Bolden's status?

[nocilla]

Why did Bolden only play a couple minutes? White and Vrank, who don't normally play, both got more minutes.

I was wondering during yesterday's game and was hoping to find something here this morning but I don't see anything.

Was there an injury? Something off-court? A bad practice?

Thanks

[superdave]

Capel is playing matchups and whoever fights the hardest. Not sure we needed to play real big vs Wake, so that was going to limit minutes for the big guys. But Bolden has been very inconsistent. I would love to see him earn more minutes, but it just has not clicked yet for him more than once or twice this month.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Capel is playing matchups and whoever fights the hardest. Not sure we needed to play real big vs Wake, so that was going to limit minutes for the big guys. But Bolden has been very inconsistent. I would love to see him earn more minutes, but it just has not clicked yet for him more than once or twice this month.
He played by far the best pick and roll defense against ncsu (as compared to our other big men) and was active around the basket. Many on this board thought he had his best game of the year. So I too was surprised at lack of PT yesterday and would be interested to know what the deal was.

[freshmanjs]

He played by far the best pick and roll defense against ncsu (as compared to our other big men) and was active around the basket. Many on this board thought he had his best game of the year. So I too was surprised at lack of PT yesterday and would be interested to know what the deal was.

That was Miami.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

That was Miami.
Yes. My bad.

[Edouble]

Why did Bolden only play a couple minutes? White and Vrank, who don't normally play, both got more minutes.

I was wondering during yesterday's game and was hoping to find something here this morning but I don't see anything.

Was there an injury? Something off-court? A bad practice?

Thanks

Jack White went in as a perimeter sub. His minutes are unrelated to the big man rotation: Amile, Harry, Marques, Vrank, Chase. White went in due to the foul trouble that some of our perimeter guys were in.

Bolden had two fouls in three minutes. Vrank was racking up the fouls too, but I think he looked better to Coach Capel in his stretch of PT than Bolden did in his two minutes.

[Bluedevil114]

Capel is playing matchups and whoever fights the hardest. Not sure we needed to play real big vs Wake, so that was going to limit minutes for the big guys. But Bolden has been very inconsistent. I would love to see him earn more minutes, but it just has not clicked yet for him more than once or twice this month.

It will be nice when teams have to adjust to our lineup instead of us having to adjust. Until we improve our defense and develop an inside identity, I guess we are the team that has to adjust. We should be able to go big now and have teams have to matchup against us. Probably more the reason we need that PG that can get the ball inside more consistently and the bigs finish. Hopefully Frank is getting closer to being that PG with court vision and Giles can improve on his touch around the basket.

[FadedTackyShirt]

Jack White went in as a perimeter sub. His minutes are unrelated to the big man rotation: Amile, Harry, Marques, Vrank, Chase. White went in due to the foul trouble that some of our perimeter guys were in.

Bolden had two fouls in three minutes. Vrank was racking up the fouls too, but I think he looked better to Coach Capel in his stretch of PT than Bolden did in his two minutes.

Vrank's best Duke game ever, but he still racked up 4 fouls in 6 mins. Crappy refs aside, those foul totals per minute from Bolden and Vrank are still alarming.

[SupaDave]

Vrank's best Duke game ever, but he still racked up 4 fouls in 6 mins. Crappy refs aside, those foul totals per minute from Bolden and Vrank are still alarming.

I wouldn't say that. His game vs Appalachian State was very impressive.

[SupaDave]

Capel is playing matchups and whoever fights the hardest. Not sure we needed to play real big vs Wake, so that was going to limit minutes for the big guys. But Bolden has been very inconsistent. I would love to see him earn more minutes, but it just has not clicked yet for him more than once or twice this month.

We absolutely had to. Their center was running around our guys until Vrank put a body on him and frustrated him. Two fouls back to back but the physicality obviously upset him b/c Vrank got him an offensive foul call to go his way.

At this point we're likely to see Bolden next year. He's not on any draft boards any more (but hey - Grayson was dropped from NBAdraft.net - but that's ridiculous).

[billy]

Vrank's best Duke game ever, but he still racked up 4 fouls in 6 mins. Crappy refs aside, those foul totals per minute from Bolden and Vrank are still alarming.

I agree I'd rather see quality big-man defense without the fouls, but heck, there were years where we didn't have the luxury of 5, much less 10, big-man fouls to give.

[Troublemaker]

Another factor, although I doubt it was the primary one, is that Duke went away from hedging screens yesterday and went back to icing them. Bolden had become sort of a hedging specialist.

The biggest factor is that Harry Giles secretly leveled up during the NCSU game while we were all bemoaning the loss. He's looked good the past couple of games. Right now, Harry has edged ahead of Marques again in the rotation. (But these things can change quickly, as we know.) That, plus the fact that Duke wanted to play small in order to guard Wake's shooters, plus the fact that Marques picked up two quick fouls, is why he didn't play more.

[freshmanjs]

Another factor, although I doubt it was the primary one, is that Duke went away from hedging screens yesterday and went back to icing them. Bolden had become sort of a hedging specialist.

The biggest factor is that Harry Giles secretly leveled up during the NCSU game while we were all bemoaning the loss. He's looked good the past couple of games. Right now, Harry has edged ahead of Marques again in the rotation. (But these things can change quickly, as we know.) That, plus the fact that Duke wanted to play small in order to guard Wake's shooters, plus the fact that Marques picked up two quick fouls, is why he didn't play more.

But Vrank ahead of Bolden in the rotation? That is surprising. Can't be the foul issue...Vrank had more fouls than Bolden and was playing.

[FadedTackyShirt]

But Vrank ahead of Bolden in the rotation? That is surprising. Can't be the foul issue...Vrank had more fouls than Bolden and was playing.

Bolden entered the game before Vrank, so he's not ahead in the rotation. Fair to say that Bolden is on a short leash though.

[weezie]

Vrank is veeeeerrrrrry handsome. Just needed to clear that up for you clueless fellas. Saw him last year at Pizza Toro and my goodness, he has certainly become even more good-looking with the added muscle.

Yes, indeedy do.

[sagegrouse]

Vrank is veeeeerrrrrry handsome. Just needed to clear that up for you clueless fellas. Saw him last year at Pizza Toro and my goodness, he has certainly become even more good-looking with the added muscle.

Yes, indeedy do.
We'll leave it to Weezie to buff things up a bit.

[53n206]

Vrank is veeeeerrrrrry handsome. Just needed to clear that up for you clueless fellas. Saw him last year at Pizza Toro and my goodness, he has certainly become even more good-looking with the added muscle.

Yes, indeedy do.

weezie, tell us what you really think.

[quahog174]

Vrank the Tank?

[gofurman]

We absolutely had to. Their center was running around our guys until Vrank put a body on him and frustrated him. Two fouls back to back but the physicality obviously upset him b/c Vrank got him an offensive foul call to go his way.

At this point we're likely to see Bolden next year. He's not on any draft boards any more (but hey - Grayson was dropped from NBAdraft.net - but that's ridiculous).

I sure hope we do see Bolden next year. Would be a good get. Forget freshman. See the difference in Kennard as a fr v sophomore? Not. Even. Close. Freshman can be great but returning sophs are often better.

Bolden plus Jeter (Giles and Jefferson gone) is a start. With another year bolden soph plus Jeter junior could be ok. I really hope we have Bolden again

[English]

I sure hope we do see Bolden next year. Would be a good get. Forget freshman. See the difference in Kennard as a fr v sophomore? Not. Even. Close. Freshman can be great but returning sophs are often better.

Bolden plus Jeter (Giles and Jefferson gone) is a start. With another year bolden soph plus Jeter junior could be ok. I really hope we have Bolden again

Another DNP-CD for Marques last night. Game analysis aside, Vrank is certainly ahead in the rotation based purely on empirical evidence. Label me baffled--or, at least surprised. Vrank didn't get much burn, largely because of fouls (not surprised) and ineffective play, but not even a cameo from Marques. After a couple of games that appeared like Bolden was putting it together, or at the very least improving, it seems he's taken a step back in the coaches' eyes. That is, if the coaches saw what an appreciable subset of the board was seeing (myself included).

[Troublemaker]

I'm worried about injury or discipline. Hopefully neither of those is true and he's back in the rotation soon.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'm worried about injury or discipline. Hopefully neither of those is true and he's back in the rotation soon.

I think it's Tatum's permanent move to the 4. That leaves the 5 for Giles, Jefferson, Vrank, and Bolden. 2 are getting squeezed, and it's obviously Vrank. Maybe Bolden too.

[FadedTackyShirt]

I think it's Tatum's permanent move to the 4. That leaves the 5 for Giles, Jefferson, Vrank, and Bolden. 2 are getting squeezed, and it's obviously Vrank. Maybe Bolden too.

Despite fouling out, Amile played 31 minutes. Giles and Vrank combined played 11 minutes. Bolden's not ready for the NBA. Two months left in the season, but Giles isn't ready for the NBA either. Hope both return, but not likely for Giles.

[Indoor66]

Do we know that there is no injury involved?

[CDu]

I think it's Tatum's permanent move to the 4. That leaves the 5 for Giles, Jefferson, Vrank, and Bolden. 2 are getting squeezed, and it's obviously Vrank. Maybe Bolden too.

I'd buy that, except that Bolden didn't even come in at all last night. Vrankovic played, and we stuck with both Jefferson and Giles each with 4 fouls (or more) for the last 10 minutes or so. Seems weird that Bolden wouldn't even see a minute in that game. Unless he's hurt.

I mean, I don't expect Bolden to play major minutes, because as you said Tatum seems to be playing most (if not all, as last night) of his minutes at the 4. Which means only one of our backup bigs can see any meaningful minutes. But I'd have expected Bolden to be the second big off the bench, not Vrankovic.

[killerleft]

Do we know that there is no injury involved?

If he's hurt, we're hiding it behind the Romulan Cloaking Device. So maybe. :)

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'd buy that, except that Bolden didn't even come in at all last night. Vrankovic played, and we stuck with both Jefferson and Giles each with 4 fouls (or more) for the last 10 minutes or so. Seems weird that Bolden wouldn't even see a minute in that game. Unless he's hurt.

I mean, I don't expect Bolden to play major minutes, because as you said Tatum seems to be playing most (if not all, as last night) of his minutes at the 4. Which means only one of our backup bigs can see any meaningful minutes. But I'd have expected Bolden to be the second big off the bench, not Vrankovic.

Over the last 80 minutes, Tatum has played all of his minutes at the 4. There are only a few minutes when two of Jefferson/Giles/Vrank played the 4/5. I agree it's strange that Bolden didn't play. Could be injury, but it could also be a "teaching moment". The fact that Vrank played may be a signal from the coaching staff that Bolden needs to get his #$%@ together to play. I don't necessarily buy this as Bolden has had his best games during Miami and NC State.

It is interesting. Hopefully, Bolden comes back. He's a very nice piece to have.

[CDu]

Over the last 80 minutes, Tatum has played all of his minutes at the 4. There are only a few minutes when two of Jefferson/Giles/Vrank played the 4/5. I agree it's strange that Bolden didn't play. Could be injury, but it could also be a "teaching moment". The fact that Vrank played may be a signal from the coaching staff that Bolden needs to get his #$%@ together to play. I don't necessarily buy this as Bolden has had his best games during Miami and NC State.

It is interesting. Hopefully, Bolden comes back. He's a very nice piece to have.

Which is exactly my point: it is weird that Vrankovic got the brief run last night and Bolden none. Hopefully whatever the issue is, it's brief. There will be games where we need 5-10 minutes of Bolden (if not more). I don't want those minutes to have to go to Vrankovic.

[NM Duke Fan]

Which is exactly my point: it is weird that Vrankovic got the brief run last night and Bolden none. Hopefully whatever the issue is, it's brief. There will be games where we need 5-10 minutes of Bolden (if not more). I don't want those minutes to have to go to Vrankovic.

Hopefully they both will be used situationally in a wise and well-timed manner, each brings some valuable things to the game in their own ways. At least they both have had enough game experience fairly recently to have some sense of the speed of the game and how they can leverage their strengths.

[RepoMan]

This season has been chaotic, especially personnel-wise. I think Capel is trying to establish stability. So, he has shrunk the rotation, and Bolden is odd man out. As we continue to play within a better sense of established roles, then I bet he starts mixing back in some of the depth.

The obvious counter to this is the unexpected appearance of Vrank. In that regard, Vrank came into the Wake game and gave a needed jolt of energy and competitive fire. Luke and Allen confirmed that in their post-game interview. My read is that he earned a reward in the ND game -- you have to reward such play from a morale standpoint. But, it was only 2 minutes, and, assuming Bolden is playing hard with good attitude (and no injury) in practice, I would be surprised if he doesn't get minutes in the next game -- likely more than Vrank.

[tbyers11]

Which is exactly my point: it is weird that Vrankovic got the brief run last night and Bolden none. Hopefully whatever the issue is, it's brief. There will be games where we need 5-10 minutes of Bolden (if not more). I don't want those minutes to have to go to Vrankovic.

Bolden got into the game before Vrank at Wake and was pretty awful in his short stint. Vrankovic was passable in his stint in the second half. With such a short turnaround between Wake and ND there was no time for practice or probably even much film study. My guess is that the staff felt Vrank executed better at Wake so he gets first shot against ND. Kind of a feel call.

I agree that ~10 minutes of Bolden will be needed in many games going forward and hope that after a week of practice he gets back to that role against Pitt.

[Ballboy1998]

Bolden got into the game before Vrank at Wake and was pretty awful in his short stint. Vrankovic was passable in his stint in the second half. With such a short turnaround between Wake and ND there was no time for practice or probably even much film study. My guess is that the staff felt Vrank executed better at Wake so he gets first shot against ND. Kind of a feel call.

I agree that ~10 minutes of Bolden will be needed in many games going forward and hope that after a week of practice he gets back to that role against Pitt.

Looking at Pitt's beefy lineup, I'm hopeful that it will be a good opportunity for Bolden to get some more run in advance of the unc game, where we will very likely need a positive contribution from him. While I think the small lineup is still likely our best -- it creates better spacing on offense and it allows Amile to play center field on defense -- I would like to see us get in at least 5-10 minutes of the bigger lineup against Pitt in anticipation for being able to go either way against unc depending on which match ups are working better.

[Troublemaker]

Looking at Pitt's beefy lineup, I'm hopeful that it will be a good opportunity for Bolden to get some more run in advance of the unc game, where we will very likely need a positive contribution from him. While I think the small lineup is still likely our best -- it creates better spacing on offense and it allows Amile to play center field on defense -- I would like to see us get in at least 5-10 minutes of the bigger lineup against Pitt in anticipation for being able to go either way against unc depending on which match ups are working better.

Pitt has beefy guards, not beefy bigs. I'm not expecting much run for Bolden on Saturday. Hopefully we'll see more of Harry, though. Weaker opponent, maybe a bigger working lead, and eventually hopefully some garbage time to work in the depth.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Pitt has beefy guards, not beefy bigs. I'm not expecting much run for Bolden on Saturday. Hopefully we'll see more of Harry, though. Weaker opponent, maybe a bigger working lead, and eventually hopefully some garbage time to work in the depth.

In fairness, any big that Duke is likely to face will be "beefy" compared to Giles. Giles, while long and athletic, is not beefy nor does he have a lot of strength. I attribute that to his plenty of defensive fouls. He gets pushed around a lot (which he doesn't like) and often pushes back a little too hard.

[CDu]

Pitt has beefy guards, not beefy bigs. I'm not expecting much run for Bolden on Saturday. Hopefully we'll see more of Harry, though. Weaker opponent, maybe a bigger working lead, and eventually hopefully some garbage time to work in the depth.

While Pitt as a team is definitely weaker, Michael Young is a hoss. Pitt's problems lie on the perimeter, not inside.

[NM Duke Fan]

While Pitt as a team is definitely weaker, Michael Young is a hoss. Pitt's problems lie on the perimeter, not inside.

This sounds like a job for Super ... Vrank as a sub.

[CDu]

This sounds like a job for Super ... Vrank as a sub.

Yeah, no. I meant "hoss" as in "very skilled." Young is about 6'9", 235. But he's REALLY good. So I don't think this is a game in which we can ease Giles into more PT. Because despite Pitt's record, their starting center is one of the best in the conference.

And Vrankovic would get torched by Young.

[NM Duke Fan]

Yeah, no. I meant "hoss" as in "very skilled." Young is about 6'9", 235. But he's REALLY good. So I don't think this is a game in which we can ease Giles into more PT. Because despite Pitt's record, their starting center is one of the best in the conference.

And Vrankovic would get torched by Young.

So is the solution that Amile gets as few fouls and as much playing time as possible?

[flyingdutchdevil]

So is the solution that Amile gets as few fouls and as much playing time as possible?

That should be the goal of every player.

[budwom]

I just think Capel wanted to matchup well with ND's smaller guys, I don't think it was a huge indication of a Bolden injury or problem.
I expect to see him more vs larger teams...

[CDu]

So is the solution that Amile gets as few fouls and as much playing time as possible?

Yes. And I would expect that to be the plan in just about every game going forward.

That's not to say that Giles won't get significant minutes. He may well push up to 15-20 minutes in the near future as his foul rate decreases. But Jefferson is going to play as much as he can in pretty much every game moving forward.

[jcastranio]

He has the size.

He did not come to us from high school with a finished, polished offensive game. Being injured early didn't help in his development.

He also didn't come to us with a finished, polished defensive game (as a big man in a helping, man-to-man defense where he is going to need to be able to hedge, ice, switch to smaller players, etc.

All these things he has to learn. He may get picked up by the NBA as a potential guy. He may grow frustrated and want to transfer (I hope not, I love his potential). However, he has to take the time to learn his craft. It is actually much more difficult for a big man (as you know).

Harry is a different story - he is remembering and regaining skills he already had. He is picking up the defense a little faster.

I like Vrank - who does not have all the physical tools that Marques has - but does have an extra year in the program. Playing Tatum with three guards does lead to a log jam at the one remaining position. That certainly doesn't help Bolden's possible playing time.

[tbyers11]

Pitt has beefy guards, not beefy bigs. I'm not expecting much run for Bolden on Saturday. Hopefully we'll see more of Harry, though. Weaker opponent, maybe a bigger working lead, and eventually hopefully some garbage time to work in the depth.

Correct. When Pitt has all their players healthy they basically play a 6 forward lineup: Jeter, Young, Artis, Johnson, Jones, and Luther. All between 6'6" and 6'9" and between 210 and 235. With Ryan Luther out due to injury the last 4 games, they have been forced to play a "guard", 6'1" freshman Justice Kithcart 10 min/game. Probably not a likely game for Bolden (or Vrank) to make a big contribution unless Amile and Harry are in early foul trouble.

One note that I think you brought up in some of your GIF posts (BTW, those are great. Thanks) is the difference with how we have played ball screen defense in the last 2 sets of games. Against Miami and NCST we hedged hard on the PNR ball screen and Bolden got a lot of playing time. Against Wake and ND the philosophy was back to ICE-ing the ball screens and Bolden sees little to no time. Are Bolden's playing time fluctuations as simple as the staff thinks he is quite good at showing/hedging hard but not very good at ICE-ing the screens?

[NM Duke Fan]

Correct. When Pitt has all their players healthy they basically play a 6 forward lineup: Jeter, Young, Artis, Johnson, Jones, and Luther. All between 6'6" and 6'9" and between 210 and 235. With Ryan Luther out due to injury the last 4 games, they have been forced to play a "guard", 6'1" freshman Justice Kithcart 10 min/game. Probably not a likely game for Bolden (or Vrank) to make a big contribution unless Amile and Harry are in early foul trouble.

One note that I think you brought up in some of your GIF posts (BTW, those are great. Thanks) is the difference with how we have played ball screen defense in the last 2 sets of games. Against Miami and NCST we hedged hard on the PNR ball screen and Bolden got a lot of playing time. Against Wake and ND the philosophy was back to ICE-ing the ball screens and Bolden sees little to no time. Are Bolden's playing time fluctuations as simple as the staff thinks he is quite good at showing/hedging hard but not very good at ICE-ing the screens?

A very interesting hypothesis indeed ...

[English]

I just think Capel wanted to matchup well with ND's smaller guys, I don't think it was a huge indication of a Bolden injury or problem.
I expect to see him more vs larger teams...

How do you reconcile that Vrank has played significantly more (for a reserve big) than Bolden has lately? It's not because Vrank matches up better against smaller frontcourt and wing players.

[Saratoga2]

There may have been some players who reacted to coach K's reprimand or someone may have leaked information to the press. I expect certain reactions or actions could have been seen as disloyal. Clearly there is no way to know if this line of thinking holds water.I hoping that Saturday, we will see Bolden back on the floor.

[Troublemaker]

Correct. When Pitt has all their players healthy they basically play a 6 forward lineup: Jeter, Young, Artis, Johnson, Jones, and Luther. All between 6'6" and 6'9" and between 210 and 235. With Ryan Luther out due to injury the last 4 games, they have been forced to play a "guard", 6'1" freshman Justice Kithcart 10 min/game. Probably not a likely game for Bolden (or Vrank) to make a big contribution unless Amile and Harry are in early foul trouble.

One note that I think you brought up in some of your GIF posts (BTW, those are great. Thanks) is the difference with how we have played ball screen defense in the last 2 sets of games. Against Miami and NCST we hedged hard on the PNR ball screen and Bolden got a lot of playing time. Against Wake and ND the philosophy was back to ICE-ing the ball screens and Bolden sees little to no time. Are Bolden's playing time fluctuations as simple as the staff thinks he is quite good at showing/hedging hard but not very good at ICE-ing the screens?

Indeed, that could definitely be a factor. After 2.5 years ('14-'15, '15-'16, and '16-'17 through FSU) of icing screens, we all of a sudden went through a 3-game sequence in which we reverted to Duke Classic and began to hard-hedge ball screens: Louisville, Miami, and NC State.

I'm very proud of this postgame comment I made for Louisville:


I have a different take from you on the ball screen defense. In the middle twenty minutes of the game, Louisville burned us just as badly as FSU did, just in a different way because of the different technique we were using on ball screen defense, i.e. we hedged instead of iced today. When icing isn't performed correctly, you will have guards beating your big men inside the paint for layups and for short lobs, which is what occurred against FSU. When hedging (and the choreography behind it) isn't performed correctly, you will give up long passes to rolling big men running free, which is what occurred against Louisville. So even though Louisville didn't burn us with as many layups from guards, they were still burning us.

However, in the final 8 minutes or so of the game, I thought our choreography on ball-screen defense was better. Score-wise, the Cardinals kept us at arm's length by making some tough outside shots. If they had shot poorly, I thought we had a chance to make it an interesting game there.

I was encouraged that Harry looked more athletic down the stretch of the game. I thought Marques did a nice job hedging in his brief stint.

Long-term, I still expect this team to get much better, and I still expect that I'll be able to read this thread later on in the season and laugh.

Little did I know that Marques' brief stint against Louisville would presage him hedging up a storm against Miami and NCSU.

But yeah, beginning with Wake Forest, we stopped hedging and went back to icing. And you're right, tbyers, it's possible that Marques is behind the other big men, including Vrank, at the art of icing.

What's more -- I believe if we had elected to continue to hedge, Marques stood a good chance of playing 20-25 mpg at center. He's a hedging specialist.

[Matches]

How do you reconcile that Vrank has played significantly more (for a reserve big) than Bolden has lately? It's not because Vrank matches up better against smaller frontcourt and wing players.

Against Wake Vrank played 6 min, Bolden played 3. Last night Vrank played 2, Bolden got a DNP. Not sure I'd really characterize that as "significant". It looks a lot more like the coaching staff was just looking for someone to give a few spot minutes (or a few spot fouls), but neither of those guys are getting significant burn.

[English]

Against Wake Vrank played 6 min, Bolden played 3. Last night Vrank played 2, Bolden got a DNP. Not sure I'd really characterize that as "significant". It looks a lot more like the coaching staff was just looking for someone to give a few spot minutes (or a few spot fouls), but neither of those guys are getting significant burn.

You're right, and I considered immediately editing my post with a further caveat in addition to my parenthetical caveat, about the distinction in minutes. Neither has played significant minutes lately. "Significant" as a descriptor was a poor choice. My thinking, perhaps explained by the aforementioned ice/hedge approach, was that Marques appeared to the gaining burn through improvement. He's since (by slight appearance, which may be explained by nothing at all) regressed behind Harry and Vrank in the big man rotation. I have trouble reconciling that merely because ND was a bad big-man matchup (again, because it seems an equally bad matchup for other big-man Vrank).

All this to say, I find it curious, but certainly not curious enough to posit wild speculation.

[MChambers]

He has the size.

He did not come to us from high school with a finished, polished offensive game. Being injured early didn't help in his development.

He also didn't come to us with a finished, polished defensive game (as a big man in a helping, man-to-man defense where he is going to need to be able to hedge, ice, switch to smaller players, etc.

All these things he has to learn. He may get picked up by the NBA as a potential guy. He may grow frustrated and want to transfer (I hope not, I love his potential). However, he has to take the time to learn his craft. It is actually much more difficult for a big man (as you know).

Harry is a different story - he is remembering and regaining skills he already had. He is picking up the defense a little faster.

I like Vrank - who does not have all the physical tools that Marques has - but does have an extra year in the program. Playing Tatum with three guards does lead to a log jam at the one remaining position. That certainly doesn't help Bolden's possible playing time.

Bolden went to the same high school as Matt Jones, and the coach there has a reputation for teaching man to man defense. I think Bolden's struggles have come largely due to his injury. I also suspect that he didn't "ice" ball screens in high school. As others have noted, he's done well when asked to do a hard hedge.

I like Bolden a lot and think he's got a bright future, but I think he has struggled not because of his high school play or coaching.

[OZ]

Which is exactly my point: it is weird that Vrankovic got the brief run last night and Bolden none. Hopefully whatever the issue is, it's brief. There will be games where we need 5-10 minutes of Bolden (if not more). I don't want those minutes to have to go to Vrankovic.



Help me to better understand that comment. If Vrank is having good practices (as was said last week) and is playing better, why not Vrank? I trust the coaches to know who best deserves and is best suited for the minutes. I really don't care who plays.

[CDu]

Help me to better understand that comment. If Vrank is having good practices (as was said last week) and is playing better, why not Vrank? I trust the coaches to know who best deserves and is best suited for the minutes. I really don't care who plays.

Because Vrankovic has consistently shown to be not good enough to really play at the ACC level. Bolden at least has the pedigree and has shown signs of being able to play at this level. So if Bolden is getting outpracticed by Vrankovic, that is a problem.

[sagegrouse]

Because Vrankovic has consistently shown to be not good enough to really play at the ACC level. Bolden at least has the pedigree and has shown signs of being able to play at this level. So if Bolden is getting outpracticed by Vrankovic, that is a problem.

Not my concern, CDu. I'm OK with Vrank playing if he earns the minutes. He will probably have a big effect at Duke in two years -- pedigree doesn't seem to matter as much among seven-footers, who often develop more slowly.

[OZ]

Because Vrankovic has consistently shown to be not good enough to really play at the ACC level. Bolden at least has the pedigree and has shown signs of being able to play at this level. So if Bolden is getting outpracticed by Vrankovic, that is a problem.

I don't want to get into a back and forth, but I respectfully disagree that a "pedigree" is the singular indicator as to how well anyone is going to perform at this level. We've had some successes and we have had some disappointments.
As to Vrank "consistently" showing that he is not good enough to play at ACC level - understanding that one game is not a fair assessment - this past Saturday, I watched Vrank have a better game than Bolden against an "ACC level" team.
I can't imagine deciding that "I" don't want a player to "get those minutes" based on a pedigree.

[phaedrus]

Because Vrankovic has consistently shown to be not good enough to really play at the ACC level. Bolden at least has the pedigree and has shown signs of being able to play at this level. So if Bolden is getting outpracticed by Vrankovic, that is a problem.

Bolden is probably more talented and will end up having the better basketball career, but Vrankovic has the superior pedigree.

[Kfanarmy]

Because Vrankovic has consistently shown to be not good enough to really play at the ACC level. Bolden at least has the pedigree and has shown signs of being able to play at this level. So if Bolden is getting outpracticed by Vrankovic, that is a problem.

Quite the opinion. Wow! Does he need to have registration papers or something?

[CajunDevil]

Because Vrankovic has consistently shown to be not good enough to really play at the ACC level. Bolden at least has the pedigree and has shown signs of being able to play at this level. So if Bolden is getting outpracticed by Vrankovic, that is a problem.

I don't agree. I'd argue the opposite, that nothing to date shows why Vrank isn't as good or better than Bolden. Now, I really like Bolden but at this stage Vrank is a better low post defender, and a better finisher. Pedigree shouldn't dictate PT.

[CDu]

Bolden is probably more talented and will end up having the better basketball career, but Vrankovic has the superior pedigree.

I was referring to high school performance, not their parents.


I don't agree. I'd argue the opposite, that nothing to date shows why Vrank isn't as good or better than Bolden. Now, I really like Bolden but at this stage Vrank is a better low post defender, and a better finisher. Pedigree shouldn't dictate PT.


I don't want to get into a back and forth, but I respectfully disagree that a "pedigree" is the singular indicator as to how well anyone is going to perform at this level. We've had some successes and we have had some disappointments.
As to Vrank "consistently" showing that he is not good enough to play at ACC level - understanding that one game is not a fair assessment - this past Saturday, I watched Vrank have a better game than Bolden against an "ACC level" team.
I can't imagine deciding that "I" don't want a player to "get those minutes" based on a pedigree.

Vrankovic did not have a better game than Bolden against Wake. Neither was effective at all. In fact, I would say that that game is evidence of my point: in a game in which folks said Vrank played well and Bolden didn't, the two were equally ineffective on the court. I expect Bolden to play no worse than he did Saturday. I expect Vrank to not play significantly better than he did Saturday.

And ultimately that is my point. If we are playing Vrank over Bolden in February for non-injury reasons, that is a problem. Vrank isn't (yet, and probably not for at least another year or more) an ACC-level talent. Bolden is. So if Bolden isn't playing up to that talent, we have a problem if we need to go to a second backup big. Because Vrank really shouldn't be seeing the floor against ACC teams at this point in his career.

[Spanarkel]

My thought about Bolden's recent dearth of burn is that he may be "paying" for his two missed dunks in the first 2 minutes of the first half and his missed layup in the first minute of the second half against State. (Of course, missed layups and dunks are not that uncommon).

[Indoor66]

Quite the opinion. Wow! Does he need to have registration papers or something?

He plays his best at the Westminster Tournament.

For the betting crowd: 8 to 5 that Cdu gets the last word. Any takers?

[budwom]

Rest assured that if there is any news on Bolden, we won't get it! Them is just the facts, have to stay tuned for the next game. I'm just happy we're improving, the
staff does what they do...

[El_Diablo]

It's also possible he has just had the flu or something, right?

[CDu]

He plays his best at the Westminster Tournament.

For the betting crowd: 8 to 5 that Cdu gets the last word. Any takers?

Thanks for your contribution to this topic!

[Kfanarmy]

I was referring to high school performance, not their parents....

That's not what that word means...

[CDu]

That's not what that word means...

There is more than one definition of "pedigree."


ped·i·gree
ˈpedəˌɡrē/
noun
noun: pedigree; plural noun: pedigrees
1.
the record of descent of an animal, showing it to be purebred.
a purebred animal.
2.
the recorded ancestry, especially upper-class ancestry, of a person or family.
synonyms: ancestry, descent, lineage, line (of descent), genealogy, family tree, extraction, derivation, origin(s), heritage, parentage, bloodline, dual heritage, background, roots
"a long pedigree"
the background or history of a person or thing, especially as conferring distinction or quality.
a genealogical table.

[Kfanarmy]

There is more than one definition of "pedigree."

The explanation clearly indicates it refers to genealogy, not individual performance....

[CDu]

The explanation clearly indicates it refers to genealogy, not individual performance...


[ped-i-gree]
Spell Syllables
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
an ancestral line; line of descent; lineage; ancestry.
2.
a genealogical table, chart, list, or record, especially of a purebred animal.
3.
distinguished, excellent, or pure ancestry.
4.
derivation, origin, or history:
the pedigree of a word.

Contemporary Examples
Name: Sam Zell Age: 71 pedigree : Legendary real estate investor, known for jumping into distressed situations.


pedigree
/ˈpɛdɪˌɡriː/
noun
1.
the line of descent of a purebred animal
(as modifier): a pedigree bull
2.
a document recording this
3.
a genealogical table, esp one indicating pure ancestry
4.
derivation or background: the pedigree of an idea


As I said, more than one definition for the word. Ancestry is the most common - but on the only - definition.

[FadedTackyShirt]

K/Capel are reasonably OK with 6 players now: Luke, Amile, Grayson, Matt, Tatum, and Frank. Probably want a 8 person rotation, so Giles, Bolden, and Vrank are fighting for two slots.

What Capel said about Giles was true: he won't get back to 100% this season. Chase probably won't get back in the mix this season, so need to let Giles/Bolden/Vrank sort out how much situational rotation minutes they'll earn over the next two months.

For better or worse, K has chosen to rely heavily on OADs at the end of his career. Not a huge fan of doubling down on OADs, but would prefer Giles and/or Bolden over Vrank if in-game production is close. Have to disregard recruiting implications if Vrank clearly outplays Giles or Bolden.

Both Kyrie and Brand showed enough to justify high lottery pre-injury as freshmen. Brand came back and dominated as a sophomore. Giles and Bolden are nowhere close to that level. Giles may roll the dice and leave now if he thinks the risk is justified given bulky knees, but Bolden needs to show significantly more (college) production to avoid slipping out of the 2017 first round.

[NM Duke Fan]

Well, like Capel had stated, Vrank had had a great week of practice, and the coach was pleased with the level of energy he brought into that game, his strongly positive impact was also noted by both GA and LK. It is going to vary according to what the team needs at the moment, how practices are going, etc. That particular game Vrank was a choice that coach and key players were quite happy with. Another game Bolden may provide just what was needed at a critical juncture. It is great to have some developing depth for various defensive schemes, needs, and pivot points of games. Giles is clearly ahead of both of them in the rotation, but all 3 have their part to play, including in the all-important practices, where apparently Vrank brings some great energy, even if he does not have the wingspan and shot blocking proclivities of Bolden. Bolden has more NBA potential according to most metrics, but this is college ball with its own dynamics.

[DavidBenAkiva]

For what it's worth, NBA talent folks are still high on Bolden. In the updated 2018 Mock Draft (http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2018/), DraftExpress has Bolden listed at 17th (with Wendell Carter at 5, Trevon Duval at 6, Kevin Knox at 9, Luke Kennard at 15, and Frank Jackson at 34). Has anyone ever gotten 6 guys drafted in the first round before? Duke might have a real chance, especially if Luke stays and Duval and Knox commit. Jonthan Givony of DraftExpress seems to me to be highly regarded as far as I can tell.

NBA Draft (http://www.nbadraft.net/2018mock_draft) has a slightly different perspective. They have Carter (3), Duval (5), Knox (7), Trent, Jr. (11), Bolden (27), and Grayson Allen (29) going the first round of the 2018 draft with Kennard going in the first round of the 2017 draft. What's interesting is that both see Bolden as a first round talent and that either of Allen or Kennard are also first round talents this year or next.

[Spanarkel]

There is more than one definition of "pedigree."

"I'm a common man, drive a common van/
And my dog ain't got a pedigree.
If I have my way/
It's gonna stay that way,
'Cause high-browed people lose their sanity."

(Apologies to John Conlee)

[CDu]

For what it's worth, NBA talent folks are still high on Bolden. In the updated 2018 Mock Draft (http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2018/), DraftExpress has Bolden listed at 17th (with Wendell Carter at 5, Trevon Duval at 6, Kevin Knox at 9, Luke Kennard at 15, and Frank Jackson at 34). Has anyone ever gotten 6 guys drafted in the first round before? Duke might have a real chance, especially if Luke stays and Duval and Knox commit. Jonthan Givony of DraftExpress seems to me to be highly regarded as far as I can tell.

NBA Draft (http://www.nbadraft.net/2018mock_draft) has a slightly different perspective. They have Carter (3), Duval (5), Knox (7), Trent, Jr. (11), Bolden (27), and Grayson Allen (29) going the first round of the 2018 draft with Kennard going in the first round of the 2017 draft. What's interesting is that both see Bolden as a first round talent and that either of Allen or Kennard are also first round talents this year or next.

I would be thrilled if Allen, Kennard, and Bolden are on next year's team. I highly doubt that all of them are. But if even one of Kennard/Allen is back along with Bolden, I'd still be pretty thrilled.

[Dukehky]

Bolden is a conundrum.

On a positive note, I think this Chase Jeter injury may be a blessing in disguise. It takes one person out of a really deep front court rotation without getting any hurt feelings.

[SupaDave]

K/Capel are reasonably OK with 6 players now: Luke, Amile, Grayson, Matt, Tatum, and Frank. Probably want a 8 person rotation, so Giles, Bolden, and Vrank are fighting for two slots.

What Capel said about Giles was true: he won't get back to 100% this season. Chase probably won't get back in the mix this season, so need to let Giles/Bolden/Vrank sort out how much situational rotation minutes they'll earn over the next two months.

For better or worse, K has chosen to rely heavily on OADs at the end of his career. Not a huge fan of doubling down on OADs, but would prefer Giles and/or Bolden over Vrank if in-game production is close. Have to disregard recruiting implications if Vrank clearly outplays Giles or Bolden.

Both Kyrie and Brand showed enough to justify high lottery pre-injury as freshmen. Brand came back and dominated as a sophomore. Giles and Bolden are nowhere close to that level. Giles may roll the dice and leave now if he thinks the risk is justified given bulky knees, but Bolden needs to show significantly more (college) production to avoid slipping out of the 2017 first round.

He's not currently projected to even be drafted in the second round. A quick perusal of draft boards will show that Tatum will be drafted on talent and size, Giles will be taken for his basketball IQ and potential, Luke will be taken for his sweet jumper and craftiness, and Grayson will be taken late in the first as a combo guard (before the incident he was on all draft boards but the blowback is real for these "fan" rankings). Jackson has one second round nod so he's likely to be around next year. Along with Bolden - who it seems only fans think he has a shot at the draft at this point.

http://bballbreakdown.com/2016/12/28/nba-draft-prospect-watch-solid-big-men-available/

"Bolden’s name has been in lottery pick discussions all year because he came into Duke as a highly-touted freshman. So did Chase Jeter a season ago. Both have found themselves struggling to carve out a role for themselves at Duke, and it’s dropped them off many scouting boards as a result. Watch for Bolden right now due to his massive length and ability to score one-on-one, but don’t be shocked if he falls off entirely before the end of the season."

[Wander]

Now, I really like Bolden but at this stage Vrank is a better low post defender, and a better finisher.

Vrank has, what, one non-garbage time basket in his college career? And that was a completely open dunk. So I don't know how he can be considered a better "finisher" than anyone.

[Dukehky]

He's not currently projected to even be drafted in the second round. A quick perusal of draft boards will show that Tatum will be drafted on talent and size, Giles will be taken for his basketball IQ and potential, Luke will be taken for his sweet jumper and craftiness, and Grayson will be taken late in the first as a combo guard (before the incident he was on all draft boards but the blowback is real for these "fan" rankings). Jackson has one second round nod so he's likely to be around next year. Along with Bolden - who it seems only fans think he has a shot at the draft at this point.

http://bballbreakdown.com/2016/12/28/nba-draft-prospect-watch-solid-big-men-available/

"Bolden’s name has been in lottery pick discussions all year because he came into Duke as a highly-touted freshman. So did Chase Jeter a season ago. Both have found themselves struggling to carve out a role for themselves at Duke, and it’s dropped them off many scouting boards as a result. Watch for Bolden right now due to his massive length and ability to score one-on-one, but don’t be shocked if he falls off entirely before the end of the season."

If he shows flashes, he'll move back up. His measurable are absurd. Like if he puts in every other game like Miami, he'll go in the first. But it's not looking like he's going to get the minutes to be able to do that.

[SupaDave]

I would be thrilled if Allen, Kennard, and Bolden are on next year's team. I highly doubt that all of them are. But if even one of Kennard/Allen is back along with Bolden, I'd still be pretty thrilled.

I'm scared but I honestly think Luke will stay that extra year to get stronger - leaving his slot to Grayson more than likely who will be done with his studies. Next year's team will need a captain - Luke and Jeter will be our only juniors with significant playing time. Robinson and Vrank will be our only other upperclassmen (unless I'm forgetting someone).

[Dukehky]

I'm scared but I honestly think Luke will stay that extra year to get stronger - leaving his slot to Grayson more than likely who will be done with his studies. Next year's team will need a captain - Luke and Jeter will be our only juniors with significant playing time. Robinson and Vrank will be our only other upperclassmen (unless I'm forgetting someone).

Next year's draft certainly makes it more likely that Luke can take a Buddy Hield-esque jump just based on the ability of the draft class.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Next year's draft certainly makes it more likely that Luke can take a Buddy Hield-esque jump just based on the ability of the draft class.

That happened this year. If he takes another Buddy Hield-esque jump, he'll turn into Pete Maravich.

Kennard can definitely improve - especially on the defensive end where he leaves a lot to be desired - but he's not doing another offensive "jump". If he comes back - and it'll be a big if - it'll be to work on the aspects of his game that are either lacking or clear weaknesses.

[NM Duke Fan]

That happened this year. If he takes another Buddy Hield-esque jump, he'll turn into Pete Maravich.

Kennard can definitely improve - especially on the defensive end where he leaves a lot to be desired - but he's not doing another offensive "jump". If he comes back - and it'll be a big if - it'll be to work on the aspects of his game that are either lacking or clear weaknesses.

Or maybe to work on getting his degree in 3 years, and enjoying being a part of a great college basketball rprogram under a legendary coach!

[szstark]

I'm scared but I honestly think Luke will stay that extra year to get stronger - leaving his slot to Grayson more than likely who will be done with his studies. Next year's team will need a captain - Luke and Jeter will be our only juniors with significant playing time. Robinson and Vrank will be our only other upperclassmen (unless I'm forgetting someone).

Jackson, DeLaurier, White, Obi

[CDu]

That happened this year. If he takes another Buddy Hield-esque jump, he'll turn into Pete Maravich.

Kennard can definitely improve - especially on the defensive end where he leaves a lot to be desired - but he's not doing another offensive "jump". If he comes back - and it'll be a big if - it'll be to work on the aspects of his game that are either lacking or clear weaknesses.

I think (emphasis on "think") that Dukehky was referring to the quality of the draft class rather than the potential for Kennard to improve. Hield went from a deep class to a weak class by staying another year, which helped his draft position. Of course, he ALSO made great improvements as a scorer, which obviously helped too.

[CDu]

Jackson, DeLaurier, White, Obi

Jackson, DeLaurier, and White would still be underclassmen (freshmen and sophomores). Obi would indeed be an upperclassman, if he is able to play physically.

[szstark]

Jackson, DeLaurier, and White would still be underclassmen (freshmen and sophomores). Obi would indeed be an upperclassman, if he is able to play physically.

Oops. You are right. I confused it with experience on the roster.

[CDu]

I'm scared but I honestly think Luke will stay that extra year to get stronger - leaving his slot to Grayson more than likely who will be done with his studies. Next year's team will need a captain - Luke and Jeter will be our only juniors with significant playing time. Robinson and Vrank will be our only other upperclassmen (unless I'm forgetting someone).

Yes, next year's team has the potential to be REALLY young and inexperienced.

[Spanarkel]

Jackson, DeLaurier, and White would still be underclassmen (freshmen and sophomores). Obi would indeed be an upperclassman, if he is able to play physically.

The term Underclassman is used to refer collectively to Freshmen and Sophomores, and Upperclassman to refer collectively to Juniors and Seniors, sometimes even Sophomores. The term Middler is used to describe a third-year student of a school (generally college) that offers five years of study.
Student - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student

[SupaDave]

Yes, next year's team has the potential to be REALLY young and inexperienced.

Yep. I tried not to think about it too much b/c I will totally over think it. At least four freshmen, 3 sophomores, 4 juniors (and I really don't consider Obi - I actually thought he was graduating this year). Kinda like 2015 ironically (but senior Quinn was essential).

[kAzE]

Yes, next year's team has the potential to be REALLY young and inexperienced.

If Luke comes back, at least our offense is going to almost assuredly be really good. Carter looks like he will be an impact scorer immediately, and we already know Luke and Frank can both score with the best of them. Trent by all accounts is also an elite scorer, but I think he may need to come off the bench for this team, especially if we get Duval.

But defensively, there's a huge question mark. Our 2 defensive pillars, Amile and Matt are gone, so unless we get both Duval (I've heard he's pretty tough on defense) and Mo Bamba, I'm not sure this is going to be a good defensive team. Hopefully Marques comes back and becomes more reliable on the defensive end.

[Rich]

If Luke comes back, at least our offense is going to almost assuredly be really good. Carter looks like he will be an impact scorer immediately, and we already know Luke and Frank can both score with the best of them. Trent by all accounts is also an elite scorer, but I think he may need to come off the bench for this team, especially if we get Duval.

But defensively, there's a huge question mark. Our 2 defensive stalwarts, Amile and Matt are gone, so unless we get both Knox and Mo Bamba, I'm not sure this is going to be a good defensive team. Hopefully Marques comes back and becomes more reliable on the defensive end.

This may be a stupid question, but do coaches recruit for defense at all? On recruiting discussion boards there is very little time devoted to discussions on defensive ability. Is it because it's very hard to gauge defensive prowess based on how high school basketball is played? Is it assumed that if a kid is a good athlete or heady player then defense can be taught?

[TruBlu]

This may be a stupid question, but do coaches recruit for defense at all? On recruiting discussion boards there is very little time devoted to discussions on defensive ability. Is it because it's very hard to gauge defensive prowess based on how high school basketball is played? Is it assumed that if a kid is a good athlete or heady player then defense can be taught?

I could be wrong (just ask my wife), but IIRC Thomas Hill was recruited as a defensive player. Going way back, unbelievably Tate Armstrong was also a defensive get. Turned out that Tate had an excellent shot also.

There are probably others. Billy King comes to mind.

[kAzE]

This may be a stupid question, but do coaches recruit for defense at all? On recruiting discussion boards there is very little time devoted to discussions on defensive ability. Is it because it's very hard to gauge defensive prowess based on how high school basketball is played? Is it assumed that if a kid is a good athlete or heady player then defense can be taught?

There's so much communication and team work that goes into defense, it's just too tough to predict how kids will eventually pan out, in my opinion. You can obviously tell with some guys, like Mo Bamba, that he will be be a stud defensively because of his length and athleticism, but the most important part of defense, especially at Duke, is knowing the system, communicating, and trusting your teammates. But it's worth mentioning that really good athletes can recover from defensive mistakes.

I think that's why typically, our best defenders are upperclassmen. There are those occasional young guys who are studs on the defensive end, like Justise, but those guys don't usually hang around for long, unless they just have no offensive game. But it doesn't seem like we recruit defensive specialists like that very often.

[SupaDave]

I could be wrong (just ask my wife), but IIRC Thomas Hill was recruited as a defensive player. Going way back, unbelievably Tate Armstrong was also a defensive get. Turned out that Tate had an excellent shot also.

There are probably others. Billy King comes to mind.

Tyler Thornton was recruited almost specifically for defense (and leadership) - particularly for his defense on Kendall Marshall.

[flyingdutchdevil]

This may be a stupid question, but do coaches recruit for defense at all? On recruiting discussion boards there is very little time devoted to discussions on defensive ability. Is it because it's very hard to gauge defensive prowess based on how high school basketball is played? Is it assumed that if a kid is a good athlete or heady player then defense can be taught?

Not stupid at all. My take is that - with the exception of Winslow - every OAD player is recruited for offense. Carter and Trent aren't coming in next year known for their defensive prowess.

It's an interesting philosophy as Kentucky has OADs who are amazing at defense (MKG, Noel) or offense (Monk, Randle). Next year, we'll have few proven defensive players, either returning or new (assuming we don't get Bamba). Frank Jackson can be an absolute stud on D, but Amile won't be there to chew him out after a missed assignment.

[Rich]

I could be wrong (just ask my wife), but IIRC Thomas Hill was recruited as a defensive player. Going way back, unbelievably Tate Armstrong was also a defensive get. Turned out that Tate had an excellent shot also.

There are probably others. Billy King comes to mind.

I did, and you are. She said Thomas Hill was recruited for his tear ducts. :)

I don't think Billy King was recruited for his defensive prowess -- at least he didn't think so -- he lived on my hall freshman year and his license plate was SKY KING.

In any event, those examples are so long ago and the game, and recruiting, have changed so much since then.

[CDu]

This may be a stupid question, but do coaches recruit for defense at all? On recruiting discussion boards there is very little time devoted to discussions on defensive ability. Is it because it's very hard to gauge defensive prowess based on how high school basketball is played? Is it assumed that if a kid is a good athlete or heady player then defense can be taught?

I don't think it's a stupid question at all. I think defense is - generally speaking - not coached very well at the high school level. And I don't think it's coached at all at the AAU level. Furthermore, defense is something that depends on the coach. A player who might work for the way Duke wants to defend might not work at Syracuse, and vice versa. By comparison, offensive skills (ballhandling, shooting, etc.) are going to translate to most offenses.

Now, there are certainly traits that translate for defense too: strength, quickness/agility, tenacity, work ethic, desire/effort, etc., are all traits that contribute to a successful defender. It's just that some of the key traits for defense are harder to assess (effort/desire is nebulous, work ethic isn't easily observed on the recruiting trail, etc.).

And ultimately, the way we coach defense is complicated enough that - with a few exceptions - it takes time in the system to get good at it. That's why guys like Jefferson, Cook, and Kelly came in without the reputation as great defenders but eventually got there. The Winslows and Matt Joneses of the world are few and far between.

That's part of the challenge with the one-and-dones. Unless we revamp how we coach defense, we're going to need to balance one-and-dones with talented players who stick around for 3-4 years. Marshall and Miles Plumlee fit that mold. Jefferson too. And Matt Jones (though he came to Duke a ready defender). A guy like Jeter certainly fits the mold, and hopefully he sticks around long-term. But it is hard to do, because it requires guys to be patient about playing time. We hoped guys like Gbinije, Ojeleye, etc. would fill that role too. But sometimes those guys transfer.

I have no doubt that, if they stick around for 3 years, all four of the main freshmen would be elite defenders for us in their junior year. They have all the tools. It just times time to learn. But not all (and maybe none) will be around for 3 years.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I don't think it's a stupid question at all. I think defense is - generally speaking - not coached very well at the high school level. And I don't think it's coached at all at the AAU level. Furthermore, defense is something that depends on the coach. A player who might work for the way Duke wants to defend might not work at Syracuse, and vice versa. By comparison, offensive skills (ballhandling, shooting, etc.) are going to translate to most offenses.

Now, there are certainly traits that translate for defense too: strength, quickness/agility, tenacity, work ethic, desire/effort, etc., are all traits that contribute to a successful defender. It's just that some of the key traits for defense are harder to assess (effort/desire is nebulous, work ethic isn't easily observed on the recruiting trail, etc.).

And ultimately, the way we coach defense is complicated enough that - with a few exceptions - it takes time in the system to get good at it. That's why guys like Jefferson, Cook, and Kelly came in without the reputation as great defenders but eventually got there. The Winslows and Matt Joneses of the world are few and far between.

That's part of the challenge with the one-and-dones. Unless we revamp how we coach defense, we're going to need to balance one-and-dones with talented players who stick around for 3-4 years. Marshall and Miles Plumlee fit that mold. Jefferson too. And Matt Jones (though he came to Duke a ready defender). A guy like Jeter certainly fits the mold, and hopefully he sticks around long-term. But it is hard to do, because it requires guys to be patient about playing time. We hoped guys like Gbinije, Ojeleye, etc. would fill that role too. But sometimes those guys transfer.

I have no doubt that, if they stick around for 3 years, all four of the main freshmen would be elite defenders for us in their junior year. They have all the tools. It just times time to learn. But not all (and maybe none) will be around for 3 years.

CDu - great write-up. I'd love to get your perspective on why Kentucky has really good defenses most years despite always being young. I assume it's a mix between recruits and coaching, but I'm sure you've thought more about this than I have.

[MCFinARL]

Jackson, DeLaurier, and White would still be underclassmen (freshmen and sophomores). Obi would indeed be an upperclassman, if he is able to play physically.

Yes--although I will be a little surprised if Obi is still at Duke next year. This is his fourth year in school, so he is probably on track to graduate in May. Unless there is a miraculous improvement in his knees, he may well just decide to move on to the next stage of his life.

[kAzE]

CDu - great write-up. I'd love to get your perspective on why Kentucky has really good defenses most years despite always being young. I assume it's a mix between recruits and coaching, but I'm sure you've thought more about this than I have.

As much as I hate to say it, you gotta give Calipari credit. He's a tremendous defensive coach, and he gets his OAD superstars to buy in to it. He's had a lot of experience coaching really young teams, and he's found a way to make it work on the defensive end. That's not easy.

But with that said . . he's gotten some incredible defensive talent. John Wall. Eric Bledsoe. Anthony Davis. Nerlens Noel. MKG. De'Aaron Fox. These guys are unbelievable athletes and elite defensive players. We haven't gotten guys like that consistently. Justise was our only OAD of late to resemble those guys.

Harry was supposed to be on that level, but he's still overcoming his knee injuries.

But with all of that said, I'll still take the elite offensive players that we've gotten first. We can get 4 year glue guys to fill in the gaps defensively, and that's worked out for us.

[Kedsy]

Like if he puts in every other game like Miami, he'll go in the first.

I don't know if even this is true. Yes, Miami was Marques's best game at Duke and, yes, I thought he defended pretty well, but in that game he had 8 points, 4 rebounds, and zero blocks in 23 minutes. If he did that every game, I'd be surprised if that were enough to entice NBA scouts.

[CDu]

CDu - great write-up. I'd love to get your perspective on why Kentucky has really good defenses most years despite always being young. I assume it's a mix between recruits and coaching, but I'm sure you've thought more about this than I have.


As much as I hate to say it, you gotta give Calipari credit. He's a tremendous defensive coach, and he gets his OAD superstars to buy in to it. He's had a lot of experience coaching really young teams, and he's found a way to make it work on the defensive end. That's not easy.

But with that said . . he's gotten some incredible defensive talent. John Wall. Eric Bledsoe. Anthony Davis. Nerlens Noel. MKG. De'Aaron Fox. These guys are unbelievable athletes and elite defensive players. We haven't gotten guys like that consistently. Justise was our only OAD of late to resemble those guys.

Harry was supposed to be on that level, but he's still overcoming his knee injuries.

Yeah, I'll admit that I haven't spent a ton of time analyzing what Calipari does in terms of defense, so this is entirely speculation. I do think a fair chunk of it is the type of athletes he gets. Long and super athletic. He almost never lacks shotblockers, and his perimeter players are usually really athletic.

I suspect he also coaches the heck out of it on the defensive end. But it certainly helps to have the athletes to overwhelm opposing offenses.


Yes--although I will be a little surprised if Obi is still at Duke next year. This is his fourth year in school, so he is probably on track to graduate in May. Unless there is a miraculous improvement in his knees, he may well just decide to move on to the next stage of his life.

Yeah, I agree that there is a very real chance he doesn't return next year. And even if he is back as a fifth-year senior or grad student, I'm not sure that he would be a contributor on the court.

Unless at least one of Kennard and Allen comes back, we're going to be very inexperienced next year. Likely nobody with more than 1000 minutes played on the roster, and almost certainly less than 2000 career minutes combined. A good bit less game experience than even the 2016 team, which was pretty inexperienced. And WAY less Duke-years experience (that team had fifth-year senior Plumlee, senior Jefferson, and junior Jones as anticipated key regulars).

So, hopefully at least one of those guys joins Jeter and maybe three of the five highly-recruited freshmen (along with Vrankovic and White as recruited players).

[Hancock 4 Duke]

Tyler Thornton was recruited almost specifically for defense (and leadership) - particularly for his defense on Kendall Marshall.
And also his ability to shoot with his feet 1 inch from out of bounds in the corner :p

[jv001]

As for as playing time for Marques and Vrank, there are just so many minutes available for 8 players. I look at minutes like this;
1) Matt= 32, Luke= 32, Grayson= 32, Amile= 28, Jayson= 30, Frank= 20, Harry= 18, that leaves 8 minutes for Marques and Vrank. There is a possibility that Matt, Luke and Grayson get more than 32 minutes. If that happens Frank, Harry, Marques and Vrank are going to get less minutes. I think Vrank got those small amount of minutes was because he's been better in practice than Marques. I look at it like this, any player regardless of where the recruiting experts picked them can improve. The best place to move up in the pecking order is to out perform your team mates in practice. It looked like Vrank was communicating on defense and looked to have confidence in the last few games. I know it was just a few minutes, but that's the way I saw it. GoDuke!

[sagegrouse]

Unless at least one of Kennard and Allen comes back, we're going to be very inexperienced next year. Likely nobody with more than 1000 minutes played on the roster, and almost certainly less than 2000 career minutes combined. A good bit less game experience than even the 2016 team, which was pretty inexperienced. And WAY less Duke-years experience (that team had fifth-year senior Plumlee, senior Jefferson, and junior Jones as anticipated key regulars).

So, hopefully at least one of those guys joins Jeter and maybe three of the five highly-recruited freshmen (along with Vrankovic and White as recruited players).

Did you get a good hotel recommendation from Captain Obvious?

We'll have a lot of talent one way or another -- Jackson, Jeter, Vrank maybe Bolden, White and DeLaurier plus the stud freshmen. And, we had only Cook as a truly experienced player in 2015.

Kindly,
Sage
'

[CDu]

Did you get a good hotel recommendation from Captain Obvious?

We'll have a lot of talent one way or another -- Jackson, Jeter, Vrank maybe Bolden, White and DeLaurier plus the stud freshmen. And, we had only Cook as a truly experienced player in 2015.

Kindly,
Sage
'

The 2015 team had Cook, who at the time had over 2,000 minutes and nearly 1,000 points. And as a senior PG, he really helped rudder the ship. We also had a junior Sulaimon (nearly 2,000 minutes) to help teach the system. And Jefferson was a junior who had logged 1200 minutes. So, no, the team next year won't have nearly the same experience without Kennard or Allen as the 2015 team had.

Now, we may have enough talent to overcome the lack of experience. But it would be - by a comfy margin - the least experienced Duke team in at least the last 30 years. So, yeah, aside from the fact that Kennard and Allen are awesome, I think we really do need at least one of them from a leadership perspective.

[uh_no]

The 2015 team had Cook, who at the time had over 2,000 minutes and nearly 1,000 points. And as a senior PG, he really helped rudder the ship. We also had a junior Sulaimon (nearly 2,000 minutes) to help teach the system. And Jefferson was a junior who had logged 1200 minutes. So, no, the team next year won't have nearly the same experience without Kennard or Allen as the 2015 team had.

Now, we may have enough talent to overcome the lack of experience. But it would be - by a comfy margin - the least experienced Duke team in at least the last 30 years. So, yeah, aside from the fact that Kennard and Allen are awesome, I think we really do need at least one of them from a leadership perspective.

cook really didn't play pg though, and that's one of the reasons he was so good sr year. he didn't have to distribute

[CDu]

cook really didn't play pg though, and that's one of the reasons he was so good sr year. he didn't have to distribute

He handled the ball a lot. And more importantly, he had that experience of running the offense. Regardless, he had more experience and production by himself than the entire returning team would have with no Kennard or Allen.

[jv001]

He handled the ball a lot. And more importantly, he had that experience of running the offense. Regardless, he had more experience and production by himself than the entire returning team would have with no Kennard or Allen.

Agree with all of the above and would add, Quinn played his best defense his senior year. Another example of a good offensive player improving his defense because of his experience in playing the Duke defense. GoDuke!

[sagegrouse]

He handled the ball a lot. And more importantly, he had that experience of running the offense. Regardless, he had more experience and production by himself than the entire returning team would have with no Kennard or Allen.

That's a meaningless statement. The relation between productivity and "time on the college court" is hardly a well-defined curve. And by dismissing Luke and Grayson, you are defining the problem away. Oh, and Sulaimon was certainly a critical of that team, wasn't he? So, basically, you are arguing that Quinn Cook, by himself, outweighs all returning players at Duke in terms of leadership and ability to help the team.

Kindly,
Sage
'BTW, you do recognize I am messin' with ya'. I am only trying to see if I can have the last word"

[CDu]

That's a meaningless statement. The relation between productivity and "time on the college court" is hardly a well-defined curve. And by dismissing Luke and Grayson, you are defining the problem away. Oh, and Sulaimon was certainly a critical of that team, wasn't he? So, basically, you are arguing that Quinn Cook, by himself, outweighs all returning players at Duke in terms of leadership and ability to help the team.

Kindly,
Sage
'BTW, you do recognize I am messin' with ya'. I am only trying to see if I can have the last word"

Yeah, my entire point is that if both Kennard and Allen go pro, we won't be nearly as experienced next year as the 2015 team. Or even the 2016 team. I don't think this is reasonably debatable.

It is certainly possible (perhaps probable) that one returns. I won't speculate on how likely it is that both are gone, other than that the probability is greater than zero.

[English]

That's a meaningless statement. The relation between productivity and "time on the college court" is hardly a well-defined curve. And by dismissing Luke and Grayson, you are defining the problem away. Oh, and Sulaimon was certainly a critical of that team, wasn't he? So, basically, you are arguing that Quinn Cook, by himself, outweighs all returning players at Duke in terms of leadership and ability to help the team.

Kindly,
Sage
'BTW, you do recognize I am messin' with ya'. I am only trying to see if I can have the last word"

Clearly not.

[Troublemaker]

For the journalists who read DBR, maybe ask Coach K about Marques tomorrow in the postgame presser? Thanks, if you can get around to it!

I wouldn't necessarily expect a straightforward answer from Coach if, for example, Marques is dealing with some injury. But I would be interested in just seeing how he answers.

[kAzE]

For the journalists who read DBR, maybe ask Coach K about Marques tomorrow in the postgame presser? Thanks, if you can get around to it!

I wouldn't necessarily expect a straightforward answer from Coach if, for example, Marques is dealing with some injury. But I would be interested in just seeing how he answers.

Of course, I have no idea what's really going on behind the scenes, but I'd venture a guess: As a program, we've pretty consistently only used 3 big men in our rotations. February is when we usually shorten the rotation to 7 (or 7.5) guys, and those 7 guys are usually 3 bigs, and 4 guards. That's our formula, and it's worked pretty well. With Amile, Jayson, and Giles playing well, or at least better than Bolden, there's just not room for him in the rotation, unless he can prove in practice and his limited chances in games that he can be better than one of those guys.

Hopefully he uses this as motivation, comes back next year, and is the dominant big man we thought he could be. His potential is awesome.

[uh_no]

For the journalists who read DBR, maybe ask Coach K about Marques tomorrow in the postgame presser? Thanks, if you can get around to it!

I wouldn't necessarily expect a straightforward answer from Coach if, for example, Marques is dealing with some injury. But I would be interested in just seeing how he answers.

I used my crystal ball. The answer is

"Marques is a really good player and is working really really hard in practice, and it's shown in the games. He's made a lot of really great improvement since the beginning of the season. We have a lot of really good (and I mean REALLY GOOD) players on this team though, and so that means not every player is going to play 40 minutes every game. There are only so minutes so we'll play the best player for a given situation (you know). But as I said, he's been doing a great job and is a big part of this team...And you can't fault the guy, you know he missed a month of practice and that's really hard as a freshman, and I just think he's doing a great job.

Any questions about players who did play in the game?"

[Edouble]

Of course, I have no idea what's really going on behind the scenes, but I'd venture a guess: As a program, we've pretty consistently only used 3 big men in our rotations. February is when we usually shorten the rotation to 7 (or 7.5) guys, and those 7 guys are usually 3 bigs, and 4 guards. That's our formula, and it's worked pretty well. With Amile, Jayson, and Giles playing well, or at least better than Bolden, there's just not room for him in the rotation, unless he can prove in practice and his limited chances in games that he can be better than one of those guys.

Hopefully he uses this as motivation, comes back next year, and is the dominant big man we thought he could be. His potential is awesome.

I agree with this, but I am surprised that Bolden is not the 7.5th player in the rotation, given his defensive abilities with ball screens as well as the chance that we may play some bigger teams in the tournament (or next Thursday), when we may want to slide Amile to the 4, with Tatum at the 3, or just Amile at the 4 with a 3 guard lineup.

Bolden getting 8-10 minutes/game is really what I expected to happen. The DNPs are a little shocking to me.

[English]

I used my crystal ball. The answer is

"Marques is a really good player and is working really really hard in practice, and it's shown in the games. He's made a lot of really great improvement since the beginning of the season. We have a lot of really good (and I mean REALLY GOOD) players on this team though, and so that means not every player is going to play 40 minutes every game. There are only so minutes so we'll play the best player for a given situation (you know). But as I said, he's been doing a great job and is a big part of this team...And you can't fault the guy, you know he missed a month of practice and that's really hard as a freshman, and I just think he's doing a great job.

Any questions about players who did play in the game?"

I love this, and it's undoubtedly spot on. That's why it's FAR more fruitful to speculate wildly on an internet forum. The bolded is what I find interesting in your fake presser quote--while we're clearly NOT seeing anything from Bolden in the games, per coach-speak, we're seeing his efforts in practice show up from the performance of his teammates because he's pushing them to excel and improve. Second-handed contributions are not to be overlooked--especially coming off a season where we couldn't have any five-on-five practices or contact in practice because of the dearth of depth/health.

Still, I admit to a fair level of unpleasant surprise (albeit, possibly because I put unfair expectations on a freshman who went through a duration recovering from injury) that Marques hasn't sniffed the court lately despite showing some appreciable improvement in earlier games.

[Indoor66]

Maybe there is a simple answer: he has an injury. I do not know but that explanation would cover all bets.