Duke MBB vs. Illinois Post-Game Thread

[JBDuke]

Post your thoughts on the Maui Invitational semi-final win over Illinois here.

[Karl Beem]

Great game for Zoubek!

[monkey]

Great job by the team tonight. Lot of hustle. Nice zone too.

Also - tonight I finally became a Gerald Henderson fan.

Not so much the dunk (which was awesome) - or the career high in points ....

It was the fade away jumper with about 5 to play. Follow that up with the sky-high deflection/near-two handed catch with about 30 seconds left. Just awesome.

[Lord Ash]

Gerald got compared to A) Kobe and B) Grant during this game. Pretty tough company, tho I have to admit, I DID see a lot of Kobe in his game.

The team played very well. Didn't fall apart, kept it going. The sheer number of fouls was disheartening, as well as the fact that we got dominated on the O-boards, but overall I felt we did well. Zoubs didn't foul out right away, and Thomas would have stuck longer if he hadn't fouled so early. Scheyer is just more and more my favorite player on the team; he has SUCH a nose for the ball in a scrum, more than any other player I can recall recently. Paulus was solid solid solid. Demarcus was STRONG as heck, really fluid and just aggressive; he looked SO confident. No Taylor King was interesting (or very little Taylor) and no Marty or Dave at all. Singler looked REAL good, although he had some trouble penetrating with such a good defender on him. Nolan also looked solid in his role as an athletic backup who could defend. We really are SUPER athletic this year.

A lot of fun to watch. I anticipate HAMMERING Marquette to make a point. What fun!

[monkey]

Gerald got compared to A) Kobe and B) Grant during this game. Pretty tough company, tho I have to admit, I DID see a lot of Kobe in his game.

The team played very well. Didn't fall apart, kept it going. The sheer number of fouls was disheartening, as well as the fact that we got dominated on the O-boards, but overall I felt we did well. Zoubs didn't foul out right away, and Thomas would have stuck longer if he hadn't fouled so early. Scheyer is just more and more my favorite player on the team; he has SUCH a nose for the ball in a scrum, more than any other player I can recall recently. Paulus was solid solid solid. Demarcus was STRONG as heck, really fluid and just aggressive; he looked SO confident. No Taylor King was interesting (or very little Taylor) and no Marty or Dave at all. Singler looked REAL good, although he had some trouble penetrating with such a good defender on him. Nolan also looked solid in his role as an athletic backup who could defend. We really are SUPER athletic this year.

A lot of fun to watch. I anticipate HAMMERING Marquette to make a point. What fun!

If we play this well tomorrow, Marquette is going to have trouble on its hands. Should be a good game.

Wonder especially why no TK .... guess we'll find out ...

BTW, for a walk-on and only a few minutes play time, Jeff Jordan is a pretty good player. Nice defense and very quick.

[dukelifer]

First of all- welcome Mr. Henderson. I heard last year about this smooth, athletic forward who could score from all over the floor. I saw glimpses of him last year- but today we got a complete game. G dominated tonight. He hit all the huge shots to keep Duke ahead. Nelson played a very good game as well. Scheyer did a lot of little things. He is one heady player. Most of what he does is so subtle it i shard to notice but he is always somewhere near the ball. Singler had a tough defender on him and made a few silly fouls- but still managed to contribute. The layup he hit of the full run was a thing of beauty. He also showed his feisty side. Zoubek helped a ton tonight. While not a clinic by any means- he got some big boards - altered a few shots and hit a few shots on follows. This is what he can do and that may be enough. Smith still looks a bit lost out there- but he will get his confidence in time. K did not go as deep as he has been going in this game- not sure how that will affect the game tomorrow. Marquette is a tough, tough team who won pretty easily.

The biggest question mark on this Duke team is their rebounding and they need to do a much better job blocking out than they did tonight. Illinois is not a good shooting team. If Duke plays a big team that can shoot- if could be a long night. Not exactly sure what they can do other than work on fundamentals- but this needs to get much better.

Good win- on to Marquette.

[wisteria]

I know that we had a pretty OK lead most of the game, but I still had a minor heart attack.

Gerald Henderson!!! WOW!!! He literally carried us through especially after Singler/Thomas/Nelson all went down with 4 fouls. Great job, Gerry! (Although the very selfish part of me inside was worried that we are going to lose Gerald to NBA soon. :( )

Has anyone noticed that we had different MVPs during the last couple of games? Schyer/Paulus for the NMSU game, Singler for the Princeton game, and Henderson/Nelson for Illi game. It's good to be deep. Keep it up, guys!

And does it concern anyone that our scores have declined game by game?

Next, Revenge, Sweet revenge!

[dukestheheat]

markie played his best game (or, the one i'd call the best) tonight; he finished so very well at the hoop and time and again, solidly turned the corner on his defender. i can see how his off-season work is paying off for him!

and then henderson! he's probably going to get the nod for Man of the Match but it's a close call betwixt Henderson and Markie, imo, tonight.

GO DUKE!

Man, this is fun. It's like the good old days all over again. Deja vu, today.

dth.

[heath_harshman4]

Overall, a good win. It looked in the beginning as though we were gonna have trouble with their bigs, but the break and pressure finally got to Illinois. Zoubek...GREAT GAME, while he had some MORE dumb fouls, I think he had a good overall offensive and defensive game. Hendo, great job. Demarcus, Great Job. The only people I was dissapointed in was Singler and King. Singler because he played okay, but not what I saw last night, and King because I didnt see him at all. I think he shouldve got a little bit of time when Thomas and Singler both had 4 fouls, but Thomas did a good job of playing with those 4 fouls and really showed some composure.

As for Marquette, I think it will be a very very close game. While we almost took them last year with a much less athletic and deep team, something about Dominic James and Jerel McNeal and that other 3 point guy who's name escapes me, kinda scares me. But I think Duke's bigs, will play the biggest role in Duke winning tomorrow night. They showed me something tonight and I think will have a great night tomorrow celebrating.

Duke-84
Marquette-75

[Sixthman]

This was a very good win. Illinois did not have the guards we will see tomorrow night, but were still a good test. Demarcus played tough and was a major factor throughout the game while today was a coming out party for Gerald will be soon talked about as one of the elite players nationally if he continues to play at this level (if my memory serves me, as recently as three weeks ago, the Raleigh News and Observer, whose sports writers cover Duke as accurately as anyone, did not include Henderson in their top 25 players in the ACC). The other thing we saw from this team is that we could win a game against a real team with our front line collectively having a fairly weak night. Great teams have to win even when not all is going well. I thought that for so early in the season, we valued the ball well tonight. I don't know how many turnovers we had, but there weren't many bad ones. It is a little discouraging to see Coach K concentrating the minutes in fewer players so soon (no Marty, no King in the second half, not much Nolan Smith). Let's watch to see if that was because of particular match ups or will be a trend against better teams.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Henderson was outstanding - that dunk was phenomenal! Zoubek played his best game since the B/W game last year! Nelson was powerfully excellent (another fantastic dunk here), and Paulus had a very good floor game. Smith got very little time tonight, and was shaky when he was in (guess those two facts go hand in hand, don't they). Where did Lance get that move to the basket? Wish he would do it more often. Singler's catch and shoot on the break was first rate.

We didn't see much of Taylor King tonight, and saw nothing of Marty and Dave. Wonder if there are some health issues there on the last two, especially when Lance, Brian and Kyle were in all foul trouble. Dave's long arms would have come in handy in the last few minutes.

[Duke09]

And does it concern anyone that our scores have declined game by game?



Not at all. The competition has gotten better each game. Its natural. We won't score the same against NCCU as Illinois. Bet most of the games against good teams we will score 80-90

[ArtVandelay]

I suspect that King and Marty will continue to be the first two guys to get their minutes chopped against superior competition. Although it may have been a matchup issue with King. But yeah - I think it was surprising how drastic the dropoff was for King (Gasp! Talking about not using all our players! Forbidden topic!). As for Dave, I think it will just take some time to get the rust off and get back in playing form.

[DavidBenAkiva]

My eyes are wide open. I had a thought that DeMarcus and Gerald would have good games tonights. Illinois is thin in the gaurd department. What, they had three guys who played most of the game, right? That was very impressive to see Gerlad show fadeaways, threes, and attack the basket. Excellent game and incredible hops. I think that the comparisons to Kobe and Hill were a little too hyperbolic, but what the hey!

My one concern about him heading into tonight's matchup was that he hadn't shown much in the way of handling the ball in traffic or breaking down his man, relying more on his overall explosive first step. I think that he just moves laterally so smoothly that it doesn't seem like he's got the same type of handle as I'm used to seeing. Does anybody else get that sense or was I just out to lunch?

Time flies like an arrow
Fruit flies like a banana

[Troublemaker]

Not at all. The competition has gotten better each game. Its natural. We won't score the same against NCCU as Illinois. Bet most of the games against good teams we will score 80-90

Yep. Also, on a per-possession basis, this was an excellent offensive game by Duke. Heck, we shot 57% from the field.

I was pleased that we did not have to rely on turnovers for points. We were able to drive on them for finishes at the basket, mid-rangers, and open kickouts.

[Bob Green]

I watched the entire first half, but none of the second half due to work (I have the game taped). I was really impressed with the zone defense during the 24-7 run. DeMarcus looked great. Gerald looked great. Kyle had his hands full being guarded by Randle. Zoubek made solid contributions and I'm anxious to watch his development through the season. He needs to get stronger holding on to the ball, but I'm convinced he is going to be a monster in the middle next year. After his performance today, he could be a monster by tournament time this year. Today was a great team effort and tomorrow we play for the championship!

[Troublemaker]

On the other hand, I was displeased that Illinois did not need to rely on penetration to get their offensive rebounds. They really just outsized / outmuscled us at times, and this problem will likely continue against huge teams like this.

[wisteria]

On the other hand, I was displeased that Illinois did not need to rely on penetration to get their offensive rebounds. They really just outsized / outmuscled us at times, and this problem will likely continue against huge teams like this.

Right, whenever there's a rebound, I could just see a cloud of orange in the paint, and the next second they got the rebound.

By the way, I dislike the black uniforms. When are we going to be the BLUE devils?

[Sir Stealth]

I think that the reason this was such a nice game for Zoubek is that people were starting to worry that he was going to have another year where he couldn't yet really make a significant contribution. He still has a lot of room for improvement, but he played a sizeable role in this game and really helped out. At over 7 feet, just being competent can make a big impact (especially on a team that lacks size). Hopefully, he'll continue to rapidly improve.

To me, believing that a freshman point guard could come in to this type of program and earn a starting spot over a point guard with 2 years experience in the bank was always somewhat naive. Paulus also can still improve a lot, but he is completely capable of leading this team to great places. I don't think that this game will be the only time that we see him nail a 3 at just the right time to swing momentum for Duke.

More than anything, this game was about Gerald Henderson demonstrating that he really can be the dominant player that everyone has hoped he could be. He was incredible to watch.

[delfrio]

I'm just glad we have such a large golf shirt budget.

[wisteria]

I'm just glad we have such a large golf shirt budget.

hahaha...They seemed to enjoy the topic two days in a row, huh?

I was actually a bit disappointed in seeing the golf shirts...The other coaches were all in hawaii shirts. I was dreaming that coach K might loosen up a tad bit. Ah well.

[Jumbo]

Bottom line is it's always good to win by 13 points against a solid Big 10 team when you don't feel like you've played your best game. The game was really disjointed, given how closely the refs called it. There's a lot to like from this game, and a few things that need some improvement.

Positives
-The players handled the tight officiating reasonably well, and dealth with some early adversity, given all the foul trouble.
-K found a way to give Henderson, Nelson and Scheyer (arguably three of the four best players) major minutes.
-Henderson showed tremendous ability to create his own shot.
-Zoubek was solid. He's still fumbling the ball a bit, his legs still aren't back, but we saw improvement.
-The guys played the zone reasonably well. I still don't like it -- much prefer the pressure man-to-man -- but as a change of pace, it could be effective.
-Scheyer's floor game was absolutely phenomenal. The kid is always in the right spot, played great D, and moved the ball so quickly on offense. I wish I could go back and figure out how many "hockey assists" he had -- seems like he often makes the pass that leads to the pass that leads to the basket. There's a reason why he led the team in minutes again.
-Singler, like Scheyer, just has an advanced feel for moving the ball on offense. Even on an off-day for him, that was clear.
-Pretty good shot selection and solid FT shooting.
-Markie was under control save for a couple of his old-school, ill-advised drives.
-The spacing and dribble penetration is a real weapon when the team focuses. The key is for all the players to keep the ball moving.
-K played the guys who earned it. I was pretty sure McClure wouldn't get in (even though I'm a big fan of his) because against Princeton, he pretty clearly looked like he's still getting healthy. And after Pocius didn't play well, I didn't expect to see him, given the fact that it's hard enough to play five good guards. But K seemed really disappointed in Taylor King against Princeton. And he got a chance early, clearly didn't meet Coach K's standards, and sat the rest of the night. For a freshman, that can be a powerful lesson.

Negatives
-Singler is proving to be foul prone, which could be a major problem against bigger teams.
-I mentioned this in the plus/minus thread, but when Gerald was in the game, Duke scored 47 points. He scored 23 of them. And Duke only outscored Illinois by three when he was in. I wondered whether his output was good or bad, and am leaning more toward bad. Specifically, Gerald has a major step to take as a basketball player, and it involves selectivity and vision. He's at the point now where he can pump and get to the foul line for a pullup with ease. But since he can get that shot whenever he wants, shooting it while contested isn't smart. A number of times, he could have kicked the ball to the weak side for a wide open three and didn't. It's great that he is emerging as a scoring force, but Duke will be much better when he adds that component to the game. Because right now, his fellow perimeter players -- particularly Scheyer -- are losing open looks at better shots as a result.
-Speaking of Scheyer, he got into the lane a bunch of times. I know he's still really skinny, but he needs to stop going up soft. He was in the teeth of the defense, often with a great angle, and he's tall/long enough to finish. He just has to go up strong, instead of throwing up a wild shot. He's good enough to finish inside or draw a foul, but he has to realize that and play with the corresponding confidence.
-Paulus played decent D on the ball. But I lost track of the number of times he got lost in the help D rotations. He has to be more aware after the first pass -- the other guards had to cover for him and close out way too often.


All in all, these are minor complaints and stuff we can expect to see improve as the team matures, both as individuals and as a group. Let's hope for an even better performance against Marquette and a Maui title!

[feldspar]

Just finished the game on TiVo.

First half observations: I think I saw more zone during the first half than I have my whole life watching Duke basketball. I liked it, and Illinois went cold when we went to it. I'm more inclined to think that they just happened to go cold when we ran it rather than us causing them to go cold, because they had lots of open looks against the zone, but couldn't put them away. Later our defense caught up with us and we started to create quality turnovers, which was good to see.

Excellent job at the free throw line in the first half. I think we only missed one or two FTs during, and we did a good job getting to the line. Seems like it took us a while to get adjusted to Illinois' size, and I was surprised to see K go to Zoubek so much more than King to help Singler out on the inside. I would have figured it would have ben the opposite.

Disappointing to see the let-down at the end of the half, and the mental miscues in the final minute (DeMarcus' foul, King watching the ball go out of bounds on the FT and the layup to follow). We really let them off the hook going into the locker room down only 8.

Second half: Even more disappointing to see us allow Illinois to carry the momentum into the second half. That's been our strength for so many years and I always get nervous when the other team comes out more intense and fired up than us.

I'm not sure where the sloppiness came from, but we struggled with that in the middle of the second half. Lazy passes, poor positioning on defense leading to fouls, just not really Duke basketball, and Illinois took advantage.

Once again, though, our defense came through and created some fast breaks, which sparked our offense, and pushed us out to a 13-point lead which we were able to sustain for a good while, largely in part to Illinois' foul situation and their horrid shooting in the second half (26%).

Overall: I know Illinois wasn't ranked going into this game, but this was a good test for us, especially given how good (and big) Randle is. I was impressed by our ability to (at times) box out effectively despite giving up inches to Illinois. We need to make that a more consistent quality. We seem to fall asleep at stretches on offense, making silly passes and running a lackadazical (sp?) offense, but tonight we were able to put it together against a decent team and get the job done. I was especially impressed by our shooting (56% for the game, 46% from 3-pt range) It still remains to be seen how we perform against a hot-shooting team, but I'll take tonight's result.



Paulus: Decent game, I really didn't notice him much, which I guess you could read either way. He had a couple really good passes, shot the ball good, but not great (33%). Had a couple of good buckets at key moments, though. I wish he would quit using that off-arm to push away the defender. A junior point guard should have to be resorting to that. He was our 3rd leading scorer, though.

Singler: Looked like a freshman at times...but that's okay. He went up against some big boys tonight and he was asked to do a lot of different things. All in all, not a great game, but not a bad one at all. Tough to see him foul out on a borderline illegal screen.

DeMarcus: It's really fun to watch this guy create off the dribble this year. He's determined to get to the basket and we reallytook advantage of that. He kept us in it in the first half.

Scheyer: Pretty good game. He finds great ways to contribute here and there on night's he's not lighting it up. Had a couple of memorable shots, and drew a great charge. Overall, solid game (7 rebounds!).

Gerald: I just love when this kid gets up in the air, because he has so many options. He seems to hang there forever. I love his versatility driving to the lane or pulling up for 3. This kid is special, and his fire does great things for us. I heard the word "Kobe-esque" tonight and...well....I'm not going to disagree.

Zoub: Again, I was surprised not to see him and King switched in and out. We didn't see a whole lot out of King period tonight. Zoub is getting more confidence as the games go on, though, and calling for the ball and being in good position. One of the things I liked seeing him do tonight was staying on his feet more on defense rather than jumping so much. He's a work in progress, but I like his progress so far.

Coach K: Loved to see him screaming at the nonsense going on between Singler and Frazier and the ensuing festivities by our guys. We don't have time for that crap. I'm also loving the versatility he's showing on defense. I don't expect to see tons of zone this year, but when it calls for it, it calls for it. Eight players with 10 minutes or more. That's nice to see.

[Jim3k]

A couple of observations.

First, the game actually changed complexion when Zoubek came in for for Thomas. Until then the rebounding was clearly in Illinois' favor. They countered with their 7-footer, but it was a favorable matchup for Duke. At that point, Zoub became a body factor whenever he was in. He only got 3 rebs, but his presence changed their attitude some.

That was followed by the zone which Illinois couldn't handle well. They got little penetration and their outside shot did not fall. By the time they found the range, the Devils had claimed the lead and would not be headed thereafter.

The AP article observed that the Illini's best weapon was the follow shot. That meant they had missed the first one, but scrummed for the second. K was not bothered by that, saying the defense Duke plays allows the rush to the offensive board. Still, as the game went on, the Devils seemed to be finding loose balls very well. Scheyer seems to have a nose (a hard one) for the ball and serves as a stealth rebounder, getting the volleyballs being batted away from the hoop. He had 7 total. He's one tough dude for his size.

I did admire the smooth, graceful hops and shots by Henderson, but he, too, is a defensive ace. I actually think that his defense is a better strength team-wise than his offense. Tonight, Illinois put its best defensive guy (Randle) on Singler and that allowed Henderson some freedom he might not see next time out.

And I cannot leave out Markie. His contributions were enormous. He's learned to take the mid-range jumper when the hoop gets jammed up. But when it's not, he's lightning to the bucket. IMO, he's virtually unstoppable. But again, his defense is really good. His quickness and footwork, combined with his reach must be frightening to anyone he's guarding. Both he and Gerald had no turnovers tonight, and Markie was handling the ball during the endgame, eating up time. A nice set of skills handled well.

Now that I've seen them against good competition, I think this team is far better than the predictions. Still, I'd rather stay back in the rankings, if possible.

[STLDukeFan4]

I would have to add the Offensive rebounds allowed problem under the negative points Jumbo. Illinois got way too many offensive rebounds and 2nd chance points. Offensive rebounds on missed free throws are especially dissapointing. Was still a good, solid victory though.

[mepanchin]

Negatives
-I mentioned this in the plus/minus thread, but when Gerald was in the game, Duke scored 47 points. He scored 23 of them. And Duke only outscored Illinois by three when he was in. I wondered whether his output was good or bad, and am leaning more toward bad. Specifically, Gerald has a major step to take as a basketball player, and it involves selectivity and vision. He's at the point now where he can pump and get to the foul line for a pullup with ease. But since he can get that shot whenever he wants, shooting it while contested isn't smart. A number of times, he could have kicked the ball to the weak side for a wide open three and didn't. It's great that he is emerging as a scoring force, but Duke will be much better when he adds that component to the game. Because right now, his fellow perimeter players -- particularly Scheyer -- are losing open looks at better shots as a result.


It's an interesting question but I think this shows the limitations of +/- than it shows something wrong with Henderson. I think your implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Henderson can score a lot but perhaps doesn't do so efficiently because he sometimes takes ill-advised shots. Well, I don't agree with this.

Against Illinois when Henderson was playing, he had a huge usage rate (36.3% of Duke's possessions ended with Henderson when he was playing), but he did so very efficiently because he shot well (8 for 15, including 2 for 4 from behind the arc) and got to the line a lot (4 possessions ending with free throws) and had zero turnovers (125 efficiency for the game - only Paulus' and Nelson's were higher for the game with much lower usage rates).

My guess is that the difference is defensive. Oddly enough Henderson played good defense tonight as far as I could tell, forcing 3.5 missed shots (I give half-credit to two guys contesting a shot), allowing 3 field goals made, had 1 block, 1 steal, and 3 defensive rebounds.

So in short, I think +/- stats are interesting but for exactly this reason they are unclear. They don't really tell you a why but only a "that" without any way to really narrow down causes for why "that" happened.

[DukeCO2009]

I'll keep my reply short since my internet connection is spotty, but whither our bench, specifically King and Smith?

[throatybeard]

By the way, I dislike the black uniforms. When are we going to be the BLUE devils?

Yeah, wasn't it odd that we were BOTH wearing road unis? What was up with that.

[sandinmyshoes]

A solid win. However, I do not put it in the "impressive" category that DBR does. Illinois is not a ranked team. I think they got about 10 votes in the coaches' poll and I'm not sure they got any in the AP poll.

The main positive for me was that they played with poise and after the initial spurt from Illinois they basically kept them at bay despite repeated challenges.

Marquette will be a tougher out. But if the three point shots fall for us, it should go our way. One way or the other we will have our best indicator to date.

[Bob Green]

By the way, I dislike the black uniforms. When are we going to be the BLUE devils?

You know we played a good game when the message board complaints are reduced to discussing uniform colors. :D

[duke74]

Pardon my ignorance, but this is the first time I've heard that description for him. Isn't he a 2, and at times (like last year when pressed) the PG? It's a good description for his game, especially last night, but is that an "official" role for him in the offense? It also makes sense with Nolan on the squad this year.

[wilson]

Did anyone else hear the announcers likening Gerald Henderson to Kobe? Wow. GH indeed looked terrific last night, but that's awfully high praise.

[duke74]

Did anyone else hear the announcers likening Gerald Henderson to Kobe? Wow. GH indeed looked terrific last night, but that's awfully high praise.

And...Jay compared him to (a smaller) Grant...

[CDu]

So in short, I think +/- stats are interesting but for exactly this reason they are unclear. They don't really tell you a why but only a "that" without any way to really narrow down causes for why "that" happened.

I agree with pretty much everything you said in this post. I thought Henderson had a very nice game on both ends of the court. I think +/- stats are much more useful over a larger sample size. Then, you tend to weed out some of the potential anomalies that can occur (and there are many). But there are just so many variables and so much room for variation that can skew these numbers on a single-game sample.

It's not that +/- isn't useful. It's very useful. But in terms of diagnostics for a single game, I don't think I'd look at the +3 for Henderson and hypothesize a reason for concern. There are just too many possible explanations unrelated to the individual player that could explain the difference. Now if, over the course of the 30-game season, we see Henderson around a break-even +/-, there'd be reason for concern.

[4decadedukie]

I just finished watching on TiVo (business trip yesterday, returning to DC quite late). It's early in the season and the team is unusually freshman-oriented, but they really played well. There certainly are areas to improve, however I was impressed with many individual performances (noted in prior posts) and with team's cohesiveness and grit. I know it's foolish to look too far ahead, but after a typically K-intense "Christmas boot camp," I can see this team surprising a LOT of pundits and Duke naysayers. And if the freshman should develop well during the ACC crucible, who can say where these guys can be in March?

[CDu]

Pardon my ignorance, but this is the first time I've heard that description for him. Isn't he a 2, and at times (like last year when pressed) the PG? It's a good description for his game, especially last night, but is that an "official" role for him in the offense? It also makes sense with Nolan on the squad this year.

He's definitely a guard. With Henderson and Nelson being more prepared to guard a "big", if two of the 3 (or all 3) are in the game, Scheyer is going to be guarding the other team's guard and the others are guarding the bigger guard or smaller forward.

I think it was either a slip of analysis (miscasting Scheyer as a forward) or a means of saying he's got a point guard mentality/skill but is not the point guard. I think the term "point wing" would be more accurate.

[cajundevil74]

Jumbo - please don't hate on Henderson. He was our best player last night and to say his presence is more "bad" than good is ... absurd. Pointing out a couple situations where he could have made an extra pass (which were not obvious) overlooks the brilliance of his play. In addition, on multiple occassions, Illinois's defensive rotation was so quick that we had trouble getting good looks on the perimeter - so making the extra pass was no guarantee of an open shot. Even the game's greats could have found areas for improvement.

[Buckeye Devil]

but Illinois got too many offensive boards. They are a big team and for some reason, the Illini have a history of being strong in this area. It seems to be the opinion that Duke may have trouble with this type of a team this season. I think it showed in this game.

Singler also picked up some silly fouls and he will need to be on the floor in big games, but I did like his spunk going face to face with that punk guard in the second half.

[whereinthehellami]

Notes

Thomas and Zoubek really stepped up and played well against a decent frontline.
It was great to see Henderson take the game over at points. He is making a move at being the go to guy.
I loved seeing the response from Singler on the hard foul with Chet. The guy is fearless and a fiery yet under control comepetitor.
Nelson played great and was very dependable, strong with the ball.


Highlights

Singler dribbling betwee his legs and then immediately going into a hard spin move to the basket with authority, control, and grace.
Henderson floating effortlessly above the rim to grab the ball with two hands, they might have to make a new stat category for that, maybe call it a hendo or something.
Singler's full speed layup with a guy draped all over him. What soft hands, quick reactions, and high basketball IQ. Damns!

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Yeah, wasn't it odd that we were BOTH wearing road unis? What was up with that.

Maybe the white uni's didn't get back from the hotel laundry?

[gw67]

The Devils continue to impress me. They are an outstanding shooting team from the field, make the opposition pay when they are fouled, they value the ball and have enough passers (Paulus, Scheyer and Smith), and they play strong team defense. I expected them to be good in these areas but so far the team has exceeded my expectations with their play.

The perimeter play has been outstanding: Henderson has raised his game and appears to be the top offensive player on the team; Nelson seems to be ready to have an outstanding senior year; Paulus and Scheyer have started out well and, IMO, will continue to prove their detractors wrong; and Smith has provided energy off the bench. Jumbo suggested that Henderson needs to look for open players on his drives. I don’t believe that either he or Nelson have that ability in their skill set. They are both outstanding going to the basket and neither is a particularly good or creative passer. On this team, I don’t see that as a particular weakness.

The frontcourt has also played well but I expect them to have some difficulties as the season plays out. Singler is very talented and tougher than I expected but he will have more games like last night against teams who have size and pound the ball low. Thomas has improved offensively but he has not rebounded well. Zoubek has played better than I expected considering that he is coming back from an injury. As the season progresses, I would expect for him to get as many or more minutes than Thomas because he is a better rebounder, blocks shots and has the potential to be a decent post player on offense.

Most predicted that the Devils were a 10-15 ranked team in the country. So far, I think that is a fair assessment although the team has loads of potential and could eventually be a top ten team.

gw67

[Jumbo]

It's an interesting question but I think this shows the limitations of +/- than it shows something wrong with Henderson. I think your implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Henderson can score a lot but perhaps doesn't do so efficiently because he sometimes takes ill-advised shots. Well, I don't agree with this.

Against Illinois when Henderson was playing, he had a huge usage rate (36.3% of Duke's possessions ended with Henderson when he was playing), but he did so very efficiently because he shot well (8 for 15, including 2 for 4 from behind the arc) and got to the line a lot (4 possessions ending with free throws) and had zero turnovers (125 efficiency for the game - only Paulus' and Nelson's were higher for the game with much lower usage rates).

My guess is that the difference is defensive. Oddly enough Henderson played good defense tonight as far as I could tell, forcing 3.5 missed shots (I give half-credit to two guys contesting a shot), allowing 3 field goals made, had 1 block, 1 steal, and 3 defensive rebounds.

So in short, I think +/- stats are interesting but for exactly this reason they are unclear. They don't really tell you a why but only a "that" without any way to really narrow down causes for why "that" happened.

No, see the difference is that I'm not purely a numbers guy. I think Gerald's offensive approach and lack of passing easily could have affected the way the rest of his teammates played at both ends. I could easily be wrong, but it's worth following in future games.

[Jumbo]

And...Jay compared him to (a smaller) Grant...

No, Jay compared a play he made to a "Grant Hill type of play," then compared their athleticism. That's not "comparing Henderson to Hill" in terms of how they play.

[Jumbo]

Jumbo - please don't hate on Henderson. He was our best player last night and to say his presence is more "bad" than good is ... absurd. Pointing out a couple situations where he could have made an extra pass (which were not obvious) overlooks the brilliance of his play. In addition, on multiple occassions, Illinois's defensive rotation was so quick that we had trouble getting good looks on the perimeter - so making the extra pass was no guarantee of an open shot. Even the game's greats could have found areas for improvement.

"Hating" on Henderson? Hardly. But comparing him to Kobe Bryant, the best basketball player on the planet, is so absurd it's not worth a response. And my only gripe with Gerald was that he is not learning how to take drive to the middle and kick to the weak side, which is a staple in this offense and where guys were open for most of the night. Did it diminish from an outstanding performance? Not really. Is it something he should strive to improve? Absolutely.

[duke74]

No, Jay compared a play he made to a "Grant Hill type of play," then compared their athleticism. That's not "comparing Henderson to Hill" in terms of how they play.

Sounds like semantics to me, but whatever....I thought I heard him compare him to a smaller Grant. That's all -- I wasn't commenting on a comparison to "how they play" or on any particular play. Just that the comparison (on whatever basis) was made.

Either way, it puts him in good company.

[feldspar]

"Hating" on Henderson? Hardly. But comparing him to Kobe Bryant, the best basketball player on the planet, is so absurd it's not worth a response. And my only gripe with Gerald was that he is not learning how to take drive to the middle and kick to the weak side, which is a staple in this offense and where guys were open for most of the night. Did it diminish from an outstanding performance? Not really. Is it something he should strive to improve? Absolutely.

I disagree. There are a lot of elements of Henderson's play that can be compared to Kobe. His explosiveness, his amazing vertical, his inside-outside combo, his ability to slash to the basket at a moment's notice.

No one is saying Henderson is as good as Kobe. Merely observing that Henderson displays many of the same unique skills as Kobe, but on a much lower scale. And nobody (respectable) is going to disagree with your assertion that Henderson has a lot of things to work on. But that wasn't the point of the comment.

In other words, it's just a metaphor.

[wisteria]

I'm just glad we have such a large golf shirt budget.

hehe, just heard it from a friend in the athletic department, the basketball team and staff brought 12 different kinds of matching shirts to Maui.. We do have a large golf shirt budget. lol

[tbyers11]

Yeah, wasn't it odd that we were BOTH wearing road unis? What was up with that.

Orange is the Illinois de facto home uniform color. They don't wear white at home much. I remember a game against Wisconsin a few years ago were the Big 10 made Illinois wear white at home because the previous year the officials had a difficult team keeping the Wisconsin red and the Illinois orange straight.

[Troublemaker]

Jumbo suggested that Henderson needs to look for open players on his drives. I don’t believe that either he or Nelson have that ability in their skill set. They are both outstanding going to the basket and neither is a particularly good or creative passer. On this team, I don’t see that as a particular weakness.

I think Nelson is getting there. I feel like he's been a pretty good drive-and-kick guy this season, which is key for this team. He's never going to bat 1.000 with penetration decisions but I feel like his batting average there is much higher this season than in previous.

[elvis14]

I think Nelson is getting there. I feel like he's been a pretty good drive-and-kick guy this season, which is key for this team. He's never going to bat 1.000 with penetration decisions but I feel like his batting average there is much higher this season than in previous.

In watching Nelson what I see is that he makes up his mind before he makes his move. In other words, when he drives and kicks is when the kick out is already there and he can see it and he makes a move specifically with the intention of kicking it out. That's different than having real good court vision where you beat your guy in the lane and then "do the right thing". There are lots of good things at Nelson does on the court but I still don't see court vision and consistently kicking out to the right guy as one of his strengths. Here's to hoping he proves me wrong.

[CDu]

"Hating" on Henderson? Hardly. But comparing him to Kobe Bryant, the best basketball player on the planet, is so absurd it's not worth a response. And my only gripe with Gerald was that he is not learning how to take drive to the middle and kick to the weak side, which is a staple in this offense and where guys were open for most of the night. Did it diminish from an outstanding performance? Not really. Is it something he should strive to improve? Absolutely.

I think you're getting carried away with regard to the Kobe/Hill "comparisons." The announcers didn't actually compare Henderson to Hill or Kobe. They just said he did things in the game that reminded them of things Kobe does, and his "smoothness" and athleticism reminded them of Hill. That's a big difference, and I think what they said was completely reasonable.

Nobody said Henderson is the next Grant Hill or the next Kobe Bryant. That would certainly be silly. Instead, they just said he showed flashes of things that remind them of Hill and Bryant. And I'd say that they're completely accurate. He had a turn fadeaway that was very Kobe-esque. His smooth, gliding style and explosive leaping ability does bring back memories of a young (shorter) Grant Hill. The difference of course is that he OCCASIONALLY shows signs of this, whereas those guys repeatedly did it.

Is it overly meaningful statement to say he does things that remind you of Hill or Bryant? No. Henderson has a long way to go to develop as a player, sure. But he's really athletic, and can do things that some great athletic players did. And because of that, it is completely reasonable to be reminded of those guys whenever he does something like that.

[Wander]

Surprised no one's mentioned my favorite play of the game.

Randle picked up his second foul in the first half and Weber decided to keep him in. Henderson then immediately called for the ball, drove on Randle, and picked up the third foul. Very, very, very smart play. Kind of thing that doesn't necessarily appear in those +/- numbers.

[Saratoga2]

Despite the rebounding disadvantage, and we will have to live with that this year, our defensive pressure caused them to shoot poorly while our offense was very efficient.

Great game for Demarcus. He played terrific defense, rebounded well and most of all he chose high percentage shots and converted them. He also has improved at the free throw line. He was careful with his ball handling and just showed a will to win and the senior leadership this team needs,

Henderson also played really well defensively and he is looking like the go to guy we didn't have last year. He can go to the basket with the best and his elevation on the fade away mid range jumper makes it virtually unstoppable. He also hit from outside. Teams are going to have to key on him with their best defender.

Scheyer also played a great game. He should be given more credit for his defense which is suffocating and he is disruptive of passing as well. He took at least two charges that I saw as well. He is figuring out his offense but I didn't see the reluctance to shoot that seemed to creep into his game late last year.

Paulus ran the team efficiently and his turnovers weren't a problem for the team. He did make one really ill advised pass, but in general he played a strong floor game. He contributed 10 points and didn't force shots.

I also liked Singler's game. He was up against really good big men and defenders but stuck in there. I thought Illinois keyed on him so he had a couple of guys to beat. Despite that, given the slightest opening, this kid can finish.

Thomas also shows that he worked this summer as his footwork and moves around the basket are much better. Both he and Singler need to be very careful about fouling, since we are not deep inside.

Smith is a good defender and can score. He does need to gain some experience in running the team as he did appear to have trouble running the team. Game experience at this level will improve his game and he has what it takes to be a good one.

Zoubek can and will make a difference for us inside. I thought he was weak with the ball duriing the first half. He had trouble catching the ball and frequently tried to tip the ball outside rather than rebound it. He may have gotten some encouragement from the coaches at half time because he was rebounding a better in the second half and keeping the ball high when he did. He also showed that he has moves around the basket which will only get better. I am one of those people that believes in game experience against a good opponent is critical to gaining confidence and making improvements.

Coach K didn't play three guys and I am sure there were solid reasons. King in particular has the big body needed to contest inside and we were getting dangerously close to losing most of our front line. King needs to show more and he will get PT.

[elvis14]

A few observations:

I really enjoyed watching this game. Especially the fist half. Duke didn't come out in a funk or flat, Ill. was playing well at the start of the game. The cool part was how we handled that. We just got better, played hard, used our talent, kept at it. Unlike watching blow outs, this was a good competitive game and I really enjoyed it. I thought our team D was great tonight and I'm impressed with how K used the zone tonight. I think using a little zone to complement our standard man-to-man adds greatly to what we can accomplish on defense. Plus it's a much better fit for Zoubek and Paulus.
It bothered me that we didn't finish the half strong, a Duke trademark.
Gerald was just great tonight. His Kobe move was spectacular and his Grant block was amazing. His first step is so smooth, quick and long! I think his pull up mid-range jumper is a very very important asset to our 1/2 court offense. At one point in the first half Randle picked up his second foul and the TV bozos were talking about him being left in the game. Then they showed him guarding G. I said to myself, he's about to get that 3rd foul....sure enough G beats him off the dribble and Randle's first half ended....classic.
Singler does a really nice job of sealing off his defender when he's getting an entry pass and this leads to what look like easy layups. They are easy because he's sealing off his defender so well (which isn't always easy, he's just good at it).
Lance is starting to show what I have thought he was capable of showing. He is much quicker than most bigs and he can score because of it.
Zoubek was good tonight. Someone else mentioned already that he did a good job of not leaving his feet as often. Big-Z, you're 7'1", keep your feet down and hands up and you'll give shooters trouble all night long!
Nolan Smith looked much better tonight than in the previous 3 games. That was a really good thing because we are going to need his defense.
Paulus, love the kids grit but he is a liability way too often on the defensive end. Also, I'm worried every time he starts dribbling the ball on offense, especially if he has a defender on him because he
can't lose anyone.
Scheyer had a good game I agree with others about his toughness and nose for the ball. He did make a few "interesting" decisions on offense tonight but that's OK. He just contributes in so many ways.
Wasn't surprised that we didn't see David or Marty. I was disappointed that we didn't see Marty. He had a poor showing against Princeton but I don't want to get into what we had last year where every time he did something not-perfect he was looking over his shoulder at the bench expecting to get pulled. I wish he would have been given a few minutes as a vote of confidence.
Enough about individuals, however. What was so great about this game is how is showed our depth and overall talent. I loved the way sooner or later everyone did something good. You don't know which Duke player is going to beat you next. Sweet!

[Troublemaker]

In watching Nelson what I see is that he makes up his mind before he makes his move. In other words, when he drives and kicks is when the kick out is already there and he can see it and he makes a move specifically with the intention of kicking it out. That's different than having real good court vision where you beat your guy in the lane and then "do the right thing". There are lots of good things at Nelson does on the court but I still don't see court vision and consistently kicking out to the right guy as one of his strengths. Here's to hoping he proves me wrong.

Oh, I agree with you. His court vision is one my (and everyone's, really) biggest complaint about Markie. I'm just saying through 7 games this season, he appears improved.

[ugadevil]

Singler also picked up some silly fouls and he will need to be on the floor in big games, but I did like his spunk going face to face with that punk guard in the second half.

I thought that was a really bizarre sequence of events. It was a hard foul and Singler and the other guy definitely were glaring at each other but it didn't look like anything was going to happen other than looking at each other. Then, I seem to remember the ref running in and blowing things up and pushing Singler, pretty aggressively to get him away from the Illinois guard. I found it amusing that the referee looked like he wanted to fight more than anyone else.

[Billy Dat]

-HELLO GERALD HENDERSON. Seriously folks, if this kid gets the confidence to go with his talent, we will finally have the top flight superstar that this team needs to aspire to greatness.

-Demarcus played the type of game he needs to play. If we get Demarcus and Gerald keeping the defense honest with the slash and finish/kick for the 3 game, we are going to be very tough. Illinois is a solid defensive squad and they were driving on them at will.

-If you don't love Scheyer's game, then you don't love basketball

-Singler is HUGE for this team. I love the fact that he was making Randle work on defense. Did you see that little through the leg dribble spin move that he threw out there? He didn't get the hoop, but the kid has game.

-Paulus played a really steady game, and I like that we can bring Smith in to give a different look

-I love that we are throwing the zone out there, it totally changed the pace in the first half. That will really keep teams on their heels as very few teams throw those kind of different looks out there.

-We must accept that our frontline is going to be small and that we will be punished on the offensive boards. Once we get McClure back, and King better understands what we need from him on D, it's going to be a matter of rotating Zoubek, Thomas, Singler, McClure and King out against the other teams' frontlines and hoping for the best. Against good frontlines, like Carolina, I fully expect 2 of our guys to foul out.

Big test tonight - James and McNeal are as good a backcourt as we will see all year. This is a great early season test.

Random notes:
-The "Duke gets all the calls" cries were getting loud last night and Webber was fueling the fire
-I don't get Webber's rotation, we were up 10-11 with 5 minutes left and he had 4 freshmen on the floor, including MJ's son Jeffrey who was getting his first minutes. A little strange, no? The game was far from over at that point.
-Love that both Tark and MJ were at the game...ghosts of Duke past....once a gym rat always a gym rat.
-In the first half, when Illinois went up 6 and looked like they were going to create some separation, Markie hits a big momentum stopper bucket. We need him to have the stones to take and make those kind of shots - he showed flashes last year.
-How about Scheyer's look away pass that led to Gerald's devastating slam...reminded me of his feed to McClure that won the Clemson game.
-Rafferty talked about it - I love how Singler goes baseline.
-Lance has some nice drop step moves in his repetoire...we need to feed the post a little more.

[Dukerati]

There are already too many notes about the game itself for me to add anything constructive on that front but did anyone else have their heart in their throats after Gerald had that monster dunk on the break? He landed kinda awkwardly on one foot and then quickly pirouetted. I thought his spin was one of pain (as in torn ACL) and my cheering was about three seconds delayed out of worry for G. I hope he has some smoother two footed landings in the future...

[wisteria]

There are already too many notes about the game itself for me to add anything constructive on that front but did anyone else have their heart in their throats after Gerald had that monster dunk on the break? He landed kinda awkwardly on one foot and then quickly pirouetted. I thought his spin was one of pain (as in torn ACL) and my cheering was about three seconds delayed out of worry for G. I hope he has some smoother two footed landings in the future...

er... All I was able to think at that moment was, "Man, that is Beautiful!"

[Jeffrey]

Hi,

IMO, the star of the game was Coach K. I think he completely out-coached Weber by making in-game adjustments that left the Illini looking weaker and weaker as the 1st half progressed.

I have yet to hear Coach K get the credit, that IMO, he deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[dukeisawesome]

Gerald got compared to A) Kobe and B) Grant during this game. Pretty tough company, tho I have to admit, I DID see a lot of Kobe in his game.

I was actually thinking GH was looking Kobe-esque before they said it. He's very smooth out there and has tons of potential. I would bet he has studied Kobe's game tapes. Obviously he's got a long way to go to reach that level though.

[TheGlobe]

Given the higher level of competition against Illinois, yesterday's was the first game that I took a very close look at the kind of zone we were playing, particularly because they looked totally unable to get any kind of offensive flow going when we were in that defensive set.

Why was the zone so effective yesterday? It may have just been coincidence, but the lineup they had on the floor was much younger when we switched to the 2-3, and that more inexperienced team just couldn't get their sets started. Illinois is a big, veteran team, and it's exactly this kind of team from which we can "steal" a few possessions by going zone against their smaller, younger reserves. It gives our starters some time to rest, can protect them from foul trouble, and gives the coaching staff a new look to play with.

Do I think we should go all Syracuse-style with our defense? No. But as a changeup from the typical Duke ball pressure, and used situationally, it worked beautifully last night.

[dw0827]

Hi,

I have yet to hear Coach K get the credit, that IMO, he deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Just out of curiosity, how has Coach K "substantially reinvented" himself?

[willywoody]

Hi,

IMO, the star of the game was Coach K. I think he completely out-coached Weber by making in-game adjustments that left the Illini looking weaker and weaker as the 1st half progressed.

I have yet to hear Coach K get the credit, that IMO, he deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

agreed. bye bye motion offense. 4 games and i've yet to see the dreaded weave. and hello active zone defense, who'd a thunk it.

[trinity92]

Like it or not, we're going to have to play a lot of zone this year to avoid getting killed on the boards. I think the zone is simply a necessity to mask our shortcomings inside, as Illinois was getting just about every offensive rebound when we weren't in the zone. This isn't a slam on Z, and I'll echo others' appreciation for his solid work last night, but a big, experienced team will just eat us up on the offensive boards unless we zone. I don't really mind it, but it's going to slow the game and bring the number of possessions down, which seems to go against our professed goal of pushing tempo and trying to score a bunch of points.

Along those lines, I haven't heard anyone mention that we didn't pick up full court at all and didn't look to trap much last night. Announcers talked a lot about Illinois going 15 deep, so maybe they weren't the right target for that up-tempo style, but looking at all their strength inside, I would have imagined we'd try to push the tempo and press a lot, if nothing else than to avoid the half-court game and their dominance on the boards.

We must be doing something very right, because in a physical and competitive game against the type of opponent we seem ill-suited to play, I found us up 10, then 15 points without really noticing it. It didn't seem like we were disrupting their game or blowing them out, but the scoreboard told a different story. I liked that.

[Jeffrey]

Just out of curiosity, how has Coach K "substantially reinvented" himself?

Hi,

Still playing the semantics game? I added the word "substantially" just so you wouldn't! Didn't you state it was not worth debating? So, why do you continue?

http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=59683&postcount=5

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[chrishoke]

"Singler does a really nice job of sealing off his defender when he's getting an entry pass and this leads to what look like easy layups. They are easy because he's sealing off his defender so well (which isn't always easy, he's just good at it)."


That's the thing I noticed most about Laetner his freshman year. They bothy make it look so easy and simple.

[bird]

In earlier games an announcer (I forget who) made the point that what we need (as opposed to desire) out of Zoubek is not starter's minutes and statistics, but rather just 10-15 solid minutes a game. K is basketball genius, and he can cover up glaring holes with smoke and mirrors to a large degree, but having a genuine big man available for at least part of the game seems to reduce the pressure on everyone else to a tremendous degree.

Last night Zoubek had 18 solid minutes.

We had indications as to what we have on our hands as to the other players in prior games, and it is generally quite good news, but I think we are starting to get an answer on what Zoubek brings to the table. And it is sufficient to our needs. And that may be the best news of all coming out of last night.

[MChambers]

Like it or not, we're going to have to play a lot of zone this year to avoid getting killed on the boards. I think the zone is simply a necessity to mask our shortcomings inside, as Illinois was getting just about every offensive rebound when we weren't in the zone. This isn't a slam on Z, and I'll echo others' appreciation for his solid work last night, but a big, experienced team will just eat us up on the offensive boards unless we zone.

Most folks think that playing a zone makes it harder to rebound, because the defensive players are not assigned to specific players to box out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_defense#Disadvantages_of_playing_a_zone_defen se

Given how small we are, I think we would do better from a rebounding point of view in the man to man.

[cajundevil74]

I think Zoubek had his most productive night in a Duke uniform. His first half catch in the lane, and score from 6-7 ft was gorgeous and uncharacteristically fluid. His strength is still subpar, but his effort and potential are there. He reminds me of a young Aaron Gray from Pitt.

[shadowfax336]

with the Aaron Gray comparison for Zoubek...
I've been making it since I first saw him last year.
Gray came into Pitt overweight, and Zoubek came in underweight, but otherwise they're extremely similar. Both have very nice natural post moves, struggled with traveling and stupid fouls as a freshman, and looked very awkward at points/didn't protect rebounds.
Gray took until his junior year to "get it" but when he did he simply exploded. He went from this big awkward kid who made Pitt fans wince when he was out there, to a nt inside guy who rebounded, scored, and made the other team build a defensive gameplan around him.
We'll see if Zoubek is willing to work as hard as Gray did, and if he is able to "get it" in the same way, but he is very very capable of being that type of player.

[CDu]

with the Aaron Gray comparison for Zoubek...
I've been making it since I first saw him last year.
Gray came into Pitt overweight, and Zoubek came in underweight, but otherwise they're extremely similar. Both have very nice natural post moves, struggled with traveling and stupid fouls as a freshman, and looked very awkward at points/didn't protect rebounds.
Gray took until his junior year to "get it" but when he did he simply exploded. He went from this big awkward kid who made Pitt fans wince when he was out there, to a nt inside guy who rebounded, scored, and made the other team build a defensive gameplan around him.
We'll see if Zoubek is willing to work as hard as Gray did, and if he is able to "get it" in the same way, but he is very very capable of being that type of player.

One unfortunate difference is that Zoubek has been limited by injury. Hopefully he is able to get it next year, but his offseason foot injury set him back in a way that may have cost him a full year of development (if you consider that much of a player's individual development occurs in the offseason).

Other than that, I think the Gray comparison is a pertinent one.

[juise]

I've read most of this thread (admittedly, I skimmed some of the longer posts) and I haven't seen any mention of Scheyer's pass on Gerald's breakaway dunk. I was very impressed by the pass because (1) the angle was tricky and (2) we looked away first. Some might view the look-away as showboating, but I think he probably distracted the defended for just a fraction of a second and got Gerald the space he needed to make the play. As many others have said, Scheyer does the little things very well.



Most folks think that playing a zone makes it harder to rebound, because the defensive players are not assigned to specific players to box out.

I thought that I remembered that conventional wisdom from my high school basketball playing days. I think that it is generally more difficult to keep your opponents off the boards in a zone.

[Classof06]

I'm with Trinity92, we're going to have to go zone on some of bigger teams; there's just no way around it. I was very satisfied with our performance last night. Demarcus and Gerald were senstational, and once we get Singler acclimated to where he can consistently produce, this team is going to get even tougher. Paulus was a steadying force once again and is playing great. As far as the sophomores go, I think each has taken their game to another level and you can truly see the difference. I think Lance can still do even more than he's doing now and I look forward to seeing him be more aggressive as the year goes on.

It's funny because you hear all these preseason interviews about how all the players really took last year's failures to heart and a lot of people thought it was just lip service. This is a game I think Duke would have lost last year. Simply put, this team is playing with a chip on its shoulder every night and it is truly a joy to watch. When things got a little chippy with Illinois last night, there was no backing down whatsoever and I can't say it would've been the same last year. The way Demarcus slashed through the lane and flushed it with two in the first half or the way Gerald went right at that kid, took the contact and slammed it home were things we never would have seen last year; just coming with a nasty vengeance. I know they'll drop some games throughout the course of the season, but I already love watching this team play. After a one year hiatus, Duke is really starting to get that swagger back.

[dw0827]

Hi,

Still playing the semantics game? I added the word "substantially" just so you wouldn't! Didn't you state it was not worth debating? So, why do you continue?

http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=59683&postcount=5

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Because I'm curious about what you think Coach K has done differently lately that is a radical (substantial?) departure from what he's done over the past 20 25 years as a coach.

[SMO]

with the Aaron Gray comparison for Zoubek...
I've been making it since I first saw him last year.
Gray came into Pitt overweight, and Zoubek came in underweight, but otherwise they're extremely similar. Both have very nice natural post moves, struggled with traveling and stupid fouls as a freshman, and looked very awkward at points/didn't protect rebounds.
Gray took until his junior year to "get it" but when he did he simply exploded. He went from this big awkward kid who made Pitt fans wince when he was out there, to a nt inside guy who rebounded, scored, and made the other team build a defensive gameplan around him.
We'll see if Zoubek is willing to work as hard as Gray did, and if he is able to "get it" in the same way, but he is very very capable of being that type of player.

Chris Collins said the same thing and I've been thinking it since last season. By the time he's a senior most teams will have to gameplan to deal with him. He will be a force.

[Jeffrey]

Because I'm curious about what you think Coach K has done differently lately that is a radical (substantial?) departure from what he's done over the past 20 25 years as a coach.

Hi,

If you're going to insist on playing the semantics game, then you may want to learn that the words "radical" and "substantial" are not interchangeable.

I did not write "radical":

radical (adj)

Synonyms: fundamental, basic, essential, deep-seated, profound, deep-rooted

I wrote "substantial":

substantial (adj)

Synonyms: considerable, large, extensive, significant, important, generous, ample, sizable, plentiful, big, abundant

I'm not going to continue to play the semantics game with you. With all due respect, I have better things to do.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Troublemaker]

The mixing in of zone is a substantial change because previously, he was a hardcore m2m guy, but other than that, everything else is pretty much the same.

[dw0827]

The mixing in of zone is a substantial change because previously, he was a hardcore m2m guy, but other than that, everything else is pretty much the same.

We've played zone before albeit not much. It remains an open question as to how much we will use it this year. If we use it alot, then, yea, I'd agree that it represents a (blank) departure from his past practice. (Fill in the blank with your own adjective). But if we use it as a change of pace once in a while, then its nothing new. We've played zone before.

[dw0827]

Hi,

If you're going to insist on playing the semantics game, then you may want to learn that the words "radical" and "substantial" are not interchangeable.

I did not write "radical":

radical (adj)

Synonyms: fundamental, basic, essential, deep-seated, profound, deep-rooted

I wrote "substantial":

substantial (adj)

Synonyms: considerable, large, extensive, significant, important, generous, ample, sizable, plentiful, big, abundant

I'm not going to continue to play the semantics game with you. With all due respect, I have better things to do.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

That made me dizzy.

You wrote: "He deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created."

I don't think its semantics to ask you what you are referring to when you refer to extreme changes. Personally, I don't see any extreme changes and I wonder what you are talking about. I wonder if I've missed something.

So what considerable, large, extensive, significant, important, generous, ample, sizable, plentiful, big, abundant, substantial or extreme changes has Coach K made?

[MChambers]

Hi,

If you're going to insist on playing the semantics game, then you may want to learn that the words "radical" and "substantial" are not interchangeable.

I did not write "radical":

radical (adj)

Synonyms: fundamental, basic, essential, deep-seated, profound, deep-rooted

I wrote "substantial":

substantial (adj)

Synonyms: considerable, large, extensive, significant, important, generous, ample, sizable, plentiful, big, abundant

I'm not going to continue to play the semantics game with you. With all due respect, I have better things to do.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Didn't Nixon say he wasn't going to play semantics?

Anyway, it seems to me that playing a fair amount of zone is a significant or even extreme change. Going to the Suns' offense is also pretty big:

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7465136

[Jeffrey]

You wrote: "He deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created."

I don't think its semantics to ask you what you are referring to when you refer to extreme changes. Personally, I don't see any extreme changes and I wonder what you are talking about. I wonder if I've missed something.

So what considerable, large, extensive, significant, important, generous, ample, sizable, plentiful, big, abundant, substantial or extreme changes has Coach K made?

Hi,

I actually wrote, "I have yet to hear Coach K get the credit, that IMO, he deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created."

IMO, implementing the Sun's offense structure of spreading the court, pick-n-rolls, and establishing/exploiting one-on-one opportunities is a substantial change from the motion offense that Coach K has been known for. Where's the weave? Where are the wings heading on the break?

IMO, adding an occasional Boeheim-like active zone D is a substantial revision from +99% man-to-man. What has been Coach K's trademark D for years? Are you certain you will see that everytime down the court this year? The Illini seemed like deers in headlights the first 3 or so times they saw it last night.

The realization that many players are NBA bound early and the recognition of the need to use all scholarships is a substantial change from the 80's & 90's.

The list goes on. I'm surprised you do not recognize and/or accept the magnitude of these modifications. IMO, the willingness to recognize the need and make these changes is highly commendable!

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Jeffrey]

Didn't Nixon say he wasn't going to play semantics?

Hi,

:D Nixon would have known the difference between radical and substantial!

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[dw0827]

Didn't Nixon say he wasn't going to play semantics?

Anyway, it seems to me that playing a fair amount of zone is a significant or even extreme change. Going to the Suns' offense is also pretty big:

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7465136

Good. Something to talk about. I completely agree with you that playing a fair amount of zone would represent a significant change. So far we haven't played a fair amount of zone, IMO. We've thrown it at teams as a change of pace. My recollection is that we played it for about 4 to 6 possessions last night in the first half. Illinois didn't catch on right away and didn't attack it well. They finally hit a 3, and wham, no more zone.

We played it sparingly in the second half when some of the guys had multiple fouls.

Coach K's teams have played zone before, and for the same reasons. But very very sparingly, I admit. If he incorporates zone into his defensive schemes and plays it a fair amount, then, yes, I'll be very surprised. (What's a "fair" amount, you ask? It's like pornography . . . you'll know it when you see it.)

Phoenix offense. I don't want to get over my head here because I'm no expert on the Phoenix offense. But having watched Coach K's teams since the beginning, I can tell you that we've played alot of schemes . . . and he's always been willing to try new things to try to figure out what works best for the team. So now the Phoenix scheme. Well, if Coach K had always been a slow-it-down tempo kinda guy, I'd say "Wow. What a change." But for a lot of years, we've played very uptempo and have been a relatively high scoring team for much of his tenure. So I see incorporating elements of the Phoenix system as a very logical adaptation to his basic offensive principles.

This is what bothers me when people say that Coach K has "reinvented" himself: To say that he has "reinvented" himself, it suggests to me that he's been static in the way he perceives and coaches the game. Well, he hasn't been. He's always been willing to try new things and, in that sense, he's probably reinvented himself practically every day of his adult life. Its an outlook . . . wanting to try new things . . . not being afraid to change . . . not being afraid to fail . . . always trying to find new ways to succeed.

So now he incorporates elements of the uptempo Phoenix system into the uptempo scheme he prefers and has played for years. I say, no big deal, I expect him to adapt and change within his philosophical comfort level. That's not reinventing . . . that just another day at the office for a great coach.

Now if he changed his core beliefs, his basic philosophical approach to b'ball, then I'd agree that he's reinvented himself. But he hasn't done that.

I'm willing to bet that Coach K would tell you that the day he goes to the gym not wanting to change anything or to learn something new . . . is the day he decides to retire.

[Karl Beem]

Hi,

I actually wrote, "I have yet to hear Coach K get the credit, that IMO, he deserves for making the rather extreme changes that he has. IMO, there are few people who would substantially reinvent themselves at age 60 after having the extreme success that Coach K has experienced/created."

IMO, implementing the Sun's offense structure of spreading the court, pick-n-rolls, and establishing/exploiting one-on-one opportunities is a substantial change from the motion offense that Coach K has been known for. Where's the weave? Where are the wings heading on the break?
...
Best regards,
Jeffrey

Throughout his career Coach K has changed as circumstances changed. I would guess that people are objecting to your use of the phrase "substantially reinvent themselves". I certainly do. I also find your jerk attitude very annoying.

[MChambers]

Throughout his career Coach K has changed as circumstances changed. I would guess that people are objecting to your use of the phrase "substantially reinvent themselves". I certainly do. I also find your jerk attitude very annoying.

I agree that people are objecting to that phrase, but I don't find Jeffrey's attitude to be that of a jerk.

Gosh, I thought he was complimenting Coach K on significant changes to his strategy. I too have been heartened by these changes. We can quibble over the semantics of how to describe the changes, but don't we have better things to do?

[JBDuke]

Time to close this thread and move on before the discussion degenerates further.