, Greg Newton, Ricky Price, Taymon Domzalski and Greg Paulus all fit that narrative.

Nate James does not.

Pet peeve.

gumbomoop
04-06-2016, 01:52 PM
No matter the possible roster changes this month, I hope Matt will not serve much at all next season as the "not-really PG who brings the ball up court to initiate the offense by passing it to someone else."

I prefer some combo of the following to bring the ball into the frontcourt, depending: Thornton, Kennard, Allen, Jackson. In that order.

Allen, Jackson, and Kennard seem to be "classic" college wing/2s, but all are probably easily capable of being combo guards. I wouldn't begrudge Grayson being given solid minutes at PG/offense initiator, and wonder whether/assume that he has talked with Kyzyzewski about how he might add to his repertoire and increase his NBA prospects.

I do hope Kennard also gets lots of chances to use his handle, vision, and passing. He's not best used as little other than a spot-up 3-bomber. You'd think that he, Grayson, and Frank would all get into the lane enough to provide alley oops to Giles, Jefferson, Jeter, possible Bolden.

Haven't even mentioned Tatum yet. Amazing... Can K get all this O-talent to share the ball and the shots? I assume so, but you'd think Duke would have at least 3 guys on the floor at all times who in normal circumstances "need the ball."

It appears that next season will feature some abnormal circumstances, most of which might be abnormally promising.

cato
04-06-2016, 01:52 PM
That precedent does not exist, and I am sure speculation concerning Matt's role on the 2017 team will be a Top-3 offseason hot potato here.

But let me offer the example of Nate James -- who, like Matt, is the kind of glue guy Coach K loves, and whose "3 and D" game was stylistically somewhat similar to Matt's (though Nate played in the frontcourt more and could rebound better).

Nate was a rotation player (not a starter) on the '99 Final Four Team as a sophomore, and his line from that season is almost identical to Matt's from 2014-15.

Matt Jones SO G 6-5 6.0 Pts, 2.3 Reb, 1.0 Ast
Nate James SO F 6-6 5.0 Pts, 2.6 Reb, 0.9 Ast

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1999.html
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html

Yet Nate James as a 5th year senior was the 6th man on the 2001 National Championship team-- because our freshmen and sophomores (Dunleavy, Duhon, Williams) were impossible to sit.

That is the potential precedent here.

Nate James started 29 of 39 games that year. Duhon did not enter the starting lineup until Boozer broke his foot.

ncexnyc
04-06-2016, 01:53 PM
Still too early for this thread.

I'll hold off on throwing my .02 cents into the ring until I hear more definitive news on the health of both Jefferson and Giles. I'd love to see some video of both players doing some major basketball things since their injuries.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 01:57 PM
I'm a bit ambivalent on this one right now, mainly because I haven't seen enough of either player. Jeter certainly has comparable size, and he'll have the advantage of an added year of development at Duke. On the other hand, Bolden seems to be further along currently than Jeter was at this time last year. And Bolden is more athletic. So it's hard to say how it would play out. I could certainly see Jeter making marked improvements and forcing a bigger role. I could also see him struggling to compete with the length and athleticism of Giles and Bolden and getting squeezed out.

I dunno, I think after watching enough tape on both of them, I would consider Jeter the more athletic player of the 2. Bolden certainly has Jeter beat in terms of wingspan: 7'4" to 7'2", but looks more like a plodding back to the basket type, whereas Jeter seems more agile, bouncier, runs the court faster, and has a nice face-up game in addition to some back to the basket moves in his arsenal.

They are both very nice prospects. Bolden looks to have more long term upside, due to his length and power, but Jeter seems more versatile. He could play either front court position, whereas Bolden seems like a true 5. I think Bolden will ultimately become the better rebounder and defensive presence of the 2, but Jeter has more upside as a scorer. The main reason I like Chase more for next year is his extra year of development in the Duke system in concert with his great work ethic. However, I doubt Bolden would be interested in Duke at all if he didn't think he could beat out Jeter for minutes, so who knows?

brlftz
04-06-2016, 01:58 PM
...

Haven't even mentioned Tatum yet. Amazing... Can K get all this O-talent to share the ball and the shots? I assume so, but you'd think Duke would have at least 3 guys on the floor at all times who in normal circumstances "need the ball."

It appears that next season will feature some abnormal circumstances, most of which might be abnormally promising.

I wonder if K's experience with the Olympic team has given him some practice managing what will be an amazingly deep and talented college team. In particular, we have so many scorers and can run just about any style of offense you want, so the challenge is deciding between many great options and getting people to buy in once a decision is made.

COYS
04-06-2016, 01:58 PM
Nate James wasn't the sixth man in 2001 because the freshmen were too good to sit. James started all season, along with Battier, Williams, Dunleavy and Boozer.

Until Boozer suffered a broken foot in the home finale against Maryland. K decided to start Sanders in place of Boozer. That suggested a quick, shock-and-awe staring lineup which suggested replacing James with Duhon.

For a few minutes. Then James replaced Sanders and Duke moved Battier to the 5 and Dunleavy to the 4.

James continued to play major minutes. He played 20 against Southern Cal in the Elite Eight, 30 against Maryland in the Final Four, 20 in the title game against Arizona.

There is no reason to think K makes this switch if Boozer remains un-injured.

James had his best season in 2001, averaging 12.3 ppg and making third-team All-ACC. In conference play, he averaged 13.6 points and 5.6 rebounds per game.

There are plenty of examples of players starting earlier in their Duke careers and not playing much less as seniors, going back to Mike Tissaw who got all of 46 minutes in 1983. Doug McNeely, John Smith, Greg Newton, Ricky Price, Taymon Domzalski and Greg Paulus all fit that narrative.

Nate James does not.

Pet peeve.

I get that you were responding to a range of posts and picked mine to quote, but I was simply discussing scenarios in which a veteran player who had been successful moved to the bench for the benefit of the team. I think Nate James comfortably fits within those parameters, even if the switch happened because of Boozer's injury. Coach K could have simply replaced Boozer with Sanders and stood pat, after all. Instead, he knew that James could still be effective coming off the bench and made the move of putting Duhon in ahead of him to start the game. This, to me, is no different than the logic of having Matt coming off the bench in favor of an overwhelmingly offensively talented starting five that includes one of our other guards.

Again, K might not think this way, at all. I'm perfectly fine with Matt starting or not starting. I think he'll get plenty of burn, anyway, as will Frank and Luke. But the way K used Nate James as a sixth man after Boozer's injury definitely counts as K moving a proven veteran to the bench because it helps the team as a whole.

Troublemaker
04-06-2016, 01:59 PM
No matter the possible roster changes this month, I hope Matt will not serve much at all next season as the "not-really PG who brings the ball up court to initiate the offense by passing it to someone else."

I prefer some combo of the following to bring the ball into the frontcourt, depending: Thornton, Kennard, Allen, Jackson. In that order.

I agree with this. If Matt starts and we have a Grayson-Matt backcourt, I would prefer if Grayson guarded the PG so Matt can shut down wings, and on offense, I would also prefer Grayson to be the de facto point guard and initiate offense. This experience would also be theoretically good for Grayson's pro aspirations.

JNort
04-06-2016, 01:59 PM
You actually believe that Matt Jones will not start a single game in either November or March?

It's not out of the question of course. I just can't envision it unless injuries occur, transfers, or K doing a random 1 or 2 game shakeup.

To me locks to start are Derryck, Grayson, Tatum and most likely Amile if he is ready to go. That leaves Giles, Jackson, Chase, Luke and Matt for the last spot.

cato
04-06-2016, 02:00 PM
Someone also astutely mentioned Jeff Capel, who spent some time coming off the bench his senior year after starting in the '94 Final Four.

To throw out the somewhat arbitrary bar of having started on a Final Four team, Greg Paulus fits as another recent example, in my opinion. The 2006 team didn't make it to the Final Four, but Greg was an instant starter (over senior Sean Dockery) at PG who led the ACC in assists that season. Of course, by his senior year he came off the bench for Nolan before regaining his starting spot for a game or two before Elliot Williams replaced both of them in the starting lineup.

So, Capel, Nate James, and Paulus are all guys who started and played important roles earlier in their careers before moving to the bench by their senior seasons in favor of talented youngsters.

A slightly different scenario but also applicable to Matt Jones is Jon Scheyer moving to a sixth man role going into the '07-'08 season after starting and scoring over 12ppg as a freshman. K and the staff thought that Jon was better suited coming off the bench than Gerald Henderson. They were right. Jon had a heck of a sophomore season while also helping Gerald improve by accepting the responsibility of starting. For the sake of chemistry, Jon coming off the bench made sense. I could potentially see similar reasoning next year. It is entirely possible that Matt is equally effective getting plenty of minutes off the bench while one of Luke/Frank/Derryck(?) performs better as a starter next to Grayson.

For the record, in crunch time, I fully expect to see liberal offensive and defensive substitutions. Coach K has always been big on this, but I definitely see Matt and Amile switching off with our more offensively minded guards with every stoppage in a tight game.

Starting on a final four team is an arbitrary bar? Actually, it is an indication of the strength of the team. Winning the starting job on a NC team is a bit different than beating out a young Sean Dockery.

Who was going to supplant Paulus in '07/'08? Certainly, the DBR denizens believed that Nolan would, but that did not happen until the next year. And then he in turn lost the job to Elliot Williams.

As for Scheyer, in his junior year, he started 35 of 37 games, and in his senior year, he started 40 of 40.

JNort
04-06-2016, 02:02 PM
I dunno, I think after watching enough tape on both of them, I would consider Jeter the more athletic player of the 2. Bolden certainly has Jeter beat in terms of wingspan: 7'4" to 7'2", but looks more like a plodding back to the basket type, whereas Jeter seems more agile, bouncier, runs the court faster, and has a nice face-up game in addition to some back to the basket moves in his arsenal. They are both very nice prospects. Bolden looks to have more long term upside, due to his length and power. I think he will ultimately become the better rebounder and defensive presence of the 2. The reason I like Chase more for next year is his extra year of development in the Duke system in concert with his great work ethic.
I'm with KAzE on this too CDu. Everything I've seen (granted not a whole lot) suggests Chase is and was further along. Chase also has shown some great post moves and seems to be lacking only the confidence and repetitions in game to hit them

jv001
04-06-2016, 02:11 PM
I'm with KAzE on this too CDu. Everything I've seen (granted not a whole lot) suggests Chase is and was further along. Chase also has shown some great post moves and seems to be lacking only the confidence and repetitions in game to hit them

I saw both Bolden and Jeter play multiple all-star games when they were high school seniors and I think Bolden looks more athletic. But Chase improved by the end of his freshman year at Duke. The question is, how do they compare now. I would say Bolden looks to be the better player but that's not against college big men. I really believe Chase has the chance to become an even better player over the summer and improve his chances to get more playing time. I just don't see him as a quick athletic big man. He's more of a low post player that doesn't have the hops to be a great low post player. I hope I'm proven wrong and Chase becomes an All-American before he graduates. As for Bolden, I have no idea how good he will become. GoDuke!

whereinthehellami
04-06-2016, 02:17 PM
My best guess for opening day starting lineup is Allen/Jones/Tatum/Giles/Jefferson, with Kennard getting major minutes off the bench and Jackson and Bolden having a real chance to move up the charts, with a bullet.

And, yes, you can read between the lines here. Just don't rumor monger. :)
Holy smokes!!!

I get why Coach likes Jones, especially healthy but I'm all about Kennard, especially with a whole off-season. Kennard has such a high-ceiling compared to Jones.

I want to buy into Bolden as a starter right off the bat but I just don't see it from my limited viewings. Looks like he might need a little time to become an impact player. Now if coach goes zone and plants him under the hoop...just kidding..haha.

Also in some other threads I have seen Tatum penciled in as a 4 for limited minutes. From my limited viewings I don't see that one either. He seems less Singler and more Hood. Doesn't seem to have a predilection for contact.

COYS
04-06-2016, 02:20 PM
Starting on a final four team is an arbitrary bar? Actually, it is an indication of the strength of the team. Winning the starting job on a NC team is a bit different than beating out a young Sean Dockery.

Who was going to supplant Paulus in '07/'08? Certainly, the DBR denizens believed that Nolan would, but that did not happen until the next year. And then he in turn lost the job to Elliot Williams.

As for Scheyer, in his junior year, he started 35 of 37 games, and in his senior year, he started 40 of 40.

I disagree with this entirely. Plenty of talented Duke teams didn't make it to the Final Four. The 2006 Duke team was probably one of the best not to make the list. And he didn't start over a young Sean Dockery but a senior Dockery.

Also, I know that Jon Scheyer went on to start in subsequent seasons, but Coach K decided that for one season it made sense for the team for him to come off the bench. That is relevant in this scenario as it could very well make sense for Matt to come off the bench next year.

I think perhaps my posts have been misunderstood. There are a variety of scenarios in which Coach K has had a proven veteran come off the bench. Sometimes this was a move made for improved chemistry (Jon in '08), sometimes it was due to lineup restructuring due to injury (Nate in '01), sometimes it was because a veteran player had been surpassed by younger guys (Greg in '09). Even last year, junior Amile and a lynch-pin of our defense moved to a reserve role when Justise and Matt established themselves as strong defenders and floor spacers around Jah. There are a number of compelling reasons why Matt can start. There are also a number of compelling reasons why he might not and for which there is precedent.

Wahoo2000
04-06-2016, 02:21 PM
I'm with KAzE on this too CDu. Everything I've seen (granted not a whole lot) suggests Chase is and was further along. Chase also has shown some great post moves and seems to be lacking only the confidence and repetitions in game to hit them

I'm an outsider, so I certainly know less than you guys who have been bleeding blue for years. That said, I think the chance anyone gets more than 7-8 minutes in the post besides Giles, Jefferson, and Tatum (more like a wing in a 4-out/1-in lineup) is basically zero.
So you can probably debate Bolden vs. Jeter all you want, but I don't think either will be much of a factor for Duke in 16-17 unless Giles or Jefferson have injury issues again. Even if Tatum goes down, I think Matt Jones is more likely to get minutes as a "4" over Jeter or Bolden.

I'd guess you guys start the season like this:
Thornton, Allen, Tatum, Jefferson, Giles
Kennard, Jones, Jackson as 6, 7, 8 respectively

And end up like this:
Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Jefferson, Giles
Kennard, Thornton/Jones as 6 & 7/8man respectively

And although K doesn't really tend to vary up his rotations a ton to be all that situational, I like to imagine the defensive lineup of:
Thornton, Jackson, Jones, Jefferson, Giles
Leaves your best offensive weapons on the bench, but MAN you would shut teams down defensively and on the boards. It must be the UVA fan in me getting all excited about how well your team could play D (rather than what kind of crazy scoring you'll be able to do).

You guys are definitely going to be sick next year, but there will be a lot of pressure. Assuming no major health issues, basically it's, "win the title or you're a disappointment" - not fair at all, but that's how the majority of fans OUTSIDE Duke will see it.

RepoMan
04-06-2016, 02:28 PM
[QUOTE=RepoMan;877425]Is this a joke?[/QU


Would Jones start in place of Jackson and Jefferson in place of Bolden? Maybe Thronton over Jackson, but I think Jackson would get the nod over either.

There is no chance that we will start a line up with 4 freshman and have both a 5th year senior and a senior, who have played meaningful minutes on a championship team, come off the bench. No chance. You are way undervaluing experience -- or, more precisely, you are way miscalculating how Coach K values experience. Jefferson, in particular, is almost guaranteed to start.

CDu
04-06-2016, 02:35 PM
I saw both Bolden and Jeter play multiple all-star games when they were high school seniors and I think Bolden looks more athletic. But Chase improved by the end of his freshman year at Duke. The question is, how do they compare now. I would say Bolden looks to be the better player but that's not against college big men. I really believe Chase has the chance to become an even better player over the summer and improve his chances to get more playing time. I just don't see him as a quick athletic big man. He's more of a low post player that doesn't have the hops to be a great low post player. I hope I'm proven wrong and Chase becomes an All-American before he graduates. As for Bolden, I have no idea how good he will become. GoDuke!

Yeah, Jeter didn't look ready to play in the high school all-star games I've seen. He looked overwhelmed physically and athletically. Bolden didn't look at all overwhelmed physically or athletically in his McDonald's game, and that was in a game with higher-quality competition than in the 2015 McD's game. That's why I think Bolden is more athletic.

But, as jv001 says, the question is whether the year of time at Duke for Jeter offsets the advantages Bolden has over pre-frosh Jeter. Maybe it does. I just don't know enough yet about either player to have a strong opinion as to who would play more.

I'm quite sure Bolden thinks he'll play more, which is why we're high on his interest list. But what he thinks and what is reality may not match.

RepoMan
04-06-2016, 02:38 PM
I'm quite sure Bolden thinks he'll play more, which is why we're high on his interest list. But what he thinks and what is reality may not match.

Whatever the on-court roles, Jefferson, Jones, and Allen have significant leadership responsibilities with all this young talent.

jimsumner
04-06-2016, 02:40 PM
I get that you were responding to a range of posts and picked mine to quote, but I was simply discussing scenarios in which a veteran player who had been successful moved to the bench for the benefit of the team. I think Nate James comfortably fits within those parameters, even if the switch happened because of Boozer's injury. Coach K could have simply replaced Boozer with Sanders and stood pat, after all. Instead, he knew that James could still be effective coming off the bench and made the move of putting Duhon in ahead of him to start the game. This, to me, is no different than the logic of having Matt coming off the bench in favor of an overwhelmingly offensively talented starting five that includes one of our other guards.

Again, K might not think this way, at all. I'm perfectly fine with Matt starting or not starting. I think he'll get plenty of burn, anyway, as will Frank and Luke. But the way K used Nate James as a sixth man after Boozer's injury definitely counts as K moving a proven veteran to the bench because it helps the team as a whole.

I could have edited down the quoted portion of the post.

This is my main point of contention.

"So, Capel, Nate James, and Paulus are all guys who started and played important roles earlier in their careers before moving to the bench by their senior seasons in favor of talented youngsters."

Nate James did not move to the bench in favor of talented youngsters.

And Capel was starting at the end of his senior season.

For the record, I will be quite pleased if a senior Matt Jones averages 12.3 points, 5.2 rebounds, 1.6 steals, shoots 49.4% from the field, 79.9% from the line in 28 mpg, while making third-team All-ACC and scoring six points in a national-title-game victory. Over Arizona.

Works for me.

gurufrisbee
04-06-2016, 02:41 PM
Oh my. I look forward to seeing how your confidence plays out.

I am confident about a great many things that never actually happen. Doesn't bother me that much.


Lol I loved that response and I also think it's correct for the question.

Thanks.

I actually think Matt Jones is a great player for Duke IF he is in the right role. And that role is absolutely not as a starter.

He wasn't a starter as a freshman. While not a great team, that team had some depth to it. He was just a freshman and still figuring it out. I don't fault him for this. But he definitely was somewhere between 8-10 on talent and he started accordingly.

As a sophomore, he also was not a starter. For about the first twenty games. Then when Sulamon got tossed, he became a starter, but really it was because of a lack of options. Starting Amile, Winslow, and Okafor clogged the lane and didn't spread the floor enough. Of course as soon as Grayson showed he was ready, he basically took all of Matt's minutes. Just didn't happen til the title game.

As a junior, he was a starter, with an asterisk. This team had no depth and had no reliable ball handler. THornton continued to show throughout the season he wasn't a reliable option. Jones was the next best ball handler. Kennard was also young and inconsistent and when Thornton looked like he could do it, they benched Kennard. But the reality is that both Thornton at point guard and Kennard at wing showed a much higher ceiling than Jones. They just really never BOTH showed it with consistency. So when Jones was healthy, he kept starting.

As a senior, I don't foresee these problems. This team has lots of depth. They have ball handlers. They have size. They have guys who score. There really isn't a hole in the starting line up that Jones fits. However, I think having him off the bench is huge for Duke. Who else gets to bring a senior with starting experience off the bench? Who has a guy who can come in and fully invest himself in a 3 and D role like that? He's perfect for that and I think it makes Duke all the more dangerous.

But he's not needed in the starting lineup, so I don't think he will be.

cato
04-06-2016, 02:42 PM
I disagree with this entirely. Plenty of talented Duke teams didn't make it to the Final Four. The 2006 Duke team was probably one of the best not to make the list. And he didn't start over a young Sean Dockery but a senior Dockery.

Also, I know that Jon Scheyer went on to start in subsequent seasons, but Coach K decided that for one season it made sense for the team for him to come off the bench. That is relevant in this scenario as it could very well make sense for Matt to come off the bench next year.

I think perhaps my posts have been misunderstood. There are a variety of scenarios in which Coach K has had a proven veteran come off the bench. Sometimes this was a move made for improved chemistry (Jon in '08), sometimes it was due to lineup restructuring due to injury (Nate in '01), sometimes it was because a veteran player had been surpassed by younger guys (Greg in '09). Even last year, junior Amile and a lynch-pin of our defense moved to a reserve role when Justise and Matt established themselves as strong defenders and floor spacers around Jah. There are a number of compelling reasons why Matt can start. There are also a number of compelling reasons why he might not and for which there is precedent.

Ah. Good correction on Dockery's class. But now that I look it up, Dockery started 32 of 36 games. It was Demarcus Nelson who could not crack the starting lineup as a Sophomore. He, of course, went on to start 31 of 34 games his junior year and 34 of 34 games his senior year.

Dockery, I submit, is a better example of the trend of K to play experienced defenders who can knock down the 3 over younger, perhaps more talented players.

I am not suggesting that Matt is a lock, but after all of the names have been listed in this thread, I still think that history suggests that he's got a very good shot of starting, particularly in November. Those who suggest that he has no shot are the ones who I do not understand.

Kedsy
04-06-2016, 02:42 PM
Matt Jones is not starting. He might be the 8th best player on the team next year.

Tyler Thornton was at best the 7th "best player" on the 2013-14 team, and yet he started 25 out of 35 games.

Monmouth77
04-06-2016, 02:43 PM
Nate James started 29 of 39 games that year. Duhon did not enter the starting lineup until Boozer broke his foot.

That is true. But down the stretch -- for the ACCT and NCAAT -- James came off the bench. Duhon played 39 minutes in the title game. James played 20. Also worth noting -- and putting aside the "starter" label -- both guys averaged 27.8 minutes a game for the season.

I could see something like that possibly playing out next year with Jones and Jackson (hopefully without anyone breaking a foot).

When he's fully healthy and mobile, Matt is a key defender. And his big-game experience is valuable. For those reasons, he's a good choice to start in a lineup that will already have plenty of perimeter scoring power (Allen, Tatum), and plenty of players who can score at the rim (Allen, Tatum, Giles, Jefferson). He would add value in that lineup just by playing his game: lock up the opposing team's best wing scorer, hit open threes, be a vocal leader in the huddle and on defense.

The question is whether Jackson can step in and be a passer and playmaker who ignites the rest of the team and makes it better. Duhon was a classic PG who could do that (after a bit of a learning curve) whereas Jackson appears to be more of a scoring guard. So we'll have to see. We'll also have to see how he defends. Duhon was a plus defender from day one, and averaged 2 steals a game as a freshman.

Where I think the 2001 team/James-Jones comparison breaks down the most is in the overall talent level and depth of perimeter talent especially. Allen will get as many minutes as he can handle (fewer than last year to keep him fresh, but still a ton). But I'll guess that Jones, Kennard and Jackson are going to be subbed in and out for each other a bunch.

JNort
04-06-2016, 02:43 PM
I know we arn't doing a mins discussion yet but...

Grayson ~30
Tatum ~27
Amile ~25
Derryck ~24
Luke ~24
Giles ~23
Matt ~23
Jackson ~14
Chase ~10

and no this isn't my final guess. Just a quick off the top

Kedsy
04-06-2016, 02:44 PM
Of course as soon as Grayson showed he was ready, he basically took all of Matt's minutes. Just didn't happen til the title game.

Matt Jones started and played 23 minutes in the 2015 title game.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 02:47 PM
I am confident about a great many things that never actually happen. Doesn't bother me that much.



Thanks.

I actually think Matt Jones is a great player for Duke IF he is in the right role. And that role is absolutely not as a starter.

He wasn't a starter as a freshman. While not a great team, that team had some depth to it. He was just a freshman and still figuring it out. I don't fault him for this. But he definitely was somewhere between 8-10 on talent and he started accordingly.

As a sophomore, he also was not a starter. For about the first twenty games. Then when Sulamon got tossed, he became a starter, but really it was because of a lack of options. Starting Amile, Winslow, and Okafor clogged the lane and didn't spread the floor enough. Of course as soon as Grayson showed he was ready, he basically took all of Matt's minutes. Just didn't happen til the title game.

As a junior, he was a starter, with an asterisk. This team had no depth and had no reliable ball handler. THornton continued to show throughout the season he wasn't a reliable option. Jones was the next best ball handler. Kennard was also young and inconsistent and when Thornton looked like he could do it, they benched Kennard. But the reality is that both Thornton at point guard and Kennard at wing showed a much higher ceiling than Jones. They just really never BOTH showed it with consistency. So when Jones was healthy, he kept starting.

As a senior, I don't foresee these problems. This team has lots of depth. They have ball handlers. They have size. They have guys who score. There really isn't a hole in the starting line up that Jones fits. However, I think having him off the bench is huge for Duke. Who else gets to bring a senior with starting experience off the bench? Who has a guy who can come in and fully invest himself in a 3 and D role like that? He's perfect for that and I think it makes Duke all the more dangerous.

But he's not needed in the starting lineup, so I don't think he will be.

3-and-D players are far less valuable off the bench than as starters, for the non-ball-dominance reason I mentioned earlier. Much, much better to have a high-usage offensive threat come off the bench, while having a starting lineup made up of both high-usage players and low-usage, high-IQ players that can make significant contributions without the ball in their hands.

There is only one ball to go around.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 02:48 PM
Ah. Good correction on Dockery's class. But now that I look it up, Dockery started 32 of 36 games. It was Demarcus Nelson who could not crack the starting lineup as a Sophomore. He, of course, went on to start 31 of 34 games his junior year and 34 of 34 games his senior year.

Dockery, I submit, is a better example of the trend of K to play experienced defenders who can knock down the 3 over younger, perhaps more talented players.

I am not suggesting that Matt is a lock, but after all of the names have been listed in this thread, I still think that history suggests that he's got a very good shot of starting, particularly in November. Those who suggest that he has no shot are the ones who I do not understand.

I actually do think Matt is a lock to be a starter to begin the season. It sends a message to the newcomers that they are expected to earn their way into the starting lineup, and it also establishes Matt as a leader on the court who is trusted by the coaches. In my opinion, no amount of practice dominance in the preseason is going to dislodge either of the seniors from the starting lineup. If anyone takes Matt's starting spot, it's going to be because of consistently great performances in games that matter.

Billy Dat
04-06-2016, 02:48 PM
You guys are definitely going to be sick next year, but there will be a lot of pressure. Assuming no major health issues, basically it's, "win the title or you're a disappointment" - not fair at all, but that's how the majority of fans OUTSIDE Duke will see it.

Indeed, but what else is there? It's a good thing to have those expectations, even if you wind up falling short. If we can manage a top 50 defense for a change, I like our chances.

CDu
04-06-2016, 02:49 PM
Matt Jones started and played 23 minutes in the 2015 title game.

Yeah, the fewest minutes Matt Jones played in the second half of the year was 19. Allen probably took more of Jefferson's and Plumlee's minutes than Jones' minutes (with Winslow playing more PF).

COYS
04-06-2016, 02:49 PM
I could have edited down the quoted portion of the post.

This is my main point of contention.

"So, Capel, Nate James, and Paulus are all guys who started and played important roles earlier in their careers before moving to the bench by their senior seasons in favor of talented youngsters."

Nate James did not move to the bench in favor of talented youngsters.

And Capel was starting at the end of his senior season.

For the record, I will be quite pleased if a senior Matt Jones averages 12.3 points, 5.2 rebounds, 1.6 steals, shoots 49.4% from the field, 79.9% from the line in 28 mpg, while making third-team All-ACC and scoring six points in a national-title-game victory. Over Arizona.

Works for me.

I see. I still think I failed to articulate my post clearly enough. My post was in response to a poster who said that no player who had been successful enough to start on a Final Four team had moved to a bench role. I brought up Capel, James, and Paulus as players that had quite a bit of success and held starting roles (and even been on Final Four teams) who moved to a reserve role for the benefit of the team. In no way did I intend to imply that the bench role that James performed at the end of the '01 season was less important than his role as a starter, as you seemed to interpret. James DID move to the bench to accommodate a starting unit that featured younger players, though, once Boozer was injured. That was my point. Coach K will not hesitate to put a player in a slightly different role if he thinks it will help the team, as he did with Nate James. For Nate James, that didn't mean a diminished role, just a different one. Sorry if I implied his role was diminished somehow.

Saratoga2
04-06-2016, 02:50 PM
It's not out of the question of course. I just can't envision it unless injuries occur, transfers, or K doing a random 1 or 2 game shakeup.

To me locks to start are Derryck, Grayson, Tatum and most likely Amile if he is ready to go. That leaves Giles, Jackson, Chase, Luke and Matt for the last spot.

There are unknowns at this point. In particular Grayson's status, Marques recruitment outcome, the health of Harry and Amile and of course any transfers which come about.

Assuming Grayson does stay and Amile and Harry are fully healthy, I believe that the starting lineup will include Grayson, Amile, Jayson and Harry. That seems like a good mix of experience with sheer talent. In my mind the final starting position would go to a PG or SG. There currently are 4 legitimate candidates for that role and they include Luke, Matt, Derryck and Frank.

There is an abundance of riches here as anyone of these 4 who doesn't start will get PT. Add to those Marques, Chase as front court subs and thee are almost no end of combinations available. Then there are the sleepers. Jack and Javin who could see floor time.

Since we are still recruiting Marques, it stands to reason that there will be at least one transfer as Grayson has not declared for the NBA draft and appears to be on the fence at this time.

COYS
04-06-2016, 02:51 PM
Ah. Good correction on Dockery's class. But now that I look it up, Dockery started 32 of 36 games. It was Demarcus Nelson who could not crack the starting lineup as a Sophomore. He, of course, went on to start 31 of 34 games his junior year and 34 of 34 games his senior year.

Dockery, I submit, is a better example of the trend of K to play experienced defenders who can knock down the 3 over younger, perhaps more talented players.

I am not suggesting that Matt is a lock, but after all of the names have been listed in this thread, I still think that history suggests that he's got a very good shot of starting, particularly in November. Those who suggest that he has no shot are the ones who I do not understand.

This is actually a good point that somehow I missed. However, DeMarcus was suffering through an ankle injury all season. He may have even needed surgery after the season was over, IIRC. Either way though, you're right. It's probably a point in favor of Matt.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 02:52 PM
There are unknowns at this point. In particular Grayson's status, Marques recruitment outcome, the health of Harry and Amile and of course any transfers which come about.

Assuming Grayson does stay and Amile and Harry are fully healthy, I believe that the starting lineup will include Grayson, Amile, Jayson and Harry. That seems like a good mix of experience with sheer talent. In my mind the final starting position would go to a PG or SG. There currently are 4 legitimate candidates for that role and they include Luke, Matt, Derryck and Frank.

There is an abundance of riches here as anyone of these 4 who doesn't start will get PT. Add to those Marques, Chase as front court subs and thee are almost no end of combinations available. Then there are the sleepers. Jack and Javin who could see floor time.

Since we are still recruiting Marques, it stands to reason that there will be at least one transfer as Grayson has not declared for the NBA draft and appears to be on the fence at this time.

He's coming back. (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?37809-Grayson-Returns!!!!)

cato
04-06-2016, 02:54 PM
That is true. But down the stretch -- for the ACCT and NCAAT -- James came off the bench. Duhon played 39 minutes in the title game. James played 20. Also worth noting -- and putting aside the "starter" label -- both guys averaged 27.8 minutes a game for the season.

I could see something like that possibly playing out next year with Jones and Jackson (hopefully without anyone breaking a foot).

When he's fully healthy and mobile, Matt is a key defender. And his big-game experience is valuable. For those reasons, he's a good choice to start in a lineup that will already have plenty of perimeter scoring power (Allen, Tatum), and plenty of players who can score at the rim (Allen, Tatum, Giles, Jefferson). He would add value in that lineup just by playing his game: lock up the opposing team's best wing scorer, hit open threes, be a vocal leader in the huddle and on defense.

The question is whether Jackson can step in and be a passer and playmaker who ignites the rest of the team and makes it better. Duhon was a classic PG who could do that (after a bit of a learning curve) whereas Jackson appears to be more of a scoring guard. So we'll have to see. We'll also have to see how he defends. Duhon was a plus defender from day one, and averaged 2 steals a game as a freshman.

Where I think the 2001 team/James-Jones comparison breaks down the most is in the overall talent level and depth of perimeter talent especially. Allen will get as many minutes as he can handle (fewer than last year to keep him fresh, but still a ton). But I'll guess that Jones, Kennard and Jackson are going to be subbed in and out for each other a bunch.

I largely agree with you. The problem, as you note, is that next year's team does not have a Chris Duhon coming in.

Kedsy
04-06-2016, 02:57 PM
There are unknowns at this point. In particular Grayson's status...

You apparently didn't hear the news, but earlier today Grayson announced he is returning to Duke next season.


Then there are the sleepers. Jack and Javin who could see floor time.

They will probably see the floor during garbage time. Nothing against Javin and Jack, but barring multiple injuries (knocking on wood now) there is virtually no chance that either of them sees meaningful court time in meaningful games in the 2016-17 season.

FerryFor50
04-06-2016, 02:58 PM
Yeah, the fewest minutes Matt Jones played in the second half of the year was 19. Allen probably took more of Jefferson's and Plumlee's minutes than Jones' minutes (with Winslow playing more PF).

I mentioned this in another thread, but Coach K has a type. Matt Jones is that type. That's why Matt Jones starts and plays so much.

Same reasoning why Tyler Thornton played so much. Only Matt's better than TT was.

Matt's lack of minutes in games were almost always tied to foul trouble or injury. Rarely was it performance, lack of offense, etc.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 03:00 PM
I mentioned this in another thread, but Coach K has a type. Matt Jones is that type. That's why Matt Jones starts and plays so much.

Same reasoning why Tyler Thornton played so much. Only Matt's better than TT was.

Matt's lack of minutes in games were almost always tied to foul trouble or injury. Rarely was it performance, lack of offense, etc.

But what does Coach K know, really?

Monmouth77
04-06-2016, 03:03 PM
Indeed, but what else is there? It's a good thing to have those expectations, even if you wind up falling short. If we can manage a top 50 defense for a change, I like our chances.

Such a key point. We've had a string of elite offensive teams that have played defense *just well enough* at times for us to beat elite teams. Lucky for us in 2015 that the defense really came together when it counted.

With two important seniors and an All-American junior playing their respective 3rd, 4th, and 5th years for Coach K, and with Giles reputed defensive prowess, can we hope for an elite defensive team? Dare we dream of a Top 20 defense?

FerryFor50
04-06-2016, 03:03 PM
But what does Coach K know, really?

Can't Coach K see how limited Matt Jones is offensively?

What? We finished with the 7th best offense in spite of Matt Jones? What? Matt Jones shot 40% from 3?

So you're telling me we need a guy who can defend multiple positions (when healthy) and hit the occasional open 3 more than we need a 4th or 5th creator on offense?

CDu
04-06-2016, 03:03 PM
They will probably see the floor during garbage time. Nothing against Javin and Jack, but barring multiple injuries (knocking on wood now) there is virtually no chance that either of them sees meaningful court time in meaningful games in the 2016-17 season.

Yeah, I am not sure why people are thinking White could play meaningful minutes this year. First of all, he doesn't look like a good enough player to play from day one on a Duke team to begin with, but beyond that we already have an incredibly deep team in front of him.

DeLaurier has at least a more reasonable case. He's at least a top-40 recruit, and could be higher depending on where the final rankings fall. But he's the #3 (or #4 assuming Tatum will play some PF) option at PF, and that usually means no minutes. If Jefferson wasn't coming back, maybe he sees the type of minutes Chase Jeter saw this year. But with the return of Jefferson and the additions of Giles and Tatum, I really don't see DeLaurier playing meaningful minutes next year either.

FerryFor50
04-06-2016, 03:05 PM
Yeah, I am not sure why people are thinking White could play meaningful minutes this year. First of all, he doesn't look like a good enough player to play from day one on a Duke team to begin with, but beyond that we already have an incredibly deep team in front of him.

DeLaurier has at least a more reasonable case. He's at least a top-40 recruit, and could be higher depending on where the final rankings fall. But he's the #3 (or #4 assuming Tatum will play some PF) option at PF, and that usually means no minutes. If Jefferson wasn't coming back, maybe he sees the type of minutes Chase Jeter saw this year. But with the return of Jefferson and the additions of Giles and Tatum, I really don't see DeLaurier playing meaningful minutes next year either.

This is the same discussion we had re: Vrankovic and Obi and Justin Robinson.

There is a strong contingent that has not figured out that Coach K will very likely never play 9-10 man rotations. We're lucky if we see an 8 man rotation.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 03:06 PM
Such a key point. We've had a string of elite offensive teams that have played defense *just well enough* at times for us to beat elite teams. Lucky for us in 2015 that the defense really came together when it counted.

With two important seniors and an All-American junior playing their respective 3rd, 4th, and 5th years for Coach K, and with Giles reputed defensive prowess, can we hope for an elite defensive team? Dare we dream of a Top 20 defense?

I'm reposting this from a thread where it was way off topic, but it answers the above question:

Harry Giles, if at full strength, is basically a lock to be one of the best defensive players in the country. His size, length, quickness, athleticism, and defensive instincts were already at elite levels for even a college player prior to his injury. He might be one of the rare players who can guard 1 through 5. Matt Jones is one of the best 1-on-1 defenders in the country, and Derryck Thornton projects to be a very good defender as well. We all know Amile is an elite defensive player due to his ability to communicate, as well as being a terrific defender in his own right. It will also help that Matt and Amile, who are almost certainly the co-captains of next year's team are both defense-first players. I don't think it's stretch to say that we should have one of the best defensive teams in the country next year, and certainly WAY better than this past year.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 03:06 PM
Can't Coach K see how limited Matt Jones is offensively?

What? We finished with the 7th best offense in spite of Matt Jones? What? Matt Jones shot 40% from 3?

So you're telling me we need a guy who can defend multiple positions (when healthy) and hit the occasional open 3 more than we need a 4th or 5th creator on offense?

Crazy, right?

devildeac
04-06-2016, 03:17 PM
No mention of Chase Jeter here. I thought he made clear strides down the stretch this season. Do you envision 2016-17 being another "building for the future" kind of campaign for him?

I see another name missing from Jim's post...

tdrake51
04-06-2016, 03:20 PM
I think we are overlooking the "Senior Jump" that nearly every player makes under Coach K.

I think Matt will start, and play 25ish mpg. He will guard the other team's best player, and will shoot open 3s. I just really hope he doesn't try to do more than he is capable of offensively.

A couple of concerns come to mind when looking at these lineups:

1) The only person I can see effectively guard opposing PGs is Derryck. (Jackson has potential but it will take time). The problem with playing Thornton major minutes, is that we don't really need a "score first" PG alongside Grayson/Tatum.

2) If Thornton doesn't start, and Matt starts instead, we still don't really have anyone who sets others up very well. (I do think Grayson will improve in this area) I think Luke has the highest ceiling on the team when it comes to passing.


*** I understand there is basically no chance of the following happening, but it's April and fun to think about***

I think the roster sets up perfectly for two "platoons" (I hate using that word now)

Thornton
Allen
Tatum
Giles
Jefferson

Jackson
Kennard
Jones
Jeter
Delaurier/Obi

jv001
04-06-2016, 03:21 PM
I see another name missing from Jim's post...

You're at it again. Spotting that hidden gem in Jim's quote, :cool: Not going to say anything more. GoDuke!

CDu
04-06-2016, 03:35 PM
2) If Thornton doesn't start, and Matt starts instead, we still don't really have anyone who sets others up very well. (I do think Grayson will improve in this area) I think Luke has the highest ceiling on the team when it comes to passing.

First, I'd suggest we all catch our breath for a few weeks on the roster and lineups. But I'd also note that Thornton wasn't the best at setting up others this year. Allen led the team in assists and A/TO ratio. People have decided that Thornton is the only "true PG" on the roster. But the reality is that he wasn't really a PG this past year. Maybe he becomes one by next season, but nothing about his performance this year suggests he'll definitely be the best option as a playmaker next year either.

That's not meant to be a knock on Thornton. He's a very talented player. But setting others up has never really been the strength of his game. So basically we had a quartet of guys (Thornton, Allen, Kennard, Ingram) who were all capable ballhandlers and could pass a little, but no PG.

jv001
04-06-2016, 03:39 PM
First, I'd suggest we all catch our breath for a few weeks on the roster and lineups. But I'd also note that Thornton wasn't the best at setting up others this year. Allen led the team in assists and A/TO ratio. People have decided that Thornton is the only "true PG" on the roster. But the reality is that he wasn't really a PG this past year. Maybe he becomes one by next season, but nothing about his performance this year suggests he'll definitely be the best option as a playmaker next year either.

I agree with your point on Thornton being the best at setting up his team mates this season and Grayson I thought was our best passer. I did like Thornton's defense on the ball. He has the quickness to harass the opposing point guard into turnovers. I believe out best distributors of the ball will be Grayson and Frank. Matt is just not good enough a ball handler nor is he the fastest player on the planet. GoDuke!

FerryFor50
04-06-2016, 03:41 PM
First, I'd suggest we all catch our breath for a few weeks on the roster and lineups. But I'd also note that Thornton wasn't the best at setting up others this year. Allen led the team in assists and A/TO ratio. People have decided that Thornton is the only "true PG" on the roster. But the reality is that he wasn't really a PG this past year. Maybe he becomes one by next season, but nothing about his performance this year suggests he'll definitely be the best option as a playmaker next year either.

That's not meant to be a knock on Thornton. He's a very talented player. But setting others up has never really been the strength of his game. So basically we had a quartet of guys (Thornton, Allen, Kennard, Ingram) who were all capable ballhandlers and could pass a little, but no PG.

Thornton's strengths were his dribbling (but struggled a bit with that down the stretch last season) and his defense (which was borderline excellent).

He often seemed to play too fast and didn't think ahead about what he wanted to do next. He didn't ever seem to have a plan when he made a move, unless he was looking to score. Then he looked ok, despite mixed success at the rim (someone pointed out 52% at the rim). He took shots out of rhythm in the offense, often too early in the shot clock, which put his teammates at a disadvantage in transition defense.

Those are things that can definitely be improved with coaching, but I agree - he didn't seem to be a "true PG."

GGLC
04-06-2016, 03:43 PM
I agree with your point on Thornton being the best at setting up his team mates this season and Grayson I thought was our best passer. I did like Thornton's defense on the ball. He has the quickness to harass the opposing point guard into turnovers. I believe out best distributors of the ball will be Grayson and Frank. Matt is just not good enough a ball handler nor is he the fastest player on the planet. GoDuke!

I don't think anyone here, even Matt's biggest fans, is suggesting that he should be Duke's primary ballhandler. To the contrary, my whole point about his value is intertwined with the fact that he doesn't need the ball in his hands to be part of a well-integrated and balanced starting unit.

jv001
04-06-2016, 03:48 PM
I don't think anyone here, even Matt's biggest fans, is suggesting that he should be Duke's primary ballhandler. To the contrary, my whole point about his value is intertwined with the fact that he doesn't need the ball in his hands to be part of a well-integrated and balanced starting unit.

I agree that Matt's greatest values are: he plays good team defense, he knows the system, he's a good team player and he can shoot the 3 ball. But he has a hard time getting his own shot. If he's used as a spot up shooter he is very valuable to the teams success. GoDuke!

Li_Duke
04-06-2016, 03:50 PM
5 guys who will play the most minutes next year (starters, if you will):
Allen
Kennard
Jones
Tatum
Giles

With Allen, Kennard, and Tatum - we have 3 very gifted scorers. I think Kennard is going to take a big sophomore leap. I believe the hype for Jackson and think he could very well be the second coming of Jason Williams, but there's only one ball to go around. He'll be behind Allen, Kennard, and Tatum in the pecking order on offense, but he'll be the instant offense off the bench.

From all accounts, Giles isn't the offensive juggernaut Okafor was, but he's a solid offensive player who does everything else better (including rebounding and defense).

I'd love to be able to predict that Jefferson would start, but the fact that he couldn't run without considerable pain late this year bothers me. He was so good early this year because of his fantastic conditioning; I'm predicting he's not going to have as good conditioning to start this year. Giles will provide a lot of what Jefferson provides (though Jefferson will remain the better team defender) but with better offense, so he'll get the nod over Jefferson.

Those seven will get most of the minutes. Jeter or Bolden, if he comes, will get as many minutes as Jeter did at the end of this year. (Bolden could surprise here and be the second coming of Okafor. If that happens, my brain is going to melt from joy and anticipation.)

Thornton looks as if he would be the sixth best perimeter player next year. He's definitely not going to be a focus on offense. I hope he responds to the challenge by attempting to become our best one-on-one perimeter defender and our best distributor. We're going to need someone to do what Jones does on defense a year from now (or when Jones sits).

In my mind, Allen returning this year makes it very likely for his senior year as well. We may get to see another jersey retired. But if everyone stays (except Jones, Tatum, Giles, and Jefferson), this log-jam in the back court is something we may have next year too (expecting we get at least one stud big and one stud perimeter recruit for 2017-18).

JNort
04-06-2016, 03:52 PM
First, I'd suggest we all catch our breath for a few weeks on the roster and lineups. But I'd also note that Thornton wasn't the best at setting up others this year. Allen led the team in assists and A/TO ratio. People have decided that Thornton is the only "true PG" on the roster. But the reality is that he wasn't really a PG this past year. Maybe he becomes one by next season, but nothing about his performance this year suggests he'll definitely be the best option as a playmaker next year either.

That's not meant to be a knock on Thornton. He's a very talented player. But setting others up has never really been the strength of his game. So basically we had a quartet of guys (Thornton, Allen, Kennard, Ingram) who were all capable ballhandlers and could pass a little, but no PG.

I still can't grasp this. From what I saw watching Derryck this year he did great at setting up his teammates when given the chance. Most of his passes were so good players didn't even expect them and turned it over. Also many of his passes went on to open guys who passed once more for an assist.

GGLC
04-06-2016, 03:54 PM
I agree that Matt's greatest values are: he plays good team defense, he knows the system, he's a good team player and he can shoot the 3 ball. But he has a hard time getting his own shot. If he's used as a spot up shooter he is very valuable to the teams success. GoDuke!

I would quibble with some of the attributes you list as values -- for example, he doesn't just play good team defense, but good on-the-ball defense -- and add a few more, but the fact that he doesn't create well on his own is what makes him more valuable in the starting lineup as opposed to coming off the bench.

CDu
04-06-2016, 03:58 PM
I still can't grasp this. From what I saw watching Derryck this year he did great at setting up his teammates when given the chance. Most of his passes were so good players didn't even expect them and turned it over. Also many of his passes went on to open guys who passed once more for an assist.

We'll have to agree to disagree. But I'd note that the same phenomena you saw for Thornton happened for others as well. We were a pass-happy perimeter team with bigs who weren't very coordinated. I stand by my belief that Thornton was no more of a PG this past year than Allen.

JNort
04-06-2016, 04:16 PM
We'll have to agree to disagree. But I'd note that the same phenomena you saw for Thornton happened for others as well. We were a pass-happy perimeter team with bigs who weren't very coordinated. I stand by my belief that Thornton was no more of a PG this past year than Allen.
Yes we certainly will have to disagree. I didn't see more than 7 pgs in all of college basketball last year who I thought was better. Only K and Derryck missing the early stuff from his reclassification was holding him back this past season. With a full workout before the season this year and hopefully K letting him play more we see his talent come to bear

jimsumner
04-06-2016, 04:26 PM
5 guys who will play the most minutes next year (starters, if you will):
Allen
Kennard
Jones
Tatum
Giles

With Allen, Kennard, and Tatum - we have 3 very gifted scorers. I think Kennard is going to take a big sophomore leap. I believe the hype for Jackson and think he could very well be the second coming of Jason Williams, but there's only one ball to go around. He'll be behind Allen, Kennard, and Tatum in the pecking order on offense, but he'll be the instant offense off the bench.

From all accounts, Giles isn't the offensive juggernaut Okafor was, but he's a solid offensive player who does everything else better (including rebounding and defense).

I'd love to be able to predict that Jefferson would start, but the fact that he couldn't run without considerable pain late this year bothers me. He was so good early this year because of his fantastic conditioning; I'm predicting he's not going to have as good conditioning to start this year. Giles will provide a lot of what Jefferson provides (though Jefferson will remain the better team defender) but with better offense, so he'll get the nod over Jefferson.

Those seven will get most of the minutes. Jeter or Bolden, if he comes, will get as many minutes as Jeter did at the end of this year. (Bolden could surprise here and be the second coming of Okafor. If that happens, my brain is going to melt from joy and anticipation.)

Thornton looks as if he would be the sixth best perimeter player next year. He's definitely not going to be a focus on offense. I hope he responds to the challenge by attempting to become our best one-on-one perimeter defender and our best distributor. We're going to need someone to do what Jones does on defense a year from now (or when Jones sits).

In my mind, Allen returning this year makes it very likely for his senior year as well. We may get to see another jersey retired. But if everyone stays (except Jones, Tatum, Giles, and Jefferson), this log-jam in the back court is something we may have next year too (expecting we get at least one stud big and one stud perimeter recruit for 2017-18).

Very good chance Allen graduates in three years and goes pro.

Which wouldn't preclude a jersey retirement. See Jason Williams.

Devilwin
04-06-2016, 04:26 PM
Starters:

Jefferson
Giles
Jackson
Tatum
Allen
Not considering Bolden til he touches pen to paper..Then we will see.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-06-2016, 04:35 PM
I still can't grasp this. From what I saw watching Derryck this year he did great at setting up his teammates when given the chance. Most of his passes were so good players didn't even expect them and turned it over. Also many of his passes went on to open guys who passed once more for an assist.

I'm a big DT fan and hope for great things from him in a Duke uniform next year. However, I disagree with the bolded part of your statement - if a player isn't expecting a pass and turns it over, that pass is inherently not a good pass. That's not exclusively on the recipient of the pass. You have to know you teammates well enough and vice versa so that passes are expected, passed, and received. Anything less is poor execution.

gurufrisbee
04-06-2016, 04:59 PM
Tyler Thornton was at best the 7th "best player" on the 2013-14 team, and yet he started 25 out of 35 games.

An indication of the poor status of our point guard play that season - that's all.


3-and-D players are far less valuable off the bench than as starters, for the non-ball-dominance reason I mentioned earlier. Much, much better to have a high-usage offensive threat come off the bench, while having a starting lineup made up of both high-usage players and low-usage, high-IQ players that can make significant contributions without the ball in their hands.

There is only one ball to go around.

I disagree. We're not talking about the US Olympic Team. You need your best five guys on the floor as much as possible. The bench is holding places. Hopefully they are doing and it bringing something to the table. Maybe they have special skills that you need - like a three point shooter to stretch against a zone or lock down on a hot player for the other team.


Yeah, the fewest minutes Matt Jones played in the second half of the year was 19. Allen probably took more of Jefferson's and Plumlee's minutes than Jones' minutes (with Winslow playing more PF).

The best line up in that game was Cook, Tyus, Allen, Winslow, Okafor/Amile.

kAzE
04-06-2016, 05:06 PM
Holy cow, I don't think I've ever seen this board go this fast from the end of the season to 6 pages (and counting) into the rotation thread. I think it says a lot about how excited we are for the upcoming season. Maybe it has something to do with every major media outlet proclaiming us as the title favorite?

Wander
04-06-2016, 05:11 PM
I'm an outsider, so I certainly know less than you guys who have been bleeding blue for years. That said, I think the chance anyone gets more than 7-8 minutes in the post besides Giles, Jefferson, and Tatum (more like a wing in a 4-out/1-in lineup) is basically zero.
So you can probably debate Bolden vs. Jeter all you want, but I don't think either will be much of a factor for Duke in 16-17 unless Giles or Jefferson have injury issues again. Even if Tatum goes down, I think Matt Jones is more likely to get minutes as a "4" over Jeter or Bolden.


Was going to say the same thing. The 7 man rotation will be Grayson, Luke, Amile, Matt, and the 3 freshman. Other than injuries and garbage time minutes, the Jeter vs Bolden debate will just be for who gets to be the backup big in games when foul trouble necessitates it.

wilson
04-06-2016, 05:32 PM
[Deleted post from wrong thread]

Kedsy
04-06-2016, 05:43 PM
An indication of the poor status of our point guard play that season - that's all.

In 2014, our regular PG was Quinn Cook, who played nearly 30 mpg and had 4.4 apg with a 2.68 a/to ratio. Want to try again?


The best line up in that game was Cook, Tyus, Allen, Winslow, Okafor/Amile.

Well, you started by saying Grayson took Matt's minutes. Since Matt played a minute and a half more than his season average in that game and Jahlil played 9 minutes fewer, I'd argue Grayson took Jahlil's minutes (required due to foul trouble), regardless of the "best line up."

GGLC
04-06-2016, 05:47 PM
An indication of the poor status of our point guard play that season - that's all.



I disagree. We're not talking about the US Olympic Team. You need your best five guys on the floor as much as possible. The bench is holding places. Hopefully they are doing and it bringing something to the table. Maybe they have special skills that you need - like a three point shooter to stretch against a zone or lock down on a hot player for the other team.



The best line up in that game was Cook, Tyus, Allen, Winslow, Okafor/Amile.

Yes, your view on Matt is abundantly clear.

It's pretty simple: I think Matt's positive attributes on the court (when healthy) mesh exceptionally nicely with ball-dominant, high-usage players. I also think he is better at many of the things he is good at than Frank Jackson or Luke Kennard are (as in, as of right now, Matt is a better defender than either, a better communicator than either, a better roleplayer than either, a better and more experienced leader than either, not least by dint of his three years in the Duke system and the fact that he's older) in a way that adds value when he is on the court, whereas Frank and Luke make more sense, to me, in roles that maximize their ability to contribute offensively. You don't think any of those things are true, and you'd rather see him on the bench as much as possible. That's fine. We'll see how Coach K feels.

cato
04-06-2016, 05:50 PM
[Deleted post from wrong thread]

This is probably the most worthwhile post in this thread. I am banning myself from it now.

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 05:59 PM
[Deleted post from wrong thread]

If it is about minute distribution, it works on any thread. If it is not, it's probably tangential at best.

wilson
04-06-2016, 06:02 PM
If it is about minute distribution, it works on any thread. If it is not, it's probably tangential at best.Nah, I was gonna ask about potential transfers. That's cool, right?

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 06:08 PM
Nah, I was gonna ask about potential transfers. That's cool, right?

Sure, knock yourself out. All the cool kids are doing it.

wilson
04-06-2016, 06:13 PM
Sure, knock yourself out. All the cool kids are doing it.I think if I ask that question, I won't need to knock myself out.

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 06:15 PM
I think if I ask that question, I won't need to knock myself out.

Dodge
Dip
Dive
Duck
Dodge

devildeac
04-06-2016, 06:17 PM
Nah, I was gonna ask about potential transfers. That's cool, right?

Not any more:

http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/announcement.php?f=2

;)

devildeac
04-06-2016, 06:19 PM
Dodge
Dip
Dive
Duck
Dodge

Wrong thread. That'd be here:

http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?37793-unc-Athletics-Scandal-Next-Month-The-HAMMER!

gurufrisbee
04-06-2016, 06:26 PM
In 2014, our regular PG was Quinn Cook, who played nearly 30 mpg and had 4.4 apg with a 2.68 a/to ratio. Want to try again?



Well, you started by saying Grayson took Matt's minutes. Since Matt played a minute and a half more than his season average in that game and Jahlil played 9 minutes fewer, I'd argue Grayson took Jahlil's minutes (required due to foul trouble), regardless of the "best line up."

No, Cook SHOULD have been the regular PG but clearly he was in Coach K's dog house and Thorton kept getting to start there instead.

Yes, in the title game most of the second half, especially the big come back, was played with Cook, Tyus, and Allen all out there together. Not with Matt.

JNort
04-06-2016, 06:28 PM
Yes, your view on Matt is abundantly clear.

It's pretty simple: I think Matt's positive attributes on the court (when healthy) mesh exceptionally nicely with ball-dominant, high-usage players. I also think he is better at many of the things he is good at than Frank Jackson or Luke Kennard are (as in, as of right now, Matt is a better defender than either, a better communicator than either, a better roleplayer than either, a better and more experienced leader than either, not least by dint of his three years in the Duke system and the fact that he's older) in a way that adds value when he is on the court, whereas Frank and Luke make more sense, to me, in roles that maximize their ability to contribute offensively. You don't think any of those things are true, and you'd rather see him on the bench as much as possible. That's fine. We'll see how Coach K feels.

While I know you weren't quoting me or even suggesting I said anything I did want to point this out because I am on the side of "less Matt" and I think most of us are tired of reading thongs like this.

We beat this to death previously in the year and I don't want to bring it back again but that is not what we are indicating or pushing for for the most part. We just don't like when Matt breaks out of his role and tries to do more than what he should. We would like Matt between 15 to 22 mins a game playing the role of leader, spot up shooter and guard the opposing teams wing. You get defensive over Matt in this regard and I get defensive over Derryck. He won't be the last and he certainly wasn't the first guy we had these arguments over.

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 06:28 PM
Wrong thread!

Sorry, my bad.

Dodge: 32 mpg
Dip: 30 mpg
Dive: 27 mpg
Duck: 23 mpg
Dodge: okay, this is where the math gets tricky . . . .

GGLC
04-06-2016, 06:31 PM
While I know you weren't quoting me or even suggesting I said anything I did want to point this out because I am on the side of "less Matt" and I think most of us are tired of reading thongs like this.

We beat this to death previously in the year and I don't want to bring it back again but that is not what we are indicating or pushing for for the most part. We just don't like when Matt breaks out of his role and tries to do more than what he should. We would like Matt between 15 to 22 mins a game playing the role of leader, spot up shooter and guard the opposing teams wing. You get defensive over Matt in this regard and I get defensive over Derryck. He won't be the last and he certainly wasn't the first guy we had these arguments over.

gurufrisbee is absolutely NOT arguing that Matt should know his role when he's on the court. He's saying that Matt should see the court as little as possible. I suggest you read his posts.

I wasn't responding to your arguments; I was responding to his.

And if you think you're tired of it, imagine how I feel when people keep suggesting that a rising senior captain who has been a stellar defender and leader for the pendency of his career when healthy, and who has started consistently since he was a sophomore, is best left buried on the bench as the eighth or ninth man because we have some new shiny freshmen to play with.

davekay1971
04-06-2016, 06:32 PM
Sorry, my bad.

Dodge: 32 mpg

Dodge: okay, this is where the math gets tricky . . . .

I trust Coach K to handle this problem better than did Mark Gottfried...

OldPhiKap
04-06-2016, 06:34 PM
I trust Coach K to handle this problem better than did Mark Gottfried...

So, Cat Barber is transferring to Duke?!?

(All seriousness, I hope Cat comes back next year but will be shocked)

tieguy
04-06-2016, 07:09 PM
Surprised to see a lot of people talking about '99 here, rather than '98. '98 is the obviously better roster comparison, since the freshman class were, well, freshmen. :) Some data points:

Wojo and Langdon led with ~28 mpg - lower than I remember, but suggests that the 30mpg some have predicted in this thread won't happen.
Shane (and Elton, in the 21 games he played) were next at around 24 minutes. K was happier giving minutes to freshmen in the pre-OAD era than I remembered.
By the end of the season, even that super-deep team played basically only 7 guys. (Basically same story in '99.)
Overall, the top five guys played 62% of available minutes (exactly 4500 out of 7200). That would have put them in the 20th-40th range for *most* bench minutes used this year. For comparison, in the past five years that number has been 79% (6th lowest bench usage in the country), 75%, 71%, 76%, and 70%, and in the theoretically very deep '99 year it was also 70%.

So, yeah, we might go deeper than we have in recent years, but seems unlikely there will be that much change - by the end of the season (and likely even the middle) we'll be seeing 7 guys.

gurufrisbee
04-06-2016, 07:49 PM
gurufrisbee is absolutely NOT arguing that Matt should know his role when he's on the court. He's saying that Matt should see the court as little as possible. I suggest you read his posts.

I wasn't responding to your arguments; I was responding to his.

And if you think you're tired of it, imagine how I feel when people keep suggesting that a rising senior captain who has been a stellar defender and leader for the pendency of his career when healthy, and who has started consistently since he was a sophomore, is best left buried on the bench as the eighth or ninth man because we have some new shiny freshmen to play with.

That is absolutely not what what I have ever said or implied. I suggest you learn to read. Or at the very least, stop putting words in people's mouth that are inflammatory and incorrect.

Dukehky
04-06-2016, 11:24 PM
K will tailor the minute distribution to who earns minutes.

Kennard, Jones, Grayson, Jackson, Thornton would all get minutes. Bolden, Jefferson, Giles, Tatum will all get heavy minutes, Jeter will hopefully improve enough to see more time.

Giles will be worked into the rotation, I would not be surprised if he didn't start the season as the starter. Jefferson and Bolden or Jeter will start with Tatum Jones and Grayson. I see no way that K doesn't at least start the season with Matt as the starter. He is our defensive perimeter stopper and a senior leader, K values that. Frank is awesome, but I don't think he's good enough to come in and get the keys to the kingdom until K tells me that this is the case. By the end of the season I agree with other posters that he will obtain a more Nate James esque role to make way for Jackson in the starting line up provided Derryick doesn't make a huge jump (and he's still in Durham).

Giles will be starting by the end of the year. I think we will see a lot of shake ups, but I also think that K will give minutes to those who earn them, and with this roster, that is going to be a lot of people. Also, hopefully we will be beating the hell out of people enough that Jeter in particular will be able to see the court a little more.

Jeter is in kind of a precarious position. He is playing behind a 5th year senior who is an all acc caliber, acc dopy candidate in Jefferson, a probable franchise changing Center in Giles, and a possible one and done talent in Bolden, not to mention Tatum who can play heavy minutes at the four and is in my opinion the most offensively ready recruit that Duke has ever had. We are also in very good position to land Carter and Bamba, two lotto picks for 2017. I hope that a junior Jeter would have the ability and confidence to get significant minutes with that roster, but there are glaring gaps in the front court for a while.

Luke will be fine and I think that he will be more a spot up shooter this year and will have adjusted to the college game more and expect his shooting numbers to improve. Kid's gonna get minutes.

Next year's team looks just silly. It's going to be a really fun year to be a Duke basketball fan. We are going to be awesome regardless of Giles' health, but if he returns to be the player that he was pre-2nd ACL tear, we have a chance to be a truly dominant team. I'm looking forward to the process, and I hope that we just pressure the bejesus out of teams. I'm excited.

JNort
04-06-2016, 11:55 PM
gurufrisbee is absolutely NOT arguing that Matt should know his role when he's on the court. He's saying that Matt should see the court as little as possible. I suggest you read his posts.

I wasn't responding to your arguments; I was responding to his.

And if you think you're tired of it, imagine how I feel when people keep suggesting that a rising senior captain who has been a stellar defender and leader for the pendency of his career when healthy, and who has started consistently since he was a sophomore, is best left buried on the bench as the eighth or ninth man because we have some new shiny freshmen to play with.

I know you weren't, read my post.

Kedsy
04-07-2016, 12:01 AM
Matt Jones is not starting. He might be the 8th best player on the team next year.


Tyler Thornton was at best the 7th "best player" on the 2013-14 team, and yet he started 25 out of 35 games.


An indication of the poor status of our point guard play that season - that's all.


In 2014, our regular PG was Quinn Cook, who played nearly 30 mpg and had 4.4 apg with a 2.68 a/to ratio. Want to try again?


No, Cook SHOULD have been the regular PG but clearly he was in Coach K's dog house and Thorton kept getting to start there instead.

Ah, now we're making a different argument, aren't we? Although perhaps a bit inconsistent, because your last post would seem to suggest that Matt Jones could end up starting after all, if he follows in Tyler Thornton's footsteps. Fact is, in 2013-14 Quinn played almost 30 mpg and started 22 games while Tyler started 25, so (a) they started at least 12 games together; (b) Quinn played more minutes at PG than anybody else on that team; and (c) despite Tyler being (at best) the 7th most talented player on the roster, he started more than 70% of our games that season. Your argument that Matt Jones won't start because he "might be the 8th best player on the team" doesn't seem to be supported by Tyler Thornton's experience in 2014.

Also, it's ThorNton, not "Thorton."

jipops
04-07-2016, 12:04 AM
Thornton's strengths were his dribbling (but struggled a bit with that down the stretch last season) and his defense (which was borderline excellent).

He often seemed to play too fast and didn't think ahead about what he wanted to do next. He didn't ever seem to have a plan when he made a move, unless he was looking to score. Then he looked ok, despite mixed success at the rim (someone pointed out 52% at the rim). He took shots out of rhythm in the offense, often too early in the shot clock, which put his teammates at a disadvantage in transition defense.

Those are things that can definitely be improved with coaching, but I agree - he didn't seem to be a "true PG."

There is also the fact that he is a freshman. I thought he had a great year. Of all things it couldn't have been easy to step right in after the ultra-mature Tyus.

gurufrisbee
04-07-2016, 12:20 AM
Ah, now we're making a different argument, aren't we? Although perhaps a bit inconsistent, because your last post would seem to suggest that Matt Jones could end up starting after all, if he follows in Tyler Thornton's footsteps. Fact is, in 2013-14 Quinn played almost 30 mpg and started 22 games while Tyler started 25, so (a) they started at least 12 games together; (b) Quinn played more minutes at PG than anybody else on that team; and (c) despite Tyler being (at best) the 7th most talented player on the roster, he started more than 70% of our games that season. Your argument that Matt Jones won't start because he "might be the 8th best player on the team" doesn't seem to be supported by Tyler Thornton's experience in 2014.

Also, it's ThorNton, not "Thorton."

Well I wasn't making the argument - you kept taking this is different directions. But that's fine. In 13-14, Tyler started at PG, was not as good as Cook, and was probably the 7th best player on the team. However that really does not mean anything about Matt Jones or next year's team. Could someone on next year's team be in the Coach K doghouse and therefore not get to start and allow Jones to start instead? Sure, but I'm not counting on it. Could both Derrick and Jackson both be so poor at PG that Matt needs to be the primary ball handler? Sure, but I'm doubt that, too. But I'm not the one fishing for obscure comparisons. I'm looking at the actual players on next year's team - and I don't see any reason why Jones as possibly the 8th best player on the team warrants starting. But he also might grow 11 inches and become the most dominant center in the history of basketball, so anything is possible.

Kedsy
04-07-2016, 12:45 AM
Well I wasn't making the argument - you kept taking this is different directions. But that's fine. In 13-14, Tyler started at PG, was not as good as Cook, and was probably the 7th best player on the team. However that really does not mean anything about Matt Jones or next year's team. Could someone on next year's team be in the Coach K doghouse and therefore not get to start and allow Jones to start instead? Sure, but I'm not counting on it. Could both Derrick and Jackson both be so poor at PG that Matt needs to be the primary ball handler? Sure, but I'm doubt that, too. But I'm not the one fishing for obscure comparisons. I'm looking at the actual players on next year's team - and I don't see any reason why Jones as possibly the 8th best player on the team warrants starting. But he also might grow 11 inches and become the most dominant center in the history of basketball, so anything is possible.

Seems to me you're deliberately missing the point. The comparison isn't "obscure," and my "direction" has been pretty consistent. In 2013-14, Quinn Cook played 30 mpg, he wasn't in any doghouse. And nobody's saying Matt Jones "needs to be the primary ball handler." And since they started together at least 12 games, and Quinn played so many minutes at PG, Tyler Thornton wasn't actually playing PG most of the time in 2013-14.

The point is that a defensive-minded player who plays the right way can start and get good minutes under Coach K, even if fans like you don't think that player is very talented. It has happened before, and will happen again, and the likelihood is Matt Jones will either start or possibly be the 6th man next season, whether you think "Jones as possibly the 8th best player on the team warrants starting" or not.

gurufrisbee
04-07-2016, 01:32 AM
Seems to me you're deliberately missing the point. The comparison isn't "obscure," and my "direction" has been pretty consistent. In 2013-14, Quinn Cook played 30 mpg, he wasn't in any doghouse. And nobody's saying Matt Jones "needs to be the primary ball handler." And since they started together at least 12 games, and Quinn played so many minutes at PG, Tyler Thornton wasn't actually playing PG most of the time in 2013-14.

The point is that a defensive-minded player who plays the right way can start and get good minutes under Coach K, even if fans like you don't think that player is very talented. It has happened before, and will happen again, and the likelihood is Matt Jones will either start or possibly be the 6th man next season, whether you think "Jones as possibly the 8th best player on the team warrants starting" or not.

I got your point. It has nothing to do with this next season or the players or their positions or skill set so it's completely obscure to this discussion, but that's fine. Unfortunately, your reading skills are on par with GGLC - there is zero respect for putting words in someone else's mouth that they never said or implied. Matt being a starter or 6th man when he is the 8th best player - definitely an interesting theory about Coach K's beliefs in putting together the best team possible.

eddiehaskell
04-07-2016, 04:56 AM
Hmm, playing time might not be a problem if we're up 15-20+ and the subs are capable of maintaining or increasing the lead. Players wanting to go pro don't need crazy stats - just ~15-20 mpg to show NBA scouts what they're capable of. In some ways this may put less pressure on the freshmen - no need to worry about scoring 18 ppg. Reminds me of Kentucky last year with 4 lotto picks on the team.

flyingdutchdevil
04-07-2016, 04:59 AM
Hmm, playing time might not be a problem if we're up 15-20+ and the subs are capable of maintaining or increasing the lead. Players wanting to go pro don't need crazy stats - just ~15-20 mpg to show NBA scouts what they're capable of. In some ways this may put less pressure on the freshmen - no need to worry about scoring 18 ppg. Reminds me of Kentucky last year with 4 lotto picks on the team.

This is exactly what I'm thinking of as well. Next year - with a ridiculous Duke team and as ridiculous ACC (as this year, for instance) - I expect more players to play plenty of minutes towards the end of the game. I think that will "artificially" inflate minutes per game for non-core rotation members (ie likely to be players 8-10 in the rotation)

lotusland
04-07-2016, 06:52 AM
No matter the possible roster changes this month, I hope Matt will not serve much at all next season as the "not-really PG who brings the ball up court to initiate the offense by passing it to someone else."

I prefer some combo of the following to bring the ball into the frontcourt, depending: Thornton, Kennard, Allen, Jackson. In that order.

Allen, Jackson, and Kennard seem to be "classic" college wing/2s, but all are probably easily capable of being combo guards. I wouldn't begrudge Grayson being given solid minutes at PG/offense initiator, and wonder whether/assume that he has talked with Kyzyzewski about how he might add to his repertoire and increase his NBA prospects.

I do hope Kennard also gets lots of chances to use his handle, vision, and passing. He's not best used as little other than a spot-up 3-bomber. You'd think that he, Grayson, and Frank would all get into the lane enough to provide alley oops to Giles, Jefferson, Jeter, possible Bolden.

Haven't even mentioned Tatum yet. Amazing... Can K get all this O-talent to share the ball and the shots? I assume so, but you'd think Duke would have at least 3 guys on the floor at all times who in normal circumstances "need the ball."

It appears that next season will feature some abnormal circumstances, most of which might be abnormally promising.

Call me old fashioned but I don't think of Allen Jackson as Classic at all. Old Hag? Now that's classic.

bob blue devil
04-07-2016, 06:56 AM
I got your point. It has nothing to do with this next season or the players or their positions or skill set so it's completely obscure to this discussion, but that's fine. Unfortunately, your reading skills are on par with GGLC - there is zero respect for putting words in someone else's mouth that they never said or implied. Matt being a starter or 6th man when he is the 8th best player - definitely an interesting theory about Coach K's beliefs in putting together the best team possible.

friendly observation i thought i might share with you - people will care more about whether you respect their (or someone else's) argument if you spell our players names correctly. ;)

Saratoga2
04-07-2016, 07:14 AM
ESPN bottom line indicated Grayson has decided to return to Duke for his junior year. This is a decision based on his projection as maybe the 30th pick in the draft. So he would have risked a non guaranteed contract in the NBA versus a scholarship and possibly a team captain slot on a team likely to contend for the national title. It has been said that Grayson highly values his education so this is a great decision for both him and the team.

This decision removes one of the open questions for next year. Grayson represents our top scorer and a good defender with a decent handle and good defensive instincts. Of course this then indications one of the other open questions becomes clarified. If we continue to recruit Bolden, then some transfer from the program seems inevitable.

Saratoga2
04-07-2016, 07:35 AM
ESPN bottom line indicated Grayson has decided to return to Duke for his junior year. This is a decision based on his projection as maybe the 30th pick in the draft. So he would have risked a non guaranteed contract in the NBA versus a scholarship and possibly a team captain slot on a team likely to contend for the national title. It has been said that Grayson highly values his education so this is a great decision for both him and the team.

This decision removes one of the open questions for next year. Grayson represents our top scorer and a good defender with a decent handle and good defensive instincts. Of course this then indications one of the other open questions becomes clarified. If we continue to recruit Bolden, then some transfer from the program seems inevitable.

Sorry, I didn't see the separate thread for Grayson. This entry best fits under his thread.

left_hook_lacey
04-07-2016, 07:48 AM
I know we arn't doing a mins discussion yet but...

Grayson ~30
Tatum ~27
Amile ~25
Derryck ~24
Luke ~24
Giles ~23
Matt ~23
Jackson ~14
Chase ~10

and no this isn't my final guess. Just a quick off the top

Why is everyone leaving Thornton out of the lineup? I thought he looked very polished the second half of the season. We were a better team when he was on the floor I felt like.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-07-2016, 08:04 AM
Why is everyone leaving Thornton out of the lineup? I thought he looked very polished the second half of the season. We were a better team when he was on the floor I felt like.

Can't speak to your specific point, but the post you quoted has him with 24 minutes.

Spanarkel
04-07-2016, 08:31 AM
Not sure what it is about DT's name, but even GoDuke.com has it (more than) misspelled as "Derryck THOMPSON" on its Duke Basketball Database, when you select "player database"(rather than season stats)and see the entire '15-'16 Duke roster displayed. Derryck's last name IS properly spelled on the site as Thornton when you go to his individual page with his '15-'16 stats. Love the GoDuke.com site otherwise.

BigZ
04-07-2016, 08:33 AM
I wouldn't be surprised at all if DeLauier gets more PT than Jeter.

CDu
04-07-2016, 08:37 AM
I wouldn't be surprised at all if DeLauier gets more PT than Jeter.

I would be quite surprised by this, since (a) Jeter was more highly rated out of high school, (b) Jeter has a year of college experience over DeLaurier, and (c) Jeter plays a position of greater need than DeLaurier (we have 3 seemingly better PF options next year, but we are somewhat short on Cs).

Not that it isn't possible. Stranger things have happened I guess. But it seems fairly unlikely to me. DeLaurier seems like a guy who will make his impact as a sophomore once Jefferson finishes and (presumably) Tatum and Giles go pro.

whereinthehellami
04-07-2016, 08:38 AM
Without a true point guard for next year, we are going to see a lot of ISO plays. Not necessarily my favorite style of play but i think that is where our strengths are. I see Allen and Tatum being the initiator's in the offense with the others feeding off their ISO. Should be a fair amount of dump-offs to Jefferson and Giles for easy dunks and garbage buckets. I love the hands that Jefferson and Giles have for those kinds of plays. No offense to Plumlee but it took a lot of effort for him to catch, gather, and make a move.

As far as teams pressing us, I like that all 5 starters can handle the ball. Even Jefferson was bringing the ball up some this past year before he got injured. And Giles will be able to do the same. It is hard to press a team that has 5 guys that can handle the ball.

gumbomoop
04-07-2016, 08:54 AM
Grayson's return, combined with the return of other very good players, the excellent incoming guys, and the possible addition of one more promising big man, led me earlier in this thread to raise the issue of a potential difficulty of having so much talent:


Can K get all this O-talent to share the ball and the shots? I assume so, but you'd think Duke would have at least 3 guys on the floor at all times who in normal circumstances "need the ball."

My concern is probably better expressed in this post from the Greyson Returns thread:


Now especially with Grayson coming back, my main question about this team is going to be what it was at the start of the 14-15 season. How well are the upperclassmen going to mesh with such talented freshmen? Will there be cohesiveness and chemistry and will everyone check their egos at the door?

The response of another poster, brlftz, to my and implicitly to mr. synellinden's question makes an important point:


I wonder if K's experience with the Olympic team has given him some practice managing what will be an amazingly deep and talented college team. In particular, we have so many scorers and can run just about any style of offense you want, so the challenge is deciding between many great options and getting people to buy in once a decision is made.

Anyone care to expand on brlftz's observation about Krzyzewski's approach to the talent and ego issues with the Olympic team and its relevance to next season's Duke team?

freshmanjs
04-07-2016, 08:57 AM
Without a true point guard for next year,

What is a true point guard?

Channing
04-07-2016, 09:01 AM
The roster is still obviously in flux. if Bolden comes, it will undoubtedly squeeze time from all of the guys on the lower end. Many years we come into a season thinking we have tremendous depth, and then there are only 7/8 guys who get meaningful minutes. For instance, I am not convinced that Grayson went into some major fund between Presbyterian and WF in 2014/2015, yet he was buried on the bench until Rasheed exited the program. My thoughts on some players and available minutes below:

1. Matt: I was as critical of Matt as anyone down the stretch. I think he was asked to play a roll that doesn't suit him and, though he gave it his best shot, his shortcomings were undeniable as the season wound down. If that was due to to the lingering injury, I look forward to him healing up and coming back stronger. But, my sense is that Matt's best role is at ~15 mpg as a spot up shooter and lock-down off-ball defender. Given his shortcomings in the quickness category, I think he is best suited to come into a game, bust his rump, and then go back out. A player who comes to mind as a comp for Matt is Paulus, who played heavy minutes So/Jr seasons out of necessity, but only played ~16 mpg his senior year because the talent around him got so much better.

2. Chase: I am higher on Chase than a lot of people. I think the game clearly sped by too fast for him last season. But, just take a look down the road ... does anyone remember the disaster that was Brice Johnson or Isaiah Hicks as freshman? I thought Chase displayed a true center's ability to post up and showed some good touch around the rim. As he gets stronger and continues to grow into his body, and gains more confidence, I think he can become a dominant force in the middle.

3. Derryck: Down the stretch DT was easily our best on the ball defender. Again, though, unless he can really improve on his outside jump shot, I'm not sure there are many minutes for him with the loaded backcourt of Grayson, Luke, Frank, and Matt. Perhaps Matt slides to the 3 for a few minutes, and that opens some minutes for DT, but (unless Frank Jackson plays the role of Grayson as a freshman and rides the pine) there just doesn't appear to be much room for him to make an impact.

4. Luke: I expect Luke to blow it out of the water next year. I think he is going to make it very difficult to sit him more than 10 (maybe 15) minutes a game.

As a final thought, there are going to be a lot of ball dominant players on the team next year. Though a very willing passer, Grayson is ball dominant, Luke can be ball dominant, and (though I don't know for sure) I assume HG and JT are ball dominant. Amile is a great addition to that group because he showed this year and last year that he can excel without requiring many touches. Perhaps that is where Matt can carve out playing time, is being a part of that rotation by not requiring a ton of shots.

MChambers
04-07-2016, 10:15 AM
What is a true point guard?
I'll take Jon Scheyer. Do I win?

kAzE
04-07-2016, 10:24 AM
The roster is still obviously in flux. if Bolden comes, it will undoubtedly squeeze time from all of the guys on the lower end. Many years we come into a season thinking we have tremendous depth, and then there are only 7/8 guys who get meaningful minutes. For instance, I am not convinced that Grayson went into some major fund between Presbyterian and WF in 2014/2015, yet he was buried on the bench until Rasheed exited the program. My thoughts on some players and available minutes below:

1. Matt: I was as critical of Matt as anyone down the stretch. I think he was asked to play a roll that doesn't suit him and, though he gave it his best shot, his shortcomings were undeniable as the season wound down. If that was due to to the lingering injury, I look forward to him healing up and coming back stronger. But, my sense is that Matt's best role is at ~15 mpg as a spot up shooter and lock-down off-ball defender. Given his shortcomings in the quickness category, I think he is best suited to come into a game, bust his rump, and then go back out. A player who comes to mind as a comp for Matt is Paulus, who played heavy minutes So/Jr seasons out of necessity, but only played ~16 mpg his senior year because the talent around him got so much better.

2. Chase: I am higher on Chase than a lot of people. I think the game clearly sped by too fast for him last season. But, just take a look down the road ... does anyone remember the disaster that was Brice Johnson or Isaiah Hicks as freshman? I thought Chase displayed a true center's ability to post up and showed some good touch around the rim. As he gets stronger and continues to grow into his body, and gains more confidence, I think he can become a dominant force in the middle.

3. Derryck: Down the stretch DT was easily our best on the ball defender. Again, though, unless he can really improve on his outside jump shot, I'm not sure there are many minutes for him with the loaded backcourt of Grayson, Luke, Frank, and Matt. Perhaps Matt slides to the 3 for a few minutes, and that opens some minutes for DT, but (unless Frank Jackson plays the role of Grayson as a freshman and rides the pine) there just doesn't appear to be much room for him to make an impact.

4. Luke: I expect Luke to blow it out of the water next year. I think he is going to make it very difficult to sit him more than 10 (maybe 15) minutes a game.

As a final thought, there are going to be a lot of ball dominant players on the team next year. Though a very willing passer, Grayson is ball dominant, Luke can be ball dominant, and (though I don't know for sure) I assume HG and JT are ball dominant. Amile is a great addition to that group because he showed this year and last year that he can excel without requiring many touches. Perhaps that is where Matt can carve out playing time, is being a part of that rotation by not requiring a ton of shots.

I mostly agree with your post, but I think you're being a little too harsh on Matt. He did play poorly after the first UNC game (when he was injured), but before that game, he was actually quite good. He'll never be a good finisher inside, but he does all the little things that you need your leader and glue guys to do and hits the spot up jumper really consistently. Before the first UNC game you could make a valid argument that he was the 3rd most valuable player on the team to that point. My only issue with him is that he's a bit of a ball stopper. His triple threat is not as "threatening" because he's just not effective off the dribble. Keep moving the ball, Matt!

So assuming he comes back healthy, I suspect Matt will play his usual allotment of 25-30 minutes a game, because he's Coach K's guy, and he's the best leader on the team. That's really valuable, it's just hard to quantify in a box score.

GGLC
04-07-2016, 10:30 AM
I got your point. It has nothing to do with this next season or the players or their positions or skill set so it's completely obscure to this discussion, but that's fine. Unfortunately, your reading skills are on par with GGLC - there is zero respect for putting words in someone else's mouth that they never said or implied. Matt being a starter or 6th man when he is the 8th best player - definitely an interesting theory about Coach K's beliefs in putting together the best team possible.

So if Coach K decides that Matt is one of the starters next year, will that cause you to revise your opinion about Matt being the 8th best player on the team? After all, Coach K believes in putting together the best team possible.

(Emphasis on "team," by the way.)

GGLC
04-07-2016, 10:35 AM
And by the way, gurufrisbee:

1) You say that the best five players should be on the court as much as possible.

2) You say that Matt is the 8th best player on the team.

3) Why do I need to "learn to read" when I conclude from that that you think Matt should be on the court as little as possible?

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 10:39 AM
1. Matt: I was as critical of Matt as anyone down the stretch. I think he was asked to play a roll that doesn't suit him and, though he gave it his best shot, his shortcomings were undeniable as the season wound down. If that was due to to the lingering injury, I look forward to him healing up and coming back stronger. But, my sense is that Matt's best role is at ~15 mpg as a spot up shooter and lock-down off-ball defender. Given his shortcomings in the quickness category, I think he is best suited to come into a game, bust his rump, and then go back out. A player who comes to mind as a comp for Matt is Paulus, who played heavy minutes So/Jr seasons out of necessity, but only played ~16 mpg his senior year because the talent around him got so much better.


Completely disagree with your assessment of Matt.

1. Matt's shortcomings were obviously due to his lingering ankle injury, which he played through like a warrior because the team needed him to. You ever sprain an ankle, see it swell as much as Matt's did and then return just a few days later to playing ball again?

2. Matt isn't just an "off-ball" defender. He's also a good on-ball defender. And there's no way he averages 15 mpg next season unless he's injured or in constant foul trouble. Matt will be seeing 20-30 mpg.

3. Comparing Matt to Greg Paulus, who was at best an average defender, is silly. Could Paulus guard positions 1-4? And Matt Jones didn't play heavy minutes out of "necessity." Unless you mean "by necessity" as "our best defender and possibly best spot up shooter who doesn't need the ball to be successful."

OldPhiKap
04-07-2016, 10:45 AM
Matt was a leader all year, and an excellent contributor until his injury. Even then, he fought hard and represented us well.

My guess is that Matt is a starter until someone beats him out of that position. If anyone can.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
04-07-2016, 10:50 AM
Matt was a leader all year, and an excellent contributor until his injury. Even then, he fought hard and represented us well.

My guess is that Matt is a starter until someone beats him out of that position. If anyone can.

One of my favorite things looking forward to next year is the idea of LEADERSHIP coming from Junior Grayson, Senior Matt, and Super-Senior Amile. I know we have lots of young talent coming on board, but it ought to balance nicely with the wise old owls.

OldPhiKap
04-07-2016, 10:53 AM
One of my favorite things looking forward to next year is the idea of LEADERSHIP coming from Junior Grayson, Senior Matt, and Super-Senior Amile. I know we have lots of young talent coming on board, but it ought to balance nicely with the wise old owls.

Yup. Quinn and four freshman worked well; this should be nice.

(And like the "super-senior" title, I hope that sticks)

Saratoga2
04-07-2016, 10:57 AM
The roster is still obviously in flux. if Bolden comes, it will undoubtedly squeeze time from all of the guys on the lower end. Many years we come into a season thinking we have tremendous depth, and then there are only 7/8 guys who get meaningful minutes. For instance, I am not convinced that Grayson went into some major fund between Presbyterian and WF in 2014/2015, yet he was buried on the bench until Rasheed exited the program. My thoughts on some players and available minutes below:

1. Matt: I was as critical of Matt as anyone down the stretch. I think he was asked to play a roll that doesn't suit him and, though he gave it his best shot, his shortcomings were undeniable as the season wound down. If that was due to to the lingering injury, I look forward to him healing up and coming back stronger. But, my sense is that Matt's best role is at ~15 mpg as a spot up shooter and lock-down off-ball defender. Given his shortcomings in the quickness category, I think he is best suited to come into a game, bust his rump, and then go back out. A player who comes to mind as a comp for Matt is Paulus, who played heavy minutes So/Jr seasons out of necessity, but only played ~16 mpg his senior year because the talent around him got so much better.

2. Chase: I am higher on Chase than a lot of people. I think the game clearly sped by too fast for him last season. But, just take a look down the road ... does anyone remember the disaster that was Brice Johnson or Isaiah Hicks as freshman? I thought Chase displayed a true center's ability to post up and showed some good touch around the rim. As he gets stronger and continues to grow into his body, and gains more confidence, I think he can become a dominant force in the middle.

3. Derryck: Down the stretch DT was easily our best on the ball defender. Again, though, unless he can really improve on his outside jump shot, I'm not sure there are many minutes for him with the loaded backcourt of Grayson, Luke, Frank, and Matt. Perhaps Matt slides to the 3 for a few minutes, and that opens some minutes for DT, but (unless Frank Jackson plays the role of Grayson as a freshman and rides the pine) there just doesn't appear to be much room for him to make an impact.

4. Luke: I expect Luke to blow it out of the water next year. I think he is going to make it very difficult to sit him more than 10 (maybe 15) minutes a game.

As a final thought, there are going to be a lot of ball dominant players on the team next year. Though a very willing passer, Grayson is ball dominant, Luke can be ball dominant, and (though I don't know for sure) I assume HG and JT are ball dominant. Amile is a great addition to that group because he showed this year and last year that he can excel without requiring many touches. Perhaps that is where Matt can carve out playing time, is being a part of that rotation by not requiring a ton of shots.

I largely agree with your player assessment but find it hard to believe that Grayson, Amile, Harry and Jayson won't be starters for the majority of the season. The 5th starter is a U pick him approach although Derryck wouldn't need to be a big scorer with 4 offensive threats on the floor with him. That team would include 3 experienced players with 2 immensely talented freshmen.

There is such an abundance of riches, that we could field a complete second team that likely would be competitive in the ACC (provided Bolden comes). That would include a front court of Bolden and Jeter with a backcourt of Jackson, Kennard and Jones. Either Jones or Kennard could play the 3.

Saying that, there still would be White and DeLaurier as backups. This will be a crazy year with starters and subs galore. Good luck to coach K finding the right mix of players going forward. With quite a few OAD's possible and at least two upperclassmen leaving, it will be important to develop some of the other players when we are blowing other teams out.

JPtheGame
04-07-2016, 11:09 AM
Matt was a leader all year, and an excellent contributor until his injury. Even then, he fought hard and represented us well.

My guess is that Matt is a starter until someone beats him out of that position. If anyone can.

He will have to start at pg bc he's not starting over Grayson or Jayson. He has some scheyer-like qualities and frank is an explosive athletic talent but has shown that he will turn it over so pg for Matt is certainly possible.

GGLC
04-07-2016, 11:13 AM
He will have to start at pg bc he's not starting over Grayson or Jayson. He has some scheyer-like qualities and frank is an explosive athletic talent but has shown that he will turn it over so pg for Matt is certainly possible.

Matt is not going to be the primary ballhandler next year.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 11:20 AM
He will have to start at pg bc he's not starting over Grayson or Jayson. He has some scheyer-like qualities and frank is an explosive athletic talent but has shown that he will turn it over so pg for Matt is certainly possible.

Assists, turnovers per game:

Player G MP AST TOV
Grayson Allen 36 36.6 3.5 2
Brandon Ingram 36 34.6 2 2
Luke Kennard 36 26.7 1.5 0.8
Amile Jefferson 9 30.3 1.4 1.7
Matt Jones 35 31.8 2.3 1.1
Marshall Plumlee 36 30.5 1.1 1.1
Derryck Thornton 36 26 2.5 1.6
Chase Jeter 32 7.9 0.1 0.6
Antonio Vrankovic 5 2.8 0 0.6
Sean Obi 10 2.7 0 0.2
Brennan Besser 1 1 0 0
Nick Pagliuca 10 1 0 0.1

Turnover %:

Player G MP TOV%
Brennan Besser 1 1 0
Luke Kennard 36 961 6.8
Grayson Allen 36 1317 10.2
Matt Jones 35 1113 10.6
Brandon Ingram 36 1246 11.3
Marshall Plumlee 36 1099 14.7
Amile Jefferson 9 273 16.1
Derryck Thornton 36 935 17.8
Chase Jeter 32 254 25.5
Sean Obi 10 27 29.2
Nick Pagliuca 10 10 50
Antonio Vrankovic 5 14 60


"Shown he will turn it over" but had more assists and fewer turnovers than Brandon Ingram. Had fewer turnovers than the "true PG" Derryck Thornton with nearly the same number of assists.

3rd lowest turnover % of players who played more than 30 games.

Sometimes you have to lay off the eye test.

GGLC
04-07-2016, 11:22 AM
Assists, turnovers per game:

Player G MP AST TOV
Grayson Allen 36 36.6 3.5 2
Brandon Ingram 36 34.6 2 2
Luke Kennard 36 26.7 1.5 0.8
Amile Jefferson 9 30.3 1.4 1.7
Matt Jones 35 31.8 2.3 1.1
Marshall Plumlee 36 30.5 1.1 1.1
Derryck Thornton 36 26 2.5 1.6
Chase Jeter 32 7.9 0.1 0.6
Antonio Vrankovic 5 2.8 0 0.6
Sean Obi 10 2.7 0 0.2
Brennan Besser 1 1 0 0
Nick Pagliuca 10 1 0 0.1

Turnover %:

Player G MP TOV%
Brennan Besser 1 1 0
Luke Kennard 36 961 6.8
Grayson Allen 36 1317 10.2
Matt Jones 35 1113 10.6
Brandon Ingram 36 1246 11.3
Marshall Plumlee 36 1099 14.7
Amile Jefferson 9 273 16.1
Derryck Thornton 36 935 17.8
Chase Jeter 32 254 25.5
Sean Obi 10 27 29.2
Nick Pagliuca 10 10 50
Antonio Vrankovic 5 14 60


"Shown he will turn it over" but had more assists and fewer turnovers than Brandon Ingram. Had fewer turnovers than the "true PG" Derryck Thornton with nearly the same number of assists.

3rd lowest turnover % of players who played more than 30 games.

Sometimes you have to lay off the eye test.

I think he was talking about Jackson. :)

JPtheGame
04-07-2016, 11:26 AM
Assists, turnovers per game:

Player G MP AST TOV
Grayson Allen 36 36.6 3.5 2
Brandon Ingram 36 34.6 2 2
Luke Kennard 36 26.7 1.5 0.8
Amile Jefferson 9 30.3 1.4 1.7
Matt Jones 35 31.8 2.3 1.1
Marshall Plumlee 36 30.5 1.1 1.1
Derryck Thornton 36 26 2.5 1.6
Chase Jeter 32 7.9 0.1 0.6
Antonio Vrankovic 5 2.8 0 0.6
Sean Obi 10 2.7 0 0.2
Brennan Besser 1 1 0 0
Nick Pagliuca 10 1 0 0.1

Turnover %:

Player G MP TOV%
Brennan Besser 1 1 0
Luke Kennard 36 961 6.8
Grayson Allen 36 1317 10.2
Matt Jones 35 1113 10.6
Brandon Ingram 36 1246 11.3
Marshall Plumlee 36 1099 14.7
Amile Jefferson 9 273 16.1
Derryck Thornton 36 935 17.8
Chase Jeter 32 254 25.5
Sean Obi 10 27 29.2
Nick Pagliuca 10 10 50
Antonio Vrankovic 5 14 60


"Shown he will turn it over" but had more assists and fewer turnovers than Brandon Ingram. Had fewer turnovers than the "true PG" Derryck Thornton with nearly the same number of assists.

3rd lowest turnover % of players who played more than 30 games.

Sometimes you have to lay off the eye test.

You may want to get an eye test (very friendly jab) because if you read what I wrote I said frank (Jackson) is uber athletic but has shown that he will turn it over. I said Matt was like scheyer as a reference to the fact that he takes care of the ball.

Neat stats though.

JPtheGame
04-07-2016, 11:27 AM
Matt is not going to be the primary ballhandler next year.

Maybe not. Who do you think will?

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 11:27 AM
I think he was talking about Jackson. :)

Ah you're right about Jackson re: turnovers. I think I've just gone on auto pilot defending Matt. :cool:

GGLC
04-07-2016, 11:29 AM
Maybe not. Who do you think will?

That's the question. I'd guess Grayson and Tatum.

Dukehky
04-07-2016, 11:31 AM
Ah you're right about Jackson re: turnovers. I think I've just gone on auto pilot defending Matt. :cool:

I'm not going to argue that he turns the ball over, because he doesn't, but if you're going to argue that the offense ran smoothly with Matt bringing the ball up after Amile went out, then i would disagree vehemently and not care what stats you put up. I know what I saw, and what I saw was that I know I don't want Matt initiating the offense. Nor should anyone else on this board.

Channing
04-07-2016, 11:36 AM
The point I was making was that it always seems like Coach K keeps his rotation at 7/8 players, regardless of the depth available. I think we all agree that the following players will certainly be part of the regular rotation:

1. Grayson
2. Jayson
3. Harry
4. Amile
5. Luke

That leaves 2/3 spots for the following:

6. Derryck
7. Matt
8. Frank
9. Chase
10. Other

My (pure) guess is that we see one regular sub who is a perimeter player and one who is more of a post/inside player. Chase is the most likely candidate for post/inside sub** and that leaves Derryck, Matt, and Frank on the perimeter. As I mentioned, it is quite possible that Frank isn't ready and gets the bench. We often over-expect from freshman before they hit campus (though our last recruit rated in the 10-15 space with an NBA ready body was definitely ready). Derryck is the closest thing we have to a point guard and Matt is our crafty veteran. I hope Matt's decrease in productivity was largely due to the ankle, and if it was and he comes back firing on all cylinders, great. I was just prognosticating my expectations. Also, in hindsight I referred to Matt as an elite off-ball defender unfairly as I was recalling him guarding pgs who were, by and large much quicker than him.

**This obviously becomes even more complicated if Bolden joins the crew.

GGLC
04-07-2016, 11:38 AM
I'm not going to argue that he turns the ball over, because he doesn't, but if you're going to argue that the offense ran smoothly with Matt bringing the ball up after Amile went out, then i would disagree vehemently and not care what stats you put up. I know what I saw, and what I saw was that I know I don't want Matt initiating the offense. Nor should anyone else on this board.

As far as I know, literally no one, not even the biggest Matt fans, have ever said that they think Matt bringing the ball up and initiating the offense should be the status quo. So this is a straw man.

dukebluesincebirth
04-07-2016, 11:43 AM
Just "rosterbating" (borrowed term from DBR) on a potential "big lineup." Imagine this five:
PG-Grayson
SG- Tatum
SF-Giles
PF- Amile
C- Bolden
Think we could get a rebound?

CDu
04-07-2016, 11:47 AM
Just "rosterbating" (borrowed term from DBR) on a potential "big lineup." Imagine this five:
PG-Grayson
SG- Tatum
SF-Giles
PF- Amile
C- Bolden
Think we could get a rebound?

I don't think Tatum will play a minute of SG this year. He will play SF and PF (mostly SF). Also, Giles won't play a minute of SF.

That team might get a ton of rebounds but would be really slow and have terrible floor spacing on offense.

Doria
04-07-2016, 11:56 AM
I don't think Tatum will play a minute of SG this year. He will play SF and PF (mostly SF). Also, Giles won't play a minute of SF.

That team might get a ton of rebounds but would be really slow and have terrible floor spacing on offense.

So basically, a Carolina team? I joke, I joke.

Those stats were interesting, though. I could've sworn Kennard had more TO's as adjusted with minutes. (I love Luke, so this is not to tag on him; just was pleasantly surprised that his ball handling was quite that good.)

Dukehky
04-07-2016, 12:08 PM
As far as I know, literally no one, not even the biggest Matt fans, have ever said that they think Matt bringing the ball up and initiating the offense should be the status quo. So this is a straw man.

Well that's just like, your opinion, man.

Jackson
04-07-2016, 12:09 PM
Posted this in another thread that is about to be buried in the "Grayson is back!" tsunami...

I think this next year will look a lot like '99. With so much talent we'll go deeper in routine situations. When it gets serious, though, I see K sticking with experience and toughness beyond what fans might expect.

My take, assuming Bolden comes, Allen stays, and that Bolden earns more time than Jeter:

Pre- through early-season. Yay, everyone plays!


Perimeter
Minutes
Swing
Minutes
Interior
Minutes


Allen
28
Tatum
28
Bolden
20


Jackson
20


Jeter
12


Kennard
20


Giles
28


Jones
20


Jefferson
24



Stuff's getting real, conference play:


Perimeter
Minutes
Swing
Minutes
Interior
Minutes


Allen
32
Tatum
32
Bolden
12


Jackson
12


Jeter
6


Kennard
22


Giles
32


Jones
20


Jefferson
32



Oh crap, win or die!


Perimeter
Minutes
Swing
Minutes
Interior
Minutes


Allen
36
Tatum
36
Bolden
4


Jackson
4


Giles
36


Kennard
20


Jefferson
36


Jones
28







I like the chart. Would like to see the minutes with Jones and Kennard switched though. If Bolden comes, would think he'd get more minutes.

G man
04-07-2016, 12:16 PM
You can put me into the camp that thinks our ceiling is highest with DT running the point. He just needs to mature and learn to read the flow of the game a little better. DT looked really young with decision making last year. His skills are there though, he has the twitch and ball handling skills to be dangerous. I hope he grows because I think he gives us the best chance at a Natty.

JPtheGame
04-07-2016, 12:37 PM
You can put me into the camp that thinks our ceiling is highest with DT running the point. He just needs to mature and learn to read the flow of the game a little better. DT looked really young with decision making last year. His skills are there though, he has the twitch and ball handling skills to be dangerous. I hope he grows because I think he gives us the best chance at a Natty.

I wouldn't invest in that position. Whatever the roster looks like, I think DT is a few seasons away from being the guy you can just hand the keys to. I believe he has some developing to do both above and below the neck. That's not a knock. Most players aren't tyus jones and DT definitely has talent.

ChillinDuke
04-07-2016, 01:20 PM
Yes we certainly will have to disagree. I didn't see more than 7 pgs in all of college basketball last year who I thought was better. Only K and Derryck missing the early stuff from his reclassification was holding him back this past season. With a full workout before the season this year and hopefully K letting him play more we see his talent come to bear

How much college basketball did you see? Was Derryck Thornton even the 7th best PG in his own conference?

I love DT's ceiling for sure, but he had an up and down freshman campaign. He simply was not a "top 7" college PG.

- Chillin

ETA: Depending on how you define PG, I'd list Angel Rodriguez, Joel Berry, London Perrantes, Cat Barber, Quentin Snider, Demetrius Jackson, and Silent G as better "point guards" in the ACC. Taking out the fringe guys, I'd say the first 5 I listed are safely in the PG category.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 01:25 PM
I'm not going to argue that he turns the ball over, because he doesn't, but if you're going to argue that the offense ran smoothly with Matt bringing the ball up after Amile went out, then i would disagree vehemently and not care what stats you put up. I know what I saw, and what I saw was that I know I don't want Matt initiating the offense. Nor should anyone else on this board.

I don't see where in my defense of Matt where I made that statement.

Matt's job was to bring the ball up and hand it off to Grayson or Ingram to initiate the offense. That was it. And teams learned that all they had to do was press Duke to get them to falter a bit when Matt was bringing it up.

But despite that, Duke still had the #7 overall offense and Matt didn't really turn the ball over much at all.

Kedsy
04-07-2016, 01:31 PM
Matt being a starter or 6th man when he is the 8th best player - definitely an interesting theory about Coach K's beliefs in putting together the best team possible.

You rank Matt Jones as the 8th best player on next year's team, so you think him starting or being the 6th man is impossible?

Where did you rank Matt this past season, especially before Amile got hurt? Yet he started every game he played. Where did you rank Matt on last season's team, while he started our last 13 games including the championship game?

I've already mentioned Tyler Thornton in 2013-14, who started 25 of 35 games. Where did you rank him? Or Lance Thomas in 2009-10 (started 39 of 40 games)? Or Greg Paulus in 2007-08 (33 of 34 games)? Or Casey Sanders in 2002-03 (21 of 33 games)? Or, best yet, Wojo in 1997-98 (started all 36 games)? I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, too.

So I don't think I'm conjuring an "interesting theory." I'm simply making a historical observation.

brlftz
04-07-2016, 01:34 PM
I like the chart. Would like to see the minutes with Jones and Kennard switched though. If Bolden comes, would think he'd get more minutes.

I could be talked into either of those. Kennard has a much higher ceiling than Jones. If his shot gets consistent he'll be lethal. WRT Bolden, I don't expect him to be better than Amile, but it's possible.

The other thing I could be talked into is Jackson taking minutes from Jones. Really, I think Jones is the #1 uncertainty given any of the possible personnel scenarios. I'm assuming the team needs his toughness and D on the floor more than they need another scorer, but that will take games to figure out.

kAzE
04-07-2016, 01:47 PM
I could be talked into either of those. Kennard has a much higher ceiling than Jones. If his shot gets consistent he'll be lethal. WRT Bolden, I don't expect him to be better than Amile, but it's possible.

The other thing I could be talked into is Jackson taking minutes from Jones. Really, I think Jones is the #1 uncertainty given any of the possible personnel scenarios. I'm assuming the team needs his toughness and D on the floor more than they need another scorer, but that will take games to figure out.

Matt Jones will play 25+ minutes a game, and I say that with 99% confidence. He's FAR from the #1 uncertainty. His pattern of usage since late in his sophomore year is evidence enough of his value to the team and Coach K's trust in him. We've seen 3 years of Matt in a Duke uniform, how is it possible that he's "uncertain"? By default, every single incoming freshman is more "uncertain." We have no idea how their skills will translate to the college game.

And for the record, I'd consider Matt and Luke equals for the 2016-17 season. Luke is better offensively, and Matt is better defensively. Considering how much offensive talent we have, Matt should play more minutes.

cato
04-07-2016, 01:58 PM
And for the record, I'd consider Matt and Luke equals for the 2016-17 season. Luke is better offensively, and Matt is better defensively. Considering how much offensive talent we have, Matt should play more minutes.

Largely agree with this, except that Matt has proven to be a much better 3P shooter than Luke:

2015-2016:

Jones: 41.5% on 183 attempts
Kennard: 32.0% on 172 attempts

If Jones keeps that percentage up, he may actually be a better fit for the offense.

As for Luke, once we hit the winter, I did not think it likely he would turn around his woes from deep during the season, and he did not.

Luckily, the season is behind us. I fully anticipate that he will greatly improve his percentage from 3 next year, but until we see something change on the court, Luke is what he is: a very valuable scorer who shoot almost 89% from the line, but cannot consistently hit the 3.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 02:00 PM
Largely agree with this, except that Matt has proven to be a much better 3P shooter than Luke:

2015-2016:

Jones: 41.5% on 183 attempts
Kennard: 32.0% on 172 attempts

If Jones keeps that percentage up, he may actually be a better fit for the offense.

As for Luke, once we hit the winter, I did not think it likely he would turn around his woes from deep during the season, and he did not.

Luckily, the season is behind us. I fully anticipate that he will greatly improve his percentage from 3 next year, but until we see something change on the court, Luke is what he is: a very valuable scorer who shoot almost 89% from the line, but cannot consistently hit the 3.

I think Luke's best place right now is as an offensive spark off the bench. Luke's offensive value is in his overall skill set. Hopefully his shot comes around similar to Matt's did from freshman to sophomore year.

Channing
04-07-2016, 02:04 PM
I like the chart. Would like to see the minutes with Jones and Kennard switched though. If Bolden comes, would think he'd get more minutes.

Does the chart presume no DT on the team?

kAzE
04-07-2016, 02:05 PM
Largely agree with this, except that Matt has proven to be a much better 3P shooter than Luke:

2015-2016:

Jones: 41.5% on 183 attempts
Kennard: 32.0% on 172 attempts

If Jones keeps that percentage up, he may actually be a better fit for the offense.

As for Luke, once we hit the winter, I did not think it likely he would turn around his woes from deep during the season, and he did not.

Luckily, the season is behind us. I fully anticipate that he will greatly improve his percentage from 3 next year, but until we see something change on the court, Luke is what he is: a very valuable scorer who shoot almost 89% from the line, but cannot consistently hit the 3.

You're right, but I'm with you in thinking Luke's bad shooting this year was more of an anomaly than the norm. But Luke is probably still the better fit offensively, he's just much more capable of making plays on offense. Luke had a better overall shooting percentage from the field and is clearly a much better ball handler and passer than Matt. Luke's ability to finish in the paint is also far more advanced than Matt's, and he also has a smooth in-between game, a rarity in modern college basketball. There's no doubt as to who is the overall better offensive player, even in spite of Luke's poor shooting from 3 last year.

But expanding on my previous argument: Matt is irreplaceable on the defensive end, where he can guard up to 4 positions and switch on almost every single screen. Or if that's not what you need, he can shadow the opponent's best scorer and limit them to far below their normal production. That's the definition of a Coach K guy. There's just no way he's not in the top 5 next year in minutes.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 02:08 PM
Come on . . . you can't base overall offensive skill on 3 point shooting percentage alone. Luke had a way better overall shooting percentage from the field and is clearly a much better ball handler and passer than Matt. Luke's ability to finish in the paint is far more advanced than Matt's, and he also has a smooth in-between game, a rarity in modern college basketball. There's no doubt as to who is the overall better offensive player, even in spite of Luke's poor shooting from 3 last year.

I agree. But Luke was also at his best with the ball in his hands. He didn't do as well off the ball.

In the starting lineup next year, there will be a lot of offensive firepower. That means if Luke starts, he won't be able to do what he does best as much - create off the dribble.

If he is on a 2nd unit where he's the primary ballhandler, then he can use his skill set.

Matt's ability to be effective on offense (hitting open 3s on kickouts better than Luke) and defense *without* needing the ball too much is why he's a perfect fit to start.

kAzE
04-07-2016, 02:15 PM
I agree. But Luke was also at his best with the ball in his hands. He didn't do as well off the ball.

In the starting lineup next year, there will be a lot of offensive firepower. That means if Luke starts, he won't be able to do what he does best as much - create off the dribble.

If he is on a 2nd unit where he's the primary ballhandler, then he can use his skill set.

Matt's ability to be effective on offense (hitting open 3s on kickouts better than Luke) and defense *without* needing the ball too much is why he's a perfect fit to start.

Oh I'm with you, I think Luke will come off the bench, and be a focal point of the offense when he's on the floor. But he does need to work on his off the ball movement. Maybe watch some JJ Redick tape and learn how to get himself open.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 02:26 PM
Oh I'm with you, I think Luke will come off the bench, and be a focal point of the offense when he's on the floor. But he does need to work on his off the ball movement. Maybe watch some JJ Redick tape and learn how to get himself open.

That would mean he'd need to also work on being a catch and shoot guy. He seems more like an off the dribble shooter.

gurufrisbee
04-07-2016, 02:44 PM
You rank Matt Jones as the 8th best player on next year's team, so you think him starting or being the 6th man is impossible?

Where did you rank Matt this past season, especially before Amile got hurt? Yet he started every game he played. Where did you rank Matt on last season's team, while he started our last 13 games including the championship game?

I've already mentioned Tyler Thornton in 2013-14, who started 25 of 35 games. Where did you rank him? Or Lance Thomas in 2009-10 (started 39 of 40 games)? Or Greg Paulus in 2007-08 (33 of 34 games)? Or Casey Sanders in 2002-03 (21 of 33 games)? Or, best yet, Wojo in 1997-98 (started all 36 games)? I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, too.

So I don't think I'm conjuring an "interesting theory." I'm simply making a historical observation.

This is fairly useless since you are committed to not actually reading and instead pulling crap out of nowhere that is irrelevant.

Where did Matt rank this year? Better than 8th! Where did he rank last year, after Sulamon was gone? Better than 8th! Those ones are pretty darn easy.

Tyler Thornton was an actual point guard on a team where the only better PG was most definitely in the doghouse. And he was better than 8th. Lance Thomas in 09-10 was better than 8th. Greg Paulus in 07-08 was better than 8th. Sanders in 02-03 was better than 8th (and was a big man on a team that was woefully short on good size after Shelden). Wojo in 97-98 was better than 8th (he may have only been 8th in scoring on that team but he was the point guard and that is a specialized position where your value isn't just in points scored).

Yes, you are conjuring an interesting theory because none of these actually have anything to do with Matt Jones or his skill set or this team - and they don't even compare the way you want them to.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 02:46 PM
This is fairly useless since you are committed to not actually reading and instead pulling crap out of nowhere that is irrelevant.

Where did Matt rank this year? Better than 8th! Where did he rank last year, after Sulamon was gone? Better than 8th! Those ones are pretty darn easy.

Tyler Thornton was an actual point guard on a team where the only better PG was most definitely in the doghouse. And he was better than 8th. Lance Thomas in 09-10 was better than 8th. Greg Paulus in 07-08 was better than 8th. Sanders in 02-03 was better than 8th (and was a big man on a team that was woefully short on good size after Shelden). Wojo in 97-98 was better than 8th (he may have only been 8th in scoring on that team but he was the point guard and that is a specialized position where your value isn't just in points scored).

Yes, you are conjuring an interesting theory because none of these actually have anything to do with Matt Jones or his skill set or this team - and they don't even compare the way you want them to.

Whose rankings are we talking about here?

DukeTrinity11
04-07-2016, 02:49 PM
I vehemently believe that Grayson will be our primary ball handler next year and Jackson will play more off the ball. I, like K, don't believe in clearly defined positions on a team with so many capable playmakers but Grayson is the most likely to be our "PG". He already averaged the most assists on the team last year.

His court vision isn't elite like Tyus Jones or Tyler Ulis but Grayson will have more talent to pass the ball to than those two did.

Here's my best guess regarding how things shake out assuming no transfers and we get Bolden:

Our Starting 5
G: Grayson Allen
G: Matt Jones
F: Jayson Tatum
F: Amile Jefferson
F: Harry Giles

Bench
G: Derryck Thornton
G: Frank Jackson
G: Luke Kennard
F: Chase Jeter
F: Marques Bolden

Does anyone else think our Bench could be a top 5 starting unit in the ACC and top 25 nationally?

Pinch me when November is here! #WinterIsComing :)

Troublemaker
04-07-2016, 02:55 PM
Others have touched upon this already, but basketball is not baseball where all that matters is how good you are individually. Basketball is played with 5-man lineups and how well you complement the other 4 players on the court matters a great deal. So yes, it is quite possible for the "8th-best player" to play starters' minutes if he complements the other 4 starters better than the 7th-best and 6th-best players do.

BTW, I don't even think Matt's going to be the 8th-best player on the team. At Duke, rising seniors tend to improve dramatically, with MP3 being the latest example. And Amile was probably on his way to showcasing this as well until injury derailed him.

MChambers
04-07-2016, 02:56 PM
I think Luke's best place right now is as an offensive spark off the bench. Luke's offensive value is in his overall skill set. Hopefully his shot comes around similar to Matt's did from freshman to sophomore year.

I expect his shot to be deadly next year.

ncexnyc
04-07-2016, 02:57 PM
I hope everyone appreciates the job the staff has done when it comes to recruiting.

If there's any doubt in your mind, just consider this. Luke Kennard isn't being mentioned anywhere on this thread as being a starter next year.

I bet Ol' Roy would love to have Luke teamed with Berry as his starting back court. Or how about a UVA back court of Perrentes and Luke. Let's take that one step further an envision a back court of Richardson and Kennard at Syracuse.

So remember, any question marks you feel this team has going into next season is minor and isn't worth tearing a kid down for.

JNort
04-07-2016, 02:57 PM
How much college basketball did you see? Was Derryck Thornton even the 7th best PG in his own conference?

I love DT's ceiling for sure, but he had an up and down freshman campaign. He simply was not a "top 7" college PG.

- Chillin

ETA: Depending on how you define PG, I'd list Angel Rodriguez, Joel Berry, London Perrantes, Cat Barber, Quentin Snider, Demetrius Jackson, and Silent G as better "point guards" in the ACC. Taking out the fringe guys, I'd say the first 5 I listed are safely in the PG category.

Yeah I watched plenty. I'd take Cat last year and possibly Perrantes out of those above over Derryck and that's it.

fraggler
04-07-2016, 02:57 PM
I vehemently believe that Grayson will be our primary ball handler next year and Jackson will play more off the ball. I, like K, don't believe in clearly defined positions on a team with so many capable playmakers but Grayson is the most likely to be our "PG". He already averaged the most assists on the team last year.

His court vision isn't elite like Tyus Jones or Tyler Ulis but Grayson will have more talent to pass the ball to than those two did.

Here's my best guess regarding how things shake out assuming no transfers and we get Bolden:

Our Starting 5
G: Grayson Allen
G: Matt Jones
F: Jayson Tatum
F: Amile Jefferson
F: Harry Giles

Bench
G: Derryck Thornton
G: Frank Jackson
G: Luke Kennard
F: Chase Jeter
F: Marques Bolden

Does anyone else think our Bench could be a top 5 starting unit in the ACC and top 25 nationally?

Pinch me when November is here! #WinterIsComing :)

Your proposed bench is likely not going to happen unless something funky happens with scholarships.

FerryFor50
04-07-2016, 03:02 PM
Yeah I watched plenty. I'd take Cat last year and possibly Perrantes out of those above over Derryck and that's it.

Wha?

Not Silent G (who was solid defensively, a good distributor and a strong, athletic scoring PG) or Angel Rodriguez?

They both were better shooters than DT and had better assist numbers.

And it's unfathomable you'd pick DT over Jackson.

CDu
04-07-2016, 03:12 PM
Wha?

Not Silent G (who was solid defensively, a good distributor and a strong, athletic scoring PG) or Angel Rodriguez?

They both were better shooters than DT and had better assist numbers.

And it's unfathomable you'd pick DT over Jackson.

Yeah, of the ACC PGs this past year, I think Thornton rates pretty low on the list. Guys whose performance I'd have taken over Thornton's include (roughly in order):
Cat Barber (obvious)
Demetrius Jackson (obvious)
London Perrantes
Michael Gbinije
Angel Rodriguez
Joel Berry or Marcus Paige
James Robinson
Bryant Crawford

That's not meant to bash Thornton. He was at a disadvantage this year by being a freshman and having missed the summer beforehand, whereas several of these guys were upperclassmen. But to say that there were only maybe two PGs who you'd have taken over Thornton this year is to not have really paid much attention to the position this year (in my opinion).

Troublemaker
04-07-2016, 03:17 PM
JNort -- between your Derryck ranking (above Demetrius Jackson???) and not making Giles a starter on next year's team, I dunno, man. Nevertheless, I enjoy unconventional opinions. Keep bringing them!

-jk
04-07-2016, 04:34 PM
I think this year Derryck was good for only 20 or 25 minutes playing time before his error rate went way up.

I'm sure K keeps this sort of info, and I'm equally sure he won't share it...

-jk

Kedsy
04-07-2016, 04:41 PM
...assuming no transfers and we get Bolden...

This assumption is mathematically impossible. We cannot sign Bolden unless someone currently on scholarship leaves the team.


Does anyone else think our Bench could be a top 5 starting unit in the ACC and top 25 nationally?

No.

Well, I guess some people might. I don't.



This is fairly useless...

I agree, though probably for different reasons than you do.

What do you think would be useful?

luvdahops
04-07-2016, 05:18 PM
Yeah, of the ACC PGs this past year, I think Thornton rates pretty low on the list. Guys whose performance I'd have taken over Thornton's include (roughly in order):
Cat Barber (obvious)
Demetrius Jackson (obvious)
London Perrantes
Michael Gbinije
Angel Rodriguez
Joel Berry or Marcus Paige
James Robinson
Bryant Crawford

That's not meant to bash Thornton. He was at a disadvantage this year by being a freshman and having missed the summer beforehand, whereas several of these guys were upperclassmen. But to say that there were only maybe two PGs who you'd have taken over Thornton this year is to not have really paid much attention to the position this year (in my opinion).

That is a pretty formidable list, and sheds some light on why DT struggled at times, as the majority of nights in conference play he was faced with a challenging - in terms of talent and/or experience - matchup.

drummerdevil
04-07-2016, 05:31 PM
Now that we have another piece to the puzzle, and because it's fun to speculate, here is who I believe will be our starting 5 next year.

pg - Jackson
sg - Allen
sf - Tatum
pf - Jefferson
c - Giles

Technically, we don't have positions in the traditional sense. But call me old fashioned.

Would love to hear other views.

Giles plays power forward, and Jefferson has always been a center... just a thought...

JNort
04-07-2016, 06:49 PM
Giles plays power forward, and Jefferson has always been a center... just a thought...

You got that backwards.

JNort
04-07-2016, 06:56 PM
JNort -- between your Derryck ranking (above Demetrius Jackson???) and not making Giles a starter on next year's team, I dunno, man. Nevertheless, I enjoy unconventional opinions. Keep bringing them!
I did have Giles starting... yes I would take him over Jackson and it would be easy.

Maybe I'm biased because if I'm coaching I have a certain style I like and a way I want the offense to run. Derryck is absolutely perfect in what I envision as an ideal pg. K obviously thinks different and I was frustrated all year in how Derryck was being used or rather not used. Just a difference in styles. Plus he came a year early annnnd he got less practice time in than the rest of the team.

Wahoo2000
04-10-2016, 02:37 PM
Well, it looks like the Thornton news is true, and so I'd guess it's becoming clear that the "core" will be Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Jefferson, Giles, Kennard, Jones.

I'm guessing you'll see a lot of Tatum and/or Jones at the "4". Given K's seeming preference for going small lately, I don't think there's any chance that both Giles and Jefferson are close to (or over) 30mpg. It'll be interesting to see which of those guys gets more PT.

BluePanda
04-10-2016, 02:44 PM
Well, it looks like the Thornton news is true, and so I'd guess it's becoming clear that the "core" will be Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Jefferson, Giles, Kennard, Jones.

I'm guessing you'll see a lot of Tatum and/or Jones at the "4". Given K's seeming preference for going small lately, I don't think there's any chance that both Giles and Jefferson are close to (or over) 30mpg. It'll be interesting to see which of those guys gets more PT.

No offense, but if we see Matt Jones at the 4, God help us all.

timmy c
04-10-2016, 02:51 PM
Well, it looks like the Thornton news is true, and so I'd guess it's becoming clear that the "core" will be Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Jefferson, Giles, Kennard, Jones.

I'm guessing you'll see a lot of Tatum and/or Jones at the "4". Given K's seeming preference for going small lately, I don't think there's any chance that both Giles and Jefferson are close to (or over) 30mpg. It'll be interesting to see which of those guys gets more PT.

Are you sure that you are a UVA fan? Cuz' your post referring to minutes and positions on the DBR makes me think you might be a closet Duke fan... 😄😳

CDu
04-10-2016, 03:07 PM
Well, it looks like the Thornton news is true, and so I'd guess it's becoming clear that the "core" will be Jackson, Allen, Tatum, Jefferson, Giles, Kennard, Jones.

I'm guessing you'll see a lot of Tatum and/or Jones at the "4". Given K's seeming preference for going small lately, I don't think there's any chance that both Giles and Jefferson are close to (or over) 30mpg. It'll be interesting to see which of those guys gets more PT.

If Bolden joins Duke (as many expect), then Jones is unlikely to play any PF, and Tatum will play it somewhat sparingly. Next year's squad will look more like 2010 than 2015, with the primary lineup being two bigs AND a tall SF.

fraggler
04-10-2016, 03:10 PM
If Bolden joins Duke (as many expect), then Jones is unlikely to play any PF, and Tatum will play it somewhat sparingly. Next year's squad will look more like 2010 than 2015, with the primary lineup being two bigs AND a tall SF.

And two guards who aren't "true point guards" doing the primary ball handling and distribution.

PalmettoExpat
04-10-2016, 03:16 PM
I think you'll see a lot of:

Starting
Frank
Grayson
Tatum
Giles
Jefferson

With these guys seeing significant minutes as well
Matt
Luke
Marques

Some minutes
Chase
Javin

Could see Matt in starting over Frank, but who knows. Just my take. And I agree that the starting lineup will be quite fluid throughout the year (as it typically is).

Sad to see Derryck go though. Feel like he could've been a great four-year player. I wish him the best.

Wahoo2000
04-10-2016, 03:17 PM
Are you sure that you are a UVA fan? Cuz' your post referring to minutes and positions on the DBR makes me think you might be a closet Duke fan... 😄😳

LOL - I'm sure. I keep up pretty closely with what the other top ACC teams are doing. Especially the one(s) I expect to be right at the very top of the heap for the upcoming season.

But as for being a fan? I respect the heck out of your program's accomplishments, but I'm usually rooting against Duke. I don't have any real "hate" though like most fans of other programs that play you guys regularly.

Wahoo2000
04-10-2016, 03:19 PM
If Bolden joins Duke (as many expect), then Jones is unlikely to play any PF, and Tatum will play it somewhat sparingly. Next year's squad will look more like 2010 than 2015, with the primary lineup being two bigs AND a tall SF.

I don't know if K's recent shift towards more small lineups is more philosophical or roster-oriented. I believe it's the former, you obviously think it's the latter. We'll definitely find out this year.

OldPhiKap
04-10-2016, 03:27 PM
And two guards who aren't "true point guards" doing the primary ball handling and distribution.

Neither Duhon nor JWill were point guards. In fact they switched positions (or roles, more accurately) mid-season IIRC. Worked fine.

I'm not terribly worried about next year's team being able to score.

OldPhiKap
04-10-2016, 03:30 PM
LOL - I'm sure. I keep up pretty closely with what the other top ACC teams are doing. Especially the one(s) I expect to be right at the very top of the heap for the upcoming season.

But as for being a fan? I respect the heck out of your program's accomplishments, but I'm usually rooting against Duke. I don't have any real "hate" though like most fans of other programs that play you guys regularly.

Game respects game.

UVa has the best young coach in the ACC. And a great school with integrity. You should be proud.

CDu
04-10-2016, 03:35 PM
I don't know if K's recent shift towards more small lineups is more philosophical or roster-oriented. I believe it's the former, you obviously think it's the latter. We'll definitely find out this year.

Coach K has always favored skill over size. It isn't a recent trend to go small. He has gone to a SF at PF many times over the last 30 years.

But he has also always been willing to play bigger when the roster suggests. And next year, with 3-4 legit bigs on the roster and only 4 guards, he is going to have to go big.

And, as 2010 suggests, he is just fine doing so if the talent permits.

fraggler
04-10-2016, 04:09 PM
Neither Duhon nor JWill were point guards. In fact they switched positions (or roles, more accurately) mid-season IIRC. Worked fine.

I'm not terribly worried about next year's team being able to score.

Not sure if you are agreeing with me and adding to my point or misunderstanding what I was getting at. "No true point guard" not only worked very well in 2010 (part of my point), but also completes the rough analog of next year's roster to that of 2010 (multipurpose guards with a pretty deep platoon of big men). I am sorry to see Thornton go as I really liked the kid, but I am not as worried as some about not having a true point guard on the roster for next season. It does put a little pressure on us to make sure we have a good one or two of them commit for the 2017 season.

As for lineups, as much as I like Frank's game, I don't see him starting unless he is even better than the hype, particularly on D. I think at the beginning of the season, when we are still learning how to play with each other, Grayson and Matt start in the backcourt, with Tatum, Giles, and Jefferson on the front line. Luke, Frank, Jeter, and Bolden (hopefully) providing quality depth off the bench. That is going deeper than K traditionally does, so Jeter or Bolden will likely get squeezed a bit as the season progresses depending on which brings more to the table. As much as I love Delaurier's hustle, I just don't see any minutes for him this year. Same for the end of the bench. Good kids and players, but victims (or beneficiaries) of Duke's crazy success right now. I can see variations where Amile and Matt get big (and closing minutes) off the bench as a stabilizers so that the stud freshman can learn to play with each other better, but not as sure since K likes to find the lineup that he trusts pretty quickly and sticks with it unless external factors force him to adapt.

OldPhiKap
04-10-2016, 04:49 PM
Not sure if you are agreeing with me and adding to my point or misunderstanding what I was getting at. "No true point guard" not only worked very well in 2010 (part of my point), but also completes the rough analog of next year's roster to that of 2010 (multipurpose guards with a pretty deep platoon of big men). I am sorry to see Thornton go as I really liked the kid, but I am not as worried as some about not having a true point guard on the roster for next season. It does put a little pressure on us to make sure we have a good one or two of them commit for the 2017 season.

As for lineups, as much as I like Frank's game, I don't see him starting unless he is even better than the hype, particularly on D. I think at the beginning of the season, when we are still learning how to play with each other, Grayson and Matt start in the backcourt, with Tatum, Giles, and Jefferson on the front line. Luke, Frank, Jeter, and Bolden (hopefully) providing quality depth off the bench. That is going deeper than K traditionally does, so Jeter or Bolden will likely get squeezed a bit as the season progresses depending on which brings more to the table. As much as I love Delaurier's hustle, I just don't see any minutes for him this year. Same for the end of the bench. Good kids and players, but victims (or beneficiaries) of Duke's crazy success right now. I can see variations where Amile and Matt get big (and closing minutes) off the bench as a stabilizers so that the stud freshman can learn to play with each other better, but not as sure since K likes to find the lineup that he trusts pretty quickly and sticks with it unless external factors force him to adapt.

Agreeing, and adding to your point.

fraggler
04-10-2016, 04:53 PM
Agreeing, and adding to your point.

Ok, I was the one confused. Cheers.

OldPhiKap
04-10-2016, 05:03 PM
Ok, I was the one confused. Cheers.

No worries, I am a very confusing person. Or a very confused person.

Plus, smoking in the big green egg and watching the Masters while posting. With Stone "Enjoy By 4-20-16" going down smoothly. Scattered Sunday.

Ahhhhhhh. Love spring in Georgia.

CDu
04-10-2016, 05:06 PM
Neither Duhon nor JWill were point guards. In fact they switched positions (or roles, more accurately) mid-season IIRC. Worked fine.

I'm not terribly worried about next year's team being able to score.

Actually they BOTH were PGs. That isn't to say we will have trouble because we don't have PGs, but the Duhon/Williams combo were indeed both PGs.

OldPhiKap
04-10-2016, 05:09 PM
Actually they BOTH were PGs. That isn't to say we will have trouble because we don't have PGs, but the Duhon/Williams combo were indeed both PGs.

I guess that raises the question of what a combo-guard is, which is what I thought both were.

I go back to my basic point though -- is anyone seriously worried that whatever five we put on the floor next year cannot score? I want to know who can play defense as a unit and/or as a shutdown defender. That's what will determine how far we go next year.

jimsumner
04-10-2016, 05:13 PM
Actually they BOTH were PGs. That isn't to say we will have trouble because we don't have PGs, but the Duhon/Williams combo were indeed both PGs.

Williams averaged 6.1 apg in 2001, Duhon 4.5.

The following season, Williams averaged 5.3, Duhon 5.9.

I could live with that for next season. :)

CDu
04-10-2016, 05:16 PM
I guess that raises the question of what a combo-guard is, which is what I thought both were.

I go back to my basic point though -- is anyone seriously worried that whatever five we put on the floor next year cannot score? I want to know who can play defense as a unit and/or as a shutdown defender. That's what will determine how far we go next year.

A combo guard is more what Nolan Smith was. Someone who was capable of playin point in a pinch, but was better suited to the 2G. Duhon was a pure point. Williams was a point who happened to also excel at SG.

That said, like you I am not worried.

Dukehky
04-10-2016, 05:27 PM
A combo guard is more what Nolan Smith was. Someone who was capable of playin point in a pinch, but was better suited to the 2G. Duhon was a pure point. Williams was a point who happened to also excel at SG.

That said, like you I am not worried.

Thank God, someone understands!!! There are real distinctions!!!

Saratoga2
04-10-2016, 08:42 PM
Not sure if you are agreeing with me and adding to my point or misunderstanding what I was getting at. "No true point guard" not only worked very well in 2010 (part of my point), but also completes the rough analog of next year's roster to that of 2010 (multipurpose guards with a pretty deep platoon of big men). I am sorry to see Thornton go as I really liked the kid, but I am not as worried as some about not having a true point guard on the roster for next season. It does put a little pressure on us to make sure we have a good one or two of them commit for the 2017 season.

As for lineups, as much as I like Frank's game, I don't see him starting unless he is even better than the hype, particularly on D. I think at the beginning of the season, when we are still learning how to play with each other, Grayson and Matt start in the backcourt, with Tatum, Giles, and Jefferson on the front line. Luke, Frank, Jeter, and Bolden (hopefully) providing quality depth off the bench. That is going deeper than K traditionally does, so Jeter or Bolden will likely get squeezed a bit as the season progresses depending on which brings more to the table. As much as I love Delaurier's hustle, I just don't see any minutes for him this year. Same for the end of the bench. Good kids and players, but victims (or beneficiaries) of Duke's crazy success right now. I can see variations where Amile and Matt get big (and closing minutes) off the bench as a stabilizers so that the stud freshman can learn to play with each other better, but not as sure since K likes to find the lineup that he trusts pretty quickly and sticks with it unless external factors force him to adapt.

I agree that Frank is unlikely to start, at least at the beginning of the season, however, I would expect Luke to start instead of Matt. Luke has a better handle, a better scorer a better rebounder and is a pretty good defender. I expect Matt might substitute for Jayson some and also play some shooting guard but he is really pretty slow for PG and slows down the pace of the game when playing that position

jbay201
04-10-2016, 10:30 PM
I agree that Frank is unlikely to start, at least at the beginning of the season, however, I would expect Luke to start instead of Matt. Luke has a better handle, a better scorer a better rebounder and is a pretty good defender. I expect Matt might substitute for Jayson some and also play some shooting guard but he is really pretty slow for PG and slows down the pace of the game when playing that position

i feel matt or luke can play pg against poor competition but once ACC play starts frank will need to start as teams will easily be able to full court press matt or luke

CDu
04-11-2016, 07:41 AM
Williams averaged 6.1 apg in 2001, Duhon 4.5.

The following season, Williams averaged 5.3, Duhon 5.9.

I could live with that for next season. :)

Exactly!

CDu
04-11-2016, 07:42 AM
No worries, I am a very confusing person. Or a very confused person.

Plus, smoking in the big green egg and watching the Masters while posting. With Stone "Enjoy By 4-20-16" going down smoothly. Scattered Sunday.

Ahhhhhhh. Love spring in Georgia.

Smoking in the big green egg? That sounds both uncomfortable and quite bad for one's lungs.

CDu
04-11-2016, 07:46 AM
i feel matt or luke can play pg against poor competition but once ACC play starts frank will need to start as teams will easily be able to full court press matt or luke

I wouldn't worry about needing a PG to beat the press. The best way to beat a press these days is to pass out of it and have multiple ballhandlers on the floor. Exhibit A was this year with Ingram at the PF. If you have a PF who is comfortable as a ballhandler, it is really hard for a team to press you. The PF can stay back, which means you can leave two guards up court to receive the press-breaking pass and attack the defense in transition.

MChambers
04-11-2016, 08:13 AM
I wouldn't worry about needing a PG to beat the press. The best way to beat a press these days is to pass out of it and have multiple ballhandlers on the floor. Exhibit A was this year with Ingram at the PF. If you have a PF who is comfortable as a ballhandler, it is really hard for a team to press you. The PF can stay back, which means you can leave two guards up court to receive the press-breaking pass and attack the defense in transition.
The roster Duke has won't struggle to break a press. I'm more worried about the lack of a quick guard to pressure the other team's point. Duke has almost always had that player.

Even in 2010, when Scheyer ran the offense, Nolan Smith pressured the other team's primary ballhandler, and did a great job. Not sure who on the roster will do that next year, and how well they'll do it. If I had to guess, I'd say Allen and Jackson have the best physical tools for the job.

It's not much of a weakness, mind you, but the coaching staff will have to adjust the defense to deal with it. The good news is that the big perimeter players may be able to switch on most screens.

Troublemaker
04-11-2016, 08:47 AM
The roster Duke has won't struggle to break a press. I'm more worried about the lack of a quick guard to pressure the other team's point. Duke has almost always had that player.

Even in 2010, when Scheyer ran the offense, Nolan Smith pressured the other team's primary ballhandler, and did a great job. Not sure who on the roster will do that next year, and how well they'll do it. If I had to guess, I'd say Allen and Jackson have the best physical tools for the job.

It's not much of a weakness, mind you, but the coaching staff will have to adjust the defense to deal with it. The good news is that the big perimeter players may be able to switch on most screens.

I'm definitely hoping either Frank or Grayson can become the primary PG-pressurer. As you noted, they have best physical skills for the job.

OldPhiKap
04-11-2016, 08:49 AM
Smoking in the big green egg? That sounds both uncomfortable and quite bad for one's lungs.

^^ Pay the man, Shirley.

dukelifer
04-11-2016, 08:53 AM
I wouldn't worry about needing a PG to beat the press. The best way to beat a press these days is to pass out of it and have multiple ballhandlers on the floor. Exhibit A was this year with Ingram at the PF. If you have a PF who is comfortable as a ballhandler, it is really hard for a team to press you. The PF can stay back, which means you can leave two guards up court to receive the press-breaking pass and attack the defense in transition.

Tatum is comfortable with the ball in the open floor- but tends to get in trouble in traffic as do most of the other guys left on the team. Maybe everyone can go to Steph Curry's ball-handling camp. There is an off guard who made himself into a point guard with an elite handle.

UrinalCake
04-11-2016, 11:10 AM
A Jackson-Allen backcourt would be amazingly athletic and big. After many seasons of having small guards and wings, it will be fun to go 6'4 6'5 6'8 from our guards/wings, with two McD slam dunk champions. I would think that Allen would be the one functioning as the point and initiating the offense, as he has more experience and K trusts him. As others have mentioned, he led the team in assists this past season and you could see him making an effort to distribute the ball more as the season went on.

kAzE
04-11-2016, 11:29 AM
How about this for an out of the box idea: Luke Kennard as the primary ball handler. He seemed much more comfortable with the ball in his hands than without it as a freshman, and even seemed to shoot more accurately off the dribble than off the catch. With his solid handle and ability to pull up from 28 feet, opponents will be forced to honor his range and play up, allowing teammates more space in the paint. If he is able to get by his first defender, he's also got the craftiness to manufacture a shot in traffic, with his smooth mid range game and better-than-average ability to finish at the rim. This would also allow Grayson to continue to catch the ball on the wing in a triple threat, where he is absolutely lethal.

Luke just seems to have more creativity with the ball to me than Grayson, thus, I believe he is slightly better suited to bring the ball up the floor. (Not necessarily play the role of a point guard, because Luke is, and probably always will be primarily a scorer.)

I'm not buying the Frank-over-Luke as a starter hype just yet. He definitely has the look of a possible one and done, but Luke Kennard is pretty damn good too, and I think he's going to be much better than last year. Give me the incumbent until the newbie proves he's got the chops.

COYS
04-11-2016, 11:30 AM
This article has been brought up a number of times, but I think it might be useful to look at it again for Duke heading into next season.

http://www.wired.com/2012/04/analytics-basketball/

The article breaks down nba players into 13 different categories that are not dependent on traditional positions. If we look at next year's roster like this, I think it's clear that Duke has plenty of capable ball handlers who can orchestrate the offense. Grayson fits the mold of a "Shooting Ball-Handler" (someone who handles the ball a lot and possesses a knack for scoring) with the potential to elevate himself into the realm of "NBA First Team" where he combines his amazing scoring with improved defense and slightly better passing. In college, I think Grayson can easily achieve this level as he wasn't far from it this past year. Luke probably fits the same mold.

Matt is somewhere between a "role-playing ball handler" and a "role player." This is really a perfect fit for him. Hopefully with our added depth next season he won't need to play outside of his comfort zone very much.

So that leaves Frank. Admittedly, it might not be good if Frank's profile stacks up too similarly to Luke's and Grayson's. However, I don't think it will. I think he'll be more like an "offensive ballhandler" (a Jason Terry or Tony Parker style attacker who gets to the line a lot and similar to Nolan's junior year playing alongside Jon, who was definitely a "Shooting Ballhandler") or perhaps a "combo ballhandler" (a guy who is solid on offense and defense without being exceptional in either). Frank doesn't need to be Tyus Jones. He just needs to bring some (hopefully) solid defense and solid offense to complement our insane arsenal of offensive threats. If he can attack the basket to take advantage of our floor spacing and thereby create a few drive and kick passing opportunities, he'll be doing his job. Personally, I'm not too worried about the offensive end.

I do think it will be interesting to see how we defend opposing point guards as I doubt we want Grayson expending his energy at the point of attack. That leaves Matt and Frank as our best options. My hope is that the return of Amile, the arrival of the mobile and bouncy Harry, and the length and mobility of Jayson will allow us to rotate faster, bother I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.s at the rim, rebound better and deflect/steal more passes to compensate for the lack of an obvious defender at the point of attack. Then again, maybe Frank surprises us.

gumbomoop
04-11-2016, 02:01 PM
How about this for an out of the box idea: Luke Kennard as the primary ball handler. He seemed much more comfortable with the ball in his hands than without it as a freshman, and even seemed to shoot more accurately off the dribble than off the catch. With his solid handle and ability to pull up from 28 feet, opponents will be forced to honor his range and play up, allowing teammates more space in the paint. If he is able to get by his first defender, he's also got the craftiness to manufacture a shot in traffic, with his smooth mid range game and better-than-average ability to finish at the rim. This would also allow Grayson to continue to catch the ball on the wing in a triple threat, where he is absolutely lethal.

Luke just seems to have more creativity with the ball to me than Grayson, thus, I believe he is slightly better suited to bring the ball up the floor. (Not necessarily play the role of a point guard, because Luke is, and probably always will be primarily a scorer.)

I'm not buying the Frank-over-Luke as a starter hype just yet. He definitely has the look of a possible one and done, but Luke Kennard is pretty damn good too, and I think he's going to be much better than last year. Give me the incumbent until the newbie proves he's got the chops.

Sign me up for this.

Plenty of varied talent among Grayson, Matt, Luke, and Frank. Plenty. Jackson looks like he might be good on-ball D. Matt perhaps best suited to defending wing/2s and 3s. With all our switching, Grayson should have abundant opportunities to exhibit improved chops guarding both PGs and wings. Luke showed plenty of willing D his first season, and was particularly good at fighting through screens up top, as well as alert passing-lane steals. I'll guess he's dedicated to being a complete player.

Adding to kAzE's analysis, Luke is a superb passer, because he sees the court, is a mental step ahead, and is amphibious. Both Marshall and Chase muffed some easy baskets because they weren't ready for some Luke passes.

Luke is not at his most effective when he's standing still waiting for the pass to shoot a 3. He doesn't need to dominate the ball -- good thing -- but he's awfully effective when he has the ball and multiple options.

Krzyzewski is pretty effective when he has talented players and multiple options.