PDA

View Full Version : Taylor King



Bluedawg
10-19-2007, 03:29 PM
Most people seem to think that Taylor will have a minor role on the team this year, but I strongly disagree. i think he will have a major impact on the team and on the ACC.


“Jerry Wainwright, who coached him in the under-18 tryouts, told me he’s like a stick of dynamite – you put him in the game and he can explode for 12 straight points,” Wojciechowski said. “Because of the way he can shoot the ball, he’s going to be on the court – maybe not as a starter, maybe not for 30 minutes a game, but, darn, if you don’t put him in the game ...”

King expects to contribute on the offensive boards and to defend, whether it’s in the post or on the wing. But he doesn’t hesitate when asked his top priority.

“Making sure I’m consistent with my jump shot,” he said. “Coach K recruited me to shoot the ball. And to play defense and to rebound. That’s what I’m going to do.” [source (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1275685)]

Classof06
10-19-2007, 04:19 PM
To be honest, I have no idea how big or small Taylor's contribution is going to be. I do think he's going to get the minutes to make a contribution, though.

If we struggle as a team shooting from the perimeter (given our perceived weakness in the post, teams may pressure us on the perimeter a little bit more), you have to believe King will get the green light. The bottom line is that much of Duke's success will be contigent upon how they shoot the ball from the perimeter. From what I hear, it's already pretty clear that he's the best perimeter shooter on the team. That counts for something.

I also think, despite being 6-6/6-7, King is a solid rebounder and post defender. These are things that will ultimately get him on the floor. If Lance continues to struggle with foul trouble, which may happen early in the season particularly, those minutes go directly to King. The bottom line is that he is a semi-big body and this year, that counts for something.

Now King's minutes may be limited depending on how quickly McClure comes back from knee surgery, and McClure will get his minutes, but he just doesn't bring the kind of offensive threat that King does.

mgtr
10-19-2007, 04:40 PM
Well, if the plan is indeed to play a much more uptempo game, get the ball up the floor quickly, and then spread the floor -- I would guess that the starters' minutes will be down some, and there will time for everybody. Promises to be interesting.

greybeard
10-19-2007, 05:26 PM
In my opinion, to be effective, an offense must threaten the basket. Only three ways to do that. Get the ball to an interior player who can shoot off the catch or one, maybe a second, bounce; pass it to a cutting player who ditto; penetrate to the basket off the dribble.

Unless the basket is threatened, and I mean seriously, an "outside" game will be ineffective. I think there will be an interior player by committee that will be integral to what this team does and that play will be more consistent and perhaps more potent than last year's interior play.

Indoor66
10-19-2007, 11:26 PM
In my opinion, to be effective, an offense must threaten the basket. Only three ways to do that. Get the ball to an interior player who can shoot off the catch or one, maybe a second, bounce; pass it to a cutting player who ditto; penetrate to the basket off the dribble.

Unless the basket is threatened, and I mean seriously, an "outside" game will be ineffective. I think there will be an interior player by committee that will be integral to what this team does and that play will be more consistent and perhaps more potent than last year's interior play.

I agree. Most successful teams I have seen work inside out on offense. Without an inside threat all other offensive patterns, whether driving and attempting to dish or outside shooting become very defensible. With an inside threat the other players are able to stretch the defense to the point that the outside and driving threats become, with reasonable passing, almost indefensible.

crote
10-20-2007, 01:50 AM
I base this solely on his high school numbers, some AAU games from summer before last, and five minutes I caught of his team in a televised game last year, but King seems like a serious, serious rebounder. Last year, King averaged better than 12 rebounds a game. He had individual games with 14 or more boards on fourteen occasions, including outings where he pulled down 20 and 24 boards. I realize there's a big difference between high school and college, but those are still very strong numbers.

When you factor that in with his range and the fact that he's one of the bigger guys on a very small team, you'd have to think K would find SOME regular role for him, provided he plays decent D.

Ignatius07
10-20-2007, 02:16 AM
A couple of months ago I thought that King would not see any minutes this year. Now I am thinking it's probably going to be feast or famine with him. That is, some games he won't come in at all, but the games he does play in will probably net him ~10 minutes.

If the other team is playing a 4 like Singler - who is able to play inside and out - King will simply be too much of a defensive liability because he is so slow. Remember how slow Paulus looked at times last year? King is slower. I realize Paulus was playing against guards, but I envision King getting burned in anything but defending the post.

But if the other team players a more traditional big at the 2nd big position who is not super quick, I think we might see King get a chance to prove his worth as a shooter and rebounder.

Carlos
10-20-2007, 09:28 AM
In my opinion, to be effective, an offense must threaten the basket. Only three ways to do that. Get the ball to an interior player who can shoot off the catch or one, maybe a second, bounce; pass it to a cutting player who ditto; penetrate to the basket off the dribble.

Unless the basket is threatened, and I mean seriously, an "outside" game will be ineffective. I think there will be an interior player by committee that will be integral to what this team does and that play will be more consistent and perhaps more potent than last year's interior play.

It's all yin and yang here. The only way Duke will threaten the basket consistently this year will be off the latter of your options - driving to the hoop. Fortunately Duke has a few guys (Henderson, Nelson, and Smith) who are pretty strong in that regard. Their ability to finish will be greatly aided by the absence of any defensive post players who will likely have to honor Duke's "inside" players who won't actually be inside.

That's why I agree that King will be a great weapon for Duke. When he's on the floor he's going to demand attention out at the 3-pt line which means that the other team's PF is going to spend a lot of time chasing him around away from the basket. Ditto for Singler. So picture Henderson or Nelson driving to the hoop and the other defenders are left with the option of helping out and leaving King, Singler, or Paulus open on the outside.

The other side of this is that Nelson, who has struggled to finish near the hoop should be much more successful if he's not trying to power over 6-9 guys - something that he's attempted without much success frequently in the past.

duketaylor
10-20-2007, 09:48 AM
Picture this scenario: On the offense, Singler has the ball at the high post, King's running off screens, cutting thru the lane, just being a pain to keep up with in general, and they are playing the 4 and 5 positions, thus leaving no bigs inside to guard the basket. Markie, Gerald and Nolan can all break their man down off the dribble. Somebody's gotta guard Kyle who can also penetrate or shoot the 3, so if the opposition guards Kyle outside (mistake, IMO) he creates for himself, if the big comes out just cut guys thru the lane with the motion O. Just a thought.
Coaches Clinic is today, I'll have a report up tonight or tomorrow.

ACCBBallFan
10-20-2007, 09:55 PM
Picture this scenario: On the offense, Singler has the ball at the high post, King's running off screens, cutting thru the lane, just being a pain to keep up with in general, and they are playing the 4 and 5 positions, thus leaving no bigs inside to guard the basket. Markie, Gerald and Nolan can all break their man down off the dribble. Somebody's gotta guard Kyle who can also penetrate or shoot the 3, so if the opposition guards Kyle outside (mistake, IMO) he creates for himself, if the big comes out just cut guys thru the lane with the motion O. Just a thought.
Coaches Clinic is today, I'll have a report up tonight or tomorrow.
Looking forward to your report, Chuck, especially since I had thought you were going to have to work and miss the coaches clinic.

duketaylor
10-20-2007, 10:44 PM
my good friend who's a HS coach and AAU coach goes every year and will fill me in. When I speak with him I will pass his observations along. He is way more knowledgable than I.

Bluedawg
10-21-2007, 08:39 AM
What we missed last year was a guaranteed last minute shot. I think King gives us that.

pfrduke
10-21-2007, 12:07 PM
What we missed last year was a guaranteed last minute shot. I think King gives us that.

Nobody can give us a "guaranteed" last minute shot. It's also tough to say that King gives us this when we don't know whether he can get himself open (or the team can get him open) to get off a shot at the end of the game. I think we have a long way to go before Taylor King is the go to guy for a last minute game winning kind of score.

riverside6
10-21-2007, 06:41 PM
I found this report (http://www.basketballforum.com/college-hoops-central/379759-bbf-exclusive-duke-practice-report-pics-video.html#post5034918) on the coaches clinic, which also includes a little video.

Cameron
10-21-2007, 09:18 PM
I think we have a long way to go before Taylor King is the go to guy for a last minute game winning kind of score.

I am a HUGE King Taylor fan already, and he's yet to play a true scrimmage against a real team. But I would tend to agree with the above sentence. He's going to have to first prove his worth during regular minutes, which I certainly think he will, before we know if he's the next Reggie Miller or not.

I think we are going to find that Greg will be one of our top go to three-ball shooters this season if we do in fact need one down the stretch. His shot just continues to get better and better and, even towards the end of last season, whenever he was pulling up for a decent look on a three, I usually booked it in my mind. He's an excellent shooter. I think he'll be tough as nails this season and make a ton of big shots for us.

Now his ball handling is a different issue... Let's just hope for good things.

OrangeDevil
10-21-2007, 10:50 PM
Guys, I live in Orange County, California (hence the tag OrangeDevil) and have seen Taylor King play (once in the flesh and several times on tv). His reputation as a shooter is well deserved; a smooth, confident stroke with mega-range. But he is also keen to post up and play with his back to the basket. I would suggest that he may be more of a scorer than a mere shooter. Loves to go to the line. The principal questions marks would be his handle (not horrendous, but not a strong point) and his defensive quickness. He will probably have matchup problems with quicker three's (what I see his natural position) on the perimeter, but he's certainly strong enough to handle many four's inside. He'll be a four year player and a definite asset.

While on the subject, his high school team (Mater Dei in Santa Ana) has two seniors, 6-9 twins David and Travis Wear, who are reported interested in Duke and UNC among others. Both are athletic, but last year were very thin and were not primary options to score (King was options 1,2,3 or so it seemed, he was that dependable) so I can't give you a more definitive report.

We still need a more dominant low post presence, but the three freshmen give us solid continuity for the next several seasons.

JasonEvans
10-22-2007, 09:44 AM
While on the subject, his high school team (Mater Dei in Santa Ana) has two seniors, 6-9 twins David and Travis Wear, who are reported interested in Duke and UNC among others. Both are athletic, but last year were very thin and were not primary options to score (King was options 1,2,3 or so it seemed, he was that dependable) so I can't give you a more definitive report.


While Duke showed some interest in the Wear twins a while ago, I think we have backed off quite a bit and are not really involved with them at this time.

I think Arizona and UCLA are supposed to be the leaders there, though Carolina and Kansas are both very much in the mix. The Wear twins were in Chapel Hill for Midnight Madness or whatever they call it at UNC.

--Jason "I wish we were involved, we do need some big bodies in the 2009 class" Evans

dukestheheat
10-22-2007, 12:28 PM
pfrduke-

you assert that we might not be able to rely on King for a last minute shot for a win; why do you think that?

((my point is: the guy can shoot it and that's what he's hired to do)).

dth.

Bluedawg
10-22-2007, 12:53 PM
Nobody can give us a "guaranteed" last minute shot. It's also tough to say that King gives us this when we don't know whether he can get himself open (or the team can get him open) to get off a shot at the end of the game. I think we have a long way to go before Taylor King is the go to guy for a last minute game winning kind of score.

I've seen him shoot, so i disagree with your final statement. Also, how many games last year did the final shot come up short. I think King will fix that.

Clipsfan
10-22-2007, 06:21 PM
I've seen him shoot, so i disagree with your final statement. Also, how many games last year did the final shot come up short. I think King will fix that.

I'm guessing that the belief isn't whether King has the range to shoot the ball, but whether he has the speed/moves to get open to take the shot. JJ was faster than King, but couldn't get off last second shots against tough athletic forwards (think Memphis). King may have similar problems when the defense is really dialed in (e.g. the last possession). I'd think that he'll find his chances during the normal flow of the game.

pfrduke
10-22-2007, 11:10 PM
I'm guessing that the belief isn't whether King has the range to shoot the ball, but whether he has the speed/moves to get open to take the shot. JJ was faster than King, but couldn't get off last second shots against tough athletic forwards (think Memphis). King may have similar problems when the defense is really dialed in (e.g. the last possession). I'd think that he'll find his chances during the normal flow of the game.

This is exactly the point I was making. If there was anyone on the team who I'd want to take a wide open shot to win a game, it would probably be King. I doubt that he'll get wide open shots in the end game, though, and none of us have any idea how effective a shooter he is with the D draped all over him.

Bluedawg, w/r/t last season's shots coming up short, I'm not sure whether you mean short in the literal sense (as in, not enough distance) or more figuratively (as in, didn't go in). By my count, we had 4 missed opportunities at game winning shots - FSU (two from the paint), UVA (twice - one from the paint, one from Paulus from 3 which hit back iron), and Virginia Tech (Paulus for 3, blocked by Deron Washington). If any of these were short (in the literal sense), it was McRoberts inside, and King's not going to do a lot to remedy that this season (nor, in all fairness, could he have kept Deron from blocking that shot).

I think King's ceiling for this season (not for his career - his career ceiling is Kevin Pittsnogle) is Keith Friel's junior year - 12 mpg, 6 ppg, and a +40% 3pt shooter who took 109 3s against 23 2s. Instant, reliable range off the bench in the middle of games, but not a guy who will be the go to at the end because he can't get his own shot from outside - he needs to have space and be open.

If we have a reliable play to get Taylor King a wide-open look from 3 in the last minute, then by all means lets run it and get him the shot. I'm just not sure we have that one in the playbook (no knock on us - it's incredibly difficult to get a wide open, last minute three when the defense is keyed on stopping precisely that shot), and we just don't know yet how he'll shoot when he's covered up. That's why I said I doubt he'll be the go-to at the end of the games.

throatybeard
10-22-2007, 11:25 PM
Guys, I live in Orange County, California (hence the tag OrangeDevil) and have seen Taylor King play (once in the flesh and several times on tv). His reputation as a shooter is well deserved; a smooth, confident stroke with mega-range. But he is also keen to post up and play with his back to the basket. I would suggest that he may be more of a scorer than a mere shooter. Loves to go to the line. The principal questions marks would be his handle (not horrendous, but not a strong point) and his defensive quickness. He will probably have matchup problems with quicker three's (what I see his natural position) on the perimeter, but he's certainly strong enough to handle many four's inside. He'll be a four year player and a definite asset.

While on the subject, his high school team (Mater Dei in Santa Ana) has two seniors, 6-9 twins David and Travis Wear, who are reported interested in Duke and UNC among others. Both are athletic, but last year were very thin and were not primary options to score (King was options 1,2,3 or so it seemed, he was that dependable) so I can't give you a more definitive report.

We still need a more dominant low post presence, but the three freshmen give us solid continuity for the next several seasons.


That whole post blows my limited mind.

And I thought Mater Dei was a FB skool.

throatybeard
10-22-2007, 11:27 PM
The Wear twins were in Chapel Hill for Midnight Madness or whatever they call it at UNC.

Crank that Roylja Boy.

Bluedawg
10-23-2007, 11:42 AM
This is exactly the point I was making. If there was anyone on the team who I'd want to take a wide open shot to win a game, it would probably be King. I doubt that he'll get wide open shots in the end game, though, and none of us have any idea how effective a shooter he is with the D draped all over him..

All I know is in the game he played at Cameron last year he pumped in 32 points. not all of them were wide open shots.




Bluedawg, w/r/t last season's shots coming up short, I'm not sure whether you mean short in the literal sense (as in, not enough distance) or more figuratively (as in, didn't go in).

figuratively ...thanks

ACCBBallFan
10-23-2007, 01:00 PM
I'm guessing that the belief isn't whether King has the range to shoot the ball, but whether he has the speed/moves to get open to take the shot. JJ was faster than King, but couldn't get off last second shots against tough athletic forwards (think Memphis). King may have similar problems when the defense is really dialed in (e.g. the last possession). I'd think that he'll find his chances during the normal flow of the game.

It still makes sense to have King Taylor in the game in that last second scenario. Even if he does not get open, he is commanding someone's attention 35 feet from the basket giving his mates a better chance of getting open 4 on 4 than 5 on 5. And if he has the slightest amount of room to shoot, he will not hesitate as was Duke's problem last year.

Clipsfan
10-23-2007, 02:42 PM
It still makes sense to have King Taylor in the game in that last second scenario. Even if he does not get open, he is commanding someone's attention 35 feet from the basket giving his mates a better chance of getting open 4 on 4 than 5 on 5. And if he has the slightest amount of room to shoot, he will not hesitate as was Duke's problem last year.

True, he would probably serve well as a decoy, but we don't know whether he would be best to attempt the shot. The lack of conscience is a good thing in that case, I guess.

As for the 32 points in Cameron in a HS game, that's exactly what it was, a HS game. We have plenty of high scorers on our team in HS (think Nelson for the highest), but that doesn't mean they're best to take the last shot.

phaedrus
10-23-2007, 06:29 PM
I scored 28 in a high school game once. True story. It wasn't in Cameron though.

Cameron
10-23-2007, 07:09 PM
The first time I ever walked onto the hallowed court at Cameron, I took my cousin's ball he was carrying, started dribbling full speed the length of the court, took off from about 35 feet out (one leg extended slightly forward, knee bent at a 90 degree angle), and drained my first ever shot on Coach K Court. Jeff Capel style. True story also.

I will never forget that moment, as it was a shot my cousin and I (also a True Blue Believer since birth) replayed in the backyard a million times over after it originally happened.

Go Duke!!!

So, I guess the whole point of this post is, Coach K, I'm ready. I'll make it.

Clipsfan
10-23-2007, 07:10 PM
I scored 28 in a high school game once. True story. It wasn't in Cameron though.

I did score in Cameron playing some intramural. Wasn't 28 points though. I've also scored in Pauley Pavilion doing the same. Was closer to 28, but still not there.

Channing
12-18-2007, 09:05 AM
To date, King has logged 146 minutes, and has scored 114, meaning he roughly scored a point for each minute and 22 seconds of game time logged. If you take out the maui invitational, he has logged 127 minutes and scored 107 points for a point roughly every minute and 12 seconds.

Other Duke Players (rough calculations):

Gerald Henderson: 231 minutes, 130 points: a point per 1 and 47 seconds
Demarcus: 290 minutes, 128 points: a point per 2 minutes and 15 seconds.
Scheyer: 268 minutes, 116 points: a point per every 2 minutes and 12 seconds

While there is more to a game than scoring, and each of those three others mentioned bring a lot of intangibles to the table, TK is scoring at an alarming rate, and should be fun to watch as he matures as a player, and is able to handle the responsibility of more minutes.

(disclaimer: I am horrible at math - if my calculations here are wrong I apologize)

cape cod
12-18-2007, 12:41 PM
Mullin? Both long-range lefty bombers with quick releases, as well as very good all-around games. About 6'6", although TK has about 20 lbs on Chris (it seems to me that CM may have lost some weight from college to pro).

dukestheheat
12-18-2007, 04:28 PM
steven-

my kids say i'm a math guy and especially my daughter, who is always telling me to 'do the math'.

so, i have run your numbers through my very large math brain and sir, i am here to tell you that certifiably, by the standards set forth by Duke's dukestheheat, YOU ARE RIGHT ON.

congratulations, and go in peace (or something like that). trying to sound like the 'man behind the curtain' from the wizard of oz.

dth.

Nittany Devil
12-18-2007, 05:53 PM
After the Albany game I was thinking about how impressive Taylor King's points per unit playing time must be. Any idea which Duke freshmen in recent memory have been in the same ballpark or have been even better in per minute scoring?

Saratoga2
12-18-2007, 09:06 PM
To date, King has logged 146 minutes, and has scored 114, meaning he roughly scored a point for each minute and 22 seconds of game time logged. If you take out the maui invitational, he has logged 127 minutes and scored 107 points for a point roughly every minute and 12 seconds.

Other Duke Players (rough calculations):

Gerald Henderson: 231 minutes, 130 points: a point per 1 and 47 seconds
Demarcus: 290 minutes, 128 points: a point per 2 minutes and 15 seconds.
Scheyer: 268 minutes, 116 points: a point per every 2 minutes and 12 seconds

While there is more to a game than scoring, and each of those three others mentioned bring a lot of intangibles to the table, TK is scoring at an alarming rate, and should be fun to watch as he matures as a player, and is able to handle the responsibility of more minutes.

(disclaimer: I am horrible at math - if my calculations here are wrong I apologize)

I calculated the points per shot and it appears that King is leading Duke in that category as well. I came up with 1.68 points per shot by taking out the free throw points and dividing the remainder by shots taken. That is really an amazing number.

SilkyJ
12-18-2007, 09:22 PM
After the Albany game I was thinking about how impressive Taylor King's points per unit playing time must be. Any idea which Duke freshmen in recent memory have been in the same ballpark or have been even better in per minute scoring?

luol probably is the closest, but probably isn't that close. he did average 15ppg, but also averaged something like 30+mpg and happened to be on the floor with jj, ewing, and shelden so they kinda scored a lot.

I do think luol would be closer in +/- though...

Bluedawg
01-10-2008, 11:15 AM
Last night 12 minutes played, 15 points scored. Fewest minutes played, most points scored.

Why doesn't he get more PT?

Ignatius07
01-10-2008, 11:24 AM
Defense probably. Some night it makes sense to limit his minutes, but last night he was shooting quite well, and had that sweet pass to Henderson. In a game when offense is hard to come by, I agree that sitting him was questionable.

Chard
01-10-2008, 11:27 AM
That is a mystery. I really liked the rebounding and inside presence that he added. He may be a great shooter but I liked what he brought on the interior. He had a surprisingly athletic dunk in the first half and drew a foul on a spin around move on the Temple center. Maybe it's his defense? I don't know. I don't have as keen a basketball eye as some here. Duke needs some kind of interior play while Lance and Zoubs are out.

DUKIECB
01-10-2008, 11:38 AM
I agree that King looks good enough on the floor to warrant more minutes. It seems the general consensus is that it may be his defense that keeps him off the floor. Does anyone here with some insight know exactly what it is defensively that he does wrong?

I totally trust K in his minutes distribution, I know he doesn't do anything without there being a good reason for it, but I'm just wondering what that reason is.

bird
01-10-2008, 11:49 AM
What I recall is that in the first seconds of his appearance he got back-doored on an in bound play (fortunately, Temple blew the layup), and within a minute committed a foul. However, I also recall that his play improved the more minutes he played. I also recall him being on the floor during a critical time in the second half.

The one thing I do wonder about is K's philosophy about bringing a player along who is struggling. K often (not always) is not inclined to give a player a chance to play through problems. I think it has been argued on this board that playing an unready player will only hurt confidence, to long-term detriment of the player. Last night King might have deserved an immediate benching, but he stayed in and responded. King's improvement as the game wore on might be one of the top positives coming out of Temple.

CMS2478
01-10-2008, 01:03 PM
I thought his defense, rebounding, passing, and obviously his shooting last night warrented more minutes.........but hey who am I to judge.

tweeze
01-10-2008, 01:05 PM
ya right now I think if King played as much as Singler he would put up a little bigger numbers. Why not try starting him along with Singler while we already have a defensive liability in the paint what teams bigs could guard either on of them and that could force the opposition to go to a zone and with our shooting guys like King, Paulus, and a hot Scheyer could tear a zone apart.

AKG
01-10-2008, 01:20 PM
I agree that a frontcourt of singler and king would be nearly impossible to match up with. In addition to the potential for both to hit the three, they would provide driving lines for nelson and henderson by stretching the defense. I'm not going to start the coach k doesn't play enough guys argument, but I do think he is sometimes a little bit too punitive in terms of limiting playing time with freshman. I have seen some defense lapses from King, but I think the effort is definitely there.

dukeENG2003
01-10-2008, 01:23 PM
Taylor is really hit or miss. He was TERRIBLE for the brief stretch when he saw action against Cornell. I think K plays him on nights when he's playing well, and not when he isn't, not much else to it IMO.

CMS2478
01-10-2008, 01:35 PM
Taylor is really hit or miss. He was TERRIBLE for the brief stretch when he saw action against Cornell. I think K plays him on nights when he's playing well, and not when he isn't, not much else to it IMO.

Then why didn't he play more last night........was he not playing well?

Classof06
01-10-2008, 01:40 PM
This is a huge mystery to me as well. I think Taylor, especially with Lance and Brian sidelined, needs to be getting A LOT more playing time. He the most efficient scorer on our team and his post defense is a lot better than I thought it would be coming into the season. Right now he averages 10 points a game in 13 minutes a game.

I think Nolan and Taylor should be playing more and Nolan has justifiably seen his minutes increase lately. I think it's time for Taylor to get his minutes...

Bluedawg
01-10-2008, 01:42 PM
Defense probably. Some night it makes sense to limit his minutes, but last night he was shooting quite well, and had that sweet pass to Henderson. In a game when offense is hard to come by, I agree that sitting him was questionable.

And lets add 3 defensive rebounds in 12 minutes.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
01-10-2008, 01:43 PM
Quote:

"Taylor is really hit or miss. He was TERRIBLE for the brief stretch when he saw action against Cornell. I think K plays him on nights when he's playing well, and not when he isn't, not much else to it IMO."


But, as other posters just mentioned, King struggled in his first few minutes of the Temple game as well. In the Temple game, however, K left him on the court and he found his way and gave us two absolute daggers as well as rebounding, playing solid (if not great) D, making some good passes, etc.

Look, there's no need to get into this debate again. K trusts some guys more than others based on practice, in-game performance, and a myriad of other factors. It ain't gonna change. Those guys who haven't sufficiently impressed K to make it past their first bad stretch can either work harder (a la Marty P), sulk a lot, or take their games elsewhere (MT, Boat, Boykin, et al).

One thing I love about Taylor is that, so far at least he seems to have taken critique and benching very well. In fact, Taylor has, for my money, had one of the best attitudes on the team. He has been a great lift when he's on the court, of course. But he is also often the first (at times last night the ONLY) guy on the bench to clap for a good on-court play, high-five guys coming to the bench, etc. The jump-and-bump between him and Nolan last night gave me a really positive feeling about the future of our team. We seem to be escaping the program-derailing Class of 2005 with the great attitudes and toughness of this year's class.

ArtVandelay
01-10-2008, 01:43 PM
Another reason for Taylor's lack of PT is that he is, well, pretty slow. Watch the fast breaks - Taylor is usually the last guy down the floor. I vaguely remember that there was one break last night where someone took an outlet pass coast-to-coast for the layup (might've been DeMarcus or Nolan). Taylor was actually running that play, but our guard got down the floor so much faster that by the time he got to the basket, Taylor wasn't available to receive a pass. To the extent that we are getting out in transition a lot(which seems to be hit or miss...I think teams are adjusting to our running game and emphasizing getting back on D), Taylor might not fit well in that tempo.

I'm not saying that this should cut down on his PT necessarily. I'm just offering another plausible explanation. I was impressed by his dunk last night - not the greatest elevation ever, but it was nice to see that he can finish strong when needed.

ArtVandelay
01-10-2008, 01:49 PM
Oh yeah, I also meant to say that for all the talk of Taylor "not having a conscience" with his shot, to quote the great Jay Bilas, I think lost a bit is the fact that Taylor is a bit of a chucker. It's good for him to shoot when he's open, but I think he's trying to force the offense a little bit at times, especially off the bounce. You almost get the impression that he's so used to scoring in bunches in high school that the idea of being on the floor without shooting a lot and scoring a lot of points kills him. He needs to learn to be a little more patient and do his thing, i.e. shoot the ball when open. He also needs to take a JJ crash course in moving without the ball to get himself open for the 3. With that kind of weapon, you need to find more ways to exploit it, and the head-fake dribble drive that JJ developed is not really in Taylor's arsenal right now.

Nittany Devil
01-10-2008, 03:11 PM
Has anyone produced updated stats on the cumulative +/- per 40 minutes for each of our players? The bottom line is that we want players who generate more points than they allow. The +/- stats that Jumbo has kindly generated each game are far from a perfect metric, but I think that the cumulative stats could give some interesting information. For example, if these ideas about Taylor's liabilities such as poor defense or being too aggressive with his shot have merit, then we might expect to see his cumulative +/- per 40 minutes to be much lower than you would expect for someone who has such a high per minute scoring average. (I think we've seen evidence of this with Henderson in some games.) However, Taylor's +/- per 40 minutes were the highest on the team against Temple, and I think they are at or near the top of the team for the season. I think that gives some evidence that whatever liabilities King has, he is overcoming them with his prolific scoring.

I also agree with other posters about judging King's Cornell game. He played a total of what, 6 minutes? Even though he didn't look good at all, that's a pretty small sample. I agree that he made several mistakes, and I have no problem with Coach K taking him out of that game since he had other good options. I just would hesitate to say anyone had a terrible game with only 6 minutes of PT. But maybe that's just my perspective.

Jumbo
01-10-2008, 04:57 PM
Has anyone produced updated stats on the cumulative +/- per 40 minutes for each of our players?

Uh, it's stickied up top: http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4862

Clipsfan
01-10-2008, 05:06 PM
Not counting Davidson, who doesn't play much, he easily has the best +/- per 40 of anyone on the team. I'm not quite sure what the exact reasons are for him not playing more (although he does make freshmen mistakes and has a tendency to test how "hot" he is if he makes a couple in a row), but I'm sure that K has a reason for what he's doing. Count me as one who wonders what his entire thought process is, but I'm not necessarily advocating that King play more. I'd just like to know more about why he doesn't, beyond the obvious speed/defense issues.

Nittany Devil
01-10-2008, 05:18 PM
Uh, it's stickied up top: http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4862

Thanks - I noticed it there the other day, and for some reason it just didn't register today. Guess I'm not thinking too straight today...

Fish80
01-10-2008, 05:46 PM
When everyone is healthy, there just aren't that many more minutes for Taylor. Through 13 games, with one game going into overtime, there were 2625 minutes available. Here’s how the minutes were allocated.

DeMarcus Nelson 395
Jon Scheyer 363
Kyle Singler 348
Greg Paulus 346
Gerald Henderson 315
Lance Thomas 208
Nolan Smith 207
Taylor King 175
Brian Zoubek 140
David McClure 83
Marty Pocius 32
Jordan Davidson 13

Realistically, when Lance and Brian are back, Taylor won’t see any significant time at the 4 spot. So we are really talking about allocating time between DeMarcus, Jon, Gerald, David, and Taylor. Who’s minutes does he take?

Jumbo
01-10-2008, 06:10 PM
I don't buy the idea that 12 minutes isn't playing much. That's more than a quarter of the game. That's a lot.
Three other things to keep in mind:
1) Does Taylor have the stamina to play extended minutes?
2) Taylor still struggled at times on D -- wouid that have been exposed even more with increased playing time?
3) Did Taylor's strengths/weaknesses mesh with Duke's strategy last night (especially on D, where Duke was applying heavy ball pressure, trying to force turnovers, switch on all screens, etc.)?

Devilsfan
01-10-2008, 06:26 PM
The more he plays the better he'll get unlike some of the bigger guys who haven't improved much at all. Last time I checked the team with the most points wins and Taylor can give us points three at a time.

OrangeDevil
01-10-2008, 06:27 PM
Having seen Taylor King play several times while he was at Mater Dei, I predicted he would be a solid contributor offensively at Duke. I also questioned his defensive quickness on the perimeter when matched against a shorter, thinner three. Inside, Taylor may be vulnerable against really big and strong fours. I suspect that this quandary accounts at least somewhat for the lack of bump in playing time. K is, rightfully, committed to tight man-to-man that emphasizes each defender's responsibility to contain his man.

That said, I am reminded of Bobby Knight's response when told that Michael Jordan could not be the first draft pick because the teams before Chicago needed centers. Knoght retorted: "So play him at center. He can guard some of them and none of them can guard him." Maybe the answer is to play Taylor against the bigs and allow him to outscore his opponent. I suspect he could hold his own on the boards.

Jumbo
01-10-2008, 06:29 PM
The more he plays the better he'll get unlike some of the bigger guys who haven't improved much at all. Last time I checked the team with the most points wins and Taylor can give us points three at a time.

Huh?

Patrick Yates
01-10-2008, 07:06 PM
With Taylor, there are certain strengths and weaknesses. Obviously, he can score. He is a game rebounder. He is a willing defender, if not super capable.

But, his athleticism is a problem. And it is not a problem that can be solved with his long arms. I am not talking about his defense. That is what it is. An athletic big or wing will have him for lunch. That may not change during his career. Where his athleticism can hurt Duke is on Offense. Like JJ, he will be susceptable against athletic defenders. Vs JJ, an athletic 6-3 to 6-6 could shut him down. Any shorter and he shot over, any taller and he would escape. Taylor's death zone will be the 6-5 to 6-8 range. A great example is Marcus Ginyard at UNC. He is a superb defender in the Nate James mold. He is an athletic 6-6 ish. If he is dedicated, he can completely shut Taylor down. King will have real trouble even getting the ball, much less getting off a shot. I like Taylor as a player. He can be great for us. But against teams with athletic defenders he will have trouble.

And if he is not hitting 3s, he really isn't doing enough otherwise to justify PT. I know that Cornell is not an example of a team with athletes, but Taylor wasn't hitting. When he isn't, he can't play. I think he should have gotten more of an opportunity than he did, but I wasn't at practice or in the huddle, so I don't know what happened.

Taylor will have to get more active on O, moving arround a la JJ to get more open looks.

In Summation, Taylor will have some great games. He will have some awful days. The one thing I doubt we will see from him is consistency. I really think it will be feast or famine, and there is no way to tell beforehand what it will be. I love debate, but I don't see this roller coaster ending this year.

This horse won't get any deader.

Patrick Yates

Constantstrain 81
01-10-2008, 07:51 PM
I have watched. I have listened. I have read. I have to admit that I like having Taylor in the game (good thing I'm not coaching). Hitting or missing, he is a threat. He is long. He hustles. He seems to bring passion.

Yes, he can be slow. Yes, he has a lot to learn. Still, I would have him out there more. The "threat" of Taylor could open up things for others.\

Just my humble opinion.

GMR
01-10-2008, 08:06 PM
I'd also like to see King get 15-20 minutes per game. His court time was substantially less than any of the other 7 guys that played against Temple. On the other hand, I did like K's substitution pattern, trying so many different combinations, and keeping legs relatively fresh. The exception to this is Nelson's 37 minutes, and King's 12 minutes. I believe that if King had gotten, for instance, 18 minutes, and Nelson 31 minutes, that would have been a good balance of using all 8 of Duke's available minutes.

GMR

sagegrouse
01-10-2008, 08:06 PM
A few things to be said about TK. Also, remember that this guy is a freshman -- and is going to get a lot better.

1. TK is an exciting player -- not all of it positive -- but you have to watch him when he's on the court. Also, he seems to get a lot better if left on the floor for a few minutes.

2. PPM figures are really impt. to this team, which will have inevitable scoring droughts (two last night). Ergo TK is going to get more minutes, IMHO (remember, for the "grouse," the "h" is silent). I also thought his defense was not bad -- he was certainly active.

3. Anyone else see a little of the Art Heyman personality in TK? You know, in your face! Oh? You didn't like that? In your face again! Of course, Art displayed a wry attitude on the court where you knew he knew it was just a basketball game.

sagegrouse

Devilsfan
01-10-2008, 08:28 PM
I think he has more to gain with added playing time. He may not be the most athletic player but he's not akward and doesn't seem to get his shots blocked.

Devil in the Blue Dress
01-10-2008, 08:29 PM
A few things to be said about TK. Also, remember that this guy is a freshman -- and is going to get a lot better.

1. TK is an exciting player -- not all of it positive -- but you have to watch him when he's on the court. Also, he seems to get a lot better if left on the floor for a few minutes.

2. PPM figures are really impt. to this team, which will have inevitable scoring droughts (two last night). Ergo TK is going to get more minutes, IMHO (remember, for the "grouse," the "h" is silent). I also thought his defense was not bad -- he was certainly active.

3. Anyone else see a little of the Art Heyman personality in TK? You know, in your face! Oh? You didn't like that? In your face again! Of course, Art displayed a wry attitude on the court where you knew he knew it was just a basketball game.

sagegrouse

Taylor's square the shoulders, stand and shoot reminds me of Bob Verga.

mike88
01-10-2008, 09:14 PM
With Taylor, there are certain strengths and weaknesses. Obviously, he can score. He is a game rebounder. He is a willing defender, if not super capable.

But, his athleticism is a problem. And it is not a problem that can be solved with his long arms. I am not talking about his defense. That is what it is. An athletic big or wing will have him for lunch. That may not change during his career. Where his athleticism can hurt Duke is on Offense. Like JJ, he will be susceptable against athletic defenders. Vs JJ, an athletic 6-3 to 6-6 could shut him down. Any shorter and he shot over, any taller and he would escape. Taylor's death zone will be the 6-5 to 6-8 range. A great example is Marcus Ginyard at UNC. He is a superb defender in the Nate James mold. He is an athletic 6-6 ish. If he is dedicated, he can completely shut Taylor down. King will have real trouble even getting the ball, much less getting off a shot. I like Taylor as a player. He can be great for us. But against teams with athletic defenders he will have trouble.

And if he is not hitting 3s, he really isn't doing enough otherwise to justify PT. I know that Cornell is not an example of a team with athletes, but Taylor wasn't hitting. When he isn't, he can't play. I think he should have gotten more of an opportunity than he did, but I wasn't at practice or in the huddle, so I don't know what happened.

Taylor will have to get more active on O, moving arround a la JJ to get more open looks.

In Summation, Taylor will have some great games. He will have some awful days. The one thing I doubt we will see from him is consistency. I really think it will be feast or famine, and there is no way to tell beforehand what it will be. I love debate, but I don't see this roller coaster ending this year.

This horse won't get any deader.

Patrick Yates

Just occupying a defender like Ginyard would bring benefit to the team. Even if King doesn't score, that means that Ginyard is not covering DeMarcus or Gerald, which is in itself a good thing.

At this point, Taylor is competing for playing time with Dave McClure and Lance Thomas. I think both Dave and Lance offer more defensively, but each of them is so minimally involved in the offense that it makes it harder for everyone else to get good looks, particularly against a well-coached team that focuses on defense. The trade-off becomes whether we are better off with McClure's and/or Lance's defensive advantage vs. King's offensive advantage- I think that the best choice will shift both within games and between games, but last night I thought we were best with Singler and King, along with 2 of Demarcus, Gerald, Jon and either Nolan or Greg.

That said, Coach K emphasizes defense and tends to reward excellent defense (like we saw from Dave) more than excellent shooting.

Wander
01-10-2008, 09:48 PM
Just occupying a defender like Ginyard would bring benefit to the team. Even if King doesn't score, that means that Ginyard is not covering DeMarcus or Gerald, which is in itself a good thing.


Exactly. If UNC assigns their best defender - maybe the best defender in the ACC - to Taylor King, that's awesome news for us.

mapei
01-10-2008, 10:27 PM
That said, Coach K emphasizes defense and tends to reward excellent defense (like we saw from Dave) more than excellent shooting.

True in the abstract, but my impression has been that McClure hardly ever plays much in the years he's been at Duke. I guess it's because he seems to be perpetually injured, but to me it seems that even when healthy he's pretty low on the list to get minutes.

Ignatius07
01-10-2008, 10:50 PM
I don't buy the idea that 12 minutes isn't playing much. That's more than a quarter of the game. That's a lot.

No one is saying that King is not playing "much"; or, if they are, that's now what I'm saying. I'm just saying he should have played more against Temple specifically. When we are struggling that much on offense, and he was shooting so well, why not throw him in there?

As for UNC, hopefully we will not need to use him just for a post body. It would be nice to have Lance at 100% and Zoubek at least able to get a few minutes. That said, if King is in the game, I highly doubt Roy Williams is going to "waste" his best defender on TK. If King knocks down a few 3s in a row, the whole game could be blown wide open because RW feels he is forced to put an elite defender on King. But I think more likely is that you will see Ginyard on D-Marc and Ellington on Henderson.

sagegrouse
01-11-2008, 12:03 AM
A few things to be said about TK. Also, remember that this guy is a freshman -- and is going to get a lot better.

1. TK is an exciting player -- not all of it positive -- but you have to watch him when he's on the court. Also, he seems to get a lot better if left on the floor for a few minutes.

2. PPM figures are really impt. to this team, which will have inevitable scoring droughts (two last night). Ergo TK is going to get more minutes, IMHO (remember, for the "grouse," the "h" is silent). I also thought his defense was not bad -- he was certainly active.

3. Anyone else see a little of the Art Heyman personality in TK? You know, in your face! Oh? You didn't like that? In your face again! Of course, Art displayed a wry attitude on the court where you knew he knew it was just a basketball game.

sagegrouse

greybeard
01-11-2008, 02:10 AM
This is a long season. I believe that there is a decent chance that K sees no need to risk wearing King out early; he can potentially fill multiple roles, each of which I'm sure he is developing more and more of a feel for without the emotional and physical drain of playing extended minutes in games now.

If he is fresh and ready as the regular season winds down, a healthy, fresh, and confident TK could be a real nice piece to have for the master to deploy.

Oriole Way
01-11-2008, 02:24 AM
When everyone is healthy, there just aren't that many more minutes for Taylor. Through 13 games, with one game going into overtime, there were 2625 minutes available. Here’s how the minutes were allocated.

DeMarcus Nelson 395
Jon Scheyer 363
Kyle Singler 348
Greg Paulus 346
Gerald Henderson 315
Lance Thomas 208
Nolan Smith 207
Taylor King 175
Brian Zoubek 140
David McClure 83
Marty Pocius 32
Jordan Davidson 13

Realistically, when Lance and Brian are back, Taylor won’t see any significant time at the 4 spot. So we are really talking about allocating time between DeMarcus, Jon, Gerald, David, and Taylor. Who’s minutes does he take?

I think the the answer is Lance Thomas. He hasn't been productive enough to justify those kinds of minutes, whereas King's production warrants a good 5+ minutes more per game. I really want to see Lance contributing and I know he hasn't been healthy, but if he doesn't start bringing more to the table, I think King and McClure should get more of his minutes.

SilkyJ
01-11-2008, 02:53 AM
Taylor's death zone will be the 6-5 to 6-8 range. A great example is Marcus Ginyard at UNC. He is a superb defender in the Nate James mold. He is an athletic 6-6 ish. If he is dedicated, he can completely shut Taylor down.

maybe, but i doubt ginyard would guard king if either gerald or demarcus were in the game. certainly not if they were both in the game. and if scheyer is in too forget about it...the only way would be if they were playing green, ellington and ginyard at the same time, and ud have to assume lawson would be on the floor so thats a 4 guard lineup basically and i dont see them running that very often. against us though they might to match quickness, but i doubt it cause they have size and quickness without having to put 4 guards on the floor.

Fish80
01-11-2008, 09:25 AM
I think the the answer is Lance Thomas. He hasn't been productive enough to justify those kinds of minutes, whereas King's production warrants a good 5+ minutes more per game. I really want to see Lance contributing and I know he hasn't been healthy, but if he doesn't start bringing more to the table, I think King and McClure should get more of his minutes.

Respectfully, I disagree. Taylor will only play the 4 if Lance and Brian are out. Lance plays the 4 or the 5, and is a much better interior and off the ball defender, something we really need. Lance is faster and stronger. Completely different games. Taylor will get 10 to 15 minutes per game, some times more, but not Lance's minutes. McClure will get minutes at the 4.

Jeffrey
01-11-2008, 09:59 AM
Hi,

There are times when I read one thread on the main board's first page and then a second thread on the main board's first page and wonder about the consistency of our thoughts.

On this thread we are discussing an extremely talented freshman who most posters would like to see get more PT but many agree it's very hard to take minutes from the other guys who are also very talented and playing relatively well. What are great problem to have.... a deep & talented team with only so many minutes to allocate.

On another thread we are discussing a myriad of concerns about this team's current play and many posters are expressing serious doubt about whether we will make it to the second weekend of the tourny.

Hmmm, we have a deep & talented team and what I think is the best coaching staff in college hoops BUT we are going nowhere in this year's tourny.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Patrick Yates
01-11-2008, 10:16 AM
Exactly. If UNC assigns their best defender - maybe the best defender in the ACC - to Taylor King, that's awesome news for us.

I agree that it would be worth something to tie up the ACC's best defender. I also concede that Taylor is like a walking talking WMD on the court, in that the D always has to know where he is. But, who does HE guard?

There are two scenarios when he is in the game vs UNC. Well, 3, but number 3 may be statistically irrelevant.

1. UNC is going with their typical lineup of two bigs. Assuming Taylor is one of our two bigs, he has to guard either Hans or Stephenson/Thompson. That won't be pretty, no offense to Taylor.

2. UNC goes small, leaving Taylor on Ginyard. If Paulus is in the game on Lawson, or Green, or Ellington, we have two players who, try though they surely will, probably can't stay within 1 arms length of the guy they are defending.

3. This assumes some weird 3 big alignment by either squad which I will have to see to believe it is happening.

In summation, Taylor is definitely a threat. And yes, having Taylor occupy Ginyard, instead of letting Ginyard play Hendo or DeMarcus (I actually think this is a good matchup for Duke and that Roy will avoid it if possible) is a good thing.

But, Taylor has to guard someone, unless we go Zone, which might not be a bad thing. I just see too many guys on UNC's team that can guard Taylor, and nobody that I would like to assign Taylor to guard. I think he will get better, but right now there are too few favorable matchups for him.

As an aside, I would love to see a gimmick D against UNC by Duke. I think a box and 1, with either Demarcus or Hendo on Ellington, their only real outside threat. That would leave the rest of the D to collapse on Lawson when he drives or Hans when he gets the ball, cause that boy won't pass for love or money.

I am not really worried about scoring on UNC. They are poor defenders on a good day. Can we slow them down is the real question?

Patrick Yates

Wander
01-11-2008, 11:29 AM
I don't see any huge problem with putting King on Thompson or Stephenson or Ginyard. I mean, I guess it's not ideal, but we all know where our frontcourt stands and that guys are going to have to guard bigger players.

Classof06
01-11-2008, 02:25 PM
I don't see any huge problem with putting King on Thompson or Stephenson or Ginyard. I mean, I guess it's not ideal, but we all know where our frontcourt stands and that guys are going to have to guard bigger players.

Agreed. Thompson, Stephenson and Ginyard aren't the scorers on that team anyway. The bottom line is that we don't match up with UNC's frontcourt anyway; it is what it is and we're going to have to deal with that. I also don't agree with people that say King's defense is bad. He's a much better post defender than I thought he would be and that's what we need him for. We have enough perimeter defenders.

I've read all the posts that take a different position than I do and I'm cognizant of your arguments. But until Brian and Lance can come back and be effective I think King needs to get more minutes. I'm not saying he deserves to be in there all game but just from a size and efficiency perspective (he's easily our most efficient scorer), I would say he needs to be on the court more. Just my $0.02

Nittany Devil
01-11-2008, 03:02 PM
Hi,

There are times when I read one thread on the main board's first page and then a second thread on the main board's first page and wonder about the consistency of our thoughts.

On this thread we are discussing an extremely talented freshman who most posters would like to see get more PT but many agree it's very hard to take minutes from the other guys who are also very talented and playing relatively well. What are great problem to have.... a deep & talented team with only so many minutes to allocate.

On another thread we are discussing a myriad of concerns about this team's current play and many posters are expressing serious doubt about whether we will make it to the second weekend of the tourny.

I was thinking along similar lines but with respect to some recruiting threads. Some are lamenting the "downfall" of our recruiting (at least with respect to UNC's), but I'm thinking about how good our freshmen are this year. It's nice that we're arguing about PT for a guy I expected to make a small contribution this year. Oh, and last year's freshmen are a pretty good class as well. I guess that perspectives vary quite a bit.

Saratoga2
01-11-2008, 03:04 PM
I don't see any huge problem with putting King on Thompson or Stephenson or Ginyard. I mean, I guess it's not ideal, but we all know where our frontcourt stands and that guys are going to have to guard bigger players.

Though not quite as tall and not quite as strong, Taylor is still strong enough to be a force inside rebounding and guarding a 4. He could be hard to post up. Taylor brings the scoring punch from outside that Brockman doesn't have. If we don't have Zoubek by the UNC game, I would try him on Hansbrough. At worst he can give fouls and protect Singler from the cheapies that Hansbrough always seems to draw. Even if we do have Zoubek, he may be our best substitute when Hansbrough is in the game.

jimsumner
01-11-2008, 04:31 PM
Interesting factoid. Against Temple, Taylor King became the first player in Duke history to lead the team in scoring in a game in which he played the fewest minutes.

Courtesy of Duke SID. Make of it what you will.

Speaking of David McClure. When he was healthy last year, he played. He averaged about 22 mpg, with a high of 34 in the first Clemson game, with a 29, a pair of 28s and three 27s.

Jeffrey
01-11-2008, 04:40 PM
I was thinking along similar lines but with respect to some recruiting threads. Some are lamenting the "downfall" of our recruiting (at least with respect to UNC's), but I'm thinking about how good our freshmen are this year. It's nice that we're arguing about PT for a guy I expected to make a small contribution this year. Oh, and last year's freshmen are a pretty good class as well. I guess that perspectives vary quite a bit.

Hi,

Another great example! We're concerned that we have a very deep & talented team that results in a very talented player like Taylor getting limited PT. At the same time, we're extremely concerned and bothered by our recruiting efforts.

How high is our expectation bar? A mile off the ground? No worries, K can just put on his cape and leap right over it while placing Duke hoops on his back. Oh yeah, and while getting Taylor more PT in the process. :)

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Patrick Yates
01-11-2008, 04:59 PM
Part of the reason that there is a discussion regarding King is our crippling logjam at the wing, compared to slim pickings in the post. If we had a few less wings, and a few more talented posts, Taylor would be getting 25+ mpg a game right now.

But, he is a natural wing, albeit one capable of doing spot duty in the post. Given his natural wing position, who would you sit in his favor? Hendo, Demarcus, and Scheyer bring more to the table defensively, and offensively, if we are honest. King can shoot. When he is hitting. K seems to be able to judge when he is off, so he doesn't play those nights. This helps his efficiency.

But, the others bring more tools to the table. If there were fewer players on the Wing, King would warrant more mpg. But our best players play that position, and King is not a part of the "best players" discussion at this point.

The whining about recruiting (paging capt obvious) is in no way related to an argument about minutes for yet another wing player.

Patrick Yates

CDu
01-11-2008, 05:06 PM
Part of the reason that there is a discussion regarding King is our crippling logjam at the wing, compared to slim pickings in the post. If we had a few less wings, and a few more talented posts, Taylor would be getting 25+ mpg a game right now.

But, he is a natural wing, albeit one capable of doing spot duty in the post. Given his natural wing position, who would you sit in his favor? Hendo, Demarcus, and Scheyer bring more to the table defensively, and offensively, if we are honest. King can shoot. When he is hitting. K seems to be able to judge when he is off, so he doesn't play those nights. This helps his efficiency.

But, the others bring more tools to the table. If there were fewer players on the Wing, King would warrant more mpg. But our best players play that position, and King is not a part of the "best players" discussion at this point.

The whining about recruiting (paging capt obvious) is in no way related to an argument about minutes for yet another wing player.

Patrick Yates

King is just way too slow and lacking in lateral quickness to be a regular wing player at the college level. Therefore, I don't see the logjam at the wing being his minutes problem. He's also not really tall enough to be a true post guy, but he fits the college PF description. I think his ideal spot is as a "4," but in an unorthodox manner on offense. Have him set high screens and drift around the perimeter like he does now.

I think part of the problem for him in terms of minutes is that Coach K hasn't really gone with a Singler/King combination much. And since Singler gets so many minutes, it's hard for King to log a lot of minutes. Another part of the problem is probably that his all-around game hasn't caught up with his shooting touch.

dukestheheat
01-11-2008, 05:44 PM
So the question was asked 'why hasn't he played more?', and I have a feeling a certain player was caught reading Conrad's novella The Heart of Darkness when K was working on defensive schemes!

(I am a jester; y'all didn't know that?).

dth.

trinity92
01-17-2008, 04:54 PM
I love TK, and see him becoming one of the best-loved Devils of all time. However, I'd like to have the coaching staff counsel him to be more patient in developing his game. He has such skill in shooting the ball, but seems to want to develop his dribble and mid-range game right now, which is not looking very pretty at present. Taylor looks to be in Durham for 4 years, and there's plenty of time-- 3 off-seasons-- for him to add other dimensions to his game.

Right now, Taylor is deadly from 3, is a solid rebounder and shot-blocker, and a decent defender overall. I think that's completely enough for now, especially given the wealth of guard talent we have. TK's amazing range forces defenders to come way out on the perimeter to guard him. Eventually, it will behoove him to dribble past those defenders. However, I'd really like to see him wait until the off-season to develop his ball-handling skills. Taylor can contribute on defense and the boards right now, and we know what he can do from outside-- if he passes the ball when he's covered on the perimeter rather than try to drive beyond what he really can at the moment, I bet K will keep him on the floor more. I truly believe Taylor staying on the floor will be a bonus for the team.

Guess this is an open letter to TK and the coaching staff to just be patient-- to let him do what he does well for the time being. JJ seems a good model for a deadeye shooter. He was little more than a great outside shooter his first couple years, and only added the penetration to his game Junior year. Even Chris Laettner was basically a post-up guy his first two years. Although he would take some 3-pointers, he really made the outside shot a big part of his arsenal later in his career.

I'd really like to see Taylor hone the skills he already has for now. Patience will pay serious dividends.

Channing
01-17-2008, 05:29 PM
I would love to see TK go through the conditioning regime JJ went through between his sophomore and junior year.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
01-17-2008, 07:19 PM
That hook shot last night was pretty nice. I do agree that Taylor needs to stay close to his comfort zone on the offensive end. It is entirely to his benefit, however, to add simple head fakes/jab steps as soon as he is able. It is also tremendously beneficial for the entire team if he can develop even the semblance of some post moves. No need for crazy drop steps/up-and-under/whatever (though I'd love to see them). But if he can approximate any post game it makes him an exponentially move dangerous mismatch. Even better, it will make him one of two guys on our team (along with Kyle) that is a credible threat in the post. I'm fine with him emulating Melch, but I'd also be happy with some C-Well/Nate.

wilko
01-17-2008, 07:29 PM
I would love to see TK go through the conditioning regime JJ went through between his sophomore and junior year.

Ahmen!!
if he worked on the same conditioning and skills program JJ did; (ie. lean lean and create off the dribble..)

I think he might maybe possibly resemble something hinting at Chris Mullin. But thats just me..
course it could be the haircut. :-)

cspan37421
01-17-2008, 08:16 PM
TK is a great interview. No guile.

MChambers
01-17-2008, 09:02 PM
I love TK, and see him becoming one of the best-loved Devils of all time. However, I'd like to have the coaching staff counsel him to be more patient in developing his game. He has such skill in shooting the ball, but seems to want to develop his dribble and mid-range game right now, which is not looking very pretty at present. Taylor looks to be in Durham for 4 years, and there's plenty of time-- 3 off-seasons-- for him to add other dimensions to his game.

Right now, Taylor is deadly from 3, is a solid rebounder and shot-blocker, and a decent defender overall. I think that's completely enough for now, especially given the wealth of guard talent we have. TK's amazing range forces defenders to come way out on the perimeter to guard him. Eventually, it will behoove him to dribble past those defenders. However, I'd really like to see him wait until the off-season to develop his ball-handling skills. Taylor can contribute on defense and the boards right now, and we know what he can do from outside-- if he passes the ball when he's covered on the perimeter rather than try to drive beyond what he really can at the moment, I bet K will keep him on the floor more. I truly believe Taylor staying on the floor will be a bonus for the team.

Guess this is an open letter to TK and the coaching staff to just be patient-- to let him do what he does well for the time being. JJ seems a good model for a deadeye shooter. He was little more than a great outside shooter his first couple years, and only added the penetration to his game Junior year. Even Chris Laettner was basically a post-up guy his first two years. Although he would take some 3-pointers, he really made the outside shot a big part of his arsenal later in his career.

I'd really like to see Taylor hone the skills he already has for now. Patience will pay serious dividends.

Chris Laettner? Don't remember him. May have to add that to our names list.

Otherwise, I agree with you!

beltwayBD
01-17-2008, 09:25 PM
I love TK, and see him becoming one of the best-loved Devils of all time. However, I'd like to have the coaching staff counsel him to be more patient in developing his game. He has such skill in shooting the ball, but seems to want to develop his dribble and mid-range game right now, which is not looking very pretty at present. Taylor looks to be in Durham for 4 years, and there's plenty of time-- 3 off-seasons-- for him to add other dimensions to his game.

Right now, Taylor is deadly from 3, is a solid rebounder and shot-blocker, and a decent defender overall. I think that's completely enough for now, especially given the wealth of guard talent we have. TK's amazing range forces defenders to come way out on the perimeter to guard him. Eventually, it will behoove him to dribble past those defenders. However, I'd really like to see him wait until the off-season to develop his ball-handling skills. Taylor can contribute on defense and the boards right now, and we know what he can do from outside-- if he passes the ball when he's covered on the perimeter rather than try to drive beyond what he really can at the moment, I bet K will keep him on the floor more. I truly believe Taylor staying on the floor will be a bonus for the team.

Guess this is an open letter to TK and the coaching staff to just be patient-- to let him do what he does well for the time being. JJ seems a good model for a deadeye shooter. He was little more than a great outside shooter his first couple years, and only added the penetration to his game Junior year. Even Chris Laettner was basically a post-up guy his first two years. Although he would take some 3-pointers, he really made the outside shot a big part of his arsenal later in his career.

I'd really like to see Taylor hone the skills he already has for now. Patience will pay serious dividends.

Couldn't agree more. Well put.

trinity92
01-17-2008, 10:24 PM
That hook shot last night was pretty nice. I do agree that Taylor needs to stay close to his comfort zone on the offensive end. It is entirely to his benefit, however, to add simple head fakes/jab steps as soon as he is able. It is also tremendously beneficial for the entire team if he can develop even the semblance of some post moves. No need for crazy drop steps/up-and-under/whatever (though I'd love to see them). But if he can approximate any post game it makes him an exponentially move dangerous mismatch. Even better, it will make him one of two guys on our team (along with Kyle) that is a credible threat in the post. I'm fine with him emulating Melch, but I'd also be happy with some C-Well/Nate.

My point is that TK can and should add all these facets to his game, but he needs to do it next year and the year after, while concentrating on his core skills this year. I don't want to overstate this, but I see a lot of potential in Taylor, and I have no doubt he can add a post-up game to his arsenal. The guards that can keep up with him on the perimeter will be seriously mismatched if TK develops a post game, while a big that can defend him in the post will never be able to keep in his face outside. If TK sticks around 4 years, I can see him developing into the double threat I always wished/envisioned Dunleavy would be, which would be a very nice thing indeed. He just needs to be patient and add those facets to his game over time, while concentrating this year on what he already does well.

BTW, I remember from the preseason some posters dismissing TK's chances of making an impact this year due to his "slow release." Given T's almost alarmingly quick release, I can't imagine what scouting report could have yielded that complaint.

BlueDevilJay
01-18-2008, 07:48 AM
I am yet to figure out why TK didn't get more playing time in the 2nd half. He came in (along with Jon) in the first half, and set the place on fire. Had two quick 3's, scored inside, took a charge, blocked a shot, and had a steal. I didn't see him doing too much wrong obviously, and my dad and I could not for the life of us figure out why he wasn't played in the 2nd half, as well as why K didn't stick with the zone, when it obviously was causing FSU problems when we switched to it for TWO plays.

dball
01-18-2008, 11:46 AM
Chris Laettner? Don't remember him. May have to add that to our names list.

Otherwise, I agree with you!

Chris' brother Christian appeared in several games for the Blue Devils :)

Dukerxman
01-23-2008, 10:45 PM
I am new to this forum. I, too love to watch TK play. I was wondering if anyone knew why he did not play Sat. night. Or if he did, I did not notice him and you usually do with those long range bombs he puts in. Mare TK.
Richard:

Cameron
01-24-2008, 12:23 AM
Dukerxman:

Taylor did play on Saturday for a few minutes early in the first half, but did not see any action in the second. This had a lot to do with the fact that Coach K played our main unit a lot heavy minutes against Clemson. Singler didn't take many breaks and that is usually when Taylor gets his time.

I definitely would have loved to have seen more King against the Tigers, though. He brings so much excitement to the game when he's on the floor. When Taylor is feeling it, there might not be a more instant offense in the college game, even this early in his career. He's like a lightning bolt when he catches fire.

trinity92:

Thank you! I have been wanting to say all of that for about two months now! Nothing drives me more crazy than when Taylor gives up an open 22-footer to turn into a bent Ping Rapture. Sorry, Taylor, but that part of your game is not here yet. Sling those triples, son!

Bluedawg
01-24-2008, 09:17 AM
Last night 12 minutes played, 15 points scored. Fewest minutes played, most points scored.

Why doesn't he get more PT?

Posted 01-10-2008, 11:15 AM after the Jan 9 Temple game.

greybeard
01-24-2008, 09:57 AM
I think that the reason that TK didn't see minutes in the second half is because he threw another 40 yeard pass to no one. K does not like that play, and whenever TK throws one that ends up in the stands he sits, for a long, long time.

I am only half joking when I say this, but I think that K might want to consider preparing the guys on the other side of the court to start on the move when TK is pressured to free themselves for a reception. When pressured, it seems that he often decides that he needs to do something dramatic and lofts one. If people were to set out on the move when they see that gleam in his eye, maybe he'll complete some of those passes and get to play more. Anyway, until one of them changes, after TK lofts one of them, I think that you can expect to see K make him sit.

Dukefan4Life
01-24-2008, 01:55 PM
King is and will be a good assest for our team for years to come! He has the sickest range ive ever seen, and most of the time he drains them! I would like to see him maybe get better shots and post a few people up if he could

CDu
01-24-2008, 02:27 PM
I think that the reason that TK didn't see minutes in the second half is because he threw another 40 yeard pass to no one. K does not like that play, and whenever TK throws one that ends up in the stands he sits, for a long, long time.


I agree. King seems to commit turnovers too frequently. At least he seems to commit some BAD turnovers too frequently. As he learns to adapt his game, improve his decision-making (and limit turnovers), and improve his conditioning, I think his role will expand.

Cameron
01-24-2008, 04:12 PM
^^I agree as well. Part of the reason Singler played as many minutes as he did in the second half against Clemson was because Coach K had seen enough Taylor passes to the Cameron Crazies. There is no denying the fact that Coach K is very unforgiving for more than one mishap pass like that. Until Taylor learns to settle down and play freely, his playing time will be lacking when he makes these mistakes.

Like others have pointed out, I also believe that Taylor seems to be pressing when he's out on the court sometimes. Some games he automatic and plays great. Others he tries too hard to make the fantastic, earn an extra five minute pass play.

jdc75
02-04-2008, 10:37 AM
Maybe this has already been used or suggested. If it has been, I apologize. How about the next time Taylor King nails a 3 the crazies break into T-K-O!, T-K-O!...(with emphasis on the O like Ohhhhhhhhhh!)
GTHC

Devil in the Blue Dress
02-04-2008, 10:38 AM
Maybe this has already been used or suggested. If it has been, I apologize. How about the next time Taylor King nails a 3 the crazies break into T-K-O!, T-K-O!...(with emphasis on the O like Ohhhhhhhhhh!)
GTHC

I like that one! Maybe we can start it upstairs where the old people sit.

Indoor66
02-04-2008, 10:40 AM
I like that one! Maybe we can start it upstairs where the old people sit.

You old folks have forgotten how to cheer. :) I too like the idea of TKOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Truth
02-04-2008, 10:42 AM
Maybe this has already been used or suggested. If it has been, I apologize. How about the next time Taylor King nails a 3 the crazies break into T-K-O!, T-K-O!...(with emphasis on the O like Ohhhhhhhhhh!)
GTHC

Don't the current Crazies already do this T-K-OOOHHHH cheer today?


One cheer that I miss is the basic "Here We Go Devils, Here We Go <clap, clap>." Any one know where that went??

alteran
02-04-2008, 10:45 AM
You old folks have forgotten how to cheer. :) I too like the idea of TKOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

It's more like we've forgotten how to stand.:)

I appreciate when the students turn around and gesture for us to get up, I wouldn't mind see a little more of that.

Devil in the Blue Dress
02-04-2008, 11:03 AM
You old folks have forgotten how to cheer. :) I too like the idea of TKOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
I think you and I are very nearly the same age.

My reference to the "old people upstairs" was made so that the younger folk who patronize this web site would understand the reference.

Summie444
02-04-2008, 11:10 AM
Yeah, as you suspected, we already do this cheer (TKO). And the "Here we go Devils, here we go!" chant is still in the repertoire as well.

Ima Facultiwyfe
02-04-2008, 11:23 AM
....is already being done. Here we go Devils is still a staple every game. Are we watching the same games,Truth?

As long as we're on the subject of standard cheers, "go to hell carolina" becomes unintelligible when it picks up steam and is yelled too fast. It just sounds like a big, loud garble. Can you Crazies manage to keep the cadence slowed down so it will be clear and effective? Its way too good to waste.

Love, Ima

PS: I'm old. I'm sitting on the next to top row. I even get up and dance to that thing I'll never understand that starts out slow and ends up frenetic and goofy. I'd love to hear from others in my generation who do the same.

PS#2: Props to the Devil who came upstairs briefly last game. I'm still waiting for the bones and the cheerleaders to come up to the nosebleed section and include us in things once in a while.

Truth
02-04-2008, 11:27 AM
Yeah, as you suspected, we already do this cheer (TKO). And the "Here we go Devils, here we go!" chant is still in the repertoire as well.

Are you sure that Here We Go Devils is still used? I was at the Clemson game and do not recall hearing it a single time. Since then I've kept an ear out for it and have yet to hear it... definitely possibly that I've missed it on a broadcast -- I'm just hoping this cheer is still out there to give some variety to the "Let's Go Duke!" and "Let's Go Devils!" team-cheers.

In the next game, my ear will be keenly focused with hopes that GTHCGTH becomes the cheer de facto for the night. :D

Devil in the Blue Dress
02-04-2008, 11:29 AM
There was a cute little girl dressed as the Blue Devil at the NC State game. Her costume was accurate right down to the color of ink on the tape on the head. Is she going to make only one appearance? The interactions between her and the official Blue Devil were quite entertaining.

Truth
02-04-2008, 11:30 AM
....is already being done. Here we go Devils is still a staple every game. Are we watching the same games,Truth?


Maybe I just need to turn-up my surround sound! I'll have to re-watch the recyclathon game tonight and keep a closer ear on the cheers...

alteran
02-04-2008, 11:33 AM
I even get up and dance to that thing I'll never understand that starts out slow and ends up frenetic and goofy.

My brother tells me that's a rave song. I'm on the border between jumping up and dancing, and wondering whether I need to act my age.

Anyone know the name of that song?

mehmattski
02-04-2008, 11:36 AM
Are you sure that Here We Go Devils is still used? I was at the Clemson game and do not recall hearing it a single time. Since then I've kept an ear out for it and have yet to hear it... definitely possibly that I've missed it on a broadcast -- I'm just hoping this cheer is still out there to give some variety to the "Let's Go Duke!" and "Let's Go Devils!" team-cheers.

In the next game, my ear will be keenly focused with hopes that GTHCGTH becomes the cheer de facto for the night. :D

On the cheer sheet given to the undergrads, four variations are listed:

"Let's... Go... Duke" (SLOWLY)
"Let's go Devils" (Clap-Clap-ClapClapClap)
"Here we go Devils, Here we go!" (Clap-Clap)
"Goooooo Devils Go!" (Clap-Clap-Clap)

When I was an undergrad (02-06) the first three were in a fairly even distribution, with a bias towards LGD, of course. "Here We Go Devils" is my favorite, and whenever there was a lull, I would start that one. The fourth option was almost never used. Now, as a grad student, options 1, 2, and 4 seem to prevail, with Here We Go Devils used maybe once a game.

One factor this year is with our speedy tempo, there isn't much time for us to get into a cheer rhythm, especially with the (slightly) more complicated Here We Go Devils. Typically you have the undergrads doing Let's Go Duke and the grads doing "Let's Go Devils" and there's confusion, which remains unsettled as Gerald Henderson scores a thundering breakaway dunk!

T-K-OH! has made a few appearances, most notably during the Virginia game. The cheer sheet for Miami also had a new suggestion for Nolan Smith:

"No-lan Smith: Go To Work!" was suggested by his mother, as that's what Derrek Smith used to say to Nolan as encouragement.

DukieInKansas
02-04-2008, 11:38 AM
My brother tells me that's a rave song. I'm on the border between jumping up and dancing, and wondering whether I need to act my age.

Anyone know the name of that song?

You're at Cameron - never act your chronological age! Life is way too short to do that. :D

mehmattski
02-04-2008, 11:55 AM
My brother tells me that's a rave song. I'm on the border between jumping up and dancing, and wondering whether I need to act my age.

Anyone know the name of that song?

Everytime we Touch, by Cascada

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK0GmiSMNGI

I always tell people the video means the song is a metaphor for Duke Basketball: the hot chick that gets the nerds out of the library and gets them dancing!

Devil in the Blue Dress
02-04-2008, 12:00 PM
Everytime we Touch, by Cascada

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK0GmiSMNGI

I always tell people the video means the song is a metaphor for Duke Basketball: the hot chick that gets the nerds out of the library and gets them dancing!
I was trying to get that same information from the Pep Band's playlist I've seen on either goduke.com or Duke Blue Planet. Haven't been able to access goduke.com. A message comes up saying that the service is temporarily unavailable. Any ideas about what's going on?

devildeac
02-04-2008, 05:40 PM
I like that one! Maybe we can start it upstairs where the old people sit.

heyyy, I resemble that remark but I still cheer(when I can figure out what the Crazies are saying)

PS-it has been done already-I think the students even have signs...

(ooohhh, Grant Hill-must not post for a while-Tilly will have a chance to gain ground)

MulletMan
02-04-2008, 05:41 PM
On the cheer sheet given to the undergrads, four variations are listed:

"Let's... Go... Duke" (SLOWLY)
"Let's go Devils" (Clap-Clap-ClapClapClap)
"Here we go Devils, Here we go!" (Clap-Clap)
"Goooooo Devils Go!" (Clap-Clap-Clap)

When I was an undergrad (02-06) the first three were in a fairly even distribution, with a bias towards LGD, of course. "Here We Go Devils" is my favorite, and whenever there was a lull, I would start that one. The fourth option was almost never used. Now, as a grad student, options 1, 2, and 4 seem to prevail, with Here We Go Devils used maybe once a game.

One factor this year is with our speedy tempo, there isn't much time for us to get into a cheer rhythm, especially with the (slightly) more complicated Here We Go Devils. Typically you have the undergrads doing Let's Go Duke and the grads doing "Let's Go Devils" and there's confusion, which remains unsettled as Gerald Henderson scores a thundering breakaway dunk!

T-K-OH! has made a few appearances, most notably during the Virginia game. The cheer sheet for Miami also had a new suggestion for Nolan Smith:

"No-lan Smith: Go To Work!" was suggested by his mother, as that's what Derrek Smith used to say to Nolan as encouragement.

While I feel that the Crazies in general have been nice and loud this season, I will say that there seems to be a preponderance of "Let's Go DUKE!" at the cost of the other aformentioned cheers. "Here we go Devils" and "Go Devils Go" have definitely fallen by the wayside. I know that back in the day, Ed and I were very conscious about rotating, and I believe that the Ugrads were as well... plus there was a little more communication between the two sides at that time. Maybe just starting out with something other than LGD will get the ball rolling in different directions at the next game.

And by the way, please don't let this come off a criticism... the Crazies are rockin' the house this year.

JBDuke
02-04-2008, 05:54 PM
My suggestion for a Taylor King chant is:

"IT'S GOOD TO BE THE KING!"

which fits nicely to the same cadence as "Meagher spit in your face!", which just happens to be one of my favorite cheers of all time.

Unfortunately, it looks like I won't make it to Cameron this year to try and get this one started...

Ima Facultiwyfe
02-04-2008, 06:29 PM
plus there was a little more communication between the two sides at that time. Maybe just starting out with something other than LGD will get the ball rolling in different directions at the next game.

And by the way, please don't let this come off a criticism... the Crazies are rockin' the house this year.

That was BCS. The off the cuff stuff was really clever. The conversations across court were genius. Congrats if you were a part of that, MM.

Love, Ima

coop1999
02-12-2008, 08:36 PM
First time poster. Is Taylor King in Coach K`s doghouse? Is lack of minutes because of his defense or what?I love watching him and I would hate to lose him.

wisteria
02-12-2008, 08:52 PM
First time poster. Is Taylor King in Coach K`s doghouse? Is lack of minutes because of his defense or what?I love watching him and I would hate to lose him.

The guy's a freshman. Can't expect every freshman to come in and play as ready as Kyle. Taylor is just fine. He's gotten major minutes when we were playing lesser components or when he was paired up with some favorable match-ups earlier on. I think he just hasn't fully figured out the system yet. He'll catch on, he'll make progress. I think we shall all have some patience.

Let's not get worried about "to lose him" as soon as a player doesn't get minutes. Let's get more confidence in our guys' heart. Actually, Taylor is the most dedicated one in terms of cheering on the bench. He is always jumping up and down, waving his arms, pumping up the crazies. You can't find anyone who has more enthusiasm for the team than Taylor. So, I say, King is just fine. Let's give him and K more patience. It's only half way through his first season~~~

Ignatius07
02-12-2008, 11:35 PM
Actually, Taylor is the most dedicated one in terms of cheering on the bench. He is always jumping up and down, waving his arms, pumping up the crazies. You can't find anyone who has more enthusiasm for the team than Taylor.

Not to freak people out, but the same thing could be said about Jamal Boykin. Players can be 100% happy about their team's success and still not content with their own development. Let's just all agree that he SEEMS happy, but we have no idea what he's thinking one way or the other.

loran16
02-12-2008, 11:41 PM
First time poster. Is Taylor King in Coach K`s doghouse? Is lack of minutes because of his defense or what?I love watching him and I would hate to lose him.

Well a couple reasons. First, vs teams with big inside presence, we've been handling them by using smaller and more agile defenders. King doesn't fit that criteria, so limited minutes vs Maryland and Clemson is quite expected. Not to mention while he's shown some defensive promise, he's shown just as much defensive awfulness that he really needs to work on that part of his game.

Second, his offense is totally one dimensional, and he doesn't have good decision making. Take the UNC game. He took 2 3s on one possession, the first way out from the arc, the 2nd one just as far from the arc despite a fresh 35. Yeah he can make those shots on occasion, but he shouldn't be taking them in those places.

Until he learns to take better shots, make better decisions, and become a better defender, he's unlikely to see play vs such opponents.

Dont expect much minutes vs Maryland tomorrow either.

DukieBoy
02-28-2008, 06:43 PM
ok...i no taylor king is not a great defensive player, but i've watched (sparingly) the last two games and i haven't noticed him nearly at all....we've been in a shooting slump and i think he has the range to shoot us out of it...

BD80
02-28-2008, 07:00 PM
I love the fact that Taylor stays really involved in the game and cheers really hard for his teammates even when he isn't getting much PT. I don't see him getting consistent minutes the rest of the year, but I can see him going off in a game this year and saving our arses. A shooter shoots - his slump won't last and the staff won't let him stop shooting.

We will see more and more of Taylor in his Duke career, and at some point he will be one of our primary weapons. I'll bet Senior day will be special in 2011!

Zeb
02-28-2008, 07:13 PM
Based on his performance last night, this is not the right time to campaign for Taylor to get more PT. He missed his shots and made several defensive mistakes (giving up I believe 2 3pters to Causey) in just a few minutes.

Taylor will hopefully make progress and get better, but his play has not justified more minutes lately.

wisteria
02-28-2008, 07:59 PM
I sincerely wish Taylor is not going to be the next Marty.
Judging from message board popularity though, he's got that potential.

I pray for Taylor. I hope he comes back next season, in excellent physical form, improves in all areas and pleasantly surprises everyone. Like, another Lance.

OZZIE4DUKE
02-28-2008, 08:00 PM
ok...i no taylor king is not a great defensive player, but i've watched (sparingly) the last two games and i haven't noticed him nearly at all....we've been in a shooting slump and i think he has the range to shoot us out of it...

[insert tongue into cheek] I guess you're just too used to texting as opposed to posting and using "proper" sentence structure like capital letters and punctuation, and abbreviating know as no. At least you didn't talk about some unknown guy named Sheldon...... [remove tongue from cheek]

Carlos
02-28-2008, 08:11 PM
Taylor's shooting 18% on threes over the last 10 games.... probably not the best time to be arguing for more PT for the guy.

wisteria
02-28-2008, 08:19 PM
Taylor's shooting 18% on threes over the last 10 games.... probably not the best time to be arguing for more PT for the guy.

I don't want to argue whether he deserves more PT or anything.

Just want to point out that this 18% thing and no-PT thing, it's quite hard to say which is the cause, which is the result. :)

Duke79UNLV77
02-28-2008, 09:16 PM
King clearly never thought much about taking shots before college. He came in with no conscience, which made him dangerous. Sooner or later, though, he had to learn that he's playing with and against better players now and can't just take whatever shot he wants. Now, he's thinking more, which was needed, but he may actually be over-thinking. I think eventually he'll get back used to the adjustment and will play more naturally and instinctively again. In the meantime, he's playing hard and seems to have a great attitude.

At least that's my theory.

OZ
02-28-2008, 09:18 PM
Based on his performance last night, this is not the right time to campaign for Taylor to get more PT. He missed his shots and made several defensive mistakes (giving up I believe 2 3pters to Causey) in just a few minutes.

Taylor will hopefully make progress and get better, but his play has not justified more minutes lately.


Your initial comment could have been said about several of our players last night. Players who got their minutes and returned...(Smith, Paulus, Thomas). Singler missed all of his shots in the second half and there seemed to have been times he would have welcomed a break. Causey was certainly not a good match-up for King.
My concern is that the once almost cocky shooter now seems to be losing some of his confidence. A couple of mistakes and you are done will do that to you.
Yes he pulls for his teammates, but I when I looked across the court last night to the Duke bench, for the most part he was sitting with his head down. I don't know what the inside deal is and I am not suggesting that I do, but it seems clear that he is not the same player that he was earlier. And that is a concern that I have.
I guess this says a lot about the talent we have, because, I doubt that someone of his ability would be sitting it out on many teams.

yancem
02-28-2008, 09:24 PM
Not to freak people out, but the same thing could be said about Jamal Boykin. Players can be 100% happy about their team's success and still not content with their own development. Let's just all agree that he SEEMS happy, but we have no idea what he's thinking one way or the other.

IIRC Boykin had some family issues and he wanted to move back closer to home. I don't think that playing time had much to do with it. In fact if he had stuck around, I'm betting he would have earned decent minutes last year.

dukegirlinsc
02-28-2008, 10:56 PM
TK's situation reminds me a lot of JJ Redick's right now. JJ scored 10 points last night, so maybe Taylor will bust out of his slump soon. If not, he's taken over the cheerleading role on the bench quite well.

We know the kid's talented. We know how sick his range is. We know he can score points. I'm not sure if he realizes all of that.

Ignatius07
02-28-2008, 11:13 PM
We know the kid's talented. We know how sick his range is. We know he can score points. I'm not sure if he realizes all of that.

We are talking about the same Taylor King, right?

dukegirlinsc
02-29-2008, 10:39 AM
We are talking about the same Taylor King, right?

Perhaps. I'm talking about the Taylor King (http://www.dukeblueplanet.com/content.asp?tid=157)that scored 20 points against N.C. Central, was 5-7 from behind the arc. He scored 15 points against Wisconsin, 5-9 behind the arc...18 points against Michigan, 17 against Albany, 15 against Temple...

Lord Ash
02-29-2008, 10:58 AM
I think the point being made was that Taylor DEFINATELY knows he can score; no confidence issues there!

Coach K was definately ripping on him in the huddle of the last game, as reported via the radio broadcast, especially after that 3 by Causey.

I think some of his shooting woes are definately due to lack of PT; shooters can be streaky, especially as freshmen, and knowing that a missed shot will get you yanked will definately screw with your ability to hit those shots. Overthinking, for sure...

ArtVandelay
02-29-2008, 11:17 AM
We are talking about the same Taylor King, right?

Ha. For those of you who think Taylor needs PT, did you SEE his attempt at a behind-the-back dribble and blown layup against GT? He looked, um...what's the word I'm looking for? Uncoordinated? Man, that was ugly. Hoo boy. Someone needs to tell him not to dribble the ball under any circumstances whatsoever. Ok, I kid. But seriously, enough with the "we need more TK" stuff. This is just not his season. He needs to lose weight and get faster.

dukegirlinsc
02-29-2008, 11:26 AM
Ha. For those of you who think Taylor needs PT, did you SEE his attempt at a behind-the-back dribble and blown layup against GT? He looked, um...what's the word I'm looking for? Uncoordinated? Man, that was ugly. Hoo boy. Someone needs to tell him not to dribble the ball under any circumstances whatsoever. Ok, I kid. But seriously, enough with the "we need more TK" stuff. This is just not his season. He needs to lose weight and get faster.

I'm not trying to be a Taylor King apologist...I probably sound like one though. ;)

And yes, I saw the sickness against GT. And everything was fine until he missed the lay-up. He got the hard point down, just missed the easy part.

I'm not campaigning for Taylor to get more playing time. All I'm saying is that he's talented...total underachiever as of late. (Which sucks.) It all goes back to the "what have you done for me lately" thing. The kid is good. I do agree that he needs to get quicker and shed some pounds. He'll come around.

MulletMan
02-29-2008, 11:43 AM
So... you all do know that Taylor King is a freshman, right? And you do realize that the number of true impact freshman is pretty limited, right?

I mean, think about this... how often do you think that TK wasn't the biggest, most athletic kid on the court in H.S.? I think that he's just fine, is developing well on the defensive end, and just needs to get some confidence back in his shot. As someone (*cough* Carlos *cough*) said to me earlier today... since he'd described as a streaky shooter, and he's 4 for his last 22, we should be due for a hot streak soon!!:D

OldPhiKap
02-29-2008, 11:51 AM
So... you all do know that Taylor King is a freshman, right? And you do realize that the number of true impact freshman is pretty limited, right?

Don't let reality get in the way of armchair quarterbacking.

Taylor's time will come. He is a great asset to the team and will be a great contributor over his four years. It doesn't all have to happen at once, and every kid runs a different race.

Look at Gerald as frosh vs. Gerald as soph. Etc. etc. etc.

Skitzle
02-29-2008, 02:56 PM
If I'm not mistaken, during the GT game Patrick/Elmore said TK was 5 of his last 28 from behind the arc.

From my standpoint, I don't care how cold he is over the next couple games as long as he hits a hot streak by about mid march...

His hot shooting seems to be contagious, and that'd be a good time to come out of the slump

Dbluedevils1530
02-29-2008, 03:02 PM
Not impressed

Cameron
02-29-2008, 03:03 PM
After the Va Tech game, it appeared to me that Taylor was ready to explode. He only shot four triples that night, but they were all from about 26 to 30 feet out--and he made three of 'em. However, contrary to my beliefs, that game seems to have been the start of a right-skewed spiral.

I hope the kid can break out one of these games and prove to everyone the talent he has, because it seems that most have forgotten his wonderful performances earlier in the year. Taylor is an extremely gifted shooter. It's just a matter of time.

ugadevil
02-29-2008, 03:19 PM
Not impressed

Not impressed with what? Maybe I'll start a thread entitled "Flat tires" and simply write "not impressed". Not impressed with Taylor's free throw shooting? Yes, that could use some work. His defense? He's a freshman who obviously still has a lot to learn. However, do you know what is impressive? Taylor is always 100% involved in the game, even when he's not playing. He's not one who sits on the side and looks like he doesn't care since he isn't in the game. Taylor is usually the first one leading the cheers from the bench and going out to greet his teammates. But whatever, you're simply...not impressed.

soccerstud2210
02-29-2008, 03:56 PM
Quote:"Taylor's shooting 18% on threes over the last 10 games.... probably not the best time to be arguing for more PT for the guy."

true...but what is ridiculous is that he is still shooting almost 40% from behind the arc...

dukegirlinsc
02-29-2008, 03:58 PM
Not impressed with what? Maybe I'll start a thread entitled "Flat tires" and simply write "not impressed". Not impressed with Taylor's free throw shooting? Yes, that could use some work. His defense? He's a freshman who obviously still has a lot to learn. However, do you know what is impressive? Taylor is always 100% involved in the game, even when he's not playing. He's not one who sits on the side and looks like he doesn't care since he isn't in the game. Taylor is usually the first one leading the cheers from the bench and going out to greet his teammates. But whatever, you're simply...not impressed.

Love this reply. :D

FerryFor50
03-01-2008, 06:48 PM
King played well today. :D

houstondukie
03-01-2008, 07:53 PM
Lots of people have been talking about Zoubek being the missing link to this team. Not sure if others have mentioned this, but I think perhaps the missing link is King.

At the beginning of the season, when Duke was blowing teams away, King was playing great. He was a huge spark off the bench and extended the defense which created lanes for drivers. His deep threes also seemed to uplift the team. I recall many games where a 5 point lead all the sudden became a double digit blow out after a few King threes (see Wisconsin).

I don't know if King will regain the confidence and form he had at the start of the season. He did play well today and hopefully we can point to this game as a "out-of-the-slump" game. But if you were to ask me who is the x-factor going into the tournament, I would say King.

dkbaseball
03-01-2008, 08:16 PM
ESPN seems to have forgotten about him. Twice now, the Game Day gang has observed King dropping a three-pointer from the corner and called him Scheyer. Four of them, everybody except Bilas, called King Scheyer. Are they reading a teleprompter when they aren't in front of the camera?

Taylor obviously has been working hard in practice to get the second half playing time and an additional minute or two in the first half. His body looks a tad tighter, so maybe he has put the heavy partying on the backburner. It's good to see. I've said all along that for this team to have a chance to go all the way, it needs contributions from all three freshmen.

Houston
03-01-2008, 08:27 PM
I was extremely happy to see TK get the minutes and hit the three. He's a tough kid who has a unique skill. If Duke is to have an extended season, Taylor (and Brian) will have to contribute. I also love Taylor's enthusiasm when he is not playing.

rthomas
03-01-2008, 08:34 PM
Taylor King (and all the freshmen) seem to understand their role on this team. Taylor is going to be a great player. Let him be. He'll be fine.

dkbaseball
03-01-2008, 08:42 PM
Taylor King (and all the freshmen) seem to understand their role on this team.

The roles of King and Smith are very much in flux. I think this team needs Smith's penetration and perimeter pressure and King's game-breaking shooting to realize its potential, so I hope both of those kids take care of business in practice and earn more playing time.

rthomas
03-01-2008, 08:48 PM
The roles of King and Smith are very much in flux. I think this team needs Smith's penetration and perimeter pressure and King's game-breaking shooting to realize its potential, so I hope both of those kids take care of business in practice and earn more playing time.

me too. I just think that we need to remember they are freshmen. They are great contributors and I love that they are. They can and will get better.

Cameron
03-01-2008, 09:21 PM
I was certainly proud of Taylor's hard work today. Not only by his momentum boosting three from the left corner before half, but from the little things he did as well. One moment that sticks out in particular was Taylor's tipped offensive rebound to himself, with which he brought down and then immediately located Jon out top for an open triple. Bam. Three points, Duke. Taylor was about six feet from the basket when he got that board. He easily could have tried to score it himself, with a tough lean in or fadeaway. But Taylor looked for his open teammate instead. He's incredibly unselfish.

Those are the types of plays that have made me love Taylor King. He works hard when he's in the game and plays with a lot of pride, and he doesn't play for himself. You can tell he loves Duke and Coach to death. His joy and determination out on the court breathe it. Reminds me a lot of Chris Collins (although, nobody in the history of Duke has displayed the unbridled passion and excitement that Chris brought every night:)).

Taylor is going to be special one day, there is no doubt about it.

BlueintheFace
03-02-2008, 11:19 AM
I really wish that some of these posts were new threads instead of added on to a huge long thread. Would it really be so inconvenient for the mods and readers to have a post called "Duke v _____ - Freshman Performances" for each game? Or if it is something specific, "Taylor King Took a Huge Step Against _____."

Some of these comments are great and could garner a lot of responses as it's own thread. Maybe I am too new to the board to make an observation like this...

Verga3
03-02-2008, 11:37 AM
I was certainly proud of Taylor's hard work today. Not only by his momentum boosting three from the left corner before half, but from the little things he did as well. One moment that sticks out in particular was Taylor's tipped offensive rebound to himself, with which he brought down and then immediately located Jon out top for an open triple. Bam. Three points, Duke. Taylor was about six feet from the basket when he got that board. He easily could have tried to score it himself, with a tough lean in or fadeaway. But Taylor looked for his open teammate instead. He's incredibly unselfish.

Those are the types of plays that have made me love Taylor King. He works hard when he's in the game and plays with a lot of pride, and he doesn't play for himself. You can tell he loves Duke and Coach to death. His joy and determination out on the court breathe it. Reminds me a lot of Chris Collins (although, nobody in the history of Duke has displayed the unbridled passion and excitement that Chris brought every night:)).

Taylor is going to be special one day, there is no doubt about it.


Well said....couldn't agree more. There will be plenty of Taylor King success before he graduates, and he will most certainly add to the already rich Duke basketball lore with his zipcode range and can-do attitude. His obvious passion for this team and for Duke will make us proud....I'm there already.

Jumbo
03-02-2008, 11:55 AM
I'll continue to say what I was saying before the season on this issue. Duke doesn't "need" a major contribution from Taylor King to be successful this season, but he still can make himself into an asset. Right now, he is a luxury. What do I mean? There's no question that TK's greatest attribute (when he's in rhythm) is his shooting. But Duke has lots of shooters, and scoring isn't a major problem. Duke also has a terrific player ahead of him (Kyle Singler) who is going to play heavy minutes. Considering that Lance brings a lot to the team on defense and that the small lineup of Paulus-Scheyer-Nelson-Henderson-Singler has been quite effective, that leaves a finite amount of playing time for frontcourt reserves anyway.

Duke has three quality backups up front in King, Zoubek and McClure. What's cool is that they're three very different players, and each matches up better against specific opponents. As long as Duke gets a solid game out of one of those three (save for major foul trouble), we're fine. Against St. John's, it was Zoubek. Against Georgia Tech, it was McClure. Against State, it was King. That's three different guys and three wins, and K deserves a lot of credit for being really flexibile with his rotation and allowing each of those guys to earn minutes based on how he is playing on a given day.

If Duke's shooting turns sour in a postseason game, it would be great to see Taylor King come off the bench to lift the team, and I wouldn't put it past him. But it's also great that Duke hasn't really needed him to do that, meaning there isn't much pressure on him. Taylor just needs to go out and play to the best of his abilities (as he did against State) and if that continues, good things will come. For Duke to win, its best players simply must play well and King isn't part of that group yet. But it's nice to have King as an additional option.

throatybeard
03-02-2008, 12:12 PM
What Jumbo said.

Also, The board obsession with TK is the backup quarterback theorem in action. In basketball, the backup QB is the bench player who fans most obsess over "needing" more PT for his own good or the team's success.

The backup QB par excellence is Marty. But he's gone for the season. That promoted Zoubek to backup QB. But Z has been hurt much of the season. He's back now and has a little backup QB pixie dust on him, but with both Marty and Z hurt much of the season, this promoted King to backup QB.

If King were hurt, doubtless we'd have reams of threads dedicated to why McClure wasn't getting enough PT.

kinghoops
03-02-2008, 08:32 PM
im not one to shout for more playing time for tk, but i do think he can be a difference maker at some point and time, hey yesterday he didnt play that badly, he does hustle, and although he is not fleet of foot, his defense wasnt terrible

MChambers
03-02-2008, 08:53 PM
What Jumbo said.

Also, The board obsession with TK is the backup quarterback theorem in action. In basketball, the backup QB is the bench player who fans most obsess over "needing" more PT for his own good or the team's success.

The backup QB par excellence is Marty. But he's gone for the season. That promoted Zoubek to backup QB. But Z has been hurt much of the season. He's back now and has a little backup QB pixie dust on him, but with both Marty and Z hurt much of the season, this promoted King to backup QB.

If King were hurt, doubtless we'd have reams of threads dedicated to why McClure wasn't getting enough PT.

I think we need to play Jurgensen more. Kilmer's a bum.

Cameron
03-02-2008, 09:39 PM
[Seinlanguage] So we're definitely done with the King Taylor? ;)

Jumbo
03-02-2008, 09:39 PM
[Seinlanguage] So we're definitely done with the King Taylor? ;)

Yup. But I hope you're getting your avatar/sig ready!

Cameron
03-02-2008, 11:01 PM
LOL. I was just waiting for you to bring that to the table on this thread;) For about the last month now, lol.

You mean I am going to have to part ways with Don?

BTW, I LOVE Taylor to death but you can officially color me insane for predicting an 85 TK three-point field goal season. Officially.

Jumbo
03-02-2008, 11:03 PM
LOL. I was just waiting for you to bring that to the table on this thread;) For about the last month now, lol.

You mean I am going to have to part ways with Don?

Yup. It's almost time to say Ahhhhhh.... SEE YA to the I-Man. (He's getting really creepy anyway.)

Cameron
03-02-2008, 11:06 PM
(He's getting really creepy anyway.)

:D The more I look at him, the more I can't believe I haven't recieved more comments. I agree, the picture is a little not right. Lol.