PDA

View Full Version : Duke MBB vs. BC Post-Game thread



-jk
02-09-2008, 03:08 PM
Whew!

terrih
02-09-2008, 03:09 PM
Lets get the guys a rest now. Good victory today- after an intense week.

Bob Green
02-09-2008, 03:15 PM
BC shot 55% from the field, but we still won by 10. A gutsy performance down the stretch. Kyle Singler is turning into a monster on the glass. His rebounding in this game and the Carolina game was really impressive. With his smooth 3-point stroke, he is a real inside-outside threat!

Indoor66
02-09-2008, 03:18 PM
Singler appears to be becoming the best player on this team. Points, boards, blocks, defense, awareness. He is tops.

somf4eva
02-09-2008, 03:19 PM
The change in Singler this year has been amazing. To see this guy emerge as the player he is has been awesome to watch.

dukestheheat
02-09-2008, 03:20 PM
I am glad that this game is over and like everyone else, I'm 'whew!'. Fifty bucks on the bet that Duke has some very intense practices to mentally ready the team for our next game. We just didn't bring it, mentally, in the first half. Great turnaround in the second half, though, and I'm proud of the way we fought through what looked like ennui today.

Henderson jumps like he's on a trampoline! The replays of his driving slam down the middle showed his speed and athleticism; I can't imagine having to stay with that guy on defense.

dth.

grc5
02-09-2008, 03:20 PM
This game reminded me a lot of '06 NCAA game against LSU: poor 3-point shooting, good shot-blocking opponent, ugly game. It's good to know we can stay tough in bad games.

dukediv2013
02-09-2008, 03:21 PM
This was a great win for Duke... poor 1st half shooting, defense and terrible FT shooting throughout the game = a 10 point victory. This team is special. 90 points while not shooting the ball particularly well. Great win. GO DUKE!

superdave
02-09-2008, 03:21 PM
We got a ton of offensive rebounds, although there seemed to be a lid on the rim for us today.

Maryland up next!

DukeBlood
02-09-2008, 03:22 PM
Singler and Nelson really carried this team. A combined 47 points and 18 boards(8 offensive rebounds).

Thomas played another good game. As has been said, he is starting to come into his own. Showing some really nice moves downlow. Wish he was a little better rebounder but not a bad one. Played another solid game.

Scheyer.. Jumbo, Im sorry. He didnt play terrible, but below average. Luckily he is a very solid FT shooter. Tried forcing too many things.

Smith. Played ok.. I like how he tries to blow by his defender and finishes with a layup(although 2 of them were blocked). I expect good things from him in the future.

Paulus and Henderson. Never really found their groove in this one. Luckily we didnt need them very much. Couple of good things was Gerald was 3/4 FT.

Zoubek. Well its good to see him back :)

somf4eva
02-09-2008, 03:26 PM
also, good to see king get some minutes. I saw him lose alot of guys, but i like that he was in there.

Bob Green
02-09-2008, 03:26 PM
Scheyer.. Jumbo, Im sorry. He didnt play terrible, but below average. Luckily he is a very solid FT shooter. Tried forcing too many things.



Scheyer had a couple of turnovers, but I thought they were the result of good defense by BC rather than a bad pass by Jon.

KenTankerous
02-09-2008, 03:30 PM
Why did Singler get T'ed up after the hard foul on Henderson? There was no contact so I am assuming it must have been language.

Atlanta Duke
02-09-2008, 03:36 PM
Why did Singler get T'ed up after the hard foul on Henderson? There was no contact so I am assuming it must have been language.

I assume Singler used a colorful 10 or 12 letter noun or a combination thereof.

K's reaction was great - he apparently could see Singler walking over and knew what was going to happen, after which he did a 180 degree turn away in exasperation

KenTankerous
02-09-2008, 03:44 PM
This just seems a dangerous trend in officiating that the zeb's blow T's for jawing but don't control the overly physical play that is changing the very nature of the game, and structure of players faces, i.e. Demarcus' scar on his left cheek.

Fish80
02-09-2008, 03:49 PM
DeMarcus started the second half really strong, set the tone. In the first 4 minutes of the second half he had points, rebounds, assists, and a steal. He and Kyle played great.

I think the technical on Kyle was for a combination of running over to the action, getting in his face, and saying something. If he ran over there and helped Gerald up, no technical. But something was going on with Gerald, a few of the BC guys were roughing him up. Don't know what that was all about.

CDu
02-09-2008, 03:54 PM
I think Henderson's wrist is bothering him. He looked really passive tonight, and on several occasions seemed to be favoring his wrist. Even on the dunk on the inbounds play in the second half, it looked like he finished with his left hand mostly.

Hopefully he gets whatever's wrong righted soon. We have a big game against Maryland next week, and we'll need him at full strength.

tbyers11
02-09-2008, 04:20 PM
I think Henderson's wrist is bothering him. He looked really passive tonight, and on several occasions seemed to be favoring his wrist. Even on the dunk on the inbounds play in the second half, it looked like he finished with his left hand mostly.

Hopefully he gets whatever's wrong righted soon. We have a big game against Maryland next week, and we'll need him at full strength.

In his post-game interview, Coach K said that they weren't sure until right before game time if Gerald was going to play because of his wrist

RelativeWays
02-09-2008, 04:23 PM
I had to listen to the second half on the radio. I'll say this. After BC, Cornell, Temple, FSU...the biggest difference between this team and last year is that this team wins the ugly games that last years team would blow at the end. Thats honestly a huge difference.

dukelifer
02-09-2008, 04:37 PM
As I feared, Duke was in a bit of a post UNC funk in the first half. It is not that they played poorly- but there was lack of focus that can get you in trouble. They let BC get comfortable and then they felt they could compete all game. But in some sense, it turned out okay- because the game was a little more intense and a better prep for Maryland who will be the first team to see Duke for the second time. That will be VERY telling.

As for the team- we are beginning to see Singler emerge as a unique talent. He is getting used to the speed of the game and is beginning to show all he can do on the floor. Today he impressed me again with his boarding in traffic. Another player that impressed me again was Lance Thomas. He again is looking confident and aggressive. If there is one guy who was born to play the end of the game K -spread-delay offense it is Gerald Henderson. He absolutely loves the end of the game and Duke continues to execute when it counts. Again the early free throw shooting is awful and then a much better job in the second half. The early misses showed me a lack of focus.

All in all, they got the win they were supposed to get . The Maryland game will be very big and intense. They will be way up for this and Duke will need to have another great effort in crunch time to keep unbeaten.

freedevil
02-09-2008, 04:39 PM
BC shot 55% from the field, but we still won by 10. A gutsy performance down the stretch. Kyle Singler is turning into a monster on the glass. His rebounding in this game and the Carolina game was really impressive. With his smooth 3-point stroke, he is a real inside-outside threat!

Completely agree. I thought Singler would be outstanding as a freshman, but he is just awesome to watch. I don't think Duke has had a more talented all-around basketball player since Battier. And I would rarely compare anyone to Battier, he's just the man.

mapei
02-09-2008, 04:42 PM
I was impressed that K used him as a point forward at the end of the game. I don't remember seeing that before.

If I had to point to one thing that made a difference today, I would point to Kyle's rebounding. I can point to other things, too, but that's the one that begins my list.

Fish80
02-09-2008, 04:46 PM
In his post-game interview, Coach K said that they weren't sure until right before game time if Gerald was going to play because of his wrist

I'm sure you saw this, Gerald had a brace on his wrist.

wisteria
02-09-2008, 04:49 PM
I was impressed that K used him as a point forward at the end of the game. I don't remember seeing that before.

If I had to point to one thing that made a difference today, I would point to Kyle's rebounding. I can point to other things, too, but that's the one that begins my list.

Right. I too was surprised to see Singler sort of running the point at the end of the game.

Lotus000
02-09-2008, 04:51 PM
I think it was a good call on Singler, but Spears should have been called for an intentional. If you're a ref in that situation, you can't have players mouthing off at other players after a hard foul, in order to keep the game under control, especially with us up in the closing minutes like that. I think it alleviated a probably very tense on-court situation.

Did you guys see K's reaction after the foul? A little grin then a floor-stomp for Singler. It's K's job to yell there, not Kyle's. I realize that it's great for the team to stick up for one another, and they did, but not when it draws a T in the closing minutes.

Lotus000
02-09-2008, 04:53 PM
The stat of the game was, for me, the offensive rebounds. According to espn's box score, we had 16 and BC had 8. Against a much thicker BC frontcourt, our guys did well down low on second-chance shots.

tbyers11
02-09-2008, 04:54 PM
I'm sure you saw this, Gerald had a brace on his wrist.

Yeah, I saw that. I just didn't realize how serious the injury was until Coach K said he was a game-time decision.

I thought his finishing on some drives and put-backs was below his normal level today, but if his wrist is hurt that badly I can't blame him at all. Let's hope a few days off helps it heal before MD on Wednesday.

ArkieDukie
02-09-2008, 04:55 PM
Why did Singler get T'ed up after the hard foul on Henderson? There was no contact so I am assuming it must have been language.

Or, more importantly, why wasn't there an ejection after the "hard foul" on Henderson? If the refs wanted to send a message about the increasing number of cheap shots, that would've been a fine time to do it. It looked pretty darn intentional to me - unlike the infamous blocked shot that resulted in an ejection and a one-game suspension for Henderson.

OrangeDevil
02-09-2008, 05:02 PM
With regard to Kyle Singer, while the superlatives might be redundant they cannot be superflous. Here's one more iteration: tree-men-dous! In a year of outstanding players collaborating and coming together to make for a great team and a special season, Kyle is on his way to becoming Duke's MVP. And let the "experts" blather all they want about Beasley and Love; I would trade Kyle, in terms he means and does for his team, for the both of them.

OrangeDevil
02-09-2008, 05:03 PM
Make that "wouldn't."

Acymetric
02-09-2008, 05:03 PM
Is there a video up anywhere that has the play resulting in a T in it? ESPN doesn't have any highlights, are there any up somewhere else?

wisteria
02-09-2008, 05:08 PM
I think it was a good call on Singler, but Spears should have been called for an intentional. If you're a ref in that situation, you can't have players mouthing off at other players after a hard foul, in order to keep the game under control, especially with us up in the closing minutes like that. I think it alleviated a probably very tense on-court situation.

Did you guys see K's reaction after the foul? A little grin then a floor-stomp for Singler. It's K's job to yell there, not Kyle's. I realize that it's great for the team to stick up for one another, and they did, but not when it draws a T in the closing minutes.

Refs were right to call the T. Singler deserved the T. But I am not blaming him. A couple times now we've seen Singler getting into opposing players' faces for his teammates, or simply refusing to back down when challenged. He's a rock. Meanwhile, he hasn't really done anything more stupid than glaring or cursing. Today's game was already decided at that moment. I think Singler knows the limit.

Lotus000
02-09-2008, 05:10 PM
Oh, I agree completely with that. I'm not necessarily BLAMING him for it at all, though a lot of people would blame him or the ref. I'm just saying it was a good call. He HAD to have said something...pretty rough, I think, for the T to fly.

And you're right, Singler is a friggin' rock. He's no longer a Frosh to me.

mapei
02-09-2008, 05:12 PM
I was annoyed that KS got a T but Spears just got a run-of-the-mill contact foul. As an example of Packer's fairness today, he was right to compare it to Gerald's last year. If the refs have the right to go to the monitor and review in that circumstance, as Packer suggested, they were wrong not to.

Lotus000
02-09-2008, 05:15 PM
HA, well you're right about that. My friend said that G needs to carry around a packet of ketchup to get that call. The only reason that he was ejected last year was all the blood from HansTravel's nose. Same thing happens if G goes down and gets a nasty cut or something. I don't think that Spears meant to hurt him, he just caught him funny and G went down hard.

wisteria
02-09-2008, 05:15 PM
Right. I am OK with the T call, but as you said, or as everybody has pointed out, the BC player should have gotten an intentional foul. Even the announcers were surprised by the decision.

mus074
02-09-2008, 05:34 PM
BC shot 55% from the field, but we still won by 10. A gutsy performance down the stretch. Kyle Singler is turning into a monster on the glass. His rebounding in this game and the Carolina game was really impressive. With his smooth 3-point stroke, he is a real inside-outside threat!

We forced 21 turnovers and committed just 6. That's 15 extra possessions to score, in a game that featured about 75 possessions. We had 20% more of game to score than they did. Its the formula for our success this year.

mus074
02-09-2008, 05:45 PM
The stat of the game was, for me, the offensive rebounds. According to espn's box score, we had 16 and BC had 8. Against a much thicker BC frontcourt, our guys did well down low on second-chance shots.

We had 16 offensive rebounds of our 39 missed FGs and approx. 6 reboundable missed FTs. Thats 35.5%.

BC had 8 ORebs of their 26 missed FGs and approx. 2 reboundable missed FTs. That's 28.6%. An advantage, but not huge.

However, TOs were a gi-normous disparity. See my above post. We had 20% more of the game to score than they did. It takes some major advantage in field goal shooting and rebounding to counter than deficit.

Of note, BC had an eFG of an astounding 61.2%, Duke's opponent's highest this year by far. Duke shot eFG of 50%, well below the season average 55.8% and worst since Pitt/Cornell/Temple. And Duke still won by 10.

Its all about turnovers, boys.

yancem
02-09-2008, 06:20 PM
Right. I too was surprised to see Singler sort of running the point at the end of the game.

That's the great thing about this team and probably why they are so good at running the stall this year. Pretty much everyone in the rotation (except Lance, Zoubs and King) can handle the ball fairly well, so K simply picks who has the best match up and gives him the ball. So far this year we have seen Paulus, Scheyer, Hederson, Smith and Nelson run the spread. With Oats guarding Singler, it was his turn. My guess is that McClure won't ever have the most favorable match up but you never know!

yancem
02-09-2008, 06:31 PM
Just got a chance to look at the box score. If you compare it to the UNC game, I'm not sure it was the same team competing. Only 2 players scored in double digits and we only shot 8-23 from behind the arc. Man I bet UNC had played the Duke team that played today instead of the one they played on Wednesday.

Of course, its easy to have a bit of a let down after such a big game.

Edit: Sorry, I didn't notice that Scheyer had 11 points.

dukepsy1963
02-09-2008, 06:35 PM
I just watched the game again and focused on Singler a bit more. He is improving at an exponential rate! His inside play, his hustle (once he flew over to challenge a BC player though there was little chance of making it), outside 3 shooting, not to mention his silky smooth movements toward the basket, controlled attitude (calm even in the face of getting banged around), etc are a joy to watch. Heck, toward the end of the game he even showed us his abilities at "guard." He is "experienced" way beyond his age. Plus, he seems to be a good guy. Without Singler and Nelson (of course), today would have been a different story I think. Gutty players both.

Don't get me wrong, I love all the guys, but with each game Singler is turning into a superstar!

Now if only we could improve the free throws a bit. But no matter, we have managed to do without them so many times this year!

heath_harshman4
02-09-2008, 07:31 PM
WHEW times a bajillion.

That was the game that everyone expected against UNC.

Bad FT shooting
Bad 3's (1st half anyway)
Just bad...

But luckily, it came against BC not UNC or any other good/great team. IF this would've happened against the likes of Maryland or Clemson, I don't think we get out so lucky.

Great game by Markie and Singler, Henderson, your legs are made of magic. He's a freak.

jzp5079
02-09-2008, 09:04 PM
was anyone else somewhat disappointed when Scheyer had that steal and fast break - and failed to dunk the ball?

It would have made for a great Scheyer face highlight. Got the team going even more, etc...

Surfsideron
02-09-2008, 11:36 PM
K's reaction was great - he apparently could see Singler walking over and knew what was going to happen, after which he did a 180 degree turn away in exasperation

I think he turned away in disbelief and disgust because the ref called a T on Singler but did not even call an intentional foul or a T on the BC player.

Virginian
02-09-2008, 11:37 PM
I can't blame Singler for getting in his face. I blame the ref for NOT being in his face. For there to be that hard and obvious a foul and the ref NOT to say something to the BC player is just indicative of how little control the refs are asserting these days. When there's a hard foul like that, the refs have to step in and take the guy aside, if for no other reason than to keep the other team (Duke) from retaliating.

No wonder everyone in the ACC hates BC. What a bunch of thugs. Was there a single play in the game when a Duke player who went into the paint did NOT get smacked?

Well, in any case, BC shot lights out in the first half, Duke shot like their eyes were closed from the field and like they were shooting opposite-handed from the free-throw line and still won going away.

Good job, guys. Keep rolling.

dukie8
02-10-2008, 12:01 AM
you guys need to lighten up. there was 1 foul when a duke guy hit the floor hard and everyone is up in arms about how dirty bc is. were there any other even quasi rough plays the rest of the game? this game was nothing like va tech, fsu or nc st. it's a contact sport. people make contact and bodies fly. that's part of the game.

back to the game, i think that it was expected that the team would come out less than 100% after the unc game and with maryland lurking next week. bc really is bad but singler and company came up big in the 2nd half so the final outcome really wasn't in doubt. they won by 10 and it was the closest home game of the year. there are worse things -- like our ft shooting! this team seems like it must have the record for most double misses from the foul line. it already cost us 1 game -- pitt -- and is going to become a bigger issue in the ncaat when the teams are better and the games are closer. i'm not sure what you can do at this point in the season because i assume that they work on it every day.

greybeard
02-10-2008, 01:52 AM
Singler and Lance are starting to play really well together on the offensive end. When Singler has it high, they are finding (I'm sure they've practiced them several ways to connect. One has the both starting high on opposite sides of the line, and Lance finding with Singler's approval a cutting/passing lane and the ball getting there; and the other is Lance's estalbishing a postion and Singler even repositioning himself to get it there.

In any case, the passes come off movement by Singler and even with collapsing littles shooting passing lanes to intercept the ball is getting through.

Singler sees the angles, aka, sometimes making the ball stay low all the way. or requiring a short-hop or other special catch by Lance, others by having the ball travel right next to a defender where he can't reach, anyway, its as if Singler in a split second puts himself of all the defenders around, factors in their tendencies (how they see and execute things) and adjusts how he is going to deliver to manipulate for or avoid the tendancies and voila. As a matter of fact, in a split second, bird-like, I think that is exactly what he is doing.

That Lance can read the play, connect up with Singler's eyes or whatever to "run good routes" shows a basketball IQ/bigman talent that often goes noticed--that of a great receiver of the ball. He is showing confidence in poised finishes off of great catches. Bouncing, pausing, sometimes attacking without breaking stride, that I dig, I mean really. A great inside game of the sort I do not believe I have seen at Duke, at least in quite some while.

Several ACC teams have such games going, Md. for one with Gist high and O low. Singler's passing ability is tough to match.

I really think that his finding more and more of his leathalness as an interior passer is giving him great confidence on offense and improving his shot. When you can assert dominion over not one, but several defenders off of making great catches and then helping your teammate make a great catch and finish, well, when you shoot, you're playing with found money.

Singler might well be the kind of talent that would lead others to be terrific reservers and finishers. Who really knows. What we do know is that he and Lance are becoming a potent tandum, and other parts of each's game is showing improvement as a consequence.

Another second half of refinements leads to steady control that inexorably wears away the resistence.

Way to go Cap. Lead the guys out in the second half and again began by showing everybody what's what.

Nice time to be a Duke fan; extraordinary, in my view.

Methodistman
02-10-2008, 07:30 AM
I know it's been said before, but Kyle reminds me so much of a hockey player, not just with all the cuts and stuff he's received this year, but in standing up for his team as well. When he went up to Spears today, it seemed just like something you'd see in a hockey game when a thug for the other team takes down the other team's star player - he went right up to him to let him know that will not be accepted. In one way, I've got to give Spears a little credit for the restraint he showed - in the heat of battle a guy jumps in your face, I'm not sure I could have stopped myself from pushing, talking back, or worse. Still, I don't want Kyle to do anything stupid, but I love the fact that he will stand up for his team.

Highlander
02-10-2008, 08:27 AM
you guys need to lighten up. there was 1 foul when a duke guy hit the floor hard and everyone is up in arms about how dirty bc is. were there any other even quasi rough plays the rest of the game? this game was nothing like va tech, fsu or nc st. it's a contact sport. people make contact and bodies fly. that's part of the game.



Agreed. I'm getting tired of the "we got fouled hard, therefore someone should be ejected/suspended" rant. Other than the UNC game, I've heard it for our last 5 games.

I always try to reverse the positions. If Kyle had gotten tangled up with the BC player and he ended up on the ground, would I be OK if Kyle was ejected/suspended?

In this case, the answer is pretty clearly no.

CDu
02-10-2008, 09:12 AM
Agreed. I'm getting tired of the "we got fouled hard, therefore someone should be ejected/suspended" rant. Other than the UNC game, I've heard it for our last 5 games.

I always try to reverse the positions. If Kyle had gotten tangled up with the BC player and he ended up on the ground, would I be OK if Kyle was ejected/suspended?

In this case, the answer is pretty clearly no.

Agreed. There was nothing in yesterday's game that was worthy of a technical from BC, much less an ejection. The sensitive skin of some on these boards is amazing.

MChambers
02-10-2008, 11:54 AM
Singler and Lance are starting to play really well together on the offensive end. When Singler has it high, they are finding (I'm sure they've practiced them several ways to connect. One has the both starting high on opposite sides of the line, and Lance finding with Singler's approval a cutting/passing lane and the ball getting there; and the other is Lance's estalbishing a postion and Singler even repositioning himself to get it there.

In any case, the passes come off movement by Singler and even with collapsing littles shooting passing lanes to intercept the ball is getting through.

Singler sees the angles, aka, sometimes making the ball stay low all the way. or requiring a short-hop or other special catch by Lance, others by having the ball travel right next to a defender where he can't reach, anyway, its as if Singler in a split second puts himself of all the defenders around, factors in their tendencies (how they see and execute things) and adjusts how he is going to deliver to manipulate for or avoid the tendancies and voila. As a matter of fact, in a split second, bird-like, I think that is exactly what he is doing.

That Lance can read the play, connect up with Singler's eyes or whatever to "run good routes" shows a basketball IQ/bigman talent that often goes noticed--that of a great receiver of the ball. He is showing confidence in poised finishes off of great catches. Bouncing, pausing, sometimes attacking without breaking stride, that I dig, I mean really. A great inside game of the sort I do not believe I have seen at Duke, at least in quite some while.

Several ACC teams have such games going, Md. for one with Gist high and O low. Singler's passing ability is tough to match.

I really think that his finding more and more of his leathalness as an interior passer is giving him great confidence on offense and improving his shot. When you can assert dominion over not one, but several defenders off of making great catches and then helping your teammate make a great catch and finish, well, when you shoot, you're playing with found money.

Singler might well be the kind of talent that would lead others to be terrific reservers and finishers. Who really knows. What we do know is that he and Lance are becoming a potent tandum, and other parts of each's game is showing improvement as a consequence.

Another second half of refinements leads to steady control that inexorably wears away the resistence.

Way to go Cap. Lead the guys out in the second half and again began by showing everybody what's what.

Nice time to be a Duke fan; extraordinary, in my view.

I was so busy focusing on how Thomas finished that I never focused on how he got the ball. Good to hear, because if he can become a reasonable scoring threat off of feeds from Singler, it makes Duke much tougher to defend. I also really like how Lance crashed the offensive boards. It seems like he is realizing he can score at this level, and is looking for his shot. That really has the potential to make Duke a much better team.

MChambers
02-10-2008, 11:55 AM
Agreed. There was nothing in yesterday's game that was worthy of a technical from BC, much less an ejection. The sensitive skin of some on these boards is amazing.

But I do think that Spears deserved more than a routine foul. At the least it should have been an intentional foul.

mapei
02-10-2008, 12:24 PM
But I do think that Spears deserved more than a routine foul. At the least it should have been an intentional foul.

I agree and, yes, if it had been one of our players, he would have deserved the same penalty.

Other than that one play, I did not find BC to be particularly thuggish yesterday. Nothing like VT or FSU as far as I could see.

juise
02-10-2008, 12:41 PM
I agree that Spears' takedown was the only play to which I took exception. I am not so sure that he deserved anything beyond a personal foul. However, the foul looked bad and I have no problem with Kyle jawing at him, so long as no contact is initiated. Basically, I would have liked to see a personal foul on Spears and nothing on Kyle or an intentional on Spears and a technical on Kyle. If they're trying to keep the game under control, they should be consistent about it.

Kimist
02-10-2008, 12:43 PM
Agreed. There was nothing in yesterday's game that was worthy of a technical from BC, much less an ejection. The sensitive skin of some on these boards is amazing.

Disagree.

From my vantage point in CIS yesterday, it was a clear head-lock take-down of Henderson in front of the Duke bench, and such an observation has nothing to do with anyone's "sensitivity."

While I agree that players should not be getting into other player's faces with taunts or whatever (and T's are quite appropriate in many cases for doing that) I do have a MAJOR problem that the current trend seems to be to "just give a foul" when a malicious and/or intentional foul has just occurred. Nelson gets undercut with what could have been a season-ending injury, and in another game Henderson gets thrown to the floor with a wrestling take-down.....and the zebras seem more intent with controlling "language"??? :mad:

A couple of well-placed player ejections and game suspensions could do wonders for putting a cap on this increasing problem in the ACC.

As an aside, I would like to note (at least from what I observed on TV) there was none of this "trash play" occurring at the recent game in the Dean Dome. (For now we'll ignore any of the usual Carowhina stuff.) It was a pleasure to see a hard-fought game that did not resemble a hockey match. (I guess I now lose favor for almost saying something positive about the heels?):confused:

k

yancem
02-10-2008, 12:58 PM
But I do think that Spears deserved more than a routine foul. At the least it should have been an intentional foul.

Like many fouls of this nature, my first impression was that it deserved an intentional foul but when you see the replay, it really didn't look nearly as bad. I would have been fine with simply a foul called but the T on Singler made it a bit hard to swallow!

CDu
02-10-2008, 01:02 PM
Disagree.

From my vantage point in CIS yesterday, it was a clear head-lock take-down of Henderson in front of the Duke bench, and such an observation has nothing to do with anyone's "sensitivity."

While I agree that players should not be getting into other player's faces with taunts or whatever (and T's are quite appropriate in many cases for doing that) I do have a MAJOR problem that the current trend seems to be to "just give a foul" when a malicious and/or intentional foul has just occurred. Nelson gets undercut with what could have been a season-ending injury, and in another game Henderson gets thrown to the floor with a wrestling take-down.....and the zebras seem more intent with controlling "language"??? :mad:

A couple of well-placed player ejections and game suspensions could do wonders for putting a cap on this increasing problem in the ACC.

As an aside, I would like to note (at least from what I observed on TV) there was none of this "trash play" occurring at the recent game in the Dean Dome. (For now we'll ignore any of the usual Carowhina stuff.) It was a pleasure to see a hard-fought game that did not resemble a hockey match. (I guess I now lose favor for almost saying something positive about the heels?):confused:

k

I think you may have not had as good a vantage point as me if you were at the game. I watched on TV, which afforded me several replays. The takedown was a grab over the shoulder and across the chest, not a headlock take down. Henderson exaggerated it a bit to be sure to draw the foul. Definitely a foul, definitely a grab to preven Henderson from beating him to the spot, and definitely not an extremely dangerous play. To include it in the same conversation as the undercut on Nelson is silly.

Did you scream for Paulus to be ejected when he fouled Costner across the head? Because that was as intentional a foul as what Spears did, and it was a lot more dangerous. If you think Spears deserved more than he got, then Paulus deserves a lot more than he got. Honestly, the Spears foul just wasn't that big a deal.

To give you perspective, Coach K was imploring Singler not to react to the incident. He was exasperated with Singler for getting the technical. Coach K had a fantastic view of the incident. If he had felt that it was deserving of more than a foul, I'm pretty sure he would have been all over the refs. But he wasn't.

yancem
02-10-2008, 01:06 PM
Disagree.

From my vantage point in CIS yesterday, it was a clear head-lock take-down of Henderson in front of the Duke bench, and such an observation has nothing to do with anyone's "sensitivity."

k

Try to find a replay of the incident. I think you may change your mind about the severity of the "take down". Coach K was 15 feet away looking directly at the play and he didn't start screaming and yelling, he smirked and almost laughed. he didn't get disgusted until Singler got his T.

I agree that there has been a lot of very physical and rough play this year that deserved technicals and possibly suspensions, but this wasn't one of them.

MChambers
02-10-2008, 02:12 PM
I think you may have not had as good a vantage point as me if you were at the game. I watched on TV, which afforded me several replays. The takedown was a grab over the shoulder and across the chest, not a headlock take down. Henderson exaggerated it a bit to be sure to draw the foul. Definitely a foul, definitely a grab to preven Henderson from beating him to the spot, and definitely not an extremely dangerous play. To include it in the same conversation as the undercut on Nelson is silly.

Did you scream for Paulus to be ejected when he fouled Costner across the head? Because that was as intentional a foul as what Spears did, and it was a lot more dangerous. If you think Spears deserved more than he got, then Paulus deserves a lot more than he got. Honestly, the Spears foul just wasn't that big a deal.

To give you perspective, Coach K was imploring Singler not to react to the incident. He was exasperated with Singler for getting the technical. Coach K had a fantastic view of the incident. If he had felt that it was deserving of more than a foul, I'm pretty sure he would have been all over the refs. But he wasn't.

I thought Paulus was trying to slap down on the ball, and missed. So he had some thought of making a legitimate defensive play. Spears didn't -- he just grabbed somebody, and he grabbed them hard. That's why I'd call one intentional and the other not.
I'll admit I'm not impartial, but still . . .

CDu
02-10-2008, 04:09 PM
I thought Paulus was trying to slap down on the ball, and missed. So he had some thought of making a legitimate defensive play. Spears didn't -- he just grabbed somebody, and he grabbed them hard. That's why I'd call one intentional and the other not.
I'll admit I'm not impartial, but still . . .

Paulus was, only in the loosest of senses, going for the ball. He was slapping down with the intent of preventing an easy layup for Costner. I'm sure Paulus HOPED he would get all ball, but his intent (and thus the force with which he swatted) was to prevent the bucket in whatever means necessary. If that meant a hard foul across the arms, so be it. The fact that Paulus hit Costner in the head (which is far from where the ball was) indicates that he wasn't being very discriminate in his effort. It is my personal belief that he was fully expecting to commit a hard foul there - if he got lucky and got all ball, so much the better. If not, well, mission still accomplished.

I agree it's not an identical situation. But trust me; fans of State (and UNC, etc) would view that as an egregious foul by Paulus. And I'd actually agree with them. It was much more physical in nature and intent than what Spears did. The only thing worse about what Spears did was that it wasn't at any point within the rules. But just because what Paulus did could be construed as an attempt at a legal play doesn't change the fact that he had a disregard for the well-being of the opposing player as a result of his actions (similar to Spears).

My main point isn't to equate the two. It's to state that what Spears did wasn't that bad. He committed a foul in preventing Henderson from getting to the spot. Henderson sold the foul by falling down. It wasn't thuggish - it was just bad (and lazy) basketball. There's a difference between thuggish play and poor play. Washington's kick to the face of Melchionni was thuggish. If Washington intentionally undercut Nelson, that's thuggish. But what Spears did wasn't thuggish - it was lazy. That's the difference.

MChambers
02-10-2008, 04:48 PM
Paulus was, only in the loosest of senses, going for the ball. He was slapping down with the intent of preventing an easy layup for Costner. I'm sure Paulus HOPED he would get all ball, but his intent (and thus the force with which he swatted) was to prevent the bucket in whatever means necessary. If that meant a hard foul across the arms, so be it. The fact that Paulus hit Costner in the head (which is far from where the ball was) indicates that he wasn't being very discriminate in his effort. It is my personal belief that he was fully expecting to commit a hard foul there - if he got lucky and got all ball, so much the better. If not, well, mission still accomplished.

I agree it's not an identical situation. But trust me; fans of State (and UNC, etc) would view that as an egregious foul by Paulus. And I'd actually agree with them. It was much more physical in nature and intent than what Spears did. The only thing worse about what Spears did was that it wasn't at any point within the rules. But just because what Paulus did could be construed as an attempt at a legal play doesn't change the fact that he had a disregard for the well-being of the opposing player as a result of his actions (similar to Spears).

My main point isn't to equate the two. It's to state that what Spears did wasn't that bad. He committed a foul in preventing Henderson from getting to the spot. Henderson sold the foul by falling down. It wasn't thuggish - it was just bad (and lazy) basketball. There's a difference between thuggish play and poor play. Washington's kick to the face of Melchionni was thuggish. If Washington intentionally undercut Nelson, that's thuggish. But what Spears did wasn't thuggish - it was lazy. That's the difference.

Thanks for analysis. Guess I'd prefer to have both of them called intentional.

CDu
02-10-2008, 04:53 PM
Thanks for analysis. Guess I'd prefer to have both of them called intentional.

That's a fair stance. It's a matter of preference in that case, really.

Kimist
02-10-2008, 06:26 PM
I will defer in my assessment to those (Coach K on bench & TV replays) who perhaps had a "better" view of the foul on Henderson than what I had from upstairs more or less behind the BC bench. It looked pretty deliberate and unnecessary, at least to me and to those nearby.

Re the "Paulus argument": One would think there would be a slight distinction between Paulus (in whatever manner) fouling a player going to the hoop (= expected) versus Henderson going to the deck at the top of the key (= not your normal defensive technique).

I guess I am just a bit tired of the continuing thuggery (real/imaginary/intentional/unintentional) that now seems to occur regularly against the Devils. At least in my somewhat biased dark-blue opinion, it does appear that to the referees yapping is apparently a far more serious offense.

And then, I may still have some unpleasant memories of Mr. Henderson getting ejected from the Dean Dome last year and then missing any ACC tournament play. Maybe the "carry some ketchup with you" idea is relevant.

k

Classof06
02-10-2008, 06:54 PM
Paulus was, only in the loosest of senses, going for the ball. He was slapping down with the intent of preventing an easy layup for Costner. I'm sure Paulus HOPED he would get all ball, but his intent (and thus the force with which he swatted) was to prevent the bucket in whatever means necessary. If that meant a hard foul across the arms, so be it. The fact that Paulus hit Costner in the head (which is far from where the ball was) indicates that he wasn't being very discriminate in his effort. It is my personal belief that he was fully expecting to commit a hard foul there - if he got lucky and got all ball, so much the better. If not, well, mission still accomplished.

I agree it's not an identical situation. But trust me; fans of State (and UNC, etc) would view that as an egregious foul by Paulus. And I'd actually agree with them. It was much more physical in nature and intent than what Spears did. The only thing worse about what Spears did was that it wasn't at any point within the rules. But just because what Paulus did could be construed as an attempt at a legal play doesn't change the fact that he had a disregard for the well-being of the opposing player as a result of his actions (similar to Spears).

My main point isn't to equate the two. It's to state that what Spears did wasn't that bad. He committed a foul in preventing Henderson from getting to the spot. Henderson sold the foul by falling down. It wasn't thuggish - it was just bad (and lazy) basketball. There's a difference between thuggish play and poor play. Washington's kick to the face of Melchionni was thuggish. If Washington intentionally undercut Nelson, that's thuggish. But what Spears did wasn't thuggish - it was lazy. That's the difference.

As someone who was at the game (1st game as an alum!), I'd agree that what Spears did wasn't nearly as bad as it looked. Henderson does a good job of selling fouls, and while he was fouled, he sprinkled a little acting into that particular play. No doubt about it.

DukieInBrasil
02-10-2008, 07:21 PM
I was mos def concerned that we would have an emotional let-down game vs BC on the heels of our destruction of the mighty UNC (snicker-snicker). It appears that we came out in the 1st half in sort-of let-down mode, although we have come out in the 1st half and played worse, so relatively it wasn't a let-down compared to some other games.

The Good
• The PF Position - Singler put together back-to-back 2x-double and has acclimated to D1/ACC play remarkably well. I also like that he doesn't feel the need to defer to his older teammates, not that he has been too shy this year. LT once again put in a solid game, nothing spectacular but worthwhile. It's too bad his FT shooting has gone in the dumps lately b/c he could be even more effective if he could shoot strait from the line. I agree with Jumbo (IIRC) that McClure must be hurt, he can't score and he's not rebounding. This indicates that he just doesn't have lift or power out of his legs.
• The Captain - DeMarcus kept his on/off 20+ streak going with a phenomenal 8-10 FG but accompanied by a miserable 6-12 FT. Just when it looks like DN is getting his head on strait at the line he falls back. This is not to overshadow the rest of his excellent play, pulling in 8 rebs and posting a 5/2 a/to.
• Ball Control - As a team our a/to was very good with special props going to The Captain for leading the team in assists w/only 2 TOs. We also forced BC into a - a/to.
• Rebounding - Once again Duke outrebounded a bigger frontcourt by being more aggressive from the wings, but also picking up 15rebs from the PF position.
• 3pt Shooting - We started off rather slow, but finished above 33% from 3. It's nice to see TK get in the scoring column again, but he was not particularly effective with a 1-4 night from deep.

The Mediocre
• Focus - It's hard to quantify this but after going to UNC and putting on an affirmation of the team's quality, they came home and just didn't bring it for a while. Jumbo posed the q as to whether Duke could go from just beating teams to destroying them, and I agree that we just haven't seen that quality from Duke in the last 2 years. Still a double-digit win in the ACC is nothing to cry over.

The Bad
• FT Shooting - 60% from the line is bad, not as bad as some other games this year, and it kept the game closer than it really should have been. Gerald actually put in a good night at the line, going 3-4, but DN couldn't find the bottom of the net from the charity stripe. Both of these guys have styles that are so well designed for getting to the line and neither of them is reliable. The biggest weakness in the perimeter oriented O that we run is that the 2 guys that get to the line the most are leaving around 5ppg on the floor by missing so many FTs. Plus, LT (and Z) is mos def a liability at the line so we can't afford to run any crunch time O thru him.