PDA

View Full Version : Why doesn't Scheyer start?



bird
12-05-2007, 04:35 PM
In team stats, he's No. 2 in minutes played (but only No. 6 in turnovers), No. 4 in scoring, No. 4 in rebounds, No. 3 in assists, No. 1 in three point shooting percentage, No. 1 in free throw shooting percentage, and tied at No. 3 in steals.

He reminds me of Quinn's ability to get weak side rebounds on the defensive end.

Some of his smart plays this year (like the tap out, which IMO was deliberate) have been Shane-esque.

More often than not he is playing at the end of games and other critical situations.

I guess the problem is that if he starts, who doesn't? DeMarcus? We need his leadership out there, and not starting would be symbolically bad. Lance? He's improving and productive, and hurting his self confidence would be bad. And what does it mean to start in the K system?

He's got to be the best sixth man in the ACC right now. He's doing something RIGHT NOW that makes Duke Basketball Duke Basketball, with a capital B.

EarlJam
12-05-2007, 04:40 PM
Seems like a good, fair question.

Probably just a matter of strategy. K likely doesn't consider Jon to be a bench guy. Just a guy who comes in to join the team effort at a different time in the game.

Traditional thinking: All bench players are lesser than those that start.

Strategic thinking: Keep a couple of ringers on the bench to balance out the full game effort.

My two cents in one minute or less.

-EarlJam

kmspeaks
12-05-2007, 04:51 PM
he's No. 2 in minutes played

Not tryin to be a smart*** here but if he's #2 in minutes played then does it really matter if he starts or not

EarlJam
12-05-2007, 04:53 PM
Not tryin to be a smart*** here but if he's #2 in minutes played then does it really matter if he starts or not

That was sort of my point. I don't think K sees him as a bench player.

-EJ

juise
12-05-2007, 05:00 PM
I agree with EJ (and other posters) that who starts is really not that important... we seem to be a bit preoccupied with it here.

Bluedog
12-05-2007, 05:02 PM
Not tryin to be a smart*** here but if he's #2 in minutes played then does it really matter if he starts or not

Somebody could argue that starting allows your best players to play more minutes at 100% since they are should be well rested at tipoff. For example, 30 minutes of playing time is spread out over 40 minutes of gametime if its a starter, whereas 30 minutes of playing time may be spread out over 35 minutes of gametime if it's somebody coming off the bench with 15 on the clock in the first half. So, it'd be more advantageous to have that player to start b/c the rest will come in between playing rather than at the beginning of the game when the player should be well rested anyways. I think this is a pretty poor argument (especially if a player hasn't shown any fatigue in games), and I myself don't think it really matters if Scheyer starts or not. I'm just saying that's the rationale some may have.

weezie
12-05-2007, 05:09 PM
Not trying to start an argument or get flamed...I adore Jon but wonder if I'm seeing a slight hesitation in his shot outside the three line? He's had a hitch as he steps away from the defender. Probably looking for the better angle that another teammate might have but he's not quite as automatic as he was last year.
Or, yes, I could be absolutely wrong.

camion
12-05-2007, 05:12 PM
Check who finishes the games. Jon is right there in most cases.

weezie
12-05-2007, 05:17 PM
Indeed, you are correct, sir.

EarlJam
12-05-2007, 05:21 PM
Not trying to start an argument or get flamed...I adore Jon but wonder if I'm seeing a slight hesitation in his shot outside the three line? He's had a hitch as he steps away from the defender. Probably looking for the better angle that another teammate might have but he's not quite as automatic as he was last year.
Or, yes, I could be absolutely wrong.

I can see that. There's been a few times this year where he's looked hesitant all around. Kind of lost. But that was mostly in the first four games. He's looked more confident over the past few.

Even when I thought he looked a bit passive, his stats were still up. He has the ability to baffle (i.e., "Jon didn't play so well today. What? He scored 21? Ten rebounds? Oh.")

-EarlJam

MulletMan
12-05-2007, 05:23 PM
Somebody could argue that starting allows your best players to play more minutes at 100% since they are should be well rested at tipoff. For example, 30 minutes of playing time is spread out over 40 minutes of gametime if its a starter, whereas 30 minutes of playing time may be spread out over 35 minutes of gametime if it's somebody coming off the bench with 15 on the clock in the first half. So, it'd be more advantageous to have that player to start b/c the rest will come in between playing rather than at the beginning of the game when the player should be well rested anyways. I think this is a pretty poor argument (especially if a player hasn't shown any fatigue in games), and I myself don't think it really matters if Scheyer starts or not. I'm just saying that's the rationale some may have.


Counter arguement:

Keeping a guy on the bench condenses his playing time, thus keeping him more "in da flow". For example... if a starter plays 30 minutes of a 40 minute game from opening tip to the end of the game, then there are 10 minutes of gametime where he is sitting after having already been in the game. If a player comes off the bench with only 34 minutes of game time left and plays 30 minutes, then he's only sitting for 4 minutes after he gets his motor running at game speed... thus being more "in da flow".

Oooooohhh.... I just blew your mind! :eek:

(Sorry, I am finished with work, but not leaving for a while) :D

Richard Berg
12-05-2007, 05:23 PM
Same reason Manu Ginobili doesn't start.

SilkyJ
12-05-2007, 05:42 PM
Even when I thought he looked a bit passive, his stats were still up. He has the ability to baffle (i.e., "Jon didn't play so well today. What? He scored 21? Ten rebounds? Oh.")

-EarlJam

that is the definition of jon scheyer. last year and this past summer I always used to look at his stats and go "he averaged double digit scoring last year?!?!" he's just a gamer, or whatever stupid colloquialism you want to use, and he quietly fills the stat sheet. he's definitely a glue guy for us, but he scores more than a typical glue guy.

why doesn't he start. eh, i mean, gerald at his best and jon at his best, I have to take gerald. but yea, its not that important, especially with all the subbing we are doing. Grant didn't start as a freshman or soph really, and he was arguably the best player on the team!

OZZIE4DUKE
12-05-2007, 05:48 PM
Not trying to start an argument or get flamed...I adore Jon but wonder if I'm seeing a slight hesitation in his shot outside the three line? He's had a hitch as he steps away from the defender. Probably looking for the better angle that another teammate might have but he's not quite as automatic as he was last year.
Or, yes, I could be absolutely wrong.

K has yelled at Jon many times this year to "shoot the ball!" He was less hesitant the last couple of games, but Taylor King could get off three shots before Jon gets off his first one.

I think one reason Lance starts instead of going "small" with Jon starting in his place is
1) Lance seems to start games well but then disappears - might as well get what we can out of him while he develops
2) Jon has embraced his 6th man status and is having a phenomenal year so far. And as you noted, he's second in minutes played which is really what counts.

dukestheheat
12-05-2007, 05:52 PM
simply this, i think: the boy is so much more powerful coming off of the pine for duke this year!

GO DUKE!

dth.

Scoring Point
12-05-2007, 05:57 PM
that is the definition of jon scheyer. last year and this past summer I always used to look at his stats and go "he averaged double digit scoring last year?!?!" he's just a gamer, or whatever stupid colloquialism you want to use, and he quietly fills the stat sheet. he's definitely a glue guy for us, but he scores more than a typical glue guy.

why doesn't he start. eh, i mean, gerald at his best and jon at his best, I have to take gerald. but yea, its not that important, especially with all the subbing we are doing. Grant didn't start as a freshman or soph really, and he was arguably the best player on the team!

For the record, Grant started 31 of 36 games as a freshman and 24 of 33 as a soph, when he actually averaged more minutes (30.3 vs. 24.6). But the point about it not mattering is right - Jon is #2 on the team in mpg, is usually on the floor at the end of games, and together with Henderson and Nelson is part of the top wing rotation in the ACC.

dukelifer
12-05-2007, 06:06 PM
Duke is a better team with him coming off the bench. He comes in against tired or second string players, he brings instant offense and can do all the little things. The fact that he is fine with this and responding by playing great - suggests that Jon is more about winning than getting stats. Scheyer and King are the difference for Duke this year. There is little drop off with those guys in the game for the starters. When McClure comes back- Duke will be even stronger. I also expect that Smith with continue to get better. Unfortunatley Marty is out- so hopefully everyone else stays healthy.

mgtr
12-05-2007, 06:30 PM
I have a sickening sense that some are pushing Jon to be the new Marty.
The critical point has been made -- it is more important who finishes than who starts.
I also like the thought that LT does better early, so why not use him?

SilkyJ
12-05-2007, 06:38 PM
For the record, Grant started 31 of 36 games as a freshman and 24 of 33 as a soph, when he actually averaged more minutes (30.3 vs. 24.6). But the point about it not mattering is right - Jon is #2 on the team in mpg, is usually on the floor at the end of games, and together with Henderson and Nelson is part of the top wing rotation in the ACC.

my bad. shoulda check my #'s. I guess I saw that footage of the UNC vs duke ACC championship game that someone posted from 92 I think it was and grant didn't start that game and so I extrapolated from there...


I have a sickening sense that some are pushing Jon to be the new Marty.


I don't know what you mean by that but you are scaring me. please clarify.

speedevil
12-05-2007, 06:48 PM
In team stats, he's No. 2 in minutes played (but only No. 6 in turnovers), No. 4 in scoring, No. 4 in rebounds, No. 3 in assists, No. 1 in three point shooting percentage, No. 1 in free throw shooting percentage, and tied at No. 3 in steals.

He reminds me of Quinn's ability to get weak side rebounds on the defensive end.

Some of his smart plays this year (like the tap out, which IMO was deliberate) have been Shane-esque.

More often than not he is playing at the end of games and other critical situations.

I guess the problem is that if he starts, who doesn't? DeMarcus? We need his leadership out there, and not starting would be symbolically bad. Lance? He's improving and productive, and hurting his self confidence would be bad. And what does it mean to start in the K system?

He's got to be the best sixth man in the ACC right now. He's doing something RIGHT NOW that makes Duke Basketball Duke Basketball, with a capital B.


nelson and henderson

allenmurray
12-05-2007, 06:50 PM
Taylor King could get off three shots before Jon gets off his first one.


King's release is so quick that at times I think he shoots the ball before he actually catches it - sort of a time-bending trick.

SilkyJ
12-05-2007, 07:00 PM
King's release is so quick that at times I think he shoots the ball before he actually catches it - sort of a time-bending trick.

its no trick my friend. just something only Kings are capable of.

Also question: what is the "tap-out" the original poster is referring to by scheyer. he also said he "thought it was intentional." what is he talking about?

DomerDevil
12-05-2007, 08:24 PM
Duke is a better team with him coming off the bench. He comes in against tired or second string players, he brings instant offense and can do all the little things. The fact that he is fine with this and responding by playing great - suggests that Jon is more about winning than getting stats. Scheyer and King are the difference for Duke this year. There is little drop off with those guys in the game for the starters. When McClure comes back- Duke will be even stronger. I also expect that Smith with continue to get better. Unfortunatley Marty is out- so hopefully everyone else stays healthy.

I couldn't agree more. Above and beyond Scheyer's quantifiable contributions, he makes an incredible amount of heady plays. The kid has a very high basketball IQ. I can't help but think that the rotation is partially determined by an effort to keep enough of those players on the court throughout the game. That becomes especially important at the end of games when making smart plays is critical. Hence Jon finishing off games.

Jumbo
12-05-2007, 08:26 PM
First of all, everyone is 100% correct in saying that it doesn't matter who starts, but who finishes. Next, it is my belief that three of Duke's four best players are wings -- Jon, Gerald and DeMarcus (the fourth being Singler). So, that left Coach K with five options:
1) Start the three wings, plus Singler and another big man (Thomas). Paulus sits.
2) Start the three wings, plus Paulus and Singler. Small lineup.
3) Bring Nelson off the bench.
4) Bring Henderson off the bench.
5) Bring Scheyer off the bench.

Now, let's look at these options:
1) This was my preference before the season. I believe Scheyer handles the ball and sees the floor better than Paulus, plus is a superior defender. I might still go this way. But the staff is content with Paulus and Smith splitting point guard minutes and clearly is encouraging Scheyer to become more of a scorer. I suppose running the point would detract from that.
2) I have no problem finishing with the small lineup (as Duke did against Marquette and likely will do in other tight games), but I'd rather start big.
3) Nelson's a senior. It's tough to ask him to come off the bench. Plus, he's Duke's best defender, and particularly with Paulus in the starting lineup, he's needed right away.
4) This was the option last year, and Henderson is still playing fewer minutes than Scheyer. But for a kid who might go pro early, I think it's important to keep him happy. And starting, though seemingly insignificant, probably does. Clearly, Henderson has embraced the role. And I think it's important that he get going right away, as he's often Duke's top scoring option.
5) Of all the guys, Scheyer seems most psychologically suited to coming off the bench. He's easily good enough to start, and I'm sure he'd like to start. But as long as he's getting big minutes, there's not much to complain about. He's mature, plays unselfishly and seems to have handled his new role extremely well. He's like a better for of Billy McCaffrey in 1990-91. He definitely needs to be more aggressive in looking for his own offense, because the kid can really score. He also needs to quicken his release. But he's a terrific player, will only get better, will be on the floor in key situations and will certainly start next season.

Ben63
12-05-2007, 08:33 PM
Coming off the bench can be very good for a player. Manu Ginobili was stated earlier and look at Jason Terry for the Mavs this year. The team is so loaded at that position someone of quality has to sit. It just happens to be Scheyer, and I agree with that decision. Henderson and Nelson are match up problems for opponents and if the other team has a camparable athlete, they will only have one, thus leaving the other with a huge advantage. Singler also provides too much verstility to leave on the bench. Scheyer while a great player is jsut the odd man out.

gep
12-05-2007, 11:23 PM
Some random thoughts after reading through...

As someone else posted, I think the idea that Jon comes off the bench after 4-5 minutes or so... and he's fresh, plays against either tired starters or (most probably) lesser bench players, and since he's good enough to start, he's an instant advantage.

Also, with discussions such as this about coming off the bench... I'm reminded of Kevin McHale, who relished his 6th man role on the Celtics. If I remember correctly, he even thought it was an advantage being the first player off the bench... he had a chance to observe the entire game situations without being in it, so when he went in, not only was he fresh, but he was able to take advantage of the actual game situations.

I also think that Jon has shown his maturity in being able to handle the 6th man role. I especially like the fact that he is in at the end of games... where close games are won... and he's great at FT's... also getting 4-point plays:)

mgtr
12-06-2007, 06:17 AM
I don't know what you mean by that but you are scaring me. please clarify.

SilkyJ is referencing my comment that I feared some people would make Scheyer into the new Marty. I meant that some seemingly have to have a rallying point for complaints, such as "Why doesn't player X get more minutes." Until his injury, X = Marty. Now, it looks possible that X = Jon in the minds of some people, but with the mantra of "Why doesn't Jon start?"

In that regard, I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the most famous sixth man, John Havlicek. While I have high regard for his ability, Jon Scheyer certainly is not up to the John Havlicek level (at least not yet). But if our Jon to do for us half of what the Celtics' John did for them, we will be in great, great shape.
Interestingly, Don Nelson played the sixth man role for the Celtics after Havlicek, but less effectively.

Bob Green
12-06-2007, 06:38 AM
In that regard, I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the most famous sixth man, John Havlicek.

Great point! Following the same line of reasoning, but utilizing a Duke example, how about Corey Maggette? He was the sixth man on the powerful 1999 team that some argue is Coach K's best team. They didn't win the NC, but it is a plausible theory that they were K's best.

shadowfax336
12-06-2007, 09:25 AM
its no trick my friend. just something only Kings are capable of.

Also question: what is the "tap-out" the original poster is referring to by scheyer. he also said he "thought it was intentional." what is he talking about?

He's referencing a play during the Davidson game...
When Davidson was making a run during the second half, we missed a shot (free throw?) that bounced towards Scheyer and another, rather larger player. Scheyer managed to get up and get one hand on the ball. He tipped it to a wide open Gerald Henderson standing under the hoop, and it really deflated a bit of Davidson's momentum. It was a very difficult play to get the tip, and a very smart play to know where Gerald was and get it to him. I agree that it was intentional to tip it to Henderson and he wasn't just flinging it around by the way.

Kilby
12-06-2007, 09:35 AM
Scheyer is a good player. Nice defense, opportunistic scorer, good ball handler, sneaky good. He won't hurt you in a game and sometimes can be the high scorer. But, what will happen if he is the first or second option on the floor is that he gets increased defensive attention. Sometimes it will be the opposing teams best defender and Scheyer's offense will be limited. I think that along with a long season this may have happened to Scheyer at the end of last year, but my memory is too bad to think back on the games. Henderson is still a threat even when defended by the best. Scheyer may aready be there and just not have the ultimate confidence, but he will.

Jarhead
12-06-2007, 01:46 PM
If that's the case then maybe it's OK. He is at least occupying the other team's best defender. Of course, he carries a whole ton of other virtues whenever he's on the court.

Devilsfan
12-06-2007, 02:39 PM
have. He does almost everything right except shoot enough, imo.

Clipsfan
12-06-2007, 03:31 PM
Also, with discussions such as this about coming off the bench... I'm reminded of Kevin McHale, who relished his 6th man role on the Celtics. If I remember correctly, he even thought it was an advantage being the first player off the bench... he had a chance to observe the entire game situations without being in it, so when he went in, not only was he fresh, but he was able to take advantage of the actual game situations.

I was going to say something along these lines as well. It's an advantage to a heady player to be able to watch the first 2-3 minutes (Scheyer is often in by the 17 minute mark) and see how to help the team out. Jon is a glue guy, as many have mentioned, and this gives him a great chance to make the most of that talent. And as almost everyone has mentioned, he is always in there during crunch time (which says a ton about how important he is).

SilkyJ
12-06-2007, 03:41 PM
But, what will happen if he is the first or second option on the floor is that he gets increased defensive attention. Sometimes it will be the opposing teams best defender and Scheyer's offense will be limited..... Scheyer may aready be there and just not have the ultimate confidence, but he will.

I agree but have to say that I am not worried about his confidence or extra defensive attention. In HS he was far and away the best player on his team so he's used to the extra attention. And I don't think scheyer's hesitation to shoot sometimes is b/c of lack of confidence, I think he;s just trying to fit into the duke system TOO much, ya know? He was a gunner, in a good way, in high school (meaning he was TOLD to be a gunner) so i don't think confidence is an issue.

An analogy would be how some people criticize bilas for going against duke too much and then people say he does it since he went to duke and he's trying "too hard to be objective"

bird
12-06-2007, 04:00 PM
I started this thread mainly as a shout out to Jon not just for being a tremendous player but also for subordinating individual glory to the good of the team. I also wanted to see what the community felt about the situation of the "sixth man." It was not to question the decision that Scheyer not start. If Scheyer's role and productivity continues apace, I look forward to comparing Scheyer to other non-starters around the league as the season develops.

Patrick Yates
12-06-2007, 04:12 PM
Coach seems to have hit on a plan that is psycologically overwhelming to our opponents. Based on our personnell, it is a sound strategy.

I liken it to what the Colts (NFL) did in years prior, by maximzining our strengths while protecting our weaknesses.

With Nelson and Henderson on the floor, Duke is at its peak physically. Hendo and Nelson are two superior athletes, with Singler and Thomas both good athletes. Paulus is the weakest athlete, but his shooting and vision compensate for this (so far). Given that Duke wants to run, this is our best combination. These athletes can deliver a blitzkrieg, attacking the rim and playing suffocating D. Defenses must sit back on their heels with these guys, cause they are dangerous from anywhere, but especially at the rim.

I think that this lineup gives Duke a chance to deliver a solid body blow, if not a knockout punch, before the other guy can bring his big(ger) guns (posts) into play. I love the team, but I still have my fears about being able to stop a team that has quality low posts and the will to feed said posts the rock. But, if Duke can deliver a early shot, we can force teams to play our game, as guards take less sound perimeter jumpers to try and "match" us, or to eat into a lead. This leads to longer rebounds, where Duke's lack of size is less dangerous.

After the speedy guys deliver knockout blows, and get the opposing D playing closer to the rim to protect on drives, here comes Scheyer and King to bomb away from outside. Jon is dangerous from anywhere, and his midrange Js work against a timid d.

We have to face that Duke may have trouble with talented bigs. We haven't yet, but I wasn't really blown away by either Wisconsin's posts, or Illinois's. There were some solid players there, but not like UCLA, UNC, G-Town, Kansas, Texas, and some others. It is imperative that Duke negate this size, somehow. I think K is right in setting off a blistering attack before the bigs get into the grove. This also forces them to run, and hopefully tire out. This gives Duke the best chance to win. Having Scheyer and King off the bench provides two guys who can score, and who are fresh, ready to drive in a few nails early. Make the other guy dig out of a hole. Sometimes, we can break their spirits, negating the possibility of a comeback.

I don't know how many here watched the G-Town game last night, but that is what I am talking about. G-town wasn't gangbusters or anything, but my god did they feed their posts. Duke will have trouble standing toe to toe in such a slugfest. But if we build a lead, it may force such a team to play faster than they'd like, in a style more suited to our strenghts than theirs.

Patrick Yates

Classof06
12-06-2007, 04:22 PM
Personally, I look at Scheyer as a 6th starter. He comes off the bench but plays starters' minutes; in fact, Scheyer is 2nd on the team in minutes per game with exactly 27; Demarcus is 1st with 29.6.

I think the main reason Duke is markedly better now than a year ago is because of depth. By depth, I mean a good bench; Scheyer coming off the bench had made our bench so much better. What I love about Jon is that he understands it's best for the team and he continues to play at a high level. This team can't develop if Scheyer doesn't accept that role and he's done a phenomenal job with what's been asked of him.

IMO, you gain more as a team by having Gerald start and Scheyer be 6th man; moreso than the other way around. The main reasons I feel that way are that as a team, I feel we need Gerald's athleticism on the floor right away and also because I think it's a lot harder for Gerald to get into the flow of the game after sitting than it is for Scheyer.

Furthermore, how many teams can counter another team with bringing a player of Scheyer's caliber off the bench? Most 6th men just aren't that good.

Wander
12-06-2007, 04:38 PM
Furthermore, how many teams can counter another team with bringing a player of Scheyer's caliber off the bench? Most 6th men just aren't that good.

There probably are some I'm forgetting, but off the top of my head I can't think of a better 6th man in the country. That's a great advantage for us to have.

dw0827
12-06-2007, 06:08 PM
I believe Scheyer handles the ball and sees the floor better than Paulus . . .

As much as I like Scheyer's game, I'm not sure I can go along with that statement. True, Scheyer does handle the point fairly well . . . I would call it solid but not remarkable. But, when healthy, I think Paulus handles the ball just fine and I think he sees the floor well. Scheyer may approach Paulus in these skills but I have a hard time saying he's clearly better.

Anyway, I agree with your sense of who plays the better defense. And I agree with your take on the psychological elements regarding Scheyer and Henderson.

As you state, who starts isn't nearly as important as who finishes . . . although I don't tape any of the games, my sense and recollection is that Scheyer has been in there at the end of every game that could be considered close. For that matter, so has Henderson, hasn't he? Seems like when we want to work the clock (I like that term better than . . . ) we go to the small-ball lineup.

Jumbo
12-06-2007, 07:42 PM
Patrick,
There's a problem with your theory. Here are the scores of games established by Duke's starting lineup before K used his first sub (which was Scheyer, or Scheyer plus other players, in every game).

NMSU Game: Duke 6, NMSU 6
Princeton Game: Duke 10, Princeton 2
Illinois Game: Illinois 6, Duke 4
Marquette Game: Duke 6, Marquette 6
Wisconsin Game: Duke 8, Wisconsin 7
Davidson Game: Duke 3, Davidson 0

I don't have the NCCU or EKU logs handy, but other than the game against Princeton, our starters have hardly blitzed the opponents early.

mepanchin
12-06-2007, 07:57 PM
I feel like Nelson and Henderson start because they are our most capable players in terms of attacking the basket, potentially getting to the line, and setting the tone for the game. Much as how teams with lots of post-offense look to get their big man involved early to open up other aspects of the game, we look to get Nelson and Henderson in attack mode early in order to open up the defense. Bringing in Scheyer usually causes defenses to open up a bit, and we continue to attack. So far, something has always given in the other team's defense and we have started scoring on some big run.

JBDuke
12-06-2007, 09:45 PM
I suspect that Jon doesn't start due to a skill mix question. Jon is a good combo guard - he can handle it fairly well, although he doesn't protect the ball as well as Greg, IMO. I also think that Jon at PG is ill-suited to the running game we're trying to use more of this year. That's why I think Greg starts instead of Jon.

Where I think Jon's skills really shine are when he's teamed with Nolan. IMO, Nolan doesn't run the offense that well, and doesn't see the floor well yet. But he can fly and runs the break adequately, and he puts good pressure on the ball. Having Jon on the floor with Nolan gives the team an extra ball-handler on the floor - almost like two PGs or two near-PGs that can share the load and complement each other. The starting rotation doesn't have anyone besides Greg that can really run the team, but he's up to the task of being the sole PG out there. So far, I'm not sure that anyone else is up to it, but having TWO guys out there together makes a big difference.

The twist is that Jon is playing so well, you don't want to limit his minutes to just those when Nolan is on the floor as well. So, Jon also gets plenty of playing time with Greg at the PG spot. During these times, Jon can concentrate on looking for scoring opportunities, or he can be a second ball handler if needed. Plus, he's so good at making the extra pass (A little too good sometimes when he's got a good shot of his own.) that the half-court offense, especially, works better with Greg and Jon on the court.

I think Jon is playing the best basketball we've seen from him so far - starting or not - and I'm always happy to see him on the court. I know he's rarely going to make a bad decision with the ball, and he's a true triple threat guy (sorry for the Dick V. reference...)

Waynne
12-06-2007, 10:06 PM
I think having Jon come in off the bench is a brilliant move by the coaching staff. His willingness to do so, after starting most games last year, is a tribute to his unselfishness and willingness to put the team first.

If he continues to play off the bench this year he will be by far the best 6th man in the ACC IMO. Why? He can play 3 positions. He is an excellent shooter (48% overall, 50% for threes, and 92% for FT- no wonder K is always yelling at him to shoot), a good passer, and a very good perimeter defender who rarely fouls.

He is our most experienced player after DeMarcus and Greg, and our most consistent player overall, filling the stat sheet game after game. He rarely makes mistakes, and his outstanding nose for the ball enables him to get rebounds, draw charges, and cause turnovers by opponents on a regular basis throughout the game. It amazes me how often he has come up with the loose ball after a scramble on the court this year. His tip-out to Gerald during the Davidson game was no accident; he made the same play several times last year.

He is a player we want in at the end of close games because he will take and make the big shot if left open, play defense and cause turnovers, and make his FT, and he won't make game-ending mistakes. His steady play will be a big factor in determining how far the team goes this year.

gep
12-06-2007, 11:32 PM
Patrick,
There's a problem with your theory. Here are the scores of games established by Duke's starting lineup before K used his first sub (which was Scheyer, or Scheyer plus other players, in every game).

NMSU Game: Duke 6, NMSU 6
Princeton Game: Duke 10, Princeton 2
Illinois Game: Illinois 6, Duke 4
Marquette Game: Duke 6, Marquette 6
Wisconsin Game: Duke 8, Wisconsin 7
Davidson Game: Duke 3, Davidson 0

I don't have the NCCU or EKU logs handy, but other than the game against Princeton, our starters have hardly blitzed the opponents early.


I feel like Nelson and Henderson start because they are our most capable players in terms of attacking the basket, potentially getting to the line, and setting the tone for the game.

Jumbo... I was a bit surprised by your stats on scores when Jon (and others) were first substituted. When watching as many of the games as I could, I didn't think the scores were that close... I guess it was the "feel" of the game... I think I almost always felt the game was going well *(at least not out of hand). "Mepanchin" seems to point out my thoughts, when he says that the starters "set the tone" for the game. [my "simple fan" perspective]

heath_harshman4
12-07-2007, 12:21 AM
I feel like Nelson and Henderson start because they are our most capable players in terms of attacking the basket, potentially getting to the line, and setting the tone for the game. Much as how teams with lots of post-offense look to get their big man involved early to open up other aspects of the game, we look to get Nelson and Henderson in attack mode early in order to open up the defense. Bringing in Scheyer usually causes defenses to open up a bit, and we continue to attack. So far, something has always given in the other team's defense and we have started scoring on some big run.


although it may not show in the scoreboard, they do set the tone. Couldn't have said it better myself.

ACCBBallFan
12-08-2007, 10:31 AM
many excellent points made in this thread.

Though I buy the theory that Jon is in effect one step faster by playing against guys Nelson and Henderson have worn down a bit, think of how much more effective Henderson or Nelson could be with that extra step of relative speed.

So I most subscribe to the scouting report theory. Most players listen to the scouting report but rely on their natural skills and tendencies. Jon with his basketball IQ uses his moxie, so he has the scouting report and a few minutes of personal observation to leverage when he enters the game.

Not so much this year, but last year it seems Nelson would score double digits in first few minutes and then revert to defensive stopper. Though both sophomores, I think Lance needs to go immediately into the game armed with the scouting report to get into the flow and the pre game pep talk whereas Jon is effective coming off the bench.

Finally it's working and seems to be a better alternative than the 5 Jumbo outlined. Jon has the flexibility to sub in for Paulus (though it has not happened much with Nolan being that sub instead), or for Henderson or Nelson whereas these latter two subbing in if Scheyer were a starter would be like a double switch and cause Jon to have to change mindset, rather than know what role is expected of him as he subs in, and everybody else's role staying the same other than minor adjustments teaming with Jon rather than Greg.