PDA

View Full Version : I have one worry



Jumbo
12-18-2007, 10:22 PM
You guys know I'm not the alarmist type, and this is a pretty minor concern. But, not just for Thursday night, but against any good team, I'm a bit worried about Singler landing in foul trouble. He has 29 fouls in 10 games, which isn't so bad. But that's a bit misleading, given his minutes played and the quality of the opposition. Against better teams, he's been saddles with fouls. He had four against NMSU, fouled out against Illinois, had four against Wisconsin and three against Davidson and Michigan (the latter in only 17 minutes). The one notable exception was Duke's toughest game of the year -- Marquette -- in which he played 37 minutes and only had two fouls.

But for Duke to be at its best, Singler has to play major minutes (especially without Thomas). And given Pittsburgh's bulk inside, it's going to be a real challenge for Kyle to avoid cheap fouls. It's hard for him, because he is so smart on D that he's often in position to take a charge. But if a couple get called blocks, that's a problem. If Lance doesn't play against Pitt, I think Duke will go small a lot. So, make sure to watch Singler and see how he adjusts. It will be something to follow as the year progresses, too.

mapei
12-18-2007, 10:34 PM
This seems to be an issue lately with Duke forwards and centers, especially as underclassmen: Shel, Shav, Lance, now maybe Kyle . . . not sure about Zoubek on a per-minute basis, but maybe him, too. It's become something that I expect!

SilkyJ
12-18-2007, 11:04 PM
This seems to be an issue lately with Duke forwards and centers, especially as underclassmen: Shel, Shav, Lance, now maybe Kyle . . . not sure about Zoubek on a per-minute basis, but maybe him, too. It's become something that I expect!

i dont think kyle's "foul troubles" (and I wouldn't call them troubles) don't even come close to comparing to lance, shav, or zoub.

Sheld was also a different animal because he was always going for blocks...

that being said, a couple weeks ago I guess I would have agreed that this could be a problem, but with the way we are playing, if lance/zoub/mcclure/king are all healthy and available I wouldn't get too worried in a game if kyle's minutes were limited due to foul trouble...

don't get me wrong, i think we are million times better with kyle in the game, I'm just saying with all the pieces we have I wouldn't get too worried...

dukemomLA
12-19-2007, 03:56 AM
Sing didn't have his best game against Albany. So be it. Everyone can have an off night.

We have a 9-10 person strong team, mix & match, sub & go. If Kyle has an off night, it doesn't concern me. Anyone/everyone can pick up the slack.

Sing & Lance need to 'bulk up.' Brian Z has to feel comfortable at being 100% healthy and be a beast. (I believe he can). ALL of this team needs to work on their FTs -- less than 85% is not something this team should settle for. (...sorry for the dangling).

Love this team. J

Bob Green
12-19-2007, 07:41 AM
We've discussed the "Freshman" adjustment period in many different threads over the years and Singler is no different. He is an amazingly talented young man, but he has demonstrated a knack for picking up an unnecessary foul here and there. Once the ACC season begins, and against Pittsburgh Thursday night, we need Singler in the game so hopefully he adjust to nuances of the college game sooner rather than later.

DUKIECB
12-19-2007, 08:35 AM
Bob's right, it just take some time for freshman to adjust no matter how good they are. This is especially true when they are big men and they are beating and banging on a regular basis. I think Kyle will be fine as he is super smart when it comes to how to play the game, something K has pointed out.

If Lance doesn't play Thurs. night, does Dave get the start? He started the second half against Albany.

Trinity84
12-19-2007, 08:35 AM
I wonder if we'll see a little more zone on Thursday? Pitt has a real size advantage (as well as physical maturity advanatge in the post). A zone might be a way to protect our inside guys and mitigate, potentially, Pitt's size advantage on the boards. If we get out rebounded like we did against Illinois (or was it Wisconsin?), it could be a very long night with a different outcome.

K has rolled out the zone a little bit this season, perhaps he'll use it again on Thursday.

Jumbo
12-19-2007, 10:27 AM
Sing didn't have his best game against Albany. So be it. Everyone can have an off night.

We have a 9-10 person strong team, mix & match, sub & go. If Kyle has an off night, it doesn't concern me. Anyone/everyone can pick up the slack.

Sing & Lance need to 'bulk up.' Brian Z has to feel comfortable at being 100% healthy and be a beast. (I believe he can). ALL of this team needs to work on their FTs -- less than 85% is not something this team should settle for. (...sorry for the dangling).

Love this team. J

I don't mean to be rude, but what does your post have to do with the issue of foul trouble?

Jumbo
12-19-2007, 10:28 AM
I wonder if we'll see a little more zone on Thursday? Pitt has a real size advantage (as well as physical maturity advanatge in the post). A zone might be a way to protect our inside guys and mitigate, potentially, Pitt's size advantage on the boards. If we get out rebounded like we did against Illinois (or was it Wisconsin?), it could be a very long night with a different outcome.

K has rolled out the zone a little bit this season, perhaps he'll use it again on Thursday.

I think we might see some of the zone, but not to help rebounding. As I've mentioned before, it is harder to rebound out of a zone than man-to-man, because you have to go find a man to box out.

ugadevil
12-19-2007, 11:06 AM
I think we might see some of the zone, but not to help rebounding. As I've mentioned before, it is harder to rebound out of a zone than man-to-man, because you have to go find a man to box out.

I don't have a tape of the game or anything but how did we rebound out of the zone against Illinois. I could be wrong about this but I thought we were getting killed on the boards against Illinois and we switched to the zone we did a little better on getting defensive rebounds. Like I said, I have no tape and I'm just going from memory so I could be way off. Is that true from that game?

Trinity84
12-19-2007, 12:06 PM
I think we might see some of the zone, but not to help rebounding. As I've mentioned before, it is harder to rebound out of a zone than man-to-man, because you have to go find a man to box out.

Jumbo:

The principal benefit that I see with the use of a zone against Pitt is as an attempt to keep our post players out of foul trouble. While I do not view the zone as a cure-all for rebounding issues, I do think there is something to be gained on the boards as well. Duke's man-to-man philosophy calls for each players to pressure his man all over the court. This season we have seen Zoubek, for example, guarding his man (if his man has the ball) as far as 20 feet from the hoop. While I love this team, a weakness is quickness. The notable exceptions are DeMarcus and Nolan. I do not think that either will be assigned to guard any of Pitt's interior players.

I really think that our aggressive man-to-man can be exploited by Pitt's athletic big men. If Zoub's, or Singler, or Dave, or Taylor, follow their men 15 - 18 feet from the basket, I question whether they have the quickness to prevent their men from going to the glass. Didn't Illinois kill us on the offensive boards? I worry about that. A least with a zone our interior players will be closer to the basket. I

Our ability to offer weak side help and prevent weak side offensive rebounds will be essential to tomorrow's night game when we play man. Our guys are going to have recover quickly and be quick to the glass.

Jumbo, what about using the K favorite of the box-and-one; or the triangle-and-two? That way we can pressure the living hell out of their ball handlers and keep our post players closer to the basket for both rebounding and protection against fouls?

Classof06
12-19-2007, 12:19 PM
I agree with Trinity84, I think some form of a zone defense would greatly benefit Duke in this game. We don't have as much post presence as Pitt and Lance isn't even playing. That means we have 2 players that can defend the post (3 if you include King). I doubt that's enough players to keep us out of foul trouble. I could also see us using some kind of variation like a box-and-one or a triangle-and-two to keep the Pitt's big guys off the boards when the shot goes up. To be totally honest, I'd be somewhat surprised if Duke was able to win this game without throwing some kind of zone at Pitt. Not having Lance really puts our back to the wall in that regard.

It's easy to play aggressive man-to-man defense when you have an eraser like Shelden Williams to anchor the defense. And Shelden was good enough where you could leave him on an island with this man. But, as we all know, those days are long gone..

As far as Singler goes, I think he'll learn to avoid the cheap fouls as the season goes on. He's only played 10 college games. Compared to someone like Lance, I don't even think Singler's fouls are that aggressive. I also think it's kinda skewed because when Singler picks up cheap fouls, he sits a little longer than normal usually because of our depth and the opponent we're playing. Against Pitt, if Singler needs to be on the court, he'll be on the court.

SilkyJ
12-19-2007, 12:27 PM
I wonder if we'll see a little more zone on Thursday? Pitt has a real size advantage (as well as physical maturity advanatge in the post). A zone might be a way to protect our inside guys and mitigate, potentially, Pitt's size advantage on the boards. If we get out rebounded like we did against Illinois (or was it Wisconsin?), it could be a very long night with a different outcome.

K has rolled out the zone a little bit this season, perhaps he'll use it again on Thursday.

I think we might play some zone when zoub is in the game, just to keep him where he is most effective at all times/out of foul trouble.

It is basically common knowledge that rebounding out of zones is harder than out of man-to-man. There are certainly other advantages to playing a zone, like keeping some people out of foul trouble, but in terms of rebounding, it generally hurts you.

Jumbo
12-19-2007, 12:44 PM
Jumbo:

The principal benefit that I see with the use of a zone against Pitt is as an attempt to keep our post players out of foul trouble. While I do not view the zone as a cure-all for rebounding issues, I do think there is something to be gained on the boards as well. Duke's man-to-man philosophy calls for each players to pressure his man all over the court. This season we have seen Zoubek, for example, guarding his man (if his man has the ball) as far as 20 feet from the hoop. While I love this team, a weakness is quickness. The notable exceptions are DeMarcus and Nolan. I do not think that either will be assigned to guard any of Pitt's interior players.

I really think that our aggressive man-to-man can be exploited by Pitt's athletic big men. If Zoub's, or Singler, or Dave, or Taylor, follow their men 15 - 18 feet from the basket, I question whether they have the quickness to prevent their men from going to the glass. Didn't Illinois kill us on the offensive boards? I worry about that. A least with a zone our interior players will be closer to the basket. I

Our ability to offer weak side help and prevent weak side offensive rebounds will be essential to tomorrow's night game when we play man. Our guys are going to have recover quickly and be quick to the glass.

Jumbo, what about using the K favorite of the box-and-one; or the triangle-and-two? That way we can pressure the living hell out of their ball handlers and keep our post players closer to the basket for both rebounding and protection against fouls?

Look, I think K has been working on the zone for a reason, and I'm sure he'll throw it at Pitt for a bit. I just don't see us wanting to do it extensively, and I don't see it helping us on the boards. (Again, conventional wisdom is that it's harder to rebound out of a zone, even if Duke's help Man D is different from other systems).

Duke has always given up offensive rebounds as a trade-off in its pressure D. I'm ok with a few putbacks as long as they are limited. I also don't worry about Blair facing up and causing problems for guys on the perimeter -- he's just a load on the block.

I definitely don't think Duke will try a junk defense like a box-and-one, nor would I want to see that. It's not like Pitt has a superb perimeter player you need to deny. And you don't run a box or a triangle to stop post players -- there are many easier ways to handle a talented big. I think Duke will double the post and pressure the ball, and the rest will take care of itself.

Trinity84
12-19-2007, 12:47 PM
Look, I think K has been working on the zone for a reason, and I'm sure he'll throw it at Pitt for a bit. I just don't see us wanting to do it extensively, and I don't see it helping us on the boards. (Again, conventional wisdom is that it's harder to rebound out of a zone, even if Duke's help Man D is different from other systems).

Duke has always given up offensive rebounds as a trade-off in its pressure D. I'm ok with a few putbacks as long as they are limited. I also don't worry about Blair facing up and causing problems for guys on the perimeter -- he's just a load on the block.

I definitely don't think Duke will try a junk defense like a box-and-one, nor would I want to see that. It's not like Pitt has a superb perimeter player you need to deny. And you don't run a box or a triangle to stop post players -- there are many easier ways to handle a talented big. I think Duke will double the post and pressure the ball, and the rest will take care of itself.

The two junk defenses were mentioned with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek. Apparently the smiley icon did not make the post.

Trinity84
12-19-2007, 12:50 PM
As we are discussing the post, any word on Lance? K mentioned in his press conference following the Albany game, that if Lance is capable of playing he will be in the starting line-up.

captmojo
12-19-2007, 05:31 PM
Over the years, Coach K has been an effective teacher of how to survive in foul trouble. I think this has been reflected in earlier games where K would not pull a guy with foul trouble, allowing him to demonstrate that he can still be beneficial on the floor. I think this has already occurred with Singler.

bird
12-19-2007, 06:13 PM
In the past, K has admitted leaving players with foul trouble in regular season games so they would have experience to draw upon come tourney time.

Zeke
12-19-2007, 10:08 PM
That's the problem with playing so many "warm up" games. The competition is not as quick and our players are a split second slow and reach in or hit the arms in trying to block. I can see your concern and know of no option other than to hope and use the depth that we have.

jimsumner
12-19-2007, 11:37 PM
Duke's "warm-up" games include three games against Big Ten teams, a game against top-10 Marquette, and games against 2007 NCAA Tournament teams Davidson (the same team that led UCLA by 18 on the road), New Mexico State, Eastern Kentucky, and Albany. With top-10 Pitt coming up. All before Christmas.

I think that's enough to figure how not to reach in or hit somebody on the arm.

Jumbo
12-19-2007, 11:42 PM
Duke's "warm-up" games include three games against Big Ten teams, a game against top-10 Marquette, and games against 2007 NCAA Tournament teams Davidson (the same team that led UCLA by 18 on the road), New Mexico State, Eastern Kentucky, and Albany. With top-10 Pitt coming up. All before Christmas.

I think that's enough to figure how not to reach in or hit somebody on the arm.


What he said.

JasonEvans
12-20-2007, 09:54 AM
The two junk defenses were mentioned with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek. Apparently the smiley icon did not make the post.

Whew-- I was thinking you were INSANE!! ;)

Duke's pressure on the perimeter would be 100% useless while running a box and 1 or triangle and 2. No way it works with those junk defenses.

I am betting we don't see much zone at all against Pitt. If Pitt can get their big men the ball in good scoring position consistently then Pitt will win the game. Period, end of story. With Duke's lack of size and shotblocking, I don't see a zone helping appreciably against that.

--Jason "ball pressure on the perimeter is a lot more important than stopping their big men once they get the ball inside" Evans

SilkyJ
12-20-2007, 12:38 PM
--Jason "ball pressure on the perimeter is a lot more important than stopping their big men once they get the ball inside" Evans

You said it. its A LOT more important.

Its by far the most important aspect of our defense this year, and a huge aspect of how we play in general as ball pressure leads to turnovers, missed shots, and subsequently (hopefully) fast breaks. Our defense definitely can help jump start our offense...something that's been a staple of K's teams, but was definitely missing last year...

Trinity84
12-20-2007, 01:23 PM
Whew-- I was thinking you were INSANE!! ;)




Any help you can offer in this area is much appreciated, Jason. :)

Clipsfan
12-20-2007, 08:30 PM
What no one has mentioned is that a zone is normally much worse for rebounding due to the fact that you're not necessarily set up to box out your man. As a result, there's often a scramble when a shot goes up to find someone to box out, and if that is done poorly one of the opponents may have a clear shot at the rebound.

It looks like Duke was doing something in the first half at times that UCLA has done very well with slightly undersized centers vs. bigger opponents: very quick rotations to double the threat (in this case Blair). Lance rotated over quickly several times, and even drew a charge once.