MBB: UVA 65, Duke 63 Post-Game Thread

[rsvman]

Honestly, I think the game was lost in the sequence that ended up with Guy making the corner three. I'm not going to watch it again, but if memory serves, we had at least two opportunities to get possession of the ball before it was passed to Guy for the three. Missed shots with long rebounds, maybe? All I remember is that it was their third opportunity at the basket, and that I was yelling "GET THE BALL!" at the television set right before that shot. Had we been able to corral the ball, Guy would not have made that shot, and the outcome might well have been different.

The other shot, from well beyond the NBA 3-point line was a dagger, to be sure, but that's a shot that would be missed at least 6 times out of 10, probably 7. He made a good pass fake, which lost Duval momentarily, but I'm not sure Trevon really thought he was going to pull up from there. Again, it's a low percentage shot, and had the shot missed, UVa fans would likely be talking about what a bad decision it was to shoot it at that time in the game. Bad decisions tend to look pretty good when they result in points.

Overall, I thought the comeback from being 13 down at the very beginning of the second half was admirable.

[Bob Green]

I would try to get O'Connell at least 10 minutes a game...

O'Connell struggles to play M2M defense against ACC opponents. If he is going to play 10 minutes a game, we need to employ the zone. There are definitely advantages to O'Connell seeing the court for more minutes starting, as you state, with the starters getting a breather while he gains experience.

[Wander]

Pretty clear that our frontcourt is awesome and Duval and Grayson are the guys who most need to improve on offense. Duval makes way too many turnovers (and I'm not sure the "he's only a freshmen" excuse makes sense for OAD players) and Grayson's inefficient shooting is taking a toll as well. Of course, you could argue it's a little silly to complain about our offense at all.

The proclamations about who's getting a 1 seed or not are happening way too early. No one, including UVA and Villanova, are locked into one, and Duke is clearly still capable of getting one. No reason to think a close loss to a top 2 team changes that.

[DarkstarWahoo]

I think the assertion that UNC is more likely is absurd as well, sorry. They are lower ranked, have less talent, more losses, and a lesser coach.

Could they go to the FF? Sure. Could Duke flame out? Yes. They could happen at the same time, sure.

But the idea of "more likely" suggests a probability and chance that simply isn't true.

Agreed. UNC has been overranked all year, although I certainly understand why. Maybe we just play them really well, or maybe I’ve seen bad performances, but I haven’t been impressed.

(How’s that for sucking up to the hosts?)

[DBGoins]

First...I thought we did a nice job adjusting on Off & Def in the second half. Good job coaches and players...

Second...and I think this comes with us being young, we have to value the ball more! To many turnovers, I know VA can do this to teams but I think we had turnovers that were unforced or just not smart plays by us.

Third...we have got to trust our bench more understanding we will need those guys in post season play.

Overall I’m positive coming out of the game, I thought it was a long shot to catch VA for the regular season champ. I see growth game by game, we are headed in the right direction.

[DBGoins]

Honestly, I think the game was lost in the sequence that ended up with Guy making the corner three. I'm not going to watch it again, but if memory serves, we had at least two opportunities to get possession of the ball before it was passed to Guy for the three. Missed shots with long rebounds, maybe? All I remember is that it was their third opportunity at the basket, and that I was yelling "GET THE BALL!" at the television set right before that shot. Had we been able to corral the ball, Guy would not have made that shot, and the outcome might well have been different.

The other shot, from well beyond the NBA 3-point line was a dagger, to be sure, but that's a shot that would be missed at least 6 times out of 10, probably 7. He made a good pass fake, which lost Duval momentarily, but I'm not sure Trevon really thought he was going to pull up from there. Again, it's a low percentage shot, and had the shot missed, UVa fans would likely be talking about what a bad decision it was to shoot it at that time in the game. Bad decisions tend to look pretty good when they result in points.

Overall, I thought the comeback from being 13 down at the very beginning of the second half was admirable.

I agree some of those 50/50 balls, long rebounds hurt us in the closing minutes.

However, with right at the minute mark we had an opportunity to tie or take the lead but we had a turnover. That was the key poss. in my opinion. I would have much rather get something in the half court, we just tried to force the pass down court. We were killing them with our bigs in the second half.

Lot of poss. could have changed the outcome but that is the one that sticks out because it was in the closing minutes.

[OldPhiKap]

(How’s that for sucking up to the hosts?)

You had me at “Dark Star”

[curtis325]

I think the assertion that UNC is more likely is absurd as well, sorry. They are lower ranked, have less talent, more losses, and a lesser coach.

Could they go to the FF? Sure. Could Duke flame out? Yes. They could happen at the same time, sure.

But the idea of "more likely" suggests a probability and chance that simply isn't true.


Which team is more likely to reach the FF:
Duke?
Cheats?
State?
Wofford?

As for the recent game in CIS, I also thought it was a great game--could have gone either way. Nearly everyone predicted a close game in the 60s and that was the case--exciting to watch. I am on record (at halftime) as expecting Duke to turn the game around in the second half. It was impressive (the turnaround, not my optimistic take).

In conclusion, we have just witnessed Duke's last loss of the season. ACC tourney champs (knocking off BC, State, and UVA), NCAAT champs. You heard it here.

Sincerely,

Pollyanna

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Which team is more likely to reach the FF:
Duke?
Cheats?
State?
Wofford?

As for the recent game in CIS, I also thought it was a great game--could have gone either way. Nearly everyone predicted a close game in the 60s and that was the case--exciting to watch. I am on record (at halftime) as expecting Duke to turn the game around in the second half. It was impressive (the turnaround, not my optimistic take).

In conclusion, we have just witnessed Duke's last loss of the season. ACC tourney champs (knocking off BC, State, and UVA), NCAAT champs. You heard it here.

Sincerely,

Pollyanna

Sign me up!

[Kedsy]

I rewatched the second half of yesterday's game, and frankly I don't think there's a lot to complain about. Virginia is a really good team that just beat us.

True, we didn't turn them over very much, but it also didn't look like we were trying to. We turned it over a lot (24.5% of our possessions), but Virginia's opponents usually turn it over a lot (23.1% of possessions for the season). Plus, 79% of our minutes played were by freshmen, so turning it over a lot in your first meeting against Virginia's packline shouldn't really be a surprise.

And for those blaming defeat on our missed one-and-ones, it's worth remembering that UVa missed two one-and-ones in the last 30 seconds to keep us in the game. And those misses were by an 88% free throw shooter and a 94% free throw shooter. Besides, missing free throws should kind of be expected by a team that shoots 69% from the line, especially when almost three-quarters of our free throws were shot by guys who are shooting 63%, 66%, and 58% from there.


Virginia on the other hand was constantly open off the plays they ran against our porous defense. It seemed and just missed a lot of those shots.

Our defense wasn't "porous." UVa wasn't "constantly open," though they were open a few times. The shots they missed during our 19-4 run were mostly rushed threes and flatfooted long twos, which (a) are exactly the shots you want opponents to take; and (b) weren't really as open as they looked.


UNC is more likely to get to the FF because their players know what it takes.


I like how you say "C'mon now", as if that was some ridiculous assertion.

I'm with those who think it's a ridiculous assertion. As MtnDevil suggested, just because something is remotely possible doesn't mean it's more likely. In this case, it's not even close.


Tyus Jones ain't walking through that door, folks.

Duke's ACC record in Tyus Jones's first nine ACC games: 6-3

Duke's ACC record in Trevon Duval's first nine ACC games: 6-3

[OldPhiKap]

Which team is more likely to reach the FF:
Duke?
Cheats?
State?
Wofford?

As for the recent game in CIS, I also thought it was a great game--could have gone either way. Nearly everyone predicted a close game in the 60s and that was the case--exciting to watch. I am on record (at halftime) as expecting Duke to turn the game around in the second half. It was impressive (the turnaround, not my optimistic take).

In conclusion, we have just witnessed Duke's last loss of the season. ACC tourney champs (knocking off BC, State, and UVA), NCAAT champs. You heard it here.

Sincerely,

Pollyanna

Ozzie has two accounts?

[DarkstarWahoo]

You had me at “Dark Star”

We had a small thread of favorite Jerry solos a couple of weeks ago on the Sabre. As you can imagine, i weighed in. This was my pick: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Na9a79rdjxs

[moonpie23]

Third...we have got to trust our bench more, understanding we will need those guys in post season play.



that is NOT how K rolls...

[lotusland]

Good point. Best defense since the Maginot Line? Wait...

If Bennett played Belgium more in his Pack line scheme, the Marginot line would be an apt comparison. I think the Berlin Wall or Marginot Line would be vulnerable to penetration by either Bagley’s unique combination of size and agility or Duval’s strength and speed. Add Grayson’s fearlessness and leadership and those fortifications don’t really stand a chance. I think we have to tip our cap to the Pack line as a historic defense mechanism .

[Wander]

Duke's ACC record in Tyus Jones's first nine ACC games: 6-3

Duke's ACC record in Trevon Duval's first nine ACC games: 6-3

Jones' season was much better than Duval's current season. That may very well change over the remainder of this season, but it is true at the moment, and cherrypicking one random stat (not even a stat of the actual players) in an attempt to show otherwise is lame.

[richardjackson199]

Point taken. I'll up the ante and say they don't make the elite eight.

I'll take that friendly wager Left Hook. One pie - I say UVA makes at least the Elite 8 this year. (Shakes on it, if you're in). I think they're due.

(I also think/hope Duke makes Final 4, but no bets there. I just hope curtis and Ozzie are right. I'll feel better when moonpie makes same prediction).

[Rich]

Jones' season was much better than Duval's current season. That may very well change over the remainder of this season, but it is true at the moment, and cherrypicking one random stat (not even a stat of the actual players) in an attempt to show otherwise is lame.

I'm sure someone will refute that with facts showing that wasn't the case. It seems we see them after every game. I think many of us have selective memory of a Tyus Jones who had (a) a few game wining/saving heroics and (b) an extraordinary second half of the season and tourney run, but I believe the stats will show that at this point in the season their output is quite similar. Many of us forget that Tyus had a few clunkers. Tyus had more of an on-court personality and a flare for the dramatic, which works in his favor with the fans and our memories, but I don't believe at this point in the season there is much to differentiate them statistically. I have no doubt that someone will prove me right or wrong.

[szstark]

K said Alex had the flu. Bolden is not quite ready and Javins hamstrings were tight in the warm up.

I’m really surprised this hasn’t been discussed more. Our #1 substitute big man doesn’t play at all, our #2 substitute big man substitute has a hamstring tighten on him during warmups, and our #1 guard substitute has the flu - all this combines to basically force an iron man performance by our starters in the second half. This had to have an effect on our guys toward the end of the game. It would certainly explain some of the missed defensive rebounds and maybe even the missed front end 1and1 free throws because of tired legs. I’m not saying it as an excuse, but a contributing factor to the outcome.

[richardjackson199]

Pretty clear that our frontcourt is awesome and Duval and Grayson are the guys who most need to improve on offense. Duval makes way too many turnovers (and I'm not sure the "he's only a freshmen" excuse makes sense for OAD players) and Grayson's inefficient shooting is taking a toll as well. Of course, you could argue it's a little silly to complain about our offense at all.

The proclamations about who's getting a 1 seed or not are happening way too early. No one, including UVA and Villanova, are locked into one, and Duke is clearly still capable of getting one. No reason to think a close loss to a top 2 team changes that.

This is right - of course it's premature to name 1 seeds in January. But this year it's not crazy to speculate at this point.

Superdave is right, our team doesn't need to think about it. They need to focus on getting better. We're relatively healthy, and we have a team who can win it all IF we keep getting better.

The ACC was good this year, but they have been hurt by injuries. Notre Dame is not the same team. Clemson had a key player with ACL - not same team. Cheats are weaker this year (yay) and are on a losing streak (double yay). I think the ACC gets one #1 seed and that team will likely be UVA. They're going to win the regular season, as last year showed us, even winning the ACC tourney didn't get the #1 seed for us.

Sure if we win out or lose exactly 1 more game we'll probably get a 1 seed. But that will be tough. Nova is virtual lock for a 1 seed. Big Ten will get one #1 seed - either Purdue or Michigan State. Big 12 is considered best conference. They'll beat each other up some, but they'll get one #1 seed, probably Kansas. Duke is looking like a 2 seed, but we can still get it done and I hope we do! Or we can win it all as a 2 seed. But yesterday hurt our 1 seed chances bad.

And yes, Lots of basketball left to be played. It's January still.

[hallcity]

Kenpom tweeted today that Duke used its bench less in the Virginia game than ANY NCAA team in ANY game so far this season.

[ncexnyc]

We had a small thread of favorite Jerry solos a couple of weeks ago on the Sabre. As you can imagine, i weighed in. This was my pick: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Na9a79rdjxs
Silly me. I thought it was a reference to that cult classic movie by John Carpenter.

[Kedsy]

Jones' season was much better than Duval's current season. That may very well change over the remainder of this season, but it is true at the moment, and cherrypicking one random stat (not even a stat of the actual players) in an attempt to show otherwise is lame.

Yeah?

FIRST 9 ACC GAMES:


Player Games Points Rebs Assists TOs Steals FG% 2pt% 3pt% FT%
Tyus Jones 9 96 23 36 17 8 37.8% 39.1% 35.7% 87.1%
Trevon Duval 9 94 20 43 28 9 45.7% 50.0% 36.0% 55.0%


Tyus turned it over less and shot much better from the line. Trevon had more assists and shot much better on 2-point shots. Otherwise, they seem pretty much the same to me, including the team's identical win-loss records. Maybe it's people's glorified memories of Tyus that are a little bit lame.

[richardjackson199]

I don't know about others but at no point, either on this board or even in my mind, have I blamed the officials for the loss. That blame belongs to turnovers, missed free throws, and not being able to knock down some decent looks from 3.

I just don't really want to join in on singing the praises of a defense that employs a we're going to foul so much you can't possibly call them all strategy. Tony Bennett is not the only one, but he is the most successful with it and I don't enjoy watching it.


As anyone who has read my posts on this board knows, I'm not a UVA fan. I'm a die hard Duke fan.

But in a perfect world, I'd like for UVA to be our new rival because their program has done things the right way without cheating. Tony Bennett is an incredible coach. His defense continues to make his team greater than the sum of their parts year after year with different players.

Yes I'm glad Duke doesn't use this style, and our games are more fun to watch.

UVA uses a physical defense. I think there is nothing wrong with that. Our 2015 team was physical, and I believe one of the players called Wisconsin soft in the final game. Playing physically (within reason) and aggressive is the mindset needed to win games. If a team is fouling too much, the refs will let them know. That 2015 Wisconsin team also had a reputation for playing defense without fouling. But after the Natty that we won fair and square, Bo Ryan was on national TV whining about what a shame it was that the game was played that way. It was pure sour grapes, and I lost all respect for him. Duke played the game physically, we went for it, and we won. This UVA team is physical, but they're tough, not dirty IMO.

I hope Duke gets better from this and beats them down twice more this year! (And if we do so a little physically that would be fine by me).

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yeah?

FIRST 9 ACC GAMES:


Player Games Points Rebs Assists TOs Steals FG% 2pt% 3pt% FT%
Tyus Jones 9 96 23 36 17 8 37.8% 39.1% 35.7% 87.1%
Trevon Duval 9 94 20 43 28 9 45.7% 50.0% 36.0% 55.0%


Tyus turned it over less and shot much better from the line. Trevon had more assists and shot much better on 2-point shots. Otherwise, they seem pretty much the same to me, including the team's identical win-loss records. Maybe it's people's glorified memories of Tyus that are a little bit lame.

Oh sure, just cherry pick a player's full stat line.

/sarcasm

Don't worry everyone, after we win the championship, we will all agree again that Duval was excellent in January.

[left_hook_lacey]

I'll take that friendly wager Left Hook. One pie - I say UVA makes at least the Elite 8 this year. (Shakes on it, if you're in). I think they're due.

(I also think/hope Duke makes Final 4, but no bets there. I just hope curtis and Ozzie are right. I'll feel better when moonpie makes same prediction).

8032

8033

[CDu]

Yeah?

FIRST 9 ACC GAMES:


Player Games Points Rebs Assists TOs Steals FG% 2pt% 3pt% FT%
Tyus Jones 9 96 23 36 17 8 37.8% 39.1% 35.7% 87.1%
Trevon Duval 9 94 20 43 28 9 45.7% 50.0% 36.0% 55.0%


Tyus turned it over less and shot much better from the line. Trevon had more assists and shot much better on 2-point shots. Otherwise, they seem pretty much the same to me, including the team's identical win-loss records. Maybe it's people's glorified memories of Tyus that are a little bit lame.

I think that's glossing over a few things a bit. Jones had a much better assist/turnover ratio (2.11 to 1.54) and a much better TS% (62.8 to 58.0). Jones was unquestionably better than Duval has been over their first 9 games. Not by quite as much as folks' memory may be. But definitely better.

It's certainly true that much of folks' memories of Jones are skewed upwards by his VERY strong finish and clutch moments (beginning arguably with the UVa win in what was his 8th ACC game). But Jones was still better than Duval through their first 8 games.

Also worth noting that Jones' play largely lacked the clunkers Duval has had more recently. Jones started off the ACC pretty poorly, shooting 6-27 in his first 4 games. After that, he was mostly good to terrific thereafter. Duval has certainly had more peaks and valleys much later in his season than Jones, who only played poorly in a few games over his last 23 of the season.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Jones was unquestionably better than Duval has been over their first 9 games.

The only "unquestionable" comparison is that Jones was a much better free throw shooters and averaged one less TO a game. Duval is clearly the better shooter from the field.

Using bother assist/turnover ratio and turnover/steal ratio is misleading. Duval has more assist and more steals. Just say Jones had fewer turnovers.

Looks pretty dang even to me.

[CDu]

The only "unquestionable" comparison is that Jones was a much better free throw shooters and averaged one less TO a game. Duval is clearly the better shooter from the field.

Looks pretty dang even to me.

It's really not though. Jones was better at drawing fouls and better at making his free throws. Thus, he was the more efficient scorer. Jones was also the more efficient playmaker based on assist/turnover ratio. So, more efficient scorer and more efficient playmaker. Basically equal in the other areas (Duval had one more steal and one more block, Jones 3 more rebounds).

So, Jones was unquestionably better. Not in a blowout, but if one player is clearly a more efficient scorer and more efficient playmaker and is equal across the rest, he clearly (hence unquestionably) was the better performer.

And no, assist/turnover ratio is not misleading. Duval got 19% more assists and 65% more turnovers than Jones. It's absolutely relevant. Saying "Duval got more assists and Jones got fewer turnovers" is misleading, because it understates the relative difference.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

It's really not though. Jones was better at drawing fouls and better at making his free throws. Thus, he was the more efficient scorer. Jones was also the more efficient playmaker based on assist/turnover ratio. So, more efficient scorer and more efficient playmaker. Basically equal in the other areas (Duval had one more steal and one more block, Jones 3 more rebounds).

So, Jones was unquestionably better. Not in a blowout, but if one player is clearly a more efficient scorer and more efficient playmaker and is equal across the rest, he clearly (hence unquestionably) was the better performer.

So... It is better to get to the free throw line than to make field goals?

I think maybe we are just asking different questions to reach "unquestionable" status. I see two guys with a slightly different skill set, but pretty dang similar value.

[left_hook_lacey]

So... It is better to get to the free throw line than to make field goals?

I think maybe we are just asking different questions to reach "unquestionable" status. I see two guys with a slightly different skill set, but pretty dang similar value.

Depends on how strong the wind is.

[CDu]

So... It is better to get to the free throw line than to make field goals?

That's not an entirely relevant question. Duval had an eFG% of 51% to Jones' 44.5%. But Jones was much better at drawing fouls and MUCH better at making free throws. Thus, on aggregate, he was the more efficient scorer. It was close, but Jones was a bit better.

And as an aside, drawing fouls and getting to the line has value over FGA in that it helps the team through getting to the bonus quicker and getting the other team in foul trouble. And when you shoot 87% from the line, it's pretty darn comparable to the value of a FGA too.

So, again, Jones was the more efficient scorer and a more efficient playmaker. Hence, better. Not by a wild degree, but better.


I think maybe we are just asking different questions to reach "unquestionable" status. I see two guys with a slightly different skill set, but pretty dang similar value.

They do have similar value. But Jones was unquestionably better. Just slightly so. And I even said it wasn't a blowout that Jones was better. But he was still better.

And this is not to disparage Duval. He's a terrific talent and has had some absolutely huge moments for us. I was in fact very much on (leading, in fact) the "Duval has been the best Duke freshman PG ever" bandwagon within the past month or so. But in the last few weeks, Duval has struggled, to the point that Jones has now outplayed him by a bit at comparable points in their ACC careers.

[YmoBeThere]

In the 2014-15 season, we were 17-3 at this point with 3 losses in conference, two on the road and one at home. I'm not sure what all the Sturm and Drang is about. Looks like we are on pace for a pretty decent season.

[Kedsy]

I think that's glossing over a few things a bit.

First of all, I don't think I glossed anything over. I included all the stats in my post.

Second, I was responding to a post that said Tyus's season was "much better," which it doesn't sound like you agree with any more than I do.

Third, my original point was simply that Tyus was not enough better to affect the team's win/loss record after nine games, a point which someone else declared was "lame," but isn't.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

That's not an entirely relevant question. Duval had an eFG% of 51% to Jones' 44.5%. But Jones was much better at drawing fouls and MUCH better at making free throws. Thus, on aggregate, he was the more efficient scorer. It was close, but Jones was a bit better.

And as an aside, drawing fouls and getting to the line has value over FGA in that it helps the team through getting to the bonus quicker and getting the other team in foul trouble. And when you shoot 87% from the line, it's pretty darn comparable to the value of a FGA too.

So, again, Jones was the more efficient scorer and a more efficient playmaker. Hence, better. Not by a wild degree, but better.



They do have similar value. But Jones was unquestionably better. Just slightly so. And I even said it wasn't a blowout that Jones was better. But he was still better.

And this is not to disparage Duval. He's a terrific talent and has had some absolutely huge moments for us. I was in fact very much on (leading, in fact) the "Duval has been the best Duke freshman PG ever" bandwagon within the past month or so. But in the last few weeks, Duval has struggled, to the point that Jones has now outplayed him by a bit at comparable points in their ACC careers.

/sigh

You are making me tired. How can the questions not be relevant when you say something is "unquestionable?" How can you say the are similar, but Jones is slightly better, and that it is "unquestionable?"

By definition, you are wrong because I am questioning it. It just seems more than conceivable to me that if you were a fan who say, values three point shooting over an extra turnover a game, you could question the conclusion you reached.

I guess what I am trying to say is that while you say Jones was better at this point in his ACC career, the stats show a pretty dang even story, and it isn't absurd to claim Duval is right there with him.

Personally, I don't care which you like better, but I think the bigger picture is that people have a glorified idea of what Tyus did (for obvious reasons) and are railing against Duval (for less obvious reasons) and I think that is unfortunate.

[wavedukefan70s]

We have had some amazing guards at duke.i think duval is doing a good job.hes not jwill,Hurley or ty.he will be ok .I believe it's like smoking a Boston butt.theres a stall point then it takes off again.you know the end point is going to be good.
he just has to get over his stall point.which I believe will start with N.D.

[CDu]

First of all, I don't think I glossed anything over. I included all the stats in my post.

To be fair, you didn't. TS% and A/TO were omitted. And your presentation sure skewed towards "they are the same." They weren't. It was somewhat close, but Jones was clearly better.


Second, I was responding to a post that said Tyus's season was "much better," which it doesn't sound like you agree with any more than I do.

I agree that Jones wasn't "much" better. I just don't quite agree with the way you presented the case though.


Third, my original point was simply that Tyus was not enough better to affect the team's win/loss record after nine games, a point which someone else declared was "lame," but isn't.

I disagree. We have lost 3 games, two of which were very close.

If we got Jones' performance against UVa instead of Duval's, we are 7-2 in conference and not 6-3. Heck, even if we just get Duval's average performance against UVa, we win and are 7-2 in conference. Similar argument about Duval's average performance applies to the BC game.

And in some other games, we won in spite of pretty bad games by Duval (specifically the games @Wake and vs Pitt).

I completely agree that Duval gets more grief in general than he deserves. Heck, back in December I was banging the drum that he was our best freshman PG ever. But he hasn't played as well as Jones to this point, and that is especially true over the last 3 games, which includes a close loss at home that has likely eliminated our chances of the 1 seed in the ACC and even a share of the ACC regular season title. So I think it's a bit misleading to say all is great and he's on par with Jones at this point.

[W&LHoo]

Props to you and other Duke fans who are gracious about the outcome of the game. DBR is by far the best opponent's board in the ACC, because its members know the game and respect opposing players and teams who play it the right way.

You don't need UVA fans to tell you what special talents you have in Bagley and Carter - if we had either one of those guys, I can't even imagine how good we'd be. With four stud freshmen, Duke isn't close to reaching its ceiling yet. It sucks to lose a game like that, but I'm sure that Coach K will use it as an opportunity to make your team better. Iron sharpens iron.

If (when) we meet again in the post-season, I'm just glad it won't be in Cameron.

Gonna echo this. Very few boards are able to a avoid a spiral into venom and sour grapes after a hard-fought loss. Very much enjoy being a guest here.

[AtlDuke72]

Agree, I love seeing the ball in Pinson’s hands. He is JP Tokoto 2.0, a liability to the Heels offense. Or, in the new vernacular, he’s their “glue guy”. Translation: a guy who has few discernible skills, hustles his butt off, and is indispensable because, hey, you need to put a 5th guy on the court.

Pinson scored 20 points yesterday.

[Kedsy]

I disagree. We have lost 3 games, two of which were very close.

If we got Jones' performance against UVa instead of Duval's, we are 7-2 in conference and not 6-3. Heck, even if we just get Duval's average performance against UVa, we win and are 7-2 in conference.

I honestly don't understand your point. Tyus Jones's team also lost 3 of its first 9 ACC games (which was my point), although only one of them was a close loss. Both teams lost one game at home, and here are our PG's stats in their home loss:

Tyus: 6 points on 22% shooting (0% from three), 2 assists vs. 2 turnovers.

Trevon: 6 points on 42% shooting (0% from three), 8 assists vs. 5 turnovers.

You can't just say "if we got Jones's average performance" and turn a loss to a win.

[kmspeaks]

This UVA team is physical, but they're tough, not dirty IMO.

Absolutely. They're not out there trying to injure people.



UVA uses a physical defense. I think there is nothing wrong with that.

If a team is fouling too much, the refs will let them know.


I hope Duke gets better from this and beats them down twice more this year! (And if we do so a little physically that would be fine by me).

Now this is where we disagree. I'd rather not see basketball turned into a game where one team can bully another out of their offense and I definitely don't trust referees to prevent that from happening since they've proven to be completely inept at doing it so far. I want an environment where skill is more important than brute strength, these "physical" defenses prevent that from happening.

[durhamhoo]

UVA is like playing Navy in football. They set the game back 50 years. Regardless when you only score 63 points AT HOME that’s a poor performance. Not sure what to say about Sr Grayson Allen’s 5 point performance. Just tough to win when K utterly refuses to play a bench. But hey he hasn’t changed in 30 years so why start trying to develop an 8 man rotation now.

"set the game back 50 years?" this is the type of quote I expect from a mouth-breathing ESPN-only fans (or UNC guys), not a poster from DBR! What was it about that game yesterday "set basketball back"? Playing (and being committed to playing) actual defense for 40 minutes? Running offensive plays every time up the floor, knowing that unless you have a clear path to the basket the other team has a better than average chance of stopping you, or making you miss? Spreading the minutes among 8-9 players because you have guys that have been in the system for years and can play a role?

I know there are trolls who will now beat this tired drum to raise Wahoo ire, but really...do you all mean it at this point or is it just an easy way to denigrate the loss? Honest question here.

[CDu]

I honestly don't understand your point. Tyus Jones's team also lost 3 of its first 9 ACC games (which was my point), although only one of them was a close loss. Both teams lost one game at home, and here are our PG's stats in their home loss:

Tyus: 6 points on 22% shooting (0% from three), 2 assists vs. 2 turnovers.

Trevon: 6 points on 42% shooting (0% from three), 8 assists vs. 5 turnovers.

You can't just say "if we got Jones's average performance" and turn a loss to a win.

I didn't say "Jones' average performance. I said Duval's average performance.

Don't be obstinate. Jones was better over their first 9 ACC games. And Duval's performance in one of the losses was a significant part of our loss. This really isn't that complicated.

Duval has played really poorly over the past 3 games. We were fortunate that two of those games came against awful teams. In the other one, it was a significant part of why we lost. And if he had played his average ACC game, with 2 fewer turnovers and has a 4-7 day from the field and 1-2 from the line instead of a missed 1-and-1 (technically that's one less FG and one more assist than his average, but you get the ideaa), I would say we win by a few points yesterday.

So, yes, the difference in Duval's play and Jones' play this season probably accounts for the one-game difference in results. Again, not a HUGE difference. But a clear difference.

[durhamhoo]

Again, the rule of thumb at our house is that if you had made half of what you missed in a close game (which in this game would have still been an average shooting day at the line), it would have changed the outcome. The equivalent of 5-15 since we missed four, I think, front ends...in our own gym. A great effort against the best team in the league with the chance for a win literally in our hands at the FT line and we couldn't make enough FTs.

More reasons than that for the loss. I like the Hoos in a rematch in the acc tourney for these reasons: our defense will be the same, we haven't had that bad a shooting night in the lane with jumpers in a LONG time, and our depth is a huge advantage.

Great game. Really glad I won't be seeing Bagley for long. He is an absolute beast (one negative - not much D).

[dukelifer]

I rewatched the second half of yesterday's game, and frankly I don't think there's a lot to complain about. Virginia is a really good team that just beat us.

True, we didn't turn them over very much, but it also didn't look like we were trying to. We turned it over a lot (24.5% of our possessions), but Virginia's opponents usually turn it over a lot (23.1% of possessions for the season). Plus, 79% of our minutes played were by freshmen, so turning it over a lot in your first meeting against Virginia's packline shouldn't really be a surprise.

And for those blaming defeat on our missed one-and-ones, it's worth remembering that UVa missed two one-and-ones in the last 30 seconds to keep us in the game. And those misses were by an 88% free throw shooter and a 94% free throw shooter. Besides, missing free throws should kind of be expected by a team that shoots 69% from the line, especially when almost three-quarters of our free throws were shot by guys who are shooting 63%, 66%, and 58% from there.



Our defense wasn't "porous." UVa wasn't "constantly open," though they were open a few times. The shots they missed during our 19-4 run were mostly rushed threes and flatfooted long twos, which (a) are exactly the shots you want opponents to take; and (b) weren't really as open as they looked.





I'm with those who think it's a ridiculous assertion. As MtnDevil suggested, just because something is remotely possible doesn't mean it's more likely. In this case, it's not even close.



Duke's ACC record in Tyus Jones's first nine ACC games: 6-3

Duke's ACC record in Trevon Duval's first nine ACC games: 6-3

The assertion is that a more experienced team is more likely to get to the FF than one dominated with Freshman. Given the data, how is that ridiculous?

[Wahoo2000]

To be fair, you didn't. TS% and A/TO were omitted. And your presentation sure skewed towards "they are the same." They weren't. It was somewhat close, but Jones was clearly better.



I agree that Jones wasn't "much" better. I just don't quite agree with the way you presented the case though.



I disagree. We have lost 3 games, two of which were very close.

If we got Jones' performance against UVa instead of Duval's, we are 7-2 in conference and not 6-3. Heck, even if we just get Duval's average performance against UVa, we win and are 7-2 in conference. Similar argument about Duval's average performance applies to the BC game.

And in some other games, we won in spite of pretty bad games by Duval (specifically the games @Wake and vs Pitt).

I completely agree that Duval gets more grief in general than he deserves. Heck, back in December I was banging the drum that he was our best freshman PG ever. But he hasn't played as well as Jones to this point, and that is especially true over the last 3 games, which includes a close loss at home that has likely eliminated our chances of the 1 seed in the ACC and even a share of the ACC regular season title. So I think it's a bit misleading to say all is great and he's on par with Jones at this point.

Same reverse could also be true vis a vis Tyus' performances in losses to NCSU and Miami. Even an "average" Duval performance, vs what Jones did in those specific games, would be a marked improvement.

I'm splitting the difference in this argument. Jones was BETTER than Duval through 9 games, but not significantly so. Clearly, but not significantly. There is the distinction for me. They are comparable in quality, with a SLIGHT edge to Jones.

[CDu]

To add to my point, I think it is also fair to note that this team is also more talented than that team was. I think Carter is every bit as good as Okafor, and we have Bagley who is doing better than both. Trent and Allen are better than Jones and Cook. Our offense is slightly better and our defense is comparable at the same point. We quite frankly don't need Duval to be great to win. But we need him to not make the mistakes he's been making recently. 5 turnovers yesterday (in a slow-paced game no less) and a missed front end of a 1-and-1 in a 2-point loss. And a couple of the turnovers were really bad (the one where he just lost his dribble uncontested comes to mind). 10 turnovers the last 3 games to only 14 assists to go with only 5-19 from the field for 11 points.

He doesn't have to be superman like he was those last 4 minutes of the FSU game. He doesn't even have to be as good as Tyus Jones was. But we need him to not be the liability he has been in several games this year.

Again, I've been one of his biggest supporters early in this season. In December, I championed the cause that he was playing better than any Duke freshman PG ever. His play has fallen substantially off since then, especially over the last 3-5 games. We don't need the 9:1 assist:turnover ratio guy back. We just need him to value the ball better and get the ball to our two bigs and Trent more consistently.

[CDu]

Same reverse could also be true vis a vis Tyus' performances in losses to NCSU and Miami. Even an "average" Duval performance, vs what Jones did in those specific games, would be a marked improvement.

Not really true. We lost both of those games by double-digits. Him playing his average game probably gets us to a 5-point loss or so.


I'm splitting the difference in this argument. Jones was BETTER than Duval through 9 games, but not significantly so. Clearly, but not significantly. There is the distinction for me. They are comparable in quality, with a SLIGHT edge to Jones.

I agree. Slight edge to Jones. Probably by about 10%. Which is, roughly, the difference between 7-2 and 6-3.

[uh_no]

More reasons than that for the loss. I like the Hoos in a rematch in the acc tourney for these reasons: our defense will be the same, we haven't had that bad a shooting night in the lane with jumpers in a LONG time, and our depth is a huge advantage.

Great game. Really glad I won't be seeing Bagley for long. He is an absolute beast (one negative - not much D).

i mean, except for a long stretch against miami....and it's not like they were all as open as a waffle house during a hurricane.

[Kedsy]

The assertion is that a more experienced team is more likely to get to the FF than one dominated with Freshman. Given the data, how is that ridiculous?

First of all, I posted data on this some time ago (unfortunately, I can't find it right now and don't feel like looking any more), but it's not really true that more experienced teams are more likely to succeed in the NCAA tournament. It just seems that way because there aren't so many freshman-dominated teams that get to the tournament.

Second, as an example, Rhode Island starts 4 seniors and has a 5th senior getting 22 minutes off the bench. Is Rhode Island also more likely than Duke to make the Final Four? Ridiculous, right?

I understand UNC is a better team than Rhode Island (though Rhode Island's RPI is better than UNC's, so who knows?), but experience is only one factor out of many. Talent is more important, and Duke has a lot more talent than UNC. That's how.

[DarkstarWahoo]

i mean, except for a long stretch against miami...and it's not like they were all as open as a waffle house during a hurricane.

FYI - that’s a Hoo you’re speaking with. (I should allow for the possibility you’re referring to UVA-Miami last year, in which case, how dare you.)

[Kedsy]

First of all, I posted data on this some time ago (unfortunately, I can't find it right now and don't feel like looking any more), but it's not really true that more experienced teams are more likely to succeed in the NCAA tournament. It just seems that way because there aren't so many freshman-dominated teams that get to the tournament.

Second, as an example, Rhode Island starts 4 seniors and has a 5th senior getting 22 minutes off the bench. Is Rhode Island also more likely than Duke to make the Final Four? Ridiculous, right?

I understand UNC is a better team than Rhode Island (though Rhode Island's RPI is better than UNC's, so who knows?), but experience is only one factor out of many. Talent is more important, and Duke has a lot more talent than UNC. That's how.

The more I think about it, I think I just performed calculations on someone else's data. That's probably why I can't find it now. But my recollection is still that the numbers for freshman-dominated teams getting to the Final Four was actually a higher percentage, but based on fewer teams.

[CDu]

The more I think about it, I think I just performed calculations on someone else's data. That's probably why I can't find it now. But my recollection is still that the numbers for freshman-dominated teams getting to the Final Four was actually a higher percentage, but based on fewer teams.

I think it is a tricky analysis. I think it is safe to say that, talent being equal, experience is better than not. Of course, that's not an interesting argument. There is certainly a point in which experience only goes so far, hence about 300+ schools have no realistic chance at reaching the Final Four. You do have to have some talent to win consistently. The question is, where is that point? The last two years were dominated by veteran teams lacking in elite NBA-level talent. 2015 saw a little of both, with two Final Four teams (one finalist) being veteran-heavy squads light on impact NBA guys and the other two (including the champ) being young but having some impact NBA talent.

Compared to all 351 schools each year? Yeah, give me the talented freshmen squad, no questions asked. Same is true compared with the top-100 schools. And for the tourney field in general (approximated by the top-50 schools). Compared to the 10 or 20 best teams? Then I'm not so certain. Could still be true, but the answer is far less clear-cut. And of course it also depends on the quality of the freshmen involved.

[Kedsy]

Compared to all 351 schools each year? Yeah, give me the talented freshmen squad, no questions asked. Same is true compared with the top-100 schools. And for the tourney field in general (approximated by the top-50 schools). Compared to the 10 or 20 best teams? Then I'm not so certain. Could still be true, but the answer is far less clear-cut. And of course it also depends on the quality of the freshmen involved.

There's also the small sample issue. How many top 10 (or 20) teams have started three or four freshmen? My guess is very few, but a healthy percentage of the ones that did (e.g., 2012 Kentucky, 2015 Duke and Kentucky, etc.) have had a fair amount of tourney success.

[WVDUKEFAN]

Are we to the point with this team that we give up on man to man defense? We clearly brought ourselves back yesterday with zone defense. I don't know if 2-3 is the answer, but a 1-3-1 or a box and one pressing the ball handler might be the way to go against better teams.

What's the answer to get Grayson back to scoring? Something just isn't right with him offensively?

[Wahoo2000]

Are we to the point with this team that we give up on man to man defense? We clearly brought ourselves back yesterday with zone defense. I don't know if 2-3 is the answer, but a 1-3-1 or a box and one pressing the ball handler might be the way to go against better teams.

What's the answer to get Grayson back to scoring? Something just isn't right with him offensively?

I don't know if your zone is that much better than your man, but it sure as heck will keep guys fresher when your minutes go: 37, 40, 37, 40, 40, 3, 3.

Edited to add: I think after last year's ACC tournament, K has decided that 18-22 year olds can definitely play at a high level for a full 40 min without fatigue being a significant issue. People here have complained about the short rotation in the past - once 8+ guys, then 7 guys, then seemingly 6+ guys, yesterday 5+ - but I think it's still shortening (and yes, I know about the flu, hamstring, and Bolden still "not ready", but K's comments in the postgame tell me he's ready to play those main 5 guys exactly like that in the games that count the most).

[dukelifer]

First of all, I posted data on this some time ago (unfortunately, I can't find it right now and don't feel like looking any more), but it's not really true that more experienced teams are more likely to succeed in the NCAA tournament. It just seems that way because there aren't so many freshman-dominated teams that get to the tournament.

Second, as an example, Rhode Island starts 4 seniors and has a 5th senior getting 22 minutes off the bench. Is Rhode Island also more likely than Duke to make the Final Four? Ridiculous, right?

I understand UNC is a better team than Rhode Island (though Rhode Island's RPI is better than UNC's, so who knows?), but experience is only one factor out of many. Talent is more important, and Duke has a lot more talent than UNC. That's how.
Yes RI is less likely to get to the FF than UNC. UNC is a team with talent- Maye is averaging 18+ and 10+. Berry is averaging 17. Those are experienced players and a coaching staff with significant FF experience and multiple National Championships. I don’t expect UNC to make the FF but on paper- returning multiple players who played in National Championship games with a Hall of Fame coach- it would not shock be to see them in a final 8 matchup. I am not sure Duke will beat UNC away even though Duke’s players will turn out to be better pros. It will likely be a coin flip at the end. We are projecting the Duke guys 3 years into the future. Every experience is new for them- they are exerting effort in figuring out the teams. Big games are mentally taxing. I enjoy this group but it takes time to build a team where each can anticipate their teammates moves at game speed. We will see where Duke is in a month. Duke’s chances for a FF go up up Allen returns to his normal self. So far in ACC play, he is playing like a Freshman as well- up and down.

[Papa John]

Uva doesn't make it to the FF. I'm willing to put pie on it.

Remember, folks were saying the same thing about Jay Wright and Villanova going into the 2016 tourney... and look how that turned out. Bennett and UVa will break through at some point... I’m guessing within the next few years.

[Kedsy]

Are we to the point with this team that we give up on man to man defense? We clearly brought ourselves back yesterday with zone defense. I don't know if 2-3 is the answer, but a 1-3-1 or a box and one pressing the ball handler might be the way to go against better teams.

Hard to say at this point. We haven't shown the zone effective for more than 8 minutes at a time. I'm not convinced it would work well if we played 40 minutes of zone. We seem to need to be able to switch up defenses, meaning we should continue to use both the zone and m2m defenses. It might even be helpful to find a third defense to switch it up even more, but it may be too late in the season to do that effectively.


Yes RI is less likely to get to the FF than UNC. UNC is a team with talent- Maye is averaging 18+ and 10+. Berry is averaging 17. Those are experienced players and a coaching staff with significant FF experience and multiple National Championships. I don’t expect UNC to make the FF but on paper- returning multiple players who played in National Championship games with a Hall of Fame coach- it would not shock be to see them in a final 8 matchup. I am not sure Duke will beat UNC away even though Duke’s players will turn out to be better pros. It will likely be a coin flip at the end. We are projecting the Duke guys 3 years into the future. Every experience is new for them- they are exerting effort in figuring out the teams. Big games are mentally taxing. I enjoy this group but it takes time to build a team where each can anticipate their teammates moves at game speed. We will see where Duke is in a month. Duke’s chances for a FF go up up Allen returns to his normal self. So far in ACC play, he is playing like a Freshman as well- up and down.

I never suggested RI was more likely to get to the Final Four than UNC. I rhetorically asked whether Rhode Island (with their scads of experience) was more likely to get to the Final Four than Duke.

You say UNC is more likely to get to the Final Four than Rhode Island because "UNC is a team with talent." Well, Duke is a team with even more talent. Much more than UNC. And I'm not talking about three years into the future. I'm talking about now. In other words, for the same reason that UNC has a better chance than Rhode Island to make the Final Four, Duke has a better chance than UNC to make the Final Four.

The idea that UNC is more likely to make the Final Four simply isn't true.

[richardjackson199]

Absolutely. They're not out there trying to injure people.



Now this is where we disagree. I'd rather not see basketball turned into a game where one team can bully another out of their offense and I definitely don't trust referees to prevent that from happening since they've proven to be completely inept at doing it so far. I want an environment where skill is more important than brute strength, these "physical" defenses prevent that from happening.

Your point is valid. I like games scored in the 70's-80's and even 90's more too by skilled teams.

Great defenses make great offenses uncomfortable. They take away what the offense is trying to do. Clean looks are few and far between. They get in your space, in your comfort zone, and are often physical. (Until we shoot free throws better, we're going to have to expect teams trying to be physical with us and even hacking Carter, Bagley, and Duval to pieces. And unless we shoot free throws better, that could really bite us come tourney time.)

The way Shabazz Napier and Ryan Boatright played defense vs. UK in the 2014 Final 4 is what I'm talking about. It was tough to score on those guys, even for very skilled players. UVA's team defense is just brilliant. I mean this team scored 22 points in the first half in Cameron in what we knew was a huge game. Ugh. Second half was better, but 63 points was not enough to get it done. We'll learn.

[DukieInBrasil]

I know this is just pablum but: "We all learned a lot. We learned that playing against really good teams like Virginia tells us that we have to be sharp all the time. We have to be smart with the ball. We have to make free throws and do all the little things, like rebound and stuff like that, to be really good teams like that." - How do players not know this already, let alone after getting embarrassed by BC and then State? It seems like every game this team doesn't come out sharp, is not smart withe ball and just looks like they expect the other team to just lose.
If Duke plays UVA in the ACC and/or NCAA tourneys, i think Duke can win it b/c they won't be surprised by the intensity with which UVA plays. We solved their defense in the second half, and our defense was good enough to hold UVA's efficiency at a reasonable level. However, after having been through this 2 other times already, there's no guarantee that this team will come out of the gate withe focus and intensity that it needs to accomplish the goal.
Many of the mistakes made were from trying to force a play to happen, rather than valuing the ball and being sharp. Even if we just reduce our turnovers to an even dozen, that would give us 4 extra possessions, and we were shooting 50% FGs, so we could expect 4 extra points, which would have totally changed the final minutes.
Anyway, i'm not depressed by this loss because we had a chance to grab the win at "winning time". This team will have lots of opportunity in the upcoming weeks to either show they've learned the lesson of "being sharp" and "being smart withe ball" or lose a whole bunch of games.

[Rich]

Great defenses make great offenses uncomfortable. They take away what the offense is trying to do. Clean looks are few and far between. They get in your space, in your comfort zone, and are often physical.

Sigh, reminds me of the good ol' days.

[CDu]

There's also the small sample issue. How many top 10 (or 20) teams have started three or four freshmen? My guess is very few, but a healthy percentage of the ones that did (e.g., 2012 Kentucky, 2015 Duke and Kentucky, etc.) have had a fair amount of tourney success.

Yeah, the sample size is a real problem. We have three really good tourney results (2012, 2013, and 2015 UK, 2015 Duke), and some not so good ones (2017 Duke, the Noel year for UK). The single-elimination tourney makes for real sample size challenges, and a ton of potential for noise to cause problems.


Hard to say at this point. We haven't shown the zone effective for more than 8 minutes at a time. I'm not convinced it would work well if we played 40 minutes of zone. We seem to need to be able to switch up defenses, meaning we should continue to use both the zone and m2m defenses. It might even be helpful to find a third defense to switch it up even more, but it may be too late in the season to do that effectively.

I never suggested RI was more likely to get to the Final Four than UNC. I rhetorically asked whether Rhode Island (with their scads of experience) was more likely to get to the Final Four than Duke.

You say UNC is more likely to get to the Final Four than Rhode Island because "UNC is a team with talent." Well, Duke is a team with even more talent. Much more than UNC. And I'm not talking about three years into the future. I'm talking about now. In other words, for the same reason that UNC has a better chance than Rhode Island to make the Final Four, Duke has a better chance than UNC to make the Final Four.

The idea that UNC is more likely to make the Final Four simply isn't true.

The question is really more, is Duke more likely to make the Final Four than UVa, Nova, or Purdue (less talented but very experienced teams).

[MChambers]

Are we to the point with this team that we give up on man to man defense? We clearly brought ourselves back yesterday with zone defense. I don't know if 2-3 is the answer, but a 1-3-1 or a box and one pressing the ball handler might be the way to go against better teams.

This team has a much higher ceiling with man to man. Maybe they won't reach it, but if they are to have a shot at a national title (or even a final four appearance), they need to play an effective man to man. Maybe they won't learn it, but I'm certain Coach K will spend the next month working on it. Doesn't mean they can't use the zone on occasion.

[Saratoga2]

I know this is just pablum but: "We all learned a lot. We learned that playing against really good teams like Virginia tells us that we have to be sharp all the time. We have to be smart with the ball. We have to make free throws and do all the little things, like rebound and stuff like that, to be really good teams like that." - How do players not know this already, let alone after getting embarrassed by BC and then State? It seems like every game this team doesn't come out sharp, is not smart withe ball and just looks like they expect the other team to just lose.
If Duke plays UVA in the ACC and/or NCAA tourneys, i think Duke can win it b/c they won't be surprised by the intensity with which UVA plays. We solved their defense in the second half, and our defense was good enough to hold UVA's efficiency at a reasonable level. However, after having been through this 2 other times already, there's no guarantee that this team will come out of the gate withe focus and intensity that it needs to accomplish the goal.
Many of the mistakes made were from trying to force a play to happen, rather than valuing the ball and being sharp. Even if we just reduce our turnovers to an even dozen, that would give us 4 extra possessions, and we were shooting 50% FGs, so we could expect 4 extra points, which would have totally changed the final minutes.
Anyway, i'm not depressed by this loss because we had a chance to grab the win at "winning time". This team will have lots of opportunity in the upcoming weeks to either show they've learned the lesson of "being sharp" and "being smart withe ball" or lose a whole bunch of games.

All players make mistakes and in the UVA game we had 16 turnovers to 5 for UVA. That is difficult to recover from although we almost did, probably due to our superior rebounding and scoring potential. I always thought John Scheyer, not a prototype PG, valued the ball and avoided the spectacular passing attempts by trying to work for a good scoring opportunity on every play. Duval is a prototype PG with an excellent handle and the ability to blow by defenders. He has yet to learn that high risk plays often get negative results. I believe he will become a major positive for us by the end of the season. If he gets his shot going, then all the better. Grayson is a senior and I expect more from him at this point in his Duke career. I do think he played solid defense but he too made a couple of lazy passes early in the game and was largely unable to find an open shot with one exception for most of the game. Gary didn't have his best game but I think he shows more maturity in his game and is a very steady performer.

[Kedsy]

The question is really more, is Duke more likely to make the Final Four than UVa, Nova, or Purdue (less talented but very experienced teams).

Could be. I haven't formed a strong opinion on that yet. I was merely responding to a poster's assertion that UNC was more likely than Duke to make the Final Four this season.

[CDu]

Could be. I haven't formed a strong opinion on that yet. I was merely responding to a poster's assertion that UNC was more likely than Duke to make the Final Four this season.

Oh I agree. I do not think UNC is more likely to make the Final Four than us. I think the cutoff line is higher than them - especially with a team this talented.

[richardjackson199]

I know this is just pablum but: "We all learned a lot. We learned that playing against really good teams like Virginia tells us that we have to be sharp all the time. We have to be smart with the ball. We have to make free throws and do all the little things, like rebound and stuff like that, to be really good teams like that." - How do players not know this already, let alone after getting embarrassed by BC and then State? It seems like every game this team doesn't come out sharp, is not smart withe ball and just looks like they expect the other team to just lose.
If Duke plays UVA in the ACC and/or NCAA tourneys, i think Duke can win it b/c they won't be surprised by the intensity with which UVA plays. We solved their defense in the second half, and our defense was good enough to hold UVA's efficiency at a reasonable level. However, after having been through this 2 other times already, there's no guarantee that this team will come out of the gate withe focus and intensity that it needs to accomplish the goal.
Many of the mistakes made were from trying to force a play to happen, rather than valuing the ball and being sharp. Even if we just reduce our turnovers to an even dozen, that would give us 4 extra possessions, and we were shooting 50% FGs, so we could expect 4 extra points, which would have totally changed the final minutes.
Anyway, i'm not depressed by this loss because we had a chance to grab the win at "winning time". This team will have lots of opportunity in the upcoming weeks to either show they've learned the lesson of "being sharp" and "being smart withe ball" or lose a whole bunch of games.

I agree and this could be a big problem.

The problem is not that our will to win did not carry us through to wins against BC, State, and UVA. IIRC, we had fairly late leads in all these games with a decent chance to win them.

The problem is that we are in this position WAY too often to be as good as we are capable of being. We have the best offense in the nation. And we could be much better. This team has shown an ability to go on incredible scoring runs. But this team has also shown a definite pattern of losing focus and finding themselves down and needing to come back way too often in the 2nd half. A team with this much talent just should not need a 2nd half comeback against Portland State. We should blow Southern out of our gym by halftime. We were in serious trouble in the 2nd half against Texas, Florida, Miami, and Florida State. We were in a 2nd half dogfight with Indiana as well. It's great that our will to win got us W's in all those. But it's happening too often.

Giving teams we should beat a close game late in 2nd half has them feeling good about themselves. They're feeling like they could knock Duke off, and tough players have done just that 3 times. It's a nice ingredient in the recipe for an upset to keep giving so many teams the late chance. We're lucky to have a 3 in the loss column now. It's caused by long lapses in focus on both ends of the floor.

This team has potential to be great or potential to be done after first weekend in March. I think we'll be great. Our defense can also be stellar. We saw what happened in 2015 in the tourney. It wasn't just Tyus' shooting. That team played just stifling defense for 40 minutes. We won because we shut down guys like Pangos and Dekker with players like Matt Jones and Winslow giving their all on D.

If this team plays with focus and heart for 40 minutes, they can be great. They won't just have the will to comeback and win. They'll be able to blow good teams out and kill their will like the 92 or 99 teams often did. We could be that good. And we have just the right coaches to lead us there.

I'm excited to see what Duke does from here.

[ncexnyc]

I know this is just pablum but: "We all learned a lot. We learned that playing against really good teams like Virginia tells us that we have to be sharp all the time. We have to be smart with the ball. We have to make free throws and do all the little things, like rebound and stuff like that, to be really good teams like that." - How do players not know this already, let alone after getting embarrassed by BC and then State? It seems like every game this team doesn't come out sharp, is not smart withe ball and just looks like they expect the other team to just lose.
If Duke plays UVA in the ACC and/or NCAA tourneys, i think Duke can win it b/c they won't be surprised by the intensity with which UVA plays. We solved their defense in the second half, and our defense was good enough to hold UVA's efficiency at a reasonable level. However, after having been through this 2 other times already, there's no guarantee that this team will come out of the gate withe focus and intensity that it needs to accomplish the goal.
Many of the mistakes made were from trying to force a play to happen, rather than valuing the ball and being sharp. Even if we just reduce our turnovers to an even dozen, that would give us 4 extra possessions, and we were shooting 50% FGs, so we could expect 4 extra points, which would have totally changed the final minutes.
Anyway, i'm not depressed by this loss because we had a chance to grab the win at "winning time". This team will have lots of opportunity in the upcoming weeks to either show they've learned the lesson of "being sharp" and "being smart withe ball" or lose a whole bunch of games.

If you follow boxing you wouldn't be asking your question, "How do players not know this?" It's one thing to watch film of a great counter-puncher who relies on his superior speed and ring generalship and then getting in the ring with them and experiencing it first hand. The same can be said when dealing with a true slugger who hits like a ton of bricks. You don't know what it feels like until you experience it.

[Kfanarmy]

i really don't understand why K refuses to acknowledge that this team sucks at m2m defense. Give it a shot at the beginning of the game, go for it. But after about 5 minutes it was obvious that m2m was not going to contain UVA. That was the biggest mistake of the game, K sticking with m2m for so long.

They scored more pts in the 2nd than the 1st half right?

[DukieInBrasil]

I agree and this could be a big problem.

The problem is not that our will to win did not carry us through to wins against BC, State, and UVA. IIRC, we had fairly late leads in all these games with a decent chance to win them.

The problem is that we are in this position WAY too often to be as good as we are capable of being. We have the best offense in the nation. And we could be much better. This team has shown an ability to go on incredible scoring runs. But this team has also shown a definite pattern of losing focus and finding themselves down and needing to come back way too often in the 2nd half. A team with this much talent just should not need a 2nd half comeback against Portland State. We should blow Southern out of our gym by halftime. We were in serious trouble in the 2nd half against Texas, Florida, Miami, and Florida State. We were in a 2nd half dogfight with Indiana as well. It's great that our will to win got us W's in all those. But it's happening too often.

Giving teams we should beat a close game late in 2nd half has them feeling good about themselves. They're feeling like they could knock Duke off, and tough players have done just that 3 times. It's a nice ingredient in the recipe for an upset to keep giving so many teams the late chance. We're lucky to have a 3 in the loss column now. It's caused by long lapses in focus on both ends of the floor.

This team has potential to be great or potential to be done after first weekend in March. I think we'll be great. Our defense can also be stellar. We saw what happened in 2015 in the tourney. It wasn't just Tyus' shooting. That team played just stifling defense for 40 minutes. We won because we shut down guys like Pangos and Dekker with players like Matt Jones and Winslow giving their all on D.

If this team plays with focus and heart for 40 minutes, they can be great. They won't just have the will to comeback and win. They'll be able to blow good teams out and kill their will like the 92 or 99 teams often did. We could be that good. And we have just the right coaches to lead us there.

I'm excited to see what Duke does from here.

From my tv seat perspective, it looks like this team plays with focus and heart for anywhere from 20-30 minutes per game. There's usually at least one 5+ minute stretch in each half where the team loses the thread. Sometimes it just takes a while to figure out what works against your opponent, so i'm not necessarily counting being down the same as losing focus or heart, but we've seen this team become unfocused or confused or (fill in the blank) when we're ahead and when we're behind, and we often encounter one such stretch within the first 5 minutes of each game. These guys are still learning how to confront the intensity they face in each game (except Grayson) but it's baffling that it's a lesson they are re-learning each game.

[DukieInBrasil]

They scored more pts in the 2nd than the 1st half right?

yes, and the pace of the game picked up too, so it's not just about points. The key was the opening 8 minutes when the zone f'd them up, and it also led to more confidence/productivity on offense for Duke. Overall, we kept UVA below 40% FGs, so that's good. After UVA figured out how to attack our zone it was less effective, but was still as good, or nearly so, as the best m2m we played in the 1st.
Somebody else pointed this out, but if our offense had been able to score at any sort of reasonable rate off the stops we did generate in the 1st half, then we may have even been up at the half and this whole discussion doesn't happen.

[richardjackson199]

From my tv seat perspective, it looks like this team plays with focus and heart for anywhere from 20-30 minutes per game. There's usually at least one 5+ minute stretch in each half where the team loses the thread. Sometimes it just takes a while to figure out what works against your opponent, so i'm not necessarily counting being down the same as losing focus or heart, but we've seen this team become unfocused or confused or (fill in the blank) when we're ahead and when we're behind, and we often encounter one such stretch within the first 5 minutes of each game. These guys are still learning how to confront the intensity they face in each game (except Grayson) but it's baffling that it's a lesson they are re-learning each game.

Sounds about right. I understand we aren't going to blow everybody out and don't expect that. But I do think we're having to come from behind, often from 2nd half double digit deficits far too often. I think it's a pattern, and I think it is associated with too many stretches of lack of focus on both ends of the floor.

I believe this team is underperforming too often given their level of talent. But they'll get better, they'll get some things shored up, and watch out when they do.

[dukelifer]

Hard to say at this point. We haven't shown the zone effective for more than 8 minutes at a time. I'm not convinced it would work well if we played 40 minutes of zone. We seem to need to be able to switch up defenses, meaning we should continue to use both the zone and m2m defenses. It might even be helpful to find a third defense to switch it up even more, but it may be too late in the season to do that effectively.



I never suggested RI was more likely to get to the Final Four than UNC. I rhetorically asked whether Rhode Island (with their scads of experience) was more likely to get to the Final Four than Duke.

You say UNC is more likely to get to the Final Four than Rhode Island because "UNC is a team with talent." Well, Duke is a team with even more talent. Much more than UNC. And I'm not talking about three years into the future. I'm talking about now. In other words, for the same reason that UNC has a better chance than Rhode Island to make the Final Four, Duke has a better chance than UNC to make the Final Four.

The idea that UNC is more likely to make the Final Four simply isn't true.
I said UNC has more experience- not more talent. I think experience matters in the tourney - particularly at the guard position- and usually gets farther in the end. Duke can have a magical run- but a team that has been to the tourney and has an advantage to one that has not. You disagree so we shall see. Happy to be wrong on this.

[Kedsy]

I said UNC has more experience- not more talent. I think experience matters in the tourney - particularly at the guard position- and usually gets farther in the end.

I understood what you said.

You said UNC has more experience than Duke. I said Rhode Island has more experience than UNC. Then you said, so what, UNC has more talent than RI. I said, exactly, Duke has more talent than UNC.

Basically, I'm saying Rhode Island is to UNC what UNC is to Duke. Put another way, Duke has as much more talent over UNC as UNC has over Rhode Island. Maybe more.

If you disagree with that, fine, we can agree to disagree. But you asked me why I thought your idea that UNC is more likely than Duke to make the Final Four is ridiculous. This is why.

Also, the data doesn't necessarily show that experience "usually gets farther in the end," but I've already discussed that and it's not worth getting into again.

[akg4y]

yes, and the pace of the game picked up too, so it's not just about points. The key was the opening 8 minutes when the zone f'd them up, and it also led to more confidence/productivity on offense for Duke. Overall, we kept UVA below 40% FGs, so that's good. After UVA figured out how to attack our zone it was less effective, but was still as good, or nearly so, as the best m2m we played in the 1st.
Somebody else pointed this out, but if our offense had been able to score at any sort of reasonable rate off the stops we did generate in the 1st half, then we may have even been up at the half and this whole discussion doesn't happen.

I don't think this is correct... Wahoo here. As someone else pointed out earlier in this thread, UVA's offensive efficiency was the same in the first and second halves. The difference was simply Duke's offensive efficiency was ridiculously high (for a team against us) in the second half. Our offensive efficiency in the second half would have been better than the first if it wasnt for the fact that Wilkins & Hunter missed 5 (intentionally) wide open shots from 15 feet in the open part of the zone. Isaiah makes that 50% of the time, so that was a bit of nerves potentially. Either way though, the difference was Duke's offensive performance against our defense, not the change to zone creating problems for UVA's offense. The other thing to keep in mind was Bennett realized that Isaiah shouldnt keep taking and missing that open shot and started rotating Hall & Hunter in the soft spot and they were much more effective. Wouldnt expect that same zone look to be effective the next time we meet, just like you don't expect our defense to surprise your guys like it did in the first half.

[CDu]

I don't think this is correct... Wahoo here. As someone else pointed out earlier in this thread, UVA's offensive efficiency was the same in the first and second halves. The difference was simply Duke's offensive efficiency was ridiculously high (for a team against us) in the second half. Our offensive efficiency in the second half would have been better than the first if it wasnt for the fact that Wilkins & Hunter missed 5 (intentionally) wide open shots from 15 feet in the open part of the zone. Isaiah makes that 50% of the time, so that was a bit of nerves potentially. Either way though, the difference was Duke's offensive performance against our defense, not the change to zone creating problems for UVA's offense. The other thing to keep in mind was Bennett realized that Isaiah shouldnt keep taking and missing that open shot and started rotating Hall & Hunter in the soft spot and they were much more effective. Wouldnt expect that same zone look to be effective the next time we meet, just like you don't expect our defense to surprise your guys like it did in the first half.

Yep. I would expect both teams to shoot better next time. Our guards stunk in that one, and yours played below their norms too. I don’t expect either team to have an easy go of it if we play again.

[azzefkram]

Trent and Allen are better than Jones and Cook.

That is at best a push and given how Allen has been playing in conference I'd give the nod to Jones and Cook. If we factor defense into the equation you would have a really tough time convincing me that Trent and Allen are better. No arguments about the front court. Wendell and Marvin are awesome.


Again, I've been one of his biggest supporters early in this season. In December, I championed the cause that he was playing better than any Duke freshman PG ever. His play has fallen substantially off since then, especially over the last 3-5 games. We don't need the 9:1 assist:turnover ratio guy back. We just need him to value the ball better and get the ball to our two bigs and Trent more consistently.

I have been on the Trevon bandwagon all year. He has certainly dropped off as of late. I think any comparison between Tyus and Trevon is incomplete if we don't mention defense. Tyus was fairly poor at it and while Trevon can have his lapses, he is markedly better than Tyus defensively. I agree that Trevon needs to value the ball better.

[CDu]

That is at best a push and given how Allen has been playing in conference I'd give the nod to Jones and Cook. If we factor defense into the equation you would have a really tough time convincing me that Trent and Allen are better. No arguments about the front court. Wendell and Marvin are awesome.



I have been on the Trevon bandwagon all year. He has certainly dropped off as of late. I think any comparison between Tyus and Trevon is incomplete if we don't mention defense. Tyus was fairly poor at it and while Trevon can have his lapses, he is markedly better than Tyus defensively. I agree that Trevon needs to value the ball better.

I was talking strictly offense, as my point was in regards to what we need offensively from him relative to Jones. Also, individual defense is so much harder to assess. Especially since we play so much zone this year. Trent and Allen are better offensively than Jones and Cook were that year, mainly because Jones wasn’t strong offensively that year. No argument that Cook/Jones were better defensively.

As for your last paragraph, I am not sure I agree. Duval certainly has the physical attributes to be a better defender, but I am not sure he has really been a good defender. He sure seems to get beaten a lot.

[Furniture]

(https://mobile.twitter.com/dukebasketball)"I saw for a split-second, he was open," Duval said. "And then I remembered as soon as it was on my fingertips, like, ‘Damn, I shouldn’t have thrown that pass.’" –Trevon Duval on his costly turnover with a minute left: (https://mobile.twitter.com/dukebasketball/status/957660291818455041)

http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2018/01/late-miscues-highlight-duke-mens-basketballs-lack-of-depth

[sagegrouse]

If you follow boxing you wouldn't be asking your question, "How do players not know this?" It's one thing to watch film of a great counter-puncher who relies on his superior speed and ring generalship and then getting in the ring with them and experiencing it first hand. The same can be said when dealing with a true slugger who hits like a ton of bricks. You don't know what it feels like until you experience it.

"Everybody has a plan until I hit them in the face." -- Mike Tyson

[Troublemaker]

If you are looking at precedent and development - senior Pinson, senior Berry and junior Maye have significant tourney experience. As hard as it is to believe- Maye is a first team all ACC player - Berry has that ability and Pinson is solid and occasionally excellent. They have a grad transfer who can shoot. On paper that team is capable of making a deep run as they too have not hit their peak. Duke has way more talent but way less experience. In terms of precedent- experience matters.


I like how you say "C'mon now", as if that was some ridiculous assertion.

You guys know me. I always put my money (err, beer/pie) where my mouth is. Let's do it, dukelifer and slower. A 6-pack (or pie if you prefer) of beer of devildeac's choice (consulting fees will be charged) goes to you guys if UNC goes further than Duke in the NCAAT. The same goes to me if Duke goes further than UNC in the NCAAT. I have a feeling you guys would psychologically love to give me that beer (or pie) anyway if UNC goes out first, you're so seemingly scared of them.

Deal?

Also, if you know Duke and UNC and other ACC teams better than me, come kick my butt in the ACC Fake Money Betting Contest (https://contests.covers.com/OfficePools/OverallLeaderboard/427c39c0-3cb8-481a-91a2-a85c00dbcc0f) ;-)


I wouldn't bet any money on Duke getting farther in the tourney than UNC. Yeah, we MAY get our act together come NCAA time - and we may not. There may just be another South Carolina waiting for us. I just don't get how somebody said pre-game yesterday that "most Duke fans think we will win" (based on WHAT, exactly?) and now the loss is being treated as a moral victory. It was a LOSS. At home. I think maybe people should stop clinging to the notion that this is some super-team that can just flip the switch at will - it's not.

"Get our act together"? We're #4 in kenpom, and it looks we're still either the fourth #1 seed or the first #2 seed after the UVA loss (http://bracketmatrix.com/).

Our act is pretty damn good already, and over the past 6 games, we seem to be on the upswing defensively, going from 100+ to 58.

Yes, there is no shame in losing to UVA in a tossup game after punting a half away. I don't know if I'd call it a "moral victory" but you have to be sad to not be able to take away some positives from that game.

Finally, very few if any people think Duke is a "super team." But we believe Duke is talented enough to win either postseason tournament, works hard and gets along well with each other according to the coaches, and is an improving team. I like this team a lot, enjoy rooting for them, and am proud of what they've accomplished already and of the trajectory they have themselves on.

[devildeac]

You guys know me. I always put my money (err, beer/pie) where my mouth is. Let's do it, dukelifer and slower. A 6-pack (or pie if you prefer) of beer of devildeac's choice (consulting fees will be charged) goes to you guys if UNC goes further than Duke in the NCAAT. The same goes to me if Duke goes further than UNC in the NCAAT. I have a feeling you guys would psychologically love to give me that beer (or pie) anyway if UNC goes out first, you're so seemingly scared of them.

Deal?

Also, if you know Duke and UNC and other ACC teams so much better than me, come kick my butt in the ACC Fake Money Betting Contest (https://contests.covers.com/OfficePools/OverallLeaderboard/427c39c0-3cb8-481a-91a2-a85c00dbcc0f).



"Get our act together"? We're #4 in kenpom, and it looks we're still either the fourth #1 seed or the first #2 seed after the UVA loss (http://bracketmatrix.com/).

Our act is pretty damn good already, and over the past 6 games, we seem to be on the upswing defensively, going from 100+ to 58.

Yes, there is no shame in losing to UVA in a tossup game after punting a half away. I don't know if I'd call it a "moral victory" but you have to be sad to not be able to take away some positives from that game.

Finally, very few if any people think Duke is a "super team." But we believe Duke is talented enough to win either postseason tournament, works hard and gets along well with each other according to the coaches, and is an improving team. I like this team a lot, enjoy rooting for them, and am proud of what they've accomplished already and of the trajectory they have themselves on.

You called? I'll be here all MBB season. I'm still waiting to collect some past consulting fees (yea, I'm posting for you, richardjackson ;)).

[CDu]

You guys know me. I always put my money (err, beer/pie) where my mouth is. Let's do it, dukelifer and slower. A 6-pack (or pie if you prefer) of beer of devildeac's choice (consulting fees will be charged) goes to you guys if UNC goes further than Duke in the NCAAT. The same goes to me if Duke goes further than UNC in the NCAAT. I have a feeling you guys would psychologically love to give me that beer (or pie) anyway if UNC goes out first, you're so seemingly scared of them.

Deal?

Also, if you know Duke and UNC and other ACC teams better than me, come kick my butt in the ACC Fake Money Betting Contest (https://contests.covers.com/OfficePools/OverallLeaderboard/427c39c0-3cb8-481a-91a2-a85c00dbcc0f) ;-)



"Get our act together"? We're #4 in kenpom, and it looks we're still either the fourth #1 seed or the first #2 seed after the UVA loss (http://bracketmatrix.com/).

Our act is pretty damn good already, and over the past 6 games, we seem to be on the upswing defensively, going from 100+ to 58.

Yes, there is no shame in losing to UVA in a tossup game after punting a half away. I don't know if I'd call it a "moral victory" but you have to be sad to not be able to take away some positives from that game.

Finally, very few if any people think Duke is a "super team." But we believe Duke is talented enough to win either postseason tournament, works hard and gets along well with each other according to the coaches, and is an improving team. I like this team a lot, enjoy rooting for them, and am proud of what they've accomplished already and of the trajectory they have themselves on.

A pie of beer? Sounds yummy. Also, while I agree that Duke is #4-5 at the moment, I am not sure how seriously I can take a matrix that has UNC as a 2 seed right now.

[Troublemaker]

A pie of beer? Sounds yummy. Also, while I agree that Duke is #4-5 at the moment, I am not sure how seriously I can take a matrix that has UNC as a 2 seed right now.

You have to look at the recent (1/28) brackets only. UNC is now a 3 or 4 seed.

Yeah, that's the one weakness of the guy who does Bracket Matrix. He averages stale brackets in with the recent brackets.

But it's easily correctable by readers by just quickly scanning the recent brackets.

[azzefkram]

I was talking strictly offense, as my point was in regards to what we need offensively from him relative to Jones. Also, individual defense is so much harder to assess. Especially since we play so much zone this year. Trent and Allen are better offensively than Jones and Cook were that year, mainly because Jones wasn’t strong offensively that year. No argument that Cook/Jones were better defensively.

As for your last paragraph, I am not sure I agree. Duval certainly has the physical attributes to be a better defender, but I am not sure he has really been a good defender. He sure seems to get beaten a lot.

While Matt wasn't as good as he was as a junior he was comfortably above average in 2015. Grayson has been very pedestrian in league play. Now Trent/Allen's peak is significantly higher than MJones/Cook's, but that peak can only be realized by Allen rediscovering his mojo.

I'll admit that I thought Trevon would be a stronger defender but Tyus set the bar super low.

[richardjackson199]

You called? I'll be here all MBB season. I'm still waiting to collect some past consulting fees (yea, I'm posting for you, richardjackson ;)).

Worry not - NYBri can confirm, I pay up on my gambling losses. Thankfully I've realized to stop betting anything real on the ACC Fake money contest. I have a gift for finishing dead last! But it's fun.

I do still owe Trouble a 12-pack of beer. Mrs. richardjackson wouldn't let me ship it because it's evidently illegal, the beer stores we tried didn't have the proper license to ship, and the website we tried also had some issue with their license to ship beer and wouldn't do it. I was going to try to just pay up in person, but that probably can't happen soon. Don't worry though Trouble, I'm just going to send you some $$ for the beer, soon!

So for those of you placing wagers, you may want to consider pies (no consult fees!) :p

And worry not Devildeac, you'll receive your consult fees at a Tailgate next year. If the juice is still running I better bring multiple growlers.

[devildeac]

Worry not - NYBri can confirm, I pay up on my gambling losses. Thankfully I've realized to stop betting anything real on the ACC Fake money contest. I have a gift for finishing dead last! But it's fun.

I do still owe Trouble a 12-pack of beer. Mrs. richardjackson wouldn't let me ship it because it's evidently illegal, the beer stores we tried didn't have the proper license to ship, and the website we tried also had some issue with their license to ship beer and wouldn't do it. I was going to try to just pay up in person, but that probably can't happen soon. Don't worry though Trouble, I'm just going to send you some $$ for the beer, soon!

So for those of you placing wagers, you may want to consider pies (no consult fees!) :p

And worry not Devildeac, you'll receive your consult fees at a Tailgate next year. If the juice is still running I better bring multiple growlers.

Never in doubt. We'll save a couple places for you at the sampling table. ;)

[uh_no]

You guys know me. I always put my money (err, beer/pie) where my mouth is. Let's do it, dukelifer and slower. A 6-pack (or pie if you prefer) of beer of devildeac's choice (consulting fees will be charged) goes to you guys if UNC goes further than Duke in the NCAAT. The same goes to me if Duke goes further than UNC in the NCAAT. I have a feeling you guys would psychologically love to give me that beer (or pie) anyway if UNC goes out first, you're so seemingly scared of them.

Deal?

Also, if you know Duke and UNC and other ACC teams better than me, come kick my butt in the ACC Fake Money Betting Contest (https://contests.covers.com/OfficePools/OverallLeaderboard/427c39c0-3cb8-481a-91a2-a85c00dbcc0f) ;-)



"Get our act together"? We're #4 in kenpom, and it looks we're still either the fourth #1 seed or the first #2 seed after the UVA loss (http://bracketmatrix.com/).

Our act is pretty damn good already, and over the past 6 games, we seem to be on the upswing defensively, going from 100+ to 58.

Yes, there is no shame in losing to UVA in a tossup game after punting a half away. I don't know if I'd call it a "moral victory" but you have to be sad to not be able to take away some positives from that game.

Finally, very few if any people think Duke is a "super team." But we believe Duke is talented enough to win either postseason tournament, works hard and gets along well with each other according to the coaches, and is an improving team. I like this team a lot, enjoy rooting for them, and am proud of what they've accomplished already and of the trajectory they have themselves on.

I, too, put my money where my mouth is, and will take all comers.

I will buy a six pack of my own choice for any taker who thinks that Rhode Island will make it further than BOTH duke and UNC :D :D :D

I think one big mistake people are making is saying "wow three losses...we're no good" when the nature of the losses is so different. A 2 point loss to the #3 team in the country will never be a bad loss IMO. The other two losses were heavily blamed on the defense which has made major progress....enough that I largely disregard those losses in the same way you would disregard losses with an injured player. We're not the same team that lost to NCSU and BC.

[CDu]

I, too, put my money where my mouth is, and will take all comers.

I will buy a six pack of my own choice for any taker who thinks that Rhode Island will make it further than BOTH duke and UNC :D :D :D

I think one big mistake people are making is saying "wow three losses...we're no good" when the nature of the losses is so different. A 2 point loss to the #3 team in the country will never be a bad loss IMO. The other two losses were heavily blamed on the defense which has made major progress...enough that I largely disregard those losses in the same way you would disregard losses with an injured player. We're not the same team that lost to NCSU and BC.

Agreed. Those first two losses are a sunk cost. Yesterday’s loss was a toss-up against one of the best teams in college. We have played consistently good half-court defense now for six straight games. I think we are far better today than we were three weeks ago. That is what is important.

We may or may not have another hiccup. But we are on par with the best in the country as is. And if we keep improving on aggregate moving forward (no reason to think - barring injury - we would get worse with time) we should be in very good shape.

[richardjackson199]

I, too, put my money where my mouth is, and will take all comers.

I will buy a six pack of my own choice for any taker who thinks that Rhode Island will make it further than BOTH duke and UNC :D :D :D

I think one big mistake people are making is saying "wow three losses...we're no good" when the nature of the losses is so different. A 2 point loss to the #3 team in the country will never be a bad loss IMO. The other two losses were heavily blamed on the defense which has made major progress...enough that I largely disregard those losses in the same way you would disregard losses with an injured player. We're not the same team that lost to NCSU and BC.

You know what cheers DBR up when they're feeling down? Ymm beer, pie, and gambling! ...Don't tease me... :cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ftN93gWFow

[Wander]

First of all, I don't think I glossed anything over. I included all the stats in my post.


You did by only including Jones' first 9 ACC games. My statement was "Jones' season was much better than Duval's current season, although that may change." That is borne out by the stats of Jones' full season, plus the "clutch factor" if you'd like to include that. If Duval improves in the next couple of months, I'll change my opinion accordingly. Even only including Jones' first 9 games shows that he was better than Duval as CDu has pointed out, although whether it's "better" or "much better" is, as Obi-Wan would say, dependent upon your certain point of view. I would personally go with "much better" because I put a lot of value on not turning the ball over, especially at the PG position, but it is subjective.

Duval is a good player and probably does get too much grief on the message boards, but you are swinging the pendulum too far in the other direction in your reaction to the Duval bashing. He has simply not been as good as Jones.

[BigZ]

if you go position by position the 2015 was only better at the point guard spot.

[uh_no]

if you go position by position the 2015 was only better at the point guard spot.

Sorry Gary....but I'm taking Justice hands down all day every day.

[BigZ]

Sorry Gary...but I'm taking Justice hands down all day every day.

Justice played the four so he goes head against Marvin. Trent > Matt Jones

[uh_no]

Justice played the four so he goes head against Marvin. Trent > Matt Jones

hmmmm...guess after last year, I forgot that amile wasn't the primary option at 4 that year.

I'd still take matt over gary. In general. i'll trade a superior defender for a few percentage points of 3.

HOWEVER...given the fact that duval is not a particularly adept shooter, those few % is far more important. Picking a team on the street, though, I'm taking sophomore matt over freshman gary. It kind of saddens me how undervalued Matt is on these boards. Heck, at the start of last year, people were talking about how he was going to get benched....and in the end, he had second most minutes after luke.....given, the team looked like the tune squad right before bill murray shows up for most of the year, but still. A lock down defender that can hit threes is a major asset in the college game.

[dukebballcamper90-91]

if you go position by position the 2015 was only better at the point guard spot.

And 2 guard spot

[BigZ]

Nah Allen is better than Cook

[subzero02]

It's Justise...

[dukebballcamper90-91]

Nah Allen is better than Cook

Cook did not have a 0 in Fg column as a Sr. Allen played 37 mins vs a very bad wfu team and did not make a fg.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

You guys know me. I always put my money (err, beer/pie) where my mouth is. Let's do it, dukelifer and slower. A 6-pack (or pie if you prefer) of beer of devildeac's choice (consulting fees will be charged) goes to you guys if UNC goes further than Duke in the NCAAT. The same goes to me if Duke goes further than UNC in the NCAAT. I have a feeling you guys would psychologically love to give me that beer (or pie) anyway if UNC goes out first, you're so seemingly scared of them.

Deal?



I am sure I am pointing this out needlessly, but even (heaven forbid) if UNC were to go further than Duke in the tournament, it wouldn't prove that at this moment in time, UNC is "likely" to do so. They just aren't.

I could go to the gas station and state that it is likely I will win the Powerball. Then, I could win the Powerball. I was still a liar.

[YmoBeThere]

I could go to the gas station and state that it is likely I will win the Powerball. Then, I could win the Powerball. I was still a liar.

Did you at least buy a ticket?

[Devilwin]

The Grayson that started the season may have been better than Cook, but not the current version. I just do not understand how he's lost his touch, barring an unmentioned injury.

[budwom]

The Grayson that started the season may have been better than Cook, but not the current version. I just do not understand how he's lost his touch, barring an unmentioned injury.

What's worse, against UVA he couldn't even get himself free for open looks. Kudos to their defense for sure, but a shooter has to find a way to get some shots.

[Wander]

if you go position by position the 2015 was only better at the point guard spot.

It's a little hard to directly compare by position given the lineup changes the 2015 team went through (in contrast to the current team, which has only really changed rotation when forced to by injury). I think it's safe to say that overall, the 2015 backcourt was better and the 2018 frontcourt was better. But really both teams were/are good overall at all starting positions.

[Troublemaker]

I am sure I am pointing this out needlessly, but even (heaven forbid) if UNC were to go further than Duke in the tournament, it wouldn't prove that at this moment in time, UNC is "likely" to do so. They just aren't.

I could go to the gas station and state that it is likely I will win the Powerball. Then, I could win the Powerball. I was still a liar.

For sure, for sure.

I'm just being charitable and creating an emotional hedge for dukelifer and slower. They will be SO relieved if UNC loses before Duke that they'd gladly ship me a pie or beer, methinks.

[Troublemaker]

As for the 2015 vs 2018 discussion popping up in several threads...

I need to see what the fully-formed version of 2018 looks like.

The fully-formed 2015 team was a dominant defensive team ably supported by a very good offense. That team would whip this current 2018 team by double-digits. Let's see what 2018 looks like in a couple of weeks and then reassess. Then reassess again a couple of weeks later, etc.

[CDu]

As for the 2015 vs 2018 discussion popping up in several threads...

I need to see what the fully-formed version of 2018 looks like.

The fully-formed 2015 team was a dominant defensive team ably supported by a very good offense. That team would whip this current 2018 team by double-digits. Let's see what 2018 looks like in a couple of weeks and then reassess. Then reassess again a couple of weeks later, etc.

Maybe. Remember that that 2015 team's defensive dominance came largely because it faced the type of teams it was well-suited to defend. Namely teams that play slower tempos without elite break-you-down guards. We also didn't face any teams with high lottery talent in that stretch. This year's team has WAY more talent than any of the teams we faced in that 2015 run. And the only team with an upper-tier big man that we faced almost cost us the tournament (Kaminsky got Okafor in foul trouble, and it took a furious comeback to beat them). Hard to see Jefferson or Winslow guarding Bagley, and almost impossible to see Okafor guarding Carter.

As of right now, both Pomeroy and Torvik would have 2015 Duke as a slight favorite based on season-long stats. Pomeroy has an efficiency margin difference of 4.7 points (about the difference between Duke and UVa this year), while Torvik has the difference at 2.4 points. But both of those differences are based largely on 2018 Duke's defense in December to early January. The team that has played the last 3 weeks consistently is far better than the average of the entire season. In another two weeks, it's very possible that the game would be considered a toss-up based on stats.

Would be fun to watch.

[Troublemaker]

Maybe. Remember that that 2015 team's defensive dominance came largely because it faced the type of teams it was well-suited to defend. Namely teams that play slower tempos without elite break-you-down guards. We also didn't face any teams with high lottery talent in that stretch. This year's team has WAY more talent than any of the teams we faced in that 2015 run. And the only team with an upper-tier big man that we faced almost cost us the tournament (Kaminsky got Okafor in foul trouble, and it took a furious comeback to beat them). Hard to see Jefferson or Winslow guarding Bagley, and almost impossible to see Okafor guarding Carter.

I disagree. Delon Wright was a first-round PG and currently a rotation player on a very good NBA team in Toronto. In college that season, he was #4 in Kenpom's NPOY rankings (https://kenpom.com/kpoy.php?y=2015). In Utah's PNR-reliant scheme, Wright would've been a nightmare for the 2015 team earlier in the season before we transformed into a dominant defensive team. Also, Duke's transformation began late February, not at the start of the NCAA tournament. Along the way, Duke blew out NCSU in the ACC tournament while holding Cat Barber to 0(!) points and Trevor Lacey to 4 points. Finally, Wisconsin 2015 is statistically the best offense in the kenpom era. They weren't a good matchup for anyone, having just put up a 123 offensive efficiency in the national semifinal against undefeated Kentucky. Duke held them to 106.

In short, I don't believe this narrative that's been popping up that 2015 just faced good matchups. We really were just a great defensive team down the stretch of the season. Hopefully 2018 can follow in those footsteps.

[kAzE]

As for the 2015 vs 2018 discussion popping up in several threads...

I need to see what the fully-formed version of 2018 looks like.

The fully-formed 2015 team was a dominant defensive team ably supported by a very good offense. That team would whip this current 2018 team by double-digits. Let's see what 2018 looks like in a couple of weeks and then reassess. Then reassess again a couple of weeks later, etc.

I disagree . . . at this point in the 2014-15 season, we were 17-3, ranked #4 in the country, had just come off of a loss to Notre Dame, our 3rd loss in the ACC, including a loss at NC State and a loss at home to Miami. The 2 teams were in almost the same exact position at the end of January. Both teams had impressive wins in the non conference, but both also struggled a bit in the first half of league play.

Okafor attempting to guard Bagley and Carter? That would be entertaining.

[Wander]

In short, I don't believe this narrative that's been popping up that 2015 just faced good matchups. We really were just a great defensive team down the stretch of the season. Hopefully 2018 can follow in those footsteps.

Agreed - Cook in particular made a huge defensive jump at the end, including guarding Wright. It definitely wasn't just a match-up thing.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I disagree . . . at this point in the 2014-15 season, we were 17-3, had just come off of a loss to Notre Dame, our 3rd loss in the ACC, including a loss at NC State and a loss at home to Miami. The 2 teams were in almost the same exact position at the end of January.

The over/under on that game, at the end of January, would be 190. I'd probably go over.

[CDu]

I disagree. Delon Wright was a first-round PG and currently a rotation player on a very good NBA team in Toronto. In college that season, he was #4 in Kenpom's NPOY rankings (https://kenpom.com/kpoy.php?y=2015). In Utah's PNR-reliant scheme, Wright would've been a nightmare for the 2015 team earlier in the season before we transformed into a dominant defensive team. Also, Duke's transformation began late February, not at the start of the NCAA tournament. Along the way, Duke blew out NCSU in the ACC tournament while holding Cat Barber to 0(!) points and Trevor Lacey to 4 points. Finally, Wisconsin 2015 is statistically the best offense in the kenpom era. They weren't a good matchup for anyone, having just put up a 123 offensive efficiency in the national semifinal against undefeated Kentucky. Duke held them to 106.

In short, I don't believe this narrative that's been popping up that 2015 just faced good matchups. We really were just a great defensive team down the stretch of the season. Hopefully 2018 can follow in those footsteps.

Delon Wright was an under-athletic PG who went late in the first round due to athletic limitations. He was an uber-efficient player, but not a break-you-down playmaker. And thus not a bad matchup for us.

Same issues for Wisconsin. They were an uber-efficient team, but slow and unathletic and lacking in break-you-down playmakers. It was the best-case scenario for the 2015 Duke team.

We were very fortunate not to face any teams with elite athleticism or elite NBA-level talent in that tournament.

sophomore Cat Barber and Trevor Lacey were not NBA talents. Sophomore Cat Barber was not nearly the player junior Cat Barber was, and junior Cat Barber wasn't an NBA talent. And Lacey was not an athletic challenge anyway, so again, didn't pose the problems for our defense.

Matchups matter. None of those teams had the athleticism or elite talent to cause us problems defensively.

[kAzE]

The over/under on that game, at the end of January, would be 190. I'd probably go over.

Yeah, I'm not sure anybody would have been able to guard anybody in that game. Senior Grayson vs. Freshman Grayson would be fun to see :D

[CDu]

I disagree . . . at this point in the 2014-15 season, we were 17-3, had just come off of a loss to Notre Dame, our 3rd loss in the ACC, including a loss at NC State and a loss at home to Miami. The 2 teams were in almost the same exact position at the end of January. Both teams had impressive wins in the non conference, but both also struggled a bit in the first half of league play.

Okafor attempting to guard Bagley and Carter? That would be entertaining.

Yeah, I would DEFINITELY take this year's team over the 2015 team in January.

The 2015 team was a great team by season's end. It also benefited from avoiding the matchups that would give our group trouble. We faced all of one team in the tournament with a dynamic center that could give Okafor problems (Kaminsky), and Kaminsky fouled Okafor to the bench. We didn't face anyone with blow-by-you athleticism or ballhandling skills on the perimeter. And we played teams that didn't like to run. We did face some strong offensive teams, but they were strong in ways we were suited to defend.

This year's team is a different animal altogether. Way better offensive rebounding team than we faced in that tournament. Way better talent than we faced in that tournament (our 4th or 5th best player would have been better than all but one or two of the guys we faced in that tournament). Way better dynamic combination of athletic interior players than we faced in that tournament. Carter and/or Bagley would have put Okafor on the bench with fouls, then abused Jefferson on the blocks in ways that Kaminsky didn't have the athleticism to do, or torched the overmatched Plumlee. And while Winslow was very capable of guarding less athletic but bigger PFs, I don't think he'd fare so well against Bagley. His toughness, strength, and athleticism helped him overwhelm less athletic PFs. But no way was he going to overwhelm Bagley.

Cook and Matt Jones would have done fine guarding Allen/Duval and Trent, but not sure how well Tyus Jones would have done on the third option. But again, the 2018 team would rely heavily on their dominant inside players.

[uh_no]

Yeah, I would DEFINITELY take this year's team over the 2015 team in January.

Easily...with the way we're playing the past couple weeks.

[Troublemaker]

I disagree . . . at this point in the 2014-15 season, we were 17-3, had just come off of a loss to Notre Dame, our 3rd loss in the ACC, including a loss at NC State and a loss at home to Miami. The 2 teams were in almost the same exact position at the end of January. Both teams had impressive wins in the non conference, but both also struggled a bit in the first half of league play.

Right, my point was that the fully-formed 2015 team would win comfortably over the current 2018 team. It's not a great idea to compare the two teams until the end of the season when we see what fully-formed 2018 looks like.

I do suspect I will still favor 2015 in the end even if 2018 continues its upward trajectory, defies single-elimination odds and goes on to win a national title. I highly value the point guard position, and it's a rout there. But we'll see what happens, and we can argue about it then.

Why compare a completed surgery with one that's still ongoing? The latter just looks like murder.

[Troublemaker]

Delon Wright was an under-athletic PG who went late in the first round due to athletic limitations. He was an uber-efficient player, but not a break-you-down playmaker. And thus not a bad matchup for us.

Same issues for Wisconsin. They were an uber-efficient team, but slow and unathletic and lacking in break-you-down playmakers. It was the best-case scenario for the 2015 Duke team.

We were very fortunate not to face any teams with elite athleticism or elite NBA-level talent in that tournament.

sophomore Cat Barber and Trevor Lacey were not NBA talents. Sophomore Cat Barber was not nearly the player junior Cat Barber was, and junior Cat Barber wasn't an NBA talent. And Lacey was not an athletic challenge anyway, so again, didn't pose the problems for our defense.

Matchups matter. None of those teams had the athleticism or elite talent to cause us problems defensively.

Yes, first-round PG and NBA rotation player Delon Wright was not athletic. I completely believe you.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml8R3MP9jSs

Yes, the Wisconsin team with a record 129 offensive efficiency was the best-case scenario matchup for Duke's defense (or any defense). That totally makes sense.

It was just good matchups, guys. Duke's defense didn't really improve.

Why bend reality to stick to a faulty narrative?

[CDu]

Yes, first-round PG and NBA rotation player Delon Wright was not athletic. I completely believe you.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml8R3MP9jSs

Sigh...

Delon Wright scouting report: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Delon-Wright-78507/

Key quotes: "From an athleticism standpoint, Wright is unique, as he is not particularly quick or explosive by traditional standards", and "He's not particularly strong, long or explosive, which makes it difficult for him to finish plays at times through contact, especially against better defenses"

So, yeah, not elite athleticism. And a late first-round pick because of it.


Yes, the Wisconsin team with a record 129 offensive efficiency was the best-case scenario matchup for Duke's defense (or any defense). That totally makes sense.

It was just good matchups, guys. Duke's defense didn't really improve.

Why bend reality to stick to a faulty narrative?

Whoah, whoah WHOAH!!! Where did I say we didn't improve? Don't create a strawman argument. C'mon man.

We absolutely improved. We absolutely were a good defense. But our defense ALSO was made to look better than it was by facing the right types of physical and stylistic matchups in the tournament.

And as such, I think the 2018 team's style would be a big problem for the 2015 team's defense.

I've never said the 2015 team was bad defensively or didn't improve. I never said the teams we faced weren't very good offenses. In fact, I said the opposite. But MATCHUPS MATTER. And those matchups were better suited for our 2015 team to succeed, whereas the 2018 Duke team is not a matchup well-suited for the 2015 team to defend.

[Wander]

Yes, the Wisconsin team with a record 129 offensive efficiency was the best-case scenario matchup for Duke's defense (or any defense). That totally makes sense.

It was just good matchups, guys. Duke's defense didn't really improve.

Why bend reality to stick to a faulty narrative?

And the flipside is that Duke's pre-tournament 2015 defense did poorly against teams without tons of NBA talent. For example, the NC State team that CDu has already admitted wasn't an athletic challenge.

The simplest explanation is that Duke's defense improved a lot at the end of the season. Arguing otherwise just comes off as arguing for the sake of arguing.

[CDu]

And the flipside is that Duke's pre-tournament 2015 defense did poorly against teams without tons of NBA talent. For example, the NC State team that CDu has already admitted wasn't an athletic challenge.

The simplest explanation is that Duke's defense improved a lot at the end of the season. Arguing otherwise just comes off as arguing for the sake of arguing.

I completely agree. We absolutely got better defensively in 2015 later in the season. Never said otherwise. Not sure why that's even being brought up. I just think that this year's team would be a really bad matchup for the 2015 team, and a type of matchup that they never had to face in 2015.

[kAzE]

Right, my point was that the fully-formed 2015 team would win comfortably over the current 2018 team. It's not a great idea to compare the two teams until the end of the season when we see what fully-formed 2018 looks like.

I do suspect I will still favor 2015 in the end even if 2018 continues its upward trajectory, defies single-elimination odds and goes on to win a national title. I highly value the point guard position, and it's a rout there. But we'll see what happens, and we can argue about it then.

But the whole point of this message board is to argue about it now :p

Look, I get it. Duval is erratic. But he's also capable of being a way more dynamic player than Tyus Jones. The Virginia game was a case study of bad Duval versus good Duval. Bad Duval got us absolutely killed in the first half with his sloppy post entry passes and careless ball handling. Good Duval absolutely destroyed Virginia with his speed and quickness, and then bad Duval missed a bunch of free throws and cost us the game with a turnover at the end.

The key to this team's success will be Duval's play. When he's at his best, even the best defenses in the country struggle to contain him. If he can be good Duval for about 80% of every game (he was good for about 40% of this game), we'd be unstoppable. He will keep getting better, it's just a question of how good he becomes by the time the games really matter.

[ncexnyc]

Right, my point was that the fully-formed 2015 team would win comfortably over the current 2018 team. It's not a great idea to compare the two teams until the end of the season when we see what fully-formed 2018 looks like.

I do suspect I will still favor 2015 in the end even if 2018 continues its upward trajectory, defies single-elimination odds and goes on to win a national title. I highly value the point guard position, and it's a rout there. But we'll see what happens, and we can argue about it then.

Why compare a completed surgery with one that's still ongoing? The latter just looks like murder.

Hmmmm, an interesting idea. I guess we could also put the Tyus vs Duval debate on hold till the end of the season as well.:D

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Hmmmm, an interesting idea. I guess we could also put the Tyus vs Duval debate on hold till the end of the season as well.:D

Like I said elsewhere, after the team wins a banner in April, the perspective on this team and these players will shift very quickly. Duval will go from serviceable to first round talent, Grayson will go from "off" to "deferential to young talent," close wins will go from signs of weakness to signs of grit, and Bagley will go from... Well, no, Bagley is a stud regardless. I look forward to seeing the revisionist history after we get K another ring.

[Kedsy]

...and then bad Duval missed a bunch of free throws...

I didn't want to weigh in on this debate (though, for the record, I agree with CDu), but Trevon Duval only missed one free throw the entire Virginia game. Not saying if he was "good Duval" or "bad Duval" at that moment, but he didn't miss a "bunch" of free throws at any point in the game.

[flyingdutchdevil]

But the whole point of this message board is to argue about it now :p

Look, I get it. Duval is erratic. But he's also capable of being a way more dynamic player than Tyus Jones. The Virginia game was a case study of bad Duval versus good Duval. Bad Duval got us absolutely killed in the first half with his sloppy post entry passes and careless ball handling. Good Duval absolutely destroyed Virginia with his speed and quickness, and then bad Duval missed a bunch of free throws and cost us the game with a turnover at the end.

The key to this team's success will be Duval's play. When he's at his best, even the best defenses in the country struggle to contain him. If he can be good Duval for about 80% of every game (he was good for about 40% of this game), we'd be unstoppable. He will keep getting better, it's just a question of how good he becomes by the time the games really matter.

I too am banking on Duval to show improvement. That, and Grayson finding his offensive game.

Duval is a little Jekyll-and-Hyde, and I too thought the UVa game perfectly portrayed that. Duval's passing was insanely good in the second half, and that opens up his ability to score. Furthermore, his D was much more attentive in the second half. When Duval makes smart passes and plays excellent D, Duke is nearly impossible to beat (first 10 min of second half). When Duval is too risky and seeks his own shot too often, Duke is in danger of losing.

That said, Grayson worries me just as much - if not more - than Duval. It's because Grayson is a senior. Any player can find/lose their shot, but I'm more worried that Grayson isn't hunting for this shot/not taking open shots when given. To me, it's a clear sign that Grayson is really struggling with decision-making when he has the ball.

[Kfanarmy]

Yeah?

FIRST 9 ACC GAMES:


Player Games Points Rebs Assists TOs Steals FG% 2pt% 3pt% FT%
Tyus Jones 9 96 23 36 17 8 37.8% 39.1% 35.7% 87.1%
Trevon Duval 9 94 20 43 28 9 45.7% 50.0% 36.0% 55.0%


Tyus turned it over less and shot much better from the line. Trevon had more assists and shot much better on 2-point shots. Otherwise, they seem pretty much the same to me, including the team's identical win-loss records. Maybe it's people's glorified memories of Tyus that are a little bit lame.


assist to TO ratio probably breaks the tie...

[jv001]

I disagree . . . at this point in the 2014-15 season, we were 17-3, ranked #4 in the country, had just come off of a loss to Notre Dame, our 3rd loss in the ACC, including a loss at NC State and a loss at home to Miami. The 2 teams were in almost the same exact position at the end of January. Both teams had impressive wins in the non conference, but both also struggled a bit in the first half of league play.

Okafor attempting to guard Bagley and Carter? That would be entertaining.

Jah's improvement on defense was one of the reason for Duke's late season streak. Many Duke fans were wondering why all of a sudden was his defense that good. But like you, I don't see him doing a good job on Mr Carter or Mr. Bagley. Yeh, they are really good at this thing called college basketball. GoDuke!

[Kfanarmy]

yes, and the pace of the game picked up too, so it's not just about points. The key was the opening 8 minutes when the zone f'd them up, and it also led to more confidence/productivity on offense for Duke. Overall, we kept UVA below 40% FGs, so that's good. After UVA figured out how to attack our zone it was less effective, but was still as good, or nearly so, as the best m2m we played in the 1st.
Somebody else pointed this out, but if our offense had been able to score at any sort of reasonable rate off the stops we did generate in the 1st half, then we may have even been up at the half and this whole discussion doesn't happen.

I agree, but I think that is more about Duke figuring out VA's defense than it is about Duke's defense...UVA has an experienced team, so they eventually began to figure out the zone Duke was playing. If it had been introduced earlier, I think they'd have adjusted earlier. As someone else said up thread, mixing up defenses in-game may ultimately be Duke's best option. I'm just not sure they'll get there in the M2M. I think you have to have some pretty well-seasoned big men for it to work effectively.

[jv001]

I too am banking on Duval to show improvement. That, and Grayson finding his offensive game.

Duval is a little Jekyll-and-Hyde, and I too thought the UVa game perfectly portrayed that. Duval's passing was insanely good in the second half, and that opens up his ability to score. Furthermore, his D was much more attentive in the second half. When Duval makes smart passes and plays excellent D, Duke is nearly impossible to beat (first 10 min of second half). When Duval is too risky and seeks his own shot too often, Duke is in danger of losing.

That said, Grayson worries me just as much - if not more - than Duval. It's because Grayson is a senior. Any player can find/lose their shot, but I'm more worried that Grayson isn't hunting for this shot/not taking open shots when given. To me, it's a clear sign that Grayson is really struggling with decision-making when he has the ball.

Like you I'm just as worried about Grayson. It looks like he's over thinking his job. Is he supposed to create for Carter and MBIII or is he supposed to be the go-to-guy. In the MSU game he looked to be the go-to-guy but then he was injured and since then, he has not been the same player. Grayson is the best at getting the ball low to our bigs and everyone else is a distant 2nd. Trevon is the drive and dish assist man with an occasional lob to Carter or Bags. But in the half court set, Grayson is the best at getting it down low. Being a senior certainly helps.

As for the conversation of Tyus and Trevon, I'm not going to be critical of either player. But from my eye test, Tyus was one of the best clutch performers at Duke. To me, he's in the Christian category. Not that good but in his company.

GoDuke!

[Lar77]

19 pages of commentary, so I apologize if I don't add anything new:

We didn't win because we missed some free throws, had a lot of turnovers against a team that forces turnovers, and didn't shoot well from the outside. We got tired, but our top 3 reserves all had noticeable health issues and playing them more would not have helped.

Our games lately against UVa have all been close and could have easily gone the other way. This one did go the other way with Jerome hitting an open 3 that he shouldn't have taken (no one expected him to pull the trigger from that far out), some long rebounds late that maybe our guards could have run down, and other noticeable reasons (missing a 3, turning the ball over, etc.).

Going 40 minutes of 2-3 zone isn't the answer. Wilkins missed more than one open from the elbow, which would have hurt. I like the switching up between M2M and zone, but we still need better movement on defense in each.

After the first half, most teams would have faded against UVa. We didn't, but we couldn't break it more open and when a game is close at the end, it becomes a 50-50 proposition.

I'm not going to be positive about this. We could have won. But we didn't. I don't think UVa is better than us, but they were on Saturday.

Will our team get better? Of course, it will. It's a better team today than it was against MSU.

On the 2015 v 2018 debate, I lean towards 2018 at this point in the season. Grayson v Grayson would be interesting - reversible jersey?

[Troublemaker]

Sigh...
Delon Wright scouting report: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Delon-Wright-78507/

Key quotes: "From an athleticism standpoint, Wright is unique, as he is not particularly quick or explosive by traditional standards", and "He's not particularly strong, long or explosive, which makes it difficult for him to finish plays at times through contact, especially against better defenses"

So, yeah, not elite athleticism. And a late first-round pick because of it.

Did you watch the video I posted? Anyway, DraftExpress reviews athleticism from an NBA standpoint, not from a college standpoint. How was Delon Wright not an athletic college point guard? Let's be clear what you are saying here. In the Sweet 16, drawing a kenpom POY candidate and arguably the best PG in the country with an NBA future in an offense heavily reliant on PNR (watch the video) was a good matchup for Duke's defense. How? What is the baseline you are working from in which that is a good matchup? Is the NCAA full of Russell Westbrook type athletes at PG?

We shut down Wright because we were a great defense at the end of the season. If we had played him earlier in the season, he probably would've had his way with us.

[jv001]

19 pages of commentary, so I apologize if I don't add anything new:

We didn't win because we missed some free throws, had a lot of turnovers against a team that forces turnovers, and didn't shoot well from the outside. We got tired, but our top 3 reserves all had noticeable health issues and playing them more would not have helped.

Our games lately against UVa have all been close and could have easily gone the other way. This one did go the other way with Jerome hitting an open 3 that he shouldn't have taken (no one expected him to pull the trigger from that far out), some long rebounds late that maybe our guards could have run down, and other noticeable reasons (missing a 3, turning the ball over, etc.).

Going 40 minutes of 2-3 zone isn't the answer. Wilkins missed more than one open from the elbow, which would have hurt. I like the switching up between M2M and zone, but we still need better movement on defense in each.

After the first half, most teams would have faded against UVa. We didn't, but we couldn't break it more open and when a game is close at the end, it becomes a 50-50 proposition.

I'm not going to be positive about this. We could have won. But we didn't. I don't think UVa is better than us, but they were on Saturday.

Will our team get better? Of course, it will. It's a better team today than it was against MSU.

On the 2015 v 2018 debate, I lean towards 2018 at this point in the season. Grayson v Grayson would be interesting - reversible jersey?

You sound positive to me and I like it. GoDuke!

[Troublemaker]

Robert Morris was also an unlucky draw for us as a 16 seed. Don't laugh. Obviously we still won comfortably, but it's rare that you draw a 16 seed that has two good high-major guards on it.

Marquise Reed is now at Clemson and is their leading scorer and go-to guy at the end of games (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/3133969/marcquise-reed). Rodney Pryor led Georgetown in scoring last season with an efficient 18 ppg (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/3133971/rodney-pryor).

I would say in the 2015 NCAAT, our defense drew poorly in 3 rounds (RMU, Utah, and Wisconsin) and drew well in 3 rounds (SDSU, Gonzaga, MSU). I don't think we were lucky with the matchups at all, although I'd like to know what the baseline expectation of a 1 seed should be? On average, are you supposed to expect 3 good matchups, 3 bad matchups? Or 4 good matchups, 2 bad matchups? Or something else?

[DarkstarWahoo]

I'd like to know what the baseline expectation of a 1 seed should be? On average, are you supposed to expect 3 good matchups, 3 bad matchups? Or 4 good matchups, 2 bad matchups? Or something else?

Pulled straight from my rear end with no research, I'd say 3 and 3 (while recognizing that "good" and "bad" are extremely broad terms). A 1 seed should get through the Sweet 16 without issue. From the regional final on, a 1 should be facing all 1s and 2s, assuming chalk. Those games should be pretty evenly matched. That's leaving aside Cinderella runs, of course, but even a team like VCU in its Final Four year has at least proven it can beat top teams.

[kAzE]

I'm still not that worried, because I know how good he is, and how clutch he is. Lately, he's been getting better at finding the balance between looking for his own offense and feeding the post, but Virginia was very effective at stopping him from getting anything going offensively.

If Grayson is still putting up games like this in late February, then I'm going to be very worried.

[WHOneedsSOX]

Tough season for Allen so far. Now there's a clip out there where he sticks his leg out to go around the screen and of course people are making a big deal about it saying he tried to trip the Virginia player. Some people are just so out to bury this guy and it's quite sad.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2018/1/28/16942464/grayson-allen-trip-virginia-vs-duke-basketball-video

[CDu]

Did you watch the video I posted? Anyway, DraftExpress reviews athleticism from an NBA standpoint, not from a college standpoint. How was Delon Wright not an athletic college point guard?

Wright was athletic for a college player. He was not an uber-athletic college point guard. He was a VERY good PG, but not one who dominates with athleticism.


Let's be clear what you are saying here. In the Sweet 16, drawing a kenpom POY candidate and arguably the best PG in the country with an NBA future in an offense heavily reliant on PNR (watch the video) was a good matchup for Duke's defense. How? What is the baseline you are working from in which that is a good matchup? Is the NCAA full of Russell Westbrook type athletes at PG?

First, Wright wasn't the best PG in the draft. Terry Rozier and Jerian Grant went above him. And yes, I'm referring to NBA level athleticism at PG. Wright wasn't that. No, there are not a ton of those guys out there in college. Wright isn't one of them. Duval is.


We shut down Wright because we were a great defense at the end of the season. If we had played him earlier in the season, he probably would've had his way with us.

I completely agree that Utah probably kills us if we played them earlier in the season. I completely agree we had a great defense later in the season. I completely agree that we got much better defensively as the season went on. I'm not sure why you keep presenting this as the argument I'm making. It's annoying that you are arguing against something that I'm not and have not been saying.

My point is that we didn't face the following in the tougher rounds of the tournament: (a) an elite athlete at guard, (b) a team with any high-lottery talent; (c) a team with an elite athlete in the post, and (d) a team that pushes tempo.

And as such, I don't think our dominance defensively in the tournament would apply to a matchup against the 2018 Duke team. We have multiple high-lottery talents. We have an elite athlete at PG, a team with high lottery talent (possibly two of them), an elite athlete in the post, and we play fast.

MATCHUPS MATTER. And I think that the 2018 team would present a matchup problem that we never faced in 2015. And hence, while I completely agree that the 2015 team played great defense down the stretch, I don't think they'd do nearly as well against this year's team. So please, stop trying to prove that we were a good defensive team in 2015. Stop trying to prove that we got better defensively in 2015. I DO, AND HAVE ALWAYS, agreed with those two points.

[CDu]

Robert Morris was also an unlucky draw for us as a 16 seed. Don't laugh. Obviously we still won comfortably, but it's rare that you draw a 16 seed that has two good high-major guards on it.

Marquise Reed is now at Clemson and is their leading scorer and go-to guy at the end of games (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/3133969/marcquise-reed). Rodney Pryor led Georgetown in scoring last season with an efficient 18 ppg (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/3133971/rodney-pryor).

RoMo would have been a bad matchup for us... if the talent level overall was remotely close. Put Reed and/or Pryor on one of the teams we faced in the second weekend, and maybe we lose. Put them on an awful team, and we win comfortably.


I would say in the 2015 NCAAT, our defense drew poorly in 3 rounds (RMU, Utah, and Wisconsin) and drew well in 3 rounds (SDSU, Gonzaga, MSU). I don't think we were lucky with the matchups at all, although I'd like to know what the baseline expectation of a 1 seed should be? On average, are you supposed to expect 3 good matchups, 3 bad matchups? Or 4 good matchups, 2 bad matchups? Or something else?

I would say that we drew poorly in RoMo, and drew well in the rest. This does not mean that Utah and Wisconsin were bad teams. Wisconsin was as good as anyone in the country. Utah was, I think, a tad overrated (they did lose 9 games overall despite playing a light non-con schedule and in the Pac-12), but still a solid 4/5 seed. But both lacked dynamic athleticism in the frontcourt, and both lacked elite athleticism on the perimeter. And that made them more susceptible to lose to us, because they didn't have the features that could exploit where our limitations were. Matchups matter in the tournament. And we got teams that profiled pretty well for us.

Again, for the zillionth time. This does not mean we weren't a terrific defensive team by season's end. This does not mean that we didn't improve dramatically defensively. It just means that I don't think our tournament opponents give us much insight into a hypothetical matchup with 2018 Duke.

[subzero02]

I'm still not that worried, because I know how good he is, and how clutch he is. Lately, he's been getting better at finding the balance between looking for his own offense and feeding the post, but Virginia was very effective at stopping him from getting anything going offensively.

If Grayson is still putting up games like this in late February, then I'm going to be very worried.

His struggles remind me of Kyle's as a senior. He's under tremendous pressure and the man is a human pressure cooker. I have faith that he'll find his groove. Duval and Trent continuing to improve could really help Allen.

[Kfanarmy]

Delon Wright was an under-athletic PG who went late in the first round due to athletic limitations. He was an uber-efficient player, but not a break-you-down playmaker. And thus not a bad matchup for us.

Same issues for Wisconsin. They were an uber-efficient team, but slow and unathletic and lacking in break-you-down playmakers. It was the best-case scenario for the 2015 Duke team.

We were very fortunate not to face any teams with elite athleticism or elite NBA-level talent in that tournament.

sophomore Cat Barber and Trevor Lacey were not NBA talents. Sophomore Cat Barber was not nearly the player junior Cat Barber was, and junior Cat Barber wasn't an NBA talent. And Lacey was not an athletic challenge anyway, so again, didn't pose the problems for our defense.

Matchups matter. None of those teams had the athleticism or elite talent to cause us problems defensively.

well not really...elite NBA talents aren't allowed to play in the NCAA tournament.

LOL. My point here is that elite NBA talent only exists in the NBA. There are usually only a handful of prospects every year who may become elite in the NBA. Duke faced some really elite NCAA TEAMS with NBA talent. Curious what unnamed team with elite talent do you believe would have beaten the 2015 squad?

[Troublemaker]

I would say that we drew poorly in RoMo, and drew well in the rest. This does not mean that Utah and Wisconsin were bad teams.

First of all, I'll stop straw-manning you if you stop straw-manning me. No need to keep repeating "matchups matter" as if that isn't the accepted premise already and we merely disagree on what a good or bad matchup is.

We still need to establish a baseline of expectations:

You say we drew well with Utah in the Sweet 16. There are eight 4 or 5 seeds. Can you tell me which of the other seven 4 or 5 seeds were we lucky to duck? Which ones had the uber-athletic point guards that were worse matchups for us than kenpom POY candidate, NBA PG Delon Wright?

You say we drew well with Wisconsin in the title game. Can you tell me which of the other six 1 or 2 seeds were worse matchups for our defense than the best offense of the kenpom era? I assume Kentucky is one, in your opinion.

[CDu]

First of all, I'll stop straw-manning you if you stop straw-manning me. No need to keep repeating "matchups matter" as if that isn't the accepted premise already and we merely disagree on what a good or bad matchup is.

We still need to establish a baseline of expectations:

You say we drew well with Utah in the Sweet 16. There are eight 4 or 5 seeds. Can you tell me which of the other seven 4 or 5 seeds were we lucky to duck? Which ones had the uber-athletic point guards that were worse matchups for us than kenpom POY candidate, NBA PG Delon Wright?

You say we drew well with Wisconsin in the title game. Can you tell me which of the other six 1 or 2 seeds were worse matchups for our defense than the best offense of the kenpom era? I assume Kentucky is one, in your opinion.

I didn't strawman you. I was just making sure you understand my point, since you seemed to be repeatedly illustrating that you didn't earlier.

In 2015, there weren't really many bad matchups available at the 4/5 line. West Virginia would be the obvious stylistic bad matchup. UNC would as well. To a lesser degree, UNC (though of course, we couldn't play them that early). Although they didn't have the PG or elite talent, I think they would have been a tougher matchup for us. But again, we were better than all those teams, so we likely beat any of them. But purely on matchups, the West Virginia and UNC would have been tougher matchups for us from a matchups perspective.

As far as the 1 seeds, Kentucky obviously. That's probably it.

As for other teams that would be problematic that weren't 4/5 or 1/2? Notre Dame, obviously. They had a better athlete at PG (two actually, and two dynamic options at PF/C in Auguste and Colson. Kansas, with a variety of quick and athletic guards (Mason, Graham, Selden) and a talented, versatile PF in Ellis. Maybe Iowa State (not so much for the fast PG, but more for the style of offense and versatility of their bigs), but they were pretty bad defensively.

There weren't really any top-25 teams with great athleticism at PG that year. That worked out quite well for us. There weren't a ton of teams that had dynamic, athletic weapons at the PF and C spot. That also worked out quite well for us. And we didn't get lined up with the few that did pose those threats. It was just a really good year in terms of potential matchups, and we were also a really good team.

In terms of other teams from other years that would have been problematic? The John Wall UK team. The UK championship team. The late-2000s UNC teams. The 2005 UNC team. The 2001 Duke team. The 1999 Duke team. The 2018 Duke team. Those are just some examples, and obviously there are not a ton of them. But again, we're talking about using as a profile to the types of things that could give a national championship team serious problems, as well as points of reference for this 2018 Duke team. There just aren't a lot of those out there.

[Troublemaker]

I didn't strawman you. I was just making sure you understand my point, since you seemed to be repeatedly illustrating that you didn't earlier.

That's poor reading comprehension on your part then because from the beginning, I was talking about matchups. We merely disagree on who was tough.



In 2015, there weren't really many bad matchups available at the 4/5 line. West Virginia would be the obvious stylistic bad matchup. UNC would as well. To a lesser degree, UNC (though of course, we couldn't play them that early). Although they didn't have the PG or elite talent, I think they would have been a tougher matchup for us. But again, we were better than all those teams, so we likely beat any of them. But purely on matchups, the West Virginia and UNC would have been tougher matchups for us from a matchups perspective.

As far as the 1 seeds, Kentucky obviously. That's probably it.

As for other teams that would be problematic that weren't 4/5 or 1/2? Notre Dame, obviously. They had a better athlete at PG (two actually, and two dynamic options at PF/C in Auguste and Colson. Kansas, with a variety of quick and athletic guards (Mason, Graham, Selden) and a talented, versatile PF in Ellis. Maybe Iowa State (not so much for the fast PG, but more for the style of offense and versatility of their bigs), but they were pretty bad defensively.

Uh huh. So what I'm hearing is that Utah and their star PG really was one of the toughest Sweet 16 matchups we could've gotten and Wiscy's historically great offense really was one of the toughest 1/2s our defense could've drawn.

And I completely disagree that UNC would've been tougher than Utah. In Cook, we had the solution for Marcus Paige, who did not possess great athleticism at PG, and Jakob Poeltl was a more athletic matchup at center than Kennedy Meeks. We can agree to disagree about that one, though. WVU would've been interesting but also not tougher than Utah. Duke played two PGs and had a PF in Winslow who could handle. I don't think WVU harms our defense if our offense takes care of the ball against the press.


There weren't really any top-25 teams with great athleticism at PG that year. That worked out quite well for us. There weren't a ton of teams that had dynamic, athletic weapons at the PF and C spot. That also worked out quite well for us. And we didn't get lined up with the few that did pose those threats. It was just a really good year in terms of potential matchups, and we were also a really good team.

Nah, I think you'll find that most years are like that. There wasn't anything special about 2015. I think this exercise of having you actually look through the bracket gave you a better sense of what opponents are actually out there. You now have a baseline and realize that we weren't particularly lucky with matchups in 2015.

[uh_no]

Nah, I think you'll find that most years are like that. There wasn't anything special about 2015.

I think this will generally be true for top teams. you don't get to be a top team by matching up poorly against a wide variety of teams....you get to be a top team by matching up well against more types of teams than anyone else.

[CDu]

That's poor reading comprehension on your part then because from the beginning, I was talking about matchups. We merely disagree on who was tough.

Don't make me go back and quote the parts where you were veering way away from this being about matchups. You kept bringing up "so obviously we didn't get better, huh?" or stuff to that effect.


Uh huh. So what I'm hearing is that Utah and their star PG really was one of the toughest Sweet 16 matchups we could've gotten and Wiscy's historically great offense really was one of the toughest 1/2s our defense could've drawn.

Utah was certainly one of the toughest 4/5s we could have drawn in 2015. No disagreement there. But that doesn't invalidate what I said at all. They were still a good matchup for our strengths/weaknesses. That there weren't other teams who matched up better with us doesn't suddenly make them less of a good matchup for us. If we'd gotten Notre Dame as a 4, for example, that'd have been a bad matchup for us. But Notre Dame wound up a 3, and were in our conference anyway. I think Arizona might have been a worse matchup than Wisconsin too. And I'm not convinced that Nova wouldn't have been tougher too.

But regardless of whether there were or were not tougher options available, that doesn't change that - in an absolute sense - Utah and Wisconsin were good matchups for us. They may well have been bad matchups relative to the other options, but if all the options are good matchups then even the worst matchup of the lot is still a good matchup.

In a room full of millionaires, the guy with exactly $1 million isn't poor just because he has the least money of anyone in the room.


And I completely disagree that UNC would've been tougher than Utah. In Cook, we had the solution for Marcus Paige, who did not possess great athleticism at PG, and Jakob Poeltl was a more athletic matchup at center than Kennedy Meeks. We can agree to disagree about that one, though. WVU would've been interesting but also not tougher than Utah. Duke played two PGs and had a PF in Winslow who could handle. I don't think WVU harms our defense if our offense takes care of the ball against the press.

UNC had multiple bigs, not just Meeks. That, and their style of play was much different than Utah's. They would have been a worse matchup in my opinion. You are more than welcome to disagree. But again, I don't really care whether or not UNC was a worse or better matchup. Just that Utah was a good matchup for us.


Nah, I think you'll find that most years are like that. There wasn't anything special about 2015. I think this exercise of having you actually look through the bracket gave you a better sense of what opponents are actually out there. You now have a baseline and realize that we weren't particularly lucky with matchups in 2015.

Here's where I think the issue may be that we're still talking about different things. It seems like you're focusing on the idea that Utah/Wisconsin were tough relative to the other options in 2015. Perhaps in a defensive posture against the "we got a lucky draw" argument, but that's just speculation on my part. But that's not what I'm talking about at all. I'm talking about a more absolute quality of the matchup. I don't care that there weren't other teams like that in our potential path. I don't think we got a lucky draw, other than perhaps not getting paired with Kentucky in the semifinal or Notre Dame in the elite 8. We were maybe a bit fortunate that there just weren't a lot of good teams with the types of talents/features to give that team trouble once we figured things out. So the matchups we got, while arguably as tough as any possible that year (except for the semifinal), were still good matchups.

[kAzE]

This debate really can't have a winner, since there's no way those teams will ever exist again, and we can't know for sure if any of those match ups would have been good or bad. Thankfully, we beat every team we faced in the NCAA tournament in 2015. It doesn't really matter that we didn't face different teams. It's fun to talk hypotheticals (like Duke 2018 vs Duke 2015), but there's really no need to get worked up over something that literally can never be resolved . . . just agree to disagree :p

[CDu]

This debate really can't have a winner, since there's no way those teams will ever exist again, and we can't know for sure if any of those match ups would have been good or bad. Thankfully, we beat every team we faced in the NCAA tournament in 2015. It doesn't really matter that we didn't face different teams. It's fun to talk hypotheticals (like Duke 2018 vs Duke 2015), but there's really no need to get worked up over something that literally can never be resolved . . . just agree to disagree :p

I think we may actually be close to an understanding. I think the roots of our disagreement has to do with relative versus absolute quality of matchups. Troublemaker seems to be talking about the quality of the matchup relative to other potential opponents that year, whereas I'm talking strictly about the quality of the matchup in an absolute stylistic sense.

Perhaps it all stems from him having the sense that I'm denigrating the 2015 team? That's a guess on my point, and if so is unfortunate because that's not what I was trying to do at all. I love that 2015 team. But I don't think that the performances we had down the stretch in 2015 give much indication of how we'd fare defensively against the 2018 Duke team, because those opponents (while undoubtedly good teams) were less well-suited to punish us where we had defensive limitations (and there weren't many). I think the 2018 Duke team is just a different animal than anything the 2015 team faced.

Maybe I'm being too optimistic in my assessment of our difference of opinion, though. Who knows?

[Dukebasketball2020]

The key to us winning it all this year lies on Allens hands. Back in 2015 when he was averaging 22 ppg he was aggressive and shooting around 7.2 FT's per game right now he is only averaging just over 3. We need him to start driving to the basket more and getting foul, 1 because he is our best or second best free throw shooter and 2 I think him getting easy points will get his confidence back and allow him to start knocking down those big 3's again. If allen isn't hitting outside our only reliable 3 point shooter is Gary Trent and he is only on every other game it seems like. I'm not going to lose sleep over this game because we played like complete crap and they hit some lucky shots at the end If duke would have came to play it would have been a 12-15 point victory. Duke had 8-9 careless mistakes where we just threw the ball away, not to mention how many free throws where we coulda got a second shot but missed the first, and shot poorly in the first half. Also K need to utilize his bench more IDC if it's for a few minutes a game, there's no reason for guys like allen, bagley, carter, duval and trent to have to play 38-40 min a game. Goldwire is good enough to play 5-10 minutes, devaier should be playing 10-15, bolden should be playing 10-12, oconnel should be play 10-12 and Vrank should be getting some time at least 5 or so minutes he is productive when he comes in.

[CDu]

The key to us winning it all this year lies on Allens hands. Back in 2015 when he was averaging 22 ppg he was aggressive and shooting around 7.2 FT's per game right now he is only averaging just over 3. We need him to start driving to the basket more and getting foul, 1 because he is our best or second best free throw shooter and 2 I think him getting easy points will get his confidence back and allow him to start knocking down those big 3's again. If allen isn't hitting outside our only reliable 3 point shooter is Gary Trent and he is only on every other game it seems like. I'm not going to lose sleep over this game because we played like complete crap and they hit some lucky shots at the end If duke would have came to play it would have been a 12-15 point victory. Duke had 8-9 careless mistakes where we just threw the ball away, not to mention how many free throws where we coulda got a second shot but missed the first, and shot poorly in the first half. Also K need to utilize his bench more IDC if it's for a few minutes a game, there's no reason for guys like allen, bagley, carter, duval and trent to have to play 38-40 min a game. Goldwire is good enough to play 5-10 minutes, devaier should be playing 10-15, bolden should be playing 10-12, oconnel should be play 10-12 and Vrank should be getting some time at least 5 or so minutes he is productive when he comes in.

I think the key is either Allen or Duval. Both are more talented than their performances of late suggest. If either is playing well, with the development of Bagley and Carter we are nearly impossible to beat. Unfortunately, while the defense has improved over the past 6 games, those guys have struggled overall offensively. Hopefully they bounce back. Not sure why both are struggling at the moment, especially Allen. But they've both shown the talent to provide much more. So hopefully it comes back sooner rather than later.

[Wander]

I completely agree. We absolutely got better defensively in 2015 later in the season. Never said otherwise. Not sure why that's even being brought up. I just think that this year's team would be a really bad matchup for the 2015 team, and a type of matchup that they never had to face in 2015.

The original statement which sparked all of this about the 2015 team was that its "defensive dominance came largely because it faced the type of teams it was well-suited to defend." That statement doesn't make sense in the context of the rest of the 2015 season, which included lots of bad defensive performances against teams that we were supposedly well-suited to defend, like NC State. Your later statements, like the one quoted above, are more nuanced and I don't think anyone would have a problem with (at least I don't).

[CDu]

The original statement which sparked all of this about the 2015 team was that its "defensive dominance came largely because it faced the type of teams it was well-suited to defend." That statement doesn't make sense in the context of the rest of the 2015 season, which included lots of bad defensive performances against teams that we were supposedly well-suited to defend, like NC State. Your later statements, like the one quoted above, are more nuanced and I don't think anyone would have a problem with (at least I don't).

I am not sure I follow your logic here. Those early season losses didn’t have much to do with the quality of matchup. Early in the season, we were just a bad defensive team. We stopped being a bad defensive team later in the season. And as a result,we got better results against them, most notably walloping State.

So I simply don’t see how that relates to the quoted statement. We were surely a good defense by year end. But our level of dominance late in the same came in no small part because we faced teams we matched up well against. That doesn’t mean we weren’t good defensively. Nor does it mean that we didn’t get better throughout the year. Just that I don’t think we were a dominant defense that could handle this year’s team, and I think our 2015 defense was somewhat overrated by the style of play of the matchups we faced in that tourney.

[Kedsy]

UNC is more likely to get to the FF because their players know what it takes.

What do you think now?

[CDu]

What do you think now?

To be fair, they were playing without Pinson for most of the game. He is pretty important to that team. I certainly don’t think UNC is more likely to reach the Final Four than us, but I don’t think tonight is the night to make that point.

[Kedsy]

To be fair, they were playing without Pinson for most of the game. He is pretty important to that team. I certainly don’t think UNC is more likely to reach the Final Four than us, but I don’t think tonight is the night to make that point.

That's a fair point. But I was alluding to the accumulation of the last three game nights, so...

[CoachJ10]

One final coda (hopefully) to this thread. Was this Virginia’s biggest win in recent memory? I am hardpressed to think of a more consequential win for their program.

[CameronDuke]

One final coda (hopefully) to this thread. Was this Virginia’s biggest win in recent memory? I am hardpressed to think of a more consequential win for their program.

Depends on how far recent memory allows us to reflect back on, I guess. Virginia's win over Duke in the 2014 ACC Tournament Championship game at the Greensboro Coliseum was pretty big for them I'm sure.

[elvis14]

Depends on how far recent memory allows us to reflect back on, I guess. Virginia's win over Duke in the 2014 ACC Tournament Championship game at the Greensboro Coliseum was pretty big for them I'm sure.

I was thinking the same thing. Probably because I was at that game in Greensboro. UVa is playing well right now and winning big games. Eventually they'll get derailed in the tournament by a good team together with an officiating crew that doesn't allow the scrum but until then you can't argue with their results.

Was really happy to see Clemson win last night, BTW. After the Cheaters closed the gap in the second half, I was sure Clemson was going to fold and man am I glad I was wrong.

[DarkstarWahoo]

One final coda (hopefully) to this thread. Was this Virginia’s biggest win in recent memory? I am hardpressed to think of a more consequential win for their program.

I'd say so, because it's the final in-conference hump Bennett hadn't gotten over. The ACC tournament win over you guys was also huge since we hadn't won a tournament since the 70s. The Syracuse beatdown at home that same year kind of served as Bennett's true coming-out party. But this feels bigger to me.

Of course, the 2016 Elite Eight game against Syracuse would have been bigger than any of those. It's a shame they canceled the rest of that tournament after the Sweet 16. Never have understood why the NCAA made that decision. Hoos could have won it all.