PDA

View Full Version : Duke's "go-to guy"?



Bluedawg
02-19-2008, 02:58 PM
Interesting question brough up in today's Chronicle (http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2008/02/19/Column/Blue-Devils.Still.Need.To.Find.GoTo.Guy.Before.March-3219003.shtml)


The Blue Devils have not orchestrated a successful buzzer-beater or made crucial free throws with the game in the balance. On one occasion, they have had to defend a shot in the final seconds, and we all remember how that turned out-Pittsburgh guard Levance Fields nailed a step-back 3-pointer over the outstretched arms of Dave McClure.

And so two questions remain about this squad in close games: Does it have the mettle to win and does it have the ability to execute?

Who is the "go to" guy?

Classof06
02-19-2008, 03:05 PM
That Chronicle excerpt from Bluedawg is why, even as a student, I never read the student columns about our team. I didn't realize we had to have a buzzer-beater this year to be considered a good team. As far as Levance Fields goes, if that's the shot Pitt needed to beat us then so be it. They were 2-15 from 3-point land before Fields hit that shot. I ain't losin sleep over that. And this team definitely has the mettle to win. They came back from two consecutive 9-point halftime defecits; one on the road and one at home. End of discussion.

I don't think Duke necessarily has a go-to-guy, rather go-to-guys. Demarcus, Gerald, Kyle and Greg have all shown the ability to to hit crucial shots and score on crucial possessions in crucial games. Last time I checked, 4 > 1.

If Duke only had one "go to guy", I'd be willing to bet we'd have more than 2 losses right now.

Cameron
02-19-2008, 03:09 PM
If we need a three-ball or a 15 foot jumper to ice/win the game, I want Greg or Kyle taking it. I trust both, and believe they have the cold-blooded instinct to step up and make it more times than not.

I would have said Jon earlier in the season, but he has been very, very erratic as of late. I'm sure he'll pop back up again, though.

Classof06
02-19-2008, 03:11 PM
As I've said before, this team's greatest asset is that it's a different guy every night; I truly believe that should be Duke's slogan this year. You can't key in on just one Duke player because we have at least 4 or 5 that can drop 20 on you in any given game.

Cameron
02-19-2008, 03:11 PM
Then again, Classof06's answer is even better.

I couldn't agree more.

Duvall
02-19-2008, 03:14 PM
Duke has hit crucial free throws late on several occasions to seal tough wins - at Maryland, at UNC, against Marquette. Since Duke has the luxury of having two solid ballhandlers that shoot ~85% from the free throw line, those games didn't have to be won on the last possession.

As for defense, the one time Duke needed to defend a last second shot, they forced a sub-30% 3-Point shooter to take a contested fallaway three-pointer.

It went in. Sometimes that happens.

2535Miles
02-19-2008, 03:21 PM
I think one of the great things about this team is that we have multiple "go-to guys". It really boils down to the situation where facing, and what kinds of match-ups we have on the floor. Perhaps then our guy is Coach K. :cool: He has gotten the most of out of these guys and has done a remarkable job coaching to the TEAM'S strengths.

I love this team.

SMO
02-19-2008, 03:23 PM
As I've said before, this team's greatest asset is that it's a different guy every night; I truly believe that should be Duke's slogan this year. You can't key in on just one Duke player because we have at least 4 or 5 that can drop 20 on you in any given game.

I am becoming very frustrated reading a variety of sportswriters and fans trying to force fit Duke into a preconceived model for basketball success which must include a low post scorer and "go-to" guy without exception. Accordingly, Duke must be flawed because they don't have a Hansbrough, nor do they have a Stephen Curry. Instead, they have 6-7 guys that could put up 20+ points on any given night. Wouldn't it be tougher to play a team with more guys that can beat you than 1-2?

Guess not. It just doesn't fit the model.

SMO
02-19-2008, 03:26 PM
Oh, and of course don't forget the Redick years, especially 2006 when the knock on Duke was that if JJ had a bad night they would lose. Duke was just too dependant on one guy. That team included both must-have elements, the "go-to" guy and the low post scorer, yet there was still criticism of that team as flawed as well. Just proves that sportswriters and analysts can come up with a "weakness" on any team given enough time.

FerryFor50
02-19-2008, 03:26 PM
I am becoming very frustrated reading a variety of sportswriters and fans trying to force fit Duke into a preconceived model for basketball success which must include a low post scorer and "go-to" guy without exception. Accordingly, Duke must be flawed because they don't have a Hansbrough, nor do they have a Stephen Curry. Instead, they have 6-7 guys that could put up 20+ points on any given night. Wouldn't it be tougher to play a team with more guys that can beat you than 1-2?

Guess not. It just doesn't fit the model.

But wouldn't it be nice to have a go-to guy?

Duke's never won a championship without one.

FerryFor50
02-19-2008, 03:27 PM
Oh, and of course don't forget the Redick years, especially 2006 when the knock on Duke was that if JJ had a bad night they would lose. Duke was just too dependant on one guy. That team included both must-have elements, the "go-to" guy and the low post scorer, yet there was still criticism of that team as flawed as well. Just proves that sportswriters and analysts can come up with a "weakness" on any team given enough time.

This is true. But they didn't have the depth they do now (or when they had championship teams). A go-to guy would be icing on the cake. Demarcus tries to be that guy sometimes, but it doesn't always work out for the best of the team.

SMO
02-19-2008, 03:34 PM
But wouldn't it be nice to have a go-to guy?

Duke's never won a championship without one.

Who was the go-to guy in 2001? J Wil, Dunleavy, Boozer? Didn't that team have more than one?

FerryFor50
02-19-2008, 03:35 PM
Who was the go-to guy in 2001? J Wil, Dunleavy, Boozer? Didn't that team have more than one?

J-Will, by far.

But that team was ridiculous. I don't know how they didn't win more championships.

Channing
02-19-2008, 03:38 PM
Who was the go-to guy in 2001? J Wil, Dunleavy, Boozer? Didn't that team have more than one?

Dont forget Battier (Dont EVER forget Battier), or Nate James (who was instrumental in both the regular season and ACC tourney wins over UMD)

As for this team - I think the go to go is determined when matchups are established at that point in the game. If Kyle is being guarded by someone bigger and slower than him (like Oates in the BC game - I think that was Kyle), he can be the go to guy. If Gerald is being guarded by a guy that he can take off the bounce and elevate over - he is the go to guy. If Demarcus is being guarded by a guy he can drive by and muscle to the hoop - he is the go to guy and so on and so forth.

Classof06
02-19-2008, 03:41 PM
Oh, and of course don't forget the Redick years, especially 2006 when the knock on Duke was that if JJ had a bad night they would lose. Duke was just too dependant on one guy. That team included both must-have elements, the "go-to" guy and the low post scorer, yet there was still criticism of that team as flawed as well. Just proves that sportswriters and analysts can come up with a "weakness" on any team given enough time.

I agree. throughout my years at Duke, those teams relied way too heavily on JJ. Shelden was basically a guaranteed double-double but there were games where even when Shelden played great, we'd lose if JJ didn't have a good game.

It's no coincidence that the only year JJ made the Final four was the year he had another star on the perimeter in Luol Deng. Not that the addition of Deng was the only factor but it was a major one.

ugadevil
02-19-2008, 03:44 PM
J-Will, by far.


By far?! As Steven said, don't EVER forget Battier. The 2001 team was Shane Battier's, no doubt about it. The team would want Shane to have it at the end of the game because they believed he wouldn't let them lose. The 2002 team, that's a different story where Jason Williams was the go-to guy.

Johnboy
02-19-2008, 03:45 PM
Our championship teams have always has two or three "go to guys" - look up in the Cameron rafters - do you see any NCAA champions up there without one or more teammates?

1991: Laettner and Hurley in the rafters (McCaffrey's 16 points in the finals didn't hurt either).
1992: Laettner, Hurley and G. Hill in the rafters.
2001: Battier, Williams in the rafters.

I will grant you that not all of these guys were necessarily THE "go to" guy in any particular NCAA championship season, but they all had made BIG plays, and some of their teammates had big games when they weren't up to snuff (I'm thinking Duhon/Dunleavy stepping up for Williams (foul problems) vs. Arizona and Laettner* (7 turnovers) vs. Michigan).

*bad first half - he finished with 19 pts, 7 rebounds for the game

This year, I think we have at least three: Nelson, Paulus and Singler, though I'm happy for Scheyer to be taking BIG free throws or G throwing down jumpshots and dunks. That's been the fun part of this team.

SMO
02-19-2008, 03:47 PM
By far?! As Steven said, don't EVER forget Battier. The 2001 team was Shane Battier's, no doubt about it. The team would want Shane to have it at the end of the game because they believed he wouldn't let them lose. The 2002 team, that's a different story where Jason Williams was the go-to guy.

I omitted Battier but you're exactly right. 4 guys minimum that could be considered go-to based on the situation in 2001. I think it's all about who you're playing and who is hot.

FerryFor50
02-19-2008, 03:50 PM
By far?! As Steven said, don't EVER forget Battier. The 2001 team was Shane Battier's, no doubt about it. The team would want Shane to have it at the end of the game because they believed he wouldn't let them lose. The 2002 team, that's a different story where Jason Williams was the go-to guy.

I didn't forget about Battier.

I still think J-Will was the true "go to" guy on those teams. That doesn't discount the others' importance.

Johnboy
02-19-2008, 03:56 PM
I didn't forget about Battier.

I still think J-Will was the true "go to" guy on those teams. That doesn't discount the others' importance.

Well, until you sent him to the free throw line. :(

I think you will find the consensus here to be that if you must pick ONE go-to guy from that team, it would be Shane. As I said, though, every NCAA Champion we've had at Duke has had two or more "go-to" players. The same might even be said of all our runners-up, though I can think of a couple teams that had one truly dominant "go-to" player and excellent role players surrounding them (1988 and 1994 in particular).

FerryFor50
02-19-2008, 04:02 PM
Well, until you sent him to the free throw line. :(

I think you will find the consensus here to be that if you must pick ONE go-to guy from that team, it would be Shane. As I said, though, every NCAA Champion we've had at Duke has had two or more "go-to" players. The same might even be said of all our runners-up, though I can think of a couple teams that had one truly dominant "go-to" player and excellent role players surrounding them (1988 and 1994 in particular).


Ah yea. Good call about the FTs. Ugh.

Shane to me was always more of the "glue" guy, who did all the little things, and then would hit some big buckets.

But to create his own shot, and take a game winning shot... I'd have J-Will over Battier. To shoot FTs... Battier. :p

ugadevil
02-19-2008, 04:09 PM
Shane to me was always more of the "glue" guy, who did all the little things, and then would hit some big buckets.



He must have been the best "glue" guy of all time since he won NPOY that season. Lots of people would consider Nate James the glue guy on that team.

FerryFor50
02-19-2008, 04:18 PM
He must have been the best "glue" guy of all time since he won NPOY that season. Lots of people would consider Nate James the glue guy on that team.

Like I said, Shane was great.

I just didn't see him as the go-to guy.

Wander
02-19-2008, 04:57 PM
That Chronicle excerpt from Bluedawg is why, even as a student, I never read the student columns about our team.

Alex Fanaroff was excellent. Other than him, though, I agree with you.

Classof06
02-19-2008, 05:25 PM
Alex Fanaroff was excellent. Other than him, though, I agree with you.

Faranoff was on the fence for me but I'll give him benefit of the doubt because of you, Wander haha...

BlueintheFace
02-19-2008, 06:14 PM
I think, like the rest of you, that there is not one go to guy, but I firmly believe that with 15 seconds and the game on the line (RIGHT NOW) K would run a high pick and roll with Singler and Paulus resulting in-

Option1- Paulus hitting an open three
Option2- Paulus hitting Singler on the Pop to the three point line
or Option3- Paulus penetration resulting in a kick out from the lane to Scheyer or Gerald in the Corner.

I think Demarcus is just too prone to getting offensive fouls when driving in traffic. He is great on that drive, but when he hits the wall of bodies he is not great at passing out of it or stopping. Plus, there is the foul shooting...

I think that if Gerald's wrist was better, then a case could be made for an isolation play for Gerald on the wing resulting in a mid-range jumper or a trip to the foul line. But it isnt right now... such is life.

Ultimately, just like last season, I think K wants the ball in Paulus' hands at the end of the game. I gotta say, even with a healthy Gerald, I would want the same. Paulus isn't the most athletic guy and won't make his own shot, but he'll knock down an open one (see-Davidson) or create an open shot for someone else (see- almost every late game three by Singler). Let's just hope we don't have to worry about this situation anytime real soon.

jzp5079
02-19-2008, 10:20 PM
Elliot Williams!!!! (kiddin)


This year our Go-To-Guy - as defined by the guy who we would go to primarily if we just needed points of ANY kind at ANY given moment - is Nelson. I don't even think its a question.

However, we are lucky to have 4 other players who have shown that quality this season (Henderson, Scheyer, Paulus, and against Wake - Smith).

If you HAD to pick 1, and only 1 - it'd be Nelson.



I think this would make for a very interesting Poll - Someone should set it up!

Mudge
02-19-2008, 10:37 PM
Elliot Williams!!!! (kiddin)


This year our Go-To-Guy - as defined by the guy who we would go to primarily if we just needed points of ANY kind at ANY given moment - is Nelson. I don't even think its a question.

However, we are lucky to have 4 other players who have shown that quality this season (Henderson, Scheyer, Paulus, and against Wake - Smith).

If you HAD to pick 1, and only 1 - it'd be Nelson.



That's absolutely questionable-- Nelson is about the 6th person on this team that I would want taking a must have shot-- I was actually encouraged when he fouled out against WF, as I hoped we would play better without him trying to "take the team on his back" and charging into the lane, only to put up a bad shot, as he tried to shoot over taller players that he can't outjump.

Nelson is, by far, the most frustrating player on this team for me to watch, as he doesn't play sound fundamental basketball (which I consider to be the hallmark of Duke basketball): He shoots free throws poorly, he forces bad shots regularly, he charges a lot because he tries to turn his body sideways and jump into players in the lane in order to draw contact (which works only occasionally for him), his passing leaves a lot to be desired, and his dribbling is usually good for at least one turnover per game, due to dribbling off of his leg, foot, or simply losing control. I would prefer all of these players (in order) to take a crucial shot: 1) Singler; 2) Paulus; 3) Scheyer; 4) Smith; 5) Henderson (when healthy).

jzp5079
02-19-2008, 11:14 PM
That's absolutely questionable-- Nelson is about the 6th person on this team that I would want taking a must have shot-- I was actually encouraged when he fouled out against WF, as I hoped we would play better without him trying to "take the team on his back" and charging into the lane, only to put up a bad shot, as he tried to shoot over taller players that he can't outjump.

Nelson is, by far, the most frustrating player on this team for me to watch, as he doesn't play sound fundamental basketball (which I consider to be the hallmark of Duke basketball): He shoots free throws poorly, he forces bad shots regularly, he charges a lot because he tries to turn his body sideways and jump into players in the lane in order to draw contact (which works only occasionally for him), his passing leaves a lot to be desired, and his dribbling is usually good for at least one turnover per game, due to dribbling off of his leg, foot, or simply losing control. I would prefer all of these players (in order) to take a crucial shot: 1) Singler; 2) Paulus; 3) Scheyer; 4) Smith; 5) Henderson (when healthy).

Encouraged when Nelson fouls out of the game?!
Senior Leadership counts for a lot. Nelsons been the man for us more then anyone this season when we needed a bucket.

1) He shoots free throws poorly - as a lot of players do with larger hands - See Rajon Rondo - But he gets to the free throw line more then anyone else on the team. (35 more times this season then the next closest player in Henderson).

2) He forces bad shots regularly -

Hes Got the best shooting percentage out of any of the players you named!!!!

3) Don't have any statistics on how many charges he commits a game. Do you?

4) He is second on the team with assists at 3.2 a game with the third best assist/turnover ratio.

Bob Green
02-19-2008, 11:15 PM
That's absolutely questionable-- Nelson is about the 6th person on this team that I would want taking a must have shot-- I was actually encouraged when he fouled out against WF, as I hoped we would play better without him trying to "take the team on his back" and charging into the lane, only to put up a bad shot, as he tried to shoot over taller players that he can't outjump.



I'm going to have to disagree with your whole post. Nelson is having a superb Senior season and is in competition for 1st Team All-ACC Honors. He has taken this team on his back and carried them to victory multiple times this season. He will be the team MVP. It appears you are overreacting to one bad game.

Johnboy
02-19-2008, 11:22 PM
OK, he's currently tied for the lead here (http://basketball.seniorclassaward.com/). Go vote for him now.

Channing
02-20-2008, 12:18 AM
The Demarcus you are talking about reminds me of Demarcus last year. This year, and especially in ACC play, it seems to me that Demarcus has been our best player (Paulus at times has been - but I think overall Demarcus has been better). Even in this past game - yea his second half wasnt necessarily up to par but he played a terrific first half.

Jumbo
02-20-2008, 12:47 AM
That's absolutely questionable-- Nelson is about the 6th person on this team that I would want taking a must have shot-- I was actually encouraged when he fouled out against WF, as I hoped we would play better without him trying to "take the team on his back" and charging into the lane, only to put up a bad shot, as he tried to shoot over taller players that he can't outjump.

Nelson is, by far, the most frustrating player on this team for me to watch, as he doesn't play sound fundamental basketball (which I consider to be the hallmark of Duke basketball): He shoots free throws poorly, he forces bad shots regularly, he charges a lot because he tries to turn his body sideways and jump into players in the lane in order to draw contact (which works only occasionally for him), his passing leaves a lot to be desired, and his dribbling is usually good for at least one turnover per game, due to dribbling off of his leg, foot, or simply losing control. I would prefer all of these players (in order) to take a crucial shot: 1) Singler; 2) Paulus; 3) Scheyer; 4) Smith; 5) Henderson (when healthy).

Interesting, since Duke outscored Wake by three points with Markie in the game and got outscored by 16 without him. So, when he fouled out, were you hoping Duke would lose by more?

Your description of DeMarcus Nelson is an indictment of you, not him. Have you watched him this year? While he isn't a paradigm of fundamental play, his improvement is substantial. Last night, he resorted to "head-down" mode a bit, but overall he has been much more aware when driving to the basket, has changed speeds and directions and has made plays for others. His FT shooting is certainly a concern, but the rest of your analysis his misguided hyperbole.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 01:19 AM
Encouraged when Nelson fouls out of the game?!
Senior Leadership counts for a lot. Nelsons been the man for us more then anyone this season when we needed a bucket.

1) He shoots free throws poorly - as a lot of players do with larger hands - See Rajon Rondo - But he gets to the free throw line more then anyone else on the team. (35 more times this season then the next closest player in Henderson).

2) He forces bad shots regularly -

Hes Got the best shooting percentage out of any of the players you named!!!!

3) Don't have any statistics on how many charges he commits a game. Do you?

4) He is second on the team with assists at 3.2 a game with the third best assist/turnover ratio.

I don't have any statistics on how big his hands are. Do you? Regardless, that's no excuse.

On charges, I note that he was called for either one or two (depending on whether you believe Tim Brando's explanation for one first-half Duke turnover while the ball was in Nelson's hands) offensive fouls against WF. If you don't think he charges into the crowd of taller players around the basket a lot, turning his body sideways to absorb the contact he induces, start counting the times he does it in the next game-- then count how many of those instances result in either a bad/forced shot, a charge, or even a foul drawn (followed by him missing at least one of the free throws). I'd rather get a good, open shot by somebody who shoots a slightly lower percentage than Nelson, than a bad, contested, forced shot by Nelson. Nelson's shooting percentage is boosted by the fact that he gets more uncontested baskets off of steals than anybody else on the team-- Kudos to him for that, but that hardly justifies him charging into the teeth of the defense to force up a bad, contested shot.

While you're at it, count the number of times he gets a defensive rebound and then dribbles it into the frontcourt himself, rather than making an outlet pass or giving the ball to our point guard. I'd be interested also to know if he is getting credit (on turnovers) for the number of bad passes that he throws at the feet of teammates that lead to turnovers-- in the WF game, the one time he did pass the ball into the frontcourt after a defensive rebound, he threw a poor pass which was very difficult for Paulus to handle without going out of bounds-- I don't know whether Paulus or Nelson got the turnover, but it should have been Nelson. He throws a pass at a teammate's feet about once a game, but I always wonder who gets charged with the turnover.

His problem is he is trying to do too much, and he ends up trying to do more than he is capable of. The people with whom I talk about Duke games all seem to agree with me on these points-- and it is hardly specific to the WF game.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 01:20 AM
I'm going to have to disagree with your whole post. Nelson is having a superb Senior season and is in competition for 1st Team All-ACC Honors. He has taken this team on his back and carried them to victory multiple times this season. He will be the team MVP. It appears you are overreacting to one bad game.

Singler is the team MVP-- without him, this team is every bit as frustrating to watch and underachieving as last year's team-- with him, they are far overachieving.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 01:38 AM
Interesting, since Duke outscored Wake by three points with Markie in the game and got outscored by 16 without him. So, when he fouled out, were you hoping Duke would lose by more?

Your description of DeMarcus Nelson is an indictment of you, not him. Have you watched him this year? While he isn't a paradigm of fundamental play, his improvement is substantial. Last night, he resorted to "head-down" mode a bit, but overall he has been much more aware when driving to the basket, has changed speeds and directions and has made plays for others. His FT shooting is certainly a concern, but the rest of your analysis his misguided hyperbole.

Well, that's funny, I don't feel indicted at all--my conversations with Duke friends about this year's team and games indicate that they agree that Nelson is trying to do more than he is capable of. We watch every game beginning to end. Yes, Nelson is better this year than past years--he loses the ball off his dribble less often, he throws the ball off his teammate's feet less often-- but he still hasn't broken himself of that Superman mentality that he probably picked up in HS playing against lesser athletes (with less size) that could not physically stop him. Every time he charges into the paint with 2 or more bigger players in there, I cringe, whether he gets lucky and scores or not.

Surely you do not regard the last period of the WF game as indicative of Duke's regular play without Nelson-- that period was rapidly degraded as a sample by the successive loss of several other starters, the large differential (and small remaining time) leading to quick, forced shots by numerous Duke players, and the need to gamble on defense and/or foul intentionally leading to either open dunks or free throws for WF. This period of the WF game was unlike any other period in a Duke game this season-- including other games where Nelson was either rested or in foul trouble.

As mentioned on another thread, I view the team with Singler, Paulus, Smith, Henderson (when healthy), and Scheyer as much better at the end of games, as they are better free throw shooters (except Henderson), better passers, and nobody in that group is inclined to bull-rush the basket to score, when there is an open teammate on the perimeter or cutting to the basket. Those five are like a well-practiced jazz quintet passing the ball around smoothly, who are then disrupted by Nelson's tendency to try to take over the game himself.

Bob Green
02-20-2008, 03:40 AM
Singler is the team MVP-- without him, this team is every bit as frustrating to watch and underachieving as last year's team-- with him, they are far overachieving.

Once again, I must disagree with your post. DeMarcus Nelson has better stats than Kyle Singler in eight out of 11 categories, they tie in one, and Kyle rebounds/shoots free throws better:


Nelson Singler
Min 31.3 28.7
Points 15.5 14.4
Rebs 5.9 6.1
Assists 3.2 1.4
TO 2.3 2.4
A/T 1.4/1 1/1.7
PF 2.2 3.1
FG% 0.498 0.498
FT% 0.616 0.771
3P% 0.414 0.388
PPS 1.47 1.42

DeMarcus Nelson is our MVP. Luckily, both players play for Duke.

jzp5079
02-20-2008, 09:44 AM
Subjective responses to objective reasoning.

FerryFor50
02-20-2008, 10:52 AM
I'm going to straddle the fence here with Mudge and his detractors.

Nelson IS much improved this year, but Mudge is right - he tends to try to do more than he's capable of at times, which sometimes results in positives, but often results in negatives.

I can't count how many times I have seen Nelson drive into the lane this year, see a double or triple team, and STILL try to shoot the ball rather than kick it out to one of the several wide open 3 point threats.

I wouldn't trade Nelson for the world, but I'd like to see him play a little more unselfishly at times.

mgtr
02-20-2008, 11:34 AM
Gee, we have two guys who contend for MVP and we are arguing who is better. I would say that is a wonderful position to be in. I bet that any team we play would gladly take either of them.

DukeDevilDeb
02-20-2008, 12:27 PM
Dont forget Battier (Dont EVER forget Battier), or Nate James (who was instrumental in both the regular season and ACC tourney wins over UMD)

As for this team - I think the go to go is determined when matchups are established at that point in the game. If Kyle is being guarded by someone bigger and slower than him (like Oates in the BC game - I think that was Kyle), he can be the go to guy. If Gerald is being guarded by a guy that he can take off the bounce and elevate over - he is the go to guy. If Demarcus is being guarded by a guy he can drive by and muscle to the hoop - he is the go to guy and so on and so forth.

Ask Coach K who the go-to guy was on the 2001 team, and he will say, "Battier" without a doubt. Look back on the last two games of the 2001 tournament... without Battier, we're gone.

DukeDevilDeb
02-20-2008, 12:31 PM
OK, he's currently tied for the lead here (http://basketball.seniorclassaward.com/). Go vote for him now.

Let's give Markie some votes!

Jumbo
02-20-2008, 02:34 PM
While you're at it, count the number of times he gets a defensive rebound and then dribbles it into the frontcourt himself, rather than making an outlet pass or giving the ball to our point guard.

The whole team has been taught to do that this year -- Coach K said as much in the preseason. Everyone from Scheyer to Singler looks to push the ball on their own after a defensive rebound. Hatred has left you blind.

Jumbo
02-20-2008, 02:35 PM
As mentioned on another thread, I view the team with Singler, Paulus, Smith, Henderson (when healthy), and Scheyer as much better at the end of games, as they are better free throw shooters (except Henderson), better passers, and nobody in that group is inclined to bull-rush the basket to score, when there is an open teammate on the perimeter or cutting to the basket. Those five are like a well-practiced jazz quintet passing the ball around smoothly, who are then disrupted by Nelson's tendency to try to take over the game himself.

You think Henderson is a better passer than Nelson? Wow. Just wow.

TwoDukeTattoos
02-20-2008, 02:39 PM
If Duke only had one "go to guy", I'd be willing to bet we'd have more than 2 losses right now.[/QUOTE]

I agree, Duke is stocked with go-to players. In fact, that may be the x-factor that may elevate us deep into the tourney. And the press hasn't covered that aspect very much.

Classof06
02-20-2008, 02:45 PM
Singler is the team MVP-- without him, this team is every bit as frustrating to watch and underachieving as last year's team-- with him, they are far overachieving.

This is a pretty bold statement. First off, Demarcus is undoubtedly our MVP, Krzyzewski said so after the first Miami game, and I quote: "There’s no more valuable player for us than him [Nelson]. It’s not even close".

I love Singler but much like Luol Deng, he's improved as the season has gone along; Nelson's been our rock all year. And while it's easy to say Singler's the reason we're better this year, you have to look at the fact that we had 3 freshman this year and all 3 have made us a substantially deeper (and thus better) team. Having a backup to Paulus in Nolan Smith has been absolutely crucial to this team. Singler's a major reason for our success but he's far from the only one.

As far as the overachieving/underachieving, I don't think Duke necessarily underachieved last year. Should we have beaten VCU? Yes, but Duke was a very young team and still won 2/3 of their games. Do you know how many schools would kill to go 22-11 and 8-8 in the ACC? As far as this year, however, I do think we're overachieving. Nobody expected Duke to fight for a 1 seed this year, I know I didn't. I expected Duke to have about 4 losses at this point. Needless to say, I've been pleasantly surprised.

FerryFor50
02-20-2008, 02:54 PM
This is a pretty bold statement. First off, Demarcus is undoubtedly our MVP, Krzyzewski said so after the first Miami game, and I quote: "There’s no more valuable player for us than him [Nelson]. It’s not even close".

I love Singler but much like Luol Deng, he's improved as the season has gone along; Nelson's been our rock all year. And while it's easy to say Singler's the reason we're better this year, you have to look at the fact that we had 3 freshman this year and all 3 have made us a substantially deeper (and thus better) team. Having a backup to Paulus in Nolan Smith has been absolutely crucial to this team. Singler's a major reason for our success but he's far from the only one.

As far as the overachieving/underachieving, I don't think Duke necessarily underachieved last year. Should we have beaten VCU? Yes, but Duke was a very young team and still won 2/3 of their games. Do you know how many schools would kill to go 22-11 and 8-8 in the ACC? As far as this year, however, I do think we're overachieving. Nobody expected Duke to fight for a 1 seed this year, I know I didn't. I expected Duke to have about 4 losses at this point. Needless to say, I've been pleasantly surprised.

I dunno man.... 22-11 and 8-8 in the ACC is underachieving for Duke.

This isn't Clemson we're talking about, where that is a top-notch season. :p

Classof06
02-20-2008, 03:05 PM
I dunno man.... 22-11 and 8-8 in the ACC is underachieving for Duke.

This isn't Clemson we're talking about, where that is a top-notch season. :p

It's definitely debatable; I can easily see why some would say Duke underachieved.

Duke is Duke but even we aren't immune to the struggles of a young team; last year was Duke's youngest in decades.

jzp5079
02-20-2008, 05:33 PM
I don't have any statistics on how big his hands are. Do you? Regardless, that's no excuse.

On charges, I note that he was called for either one or two (depending on whether you believe Tim Brando's explanation for one first-half Duke turnover while the ball was in Nelson's hands) offensive fouls against WF. If you don't think he charges into the crowd of taller players around the basket a lot, turning his body sideways to absorb the contact he induces, start counting the times he does it in the next game-- then count how many of those instances result in either a bad/forced shot, a charge, or even a foul drawn (followed by him missing at least one of the free throws). I'd rather get a good, open shot by somebody who shoots a slightly lower percentage than Nelson, than a bad, contested, forced shot by Nelson. Nelson's shooting percentage is boosted by the fact that he gets more uncontested baskets off of steals than anybody else on the team-- Kudos to him for that, but that hardly justifies him charging into the teeth of the defense to force up a bad, contested shot.

While you're at it, count the number of times he gets a defensive rebound and then dribbles it into the frontcourt himself, rather than making an outlet pass or giving the ball to our point guard. I'd be interested also to know if he is getting credit (on turnovers) for the number of bad passes that he throws at the feet of teammates that lead to turnovers-- in the WF game, the one time he did pass the ball into the frontcourt after a defensive rebound, he threw a poor pass which was very difficult for Paulus to handle without going out of bounds-- I don't know whether Paulus or Nelson got the turnover, but it should have been Nelson. He throws a pass at a teammate's feet about once a game, but I always wonder who gets charged with the turnover.

His problem is he is trying to do too much, and he ends up trying to do more than he is capable of. The people with whom I talk about Duke games all seem to agree with me on these points-- and it is hardly specific to the WF game.

Can you squelch people on these message boards?

12_2bretired
02-20-2008, 05:52 PM
I think this thread has drifted off a bit here and it's interesting to read everyones thoughts on the subject. Both this years team and the great Duke teams of the past had more than one "go-to guy" and for me it makes them more fun to watch and improves their chances of making a serious run.

When talking about a go-to guy, i think it breaks down into two and maybe more categories:

1. Who is going to carry the load for the majority of the game? Your #1 option. The guy most teams focus on stopping.
So far this guy has been Demarcus. He is a senior leader and has filled up the stat sheet almost every night. If you stop him than Duke struggles. I think Singler has really improved and will fill this role nicely in the coming years but right now i say its Nelson.

2. Who do you want to have the ball and the end of the game either for a big shot or just to secure a win?
While this could easily be the same player and for most teams it is, this year for me that player is Paulus. Now matter how much he struggles during the game he seems to recover in time and do what needs to be done to get the win. The way he is shooting threes right now reminds me a bit of Hurley. When you need a big one to drop he hits it. He handles the ball and pressure well and is hitting free throws as well. In the closing minutes the ball has to be in his hands.

While these may not hold true every single night, i think they do for the most part. I think this represents 2 different ways of viewing " go-to guys" . Like i said this could be the same person. I think we as fans and Duke basketball is fortunate to have a few different players that can fill this role.

Just my 2 cents.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 07:31 PM
I dunno man.... 22-11 and 8-8 in the ACC is underachieving for Duke.

This isn't Clemson we're talking about, where that is a top-notch season. :p

Agreed... I'm so tired of the young excuse and the injured excuse-- DBR plays those tapes so often, I'm surprised they haven't broken in the machine... Florida was young when they won the championship in 06 and still not old when they won in 07-- nobody good gets old anymore, they go to the NBA. Duke was young in 01 when we won, and not old when we blew it in 02.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 07:33 PM
Can you squelch people on these message boards?

Yeah, how can I squelch you-- oh, wait, that function went away when we lost the Sagarmatha board that James built from scratch.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 07:35 PM
This is a pretty bold statement. First off, Demarcus is undoubtedly our MVP, Krzyzewski said so after the first Miami game, and I quote: "There’s no more valuable player for us than him [Nelson]. It’s not even close".

I love Singler but much like Luol Deng, he's improved as the season has gone along; Nelson's been our rock all year. And while it's easy to say Singler's the reason we're better this year, you have to look at the fact that we had 3 freshman this year and all 3 have made us a substantially deeper (and thus better) team. Having a backup to Paulus in Nolan Smith has been absolutely crucial to this team. Singler's a major reason for our success but he's far from the only one.

As far as the overachieving/underachieving, I don't think Duke necessarily underachieved last year. Should we have beaten VCU? Yes, but Duke was a very young team and still won 2/3 of their games. Do you know how many schools would kill to go 22-11 and 8-8 in the ACC? As far as this year, however, I do think we're overachieving. Nobody expected Duke to fight for a 1 seed this year, I know I didn't. I expected Duke to have about 4 losses at this point. Needless to say, I've been pleasantly surprised.

Exactly-- Singler improves by the week-- by the end of the year, there will be no doubt who the most indispensable player on this team is...there's already no doubt in my mind. I just hope the kid stays more than 1 or 2 years, because I know who the pros are going to want most on this team.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 07:37 PM
You think Henderson is a better passer than Nelson? Wow. Just wow.

I think Henderson is a better team player than Nelson, who fits better into the whole than Nelson, because he doesn't try to do things that he simply can't do on a regular basis, thereby undermining the cumulative capability of the other four players on the floor.

Mudge
02-20-2008, 07:41 PM
The whole team has been taught to do that this year -- Coach K said as much in the preseason. Everyone from Scheyer to Singler looks to push the ball on their own after a defensive rebound. Hatred has left you blind.

So an outlet pass to an open teammate down the floor in the frontcourt, that might lead to an uncontested shot (layup or 3-pointer) is not desired anymore? This isn't good fundamental basketball, if it's really what is being taught, and hasn't been since Russell made the outlet pass a key to fastbreak basketball. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the fastbreak, and Phoenix wants the ball in Nash's hands on the outlet, not Boris Diaw.

Classof06
02-20-2008, 07:51 PM
Agreed... I'm so tired of the young excuse and the injured excuse-- DBR plays those tapes so often, I'm surprised they haven't broken in the machine... Florida was young when they won the championship in 06 and still not old when they won in 07-- nobody good gets old anymore, they go to the NBA. Duke was young in 01 when we won, and not old when we blew it in 02.

I agree in that college basketball has changed to the point where any BCS conference junior averaging 10 points or more is almost expected to enter the draft.

But I really don't think it's an excuse to call Duke a young team and it definitely wasn't an excuse last year. That's not me making excuses it's a fact; this year, we have one scholarship senior and one scholarship junior that hasn't missed a year due to injury (Paulus). How is that not young? When you're 10-man rotation consists of 3 freshman (Singler, King, Nolan) and sophomores (Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas, Zoubek); that's young.

UCLA - 5 Juniors (Collison, Shipp, Aboya, Mbah a Moute, Roll), 1 senior (Mata-Real)

Kansas - 3 Seniors (Robinson, Kaun, Jackson), 2 Juniors (Chalmers, Rush)

Memphis - 2 Seniors (Dorsey, Allen), 3 Juniors (CDR, Dozier, Antonio Anderson)

UNC - 1 senior (Thomas), 4 juniors (Ginyard, Frasor, Green, Hansbrough)

Duke - 1 senior (Nelson), 2 juniors (Paulus, McClure-who averages 1 pt, 2rebs a game and missed a season due to injury)


Still don't think Duke is young?

Mudge
02-20-2008, 08:03 PM
Once again, I must disagree with your post. DeMarcus Nelson has better stats than Kyle Singler in eight out of 11 categories, they tie in one, and Kyle rebounds/shoots free throws better:


Nelson Singler
Min 31.3 28.7
Points 15.5 14.4
Rebs 5.9 6.1
Assists 3.2 1.4
TO 2.3 2.4
A/T 1.4/1 1/1.7
PF 2.2 3.1
FG% 0.498 0.498
FT% 0.616 0.771
3P% 0.414 0.388
PPS 1.47 1.42

DeMarcus Nelson is our MVP. Luckily, both players play for Duke.

This is quite helpful-- here is what I see in the above numbers:
1) Identical points per minute played (actually slightly higher for Singler, but not enough to argue over.)
2) More rebounds/game and per minute for Singler (to be expected for a front-court player vs. a backcourt player).
3) More assists for Nelson (again, to be expected for a backcourt player over a frontcourt player).
4) Slightly more TO/minute for Singler-- this is the one stat that really surprises me- I would be interested to see if this season-long data is also supported by the trend over, say the last 10 games, as Singler is getting better every week, while Nelson is a 4th year player, and on less of a learning curve.
5) Slightly more fouls for Singler-- again, what I would expect for a front-court player guarding bigger, more physical players down low, where the play tends to be more physical.
6) Equal FG shooting percentage but notably higher FT shooting percentage for Singler, which indicates that Singler is more efficient at producing points per ball possession than Nelson, because players do not get a shot attempt when fouled (unless they make the basket, and get the bonus), so Singler is more than making up for his 2.6% lower percentage on 3-pointers by his 15.5% higher percentage on free throws. This anomaly throws off the PPS stat, IMO, showing Nelson with a higher points per shot, but not recognizing the lower efficiency of Nelson on points per ball possession (exacerbated, when one factors in how many times Nelson misses the front end of 1-and-1 FTs, thereby not even getting a second FT.)

Nelson is your MVP; Singler is mine.

dukestheheat
02-20-2008, 08:05 PM
If Duke only had one "go to guy", I'd be willing to bet we'd have more than 2 losses right now.

I agree, Duke is stocked with go-to players. In fact, that may be the x-factor that may elevate us deep into the tourney. And the press hasn't covered that aspect very much.[/QUOTE]

Super post and pick up.

dth.

Mudge
02-24-2008, 10:41 PM
On charges, I note that he was called for either one or two (depending on whether you believe Tim Brando's explanation for one first-half Duke turnover while the ball was in Nelson's hands) offensive fouls against WF. If you don't think he charges into the crowd of taller players around the basket a lot, turning his body sideways to absorb the contact he induces, start counting the times he does it in the next game-- then count how many of those instances result in either a bad/forced shot, a charge, or even a foul drawn (followed by him missing at least one of the free throws).

Nelson's problem is he is trying to do too much, and he ends up trying to do more than he is capable of. The people with whom I talk about Duke games all seem to agree with me on these points-- and it is hardly specific to the WF game.

Unfortunately, a total of only ~20 minutes of Duke's last two games have been broadcast in my viewing area, but in the 20 minutes of the St. Johns' game that I was privileged to see, Nelson managed to get called for one offensive foul in the lane for charging in with his shoulder turned sideways, and got away with another charge on a spin move into the lane that was so egregious that St. Johns' coach drew a technical foul complaining about it. Not exactly a scientific survey, but still a fairly notable trend in the only 20 minutes of Duke basketball that I have seen since the WF game (when I posted the above note about Nelson's charges.)

I'm not sure Nelson has reduced his tendency to do this at all from his freshman year, which is one reason he frustrates me so... contrast that with Shelden's dramatic improvement in this area from his freshman year to his senior year.

Jumbo
02-24-2008, 10:58 PM
Unfortunately, a total of only ~20 minutes of Duke's last two games have been broadcast in my viewing area, but in the 20 minutes of the St. Johns' game that I was privileged to see, Nelson managed to get called for one offensive foul in the lane for charging in with his shoulder turned sideways, and got away with another charge on a spin move into the lane that was so egregious that St. Johns' coach drew a technical foul complaining about it. Not exactly a scientific survey, but still a fairly notable trend in the only 20 minutes of Duke basketball that I have seen since the WF game (when I posted the above note about Nelson's charges.)

I'm not sure Nelson has reduced his tendency to do this at all from his freshman year, which is one reason he frustrates me so... contrast that with Shelden's dramatic improvement in this area from his freshman year to his senior year.

You're responding to yourself. If that doesn't tell you something at this point, I'm not sure what will.

dukegirlinsc
02-24-2008, 11:02 PM
J-Will, by far.

But that team was ridiculous. I don't know how they didn't win more championships.

the nba is why it didn't happen.

dukegirlinsc
02-24-2008, 11:02 PM
Ask Coach K who the go-to guy was on the 2001 team, and he will say, "Battier" without a doubt. Look back on the last two games of the 2001 tournament... without Battier, we're gone.

i agree...to the fullest extent possible. :D

Mudge
02-24-2008, 11:27 PM
You're responding to yourself. If that doesn't tell you something at this point, I'm not sure what will.

I initially started by quoting your own response to my previous post discussing Nelson's charging tendencies, but the "quote" function drops out the quote within a quote, so I found it more compelling to re-use my initial point about watching what Nelson did in future games... of course, every lone voice in the wilderness ought to be disregarded-- they're all nutjobs and crackpots, like Elijah, John, etc.

Jumbo
02-24-2008, 11:31 PM
I initially started by quoting your own response to my previous post discussing Nelson's charging tendencies, but the "quote" function drops out the quote within a quote, so I found it more compelling to re-use my initial point about watching what Nelson did in future games... of course, every lone voice in the wilderness ought to be disregarded-- they're all nutjobs and crackpots, like Elijah, John, etc.

Yup, you're a regular prophet. But you will not use this board as your pulpit to bully DeMarcus Nelson with baseless, mindless carping. For one example, take your insistence that Nelson's pushing the ball after a rebound was some violation of a fundamental basketball truism. I give you the voice of one Coach K, prior to this season:

"When you come to perimeter players, DeMarcus [Nelson] and G [Henderson] can get a rebound, and push it up. When it doesn’t have to become just a point guard-oriented break you become tougher to defend in the break."
http://www.wral.com/sports/story/1953427/

Mudge
02-24-2008, 11:50 PM
Yup, you're a regular prophet. But you will not use this board as your pulpit to bully DeMarcus Nelson with baseless, mindless carping. For one example, take your insistence that Nelson's pushing the ball after a rebound was some violation of a fundamental basketball truism. I give you the voice of one Coach K, prior to this season:

"When you come to perimeter players, DeMarcus [Nelson] and G [Henderson] can get a rebound, and push it up. When it doesn’t have to become just a point guard-oriented break you become tougher to defend in the break."
http://www.wral.com/sports/story/1953427/

Yeah, that's right-- it's baseless, mindless carping to try to cite specific later examples to prove a point I argued earlier-- it would be better to just argue about gut feelings... I think you yourself acknowledged that Nelson had reverted "a bit to head-down mode" in the WF game.

As for pushing it up the floor, when I brought it up, I acknowledged that sometimes Nelson constitutes a one-man fastbreak-- when he DOES push it up. What I don't understand is how many times he gets a defensive rebound, dribbles out to the side IN THE BACKCOURT, and then dribbles up the floor at a moderate pace, never attempting to make an outlet pass to players ahead of him or to the point guard. This usually happens when Nelson gets a rebound deeper under the basket, rather than on long caroms out to the top of the key (which are the ones he usually tries to push himself).

My perception is that, unless Nelson takes it all the way to the hoop himself, he almost never makes the outlet pass to a teammate up the floor. I'd understand that SOMETIMES his teammates are all well-covered by opponents-- but every time-- No, I'd expect to see at least some outlet passes from Nelson to teammates upcourt. I imagine you would not argue that players should never make an outlet pass from deep underneath their own defensive basket-- if so, Wes Unseld, Bill Russell, and Bill Walton would hardly have been celebrated for their abilities in this area.

Uncle Drew
02-25-2008, 12:04 AM
Forgive me if this has already been stated, but I read through the first several posts and agreed with what was said. The media is trying to put Duke in a category or mold like that of past teams. But to be frank I'm not sure I've EVER seen a college basketball team like this one and certainly not at Duke. Having a "go to guy" (and by that I am assuming means a guy you want to gave the ball in their hands to take and make the winning shot) is nice, but I have to agree with many other posters that I can see several Duke players able to do just this.

In my opinion our go to guy has been with Duke for over 25 years and he goes by the name Mike Krzyzewski. He's drawn up his fair share of buzzer beaters by various players over the years. And I honestly think he could draw up a money play depending on the situation for anyone from Nelson to Zoubek.

And please don't take that like I'm kissing K butt. The man has made me eat more than my fair share of my own words and crow this season. There were situations last year where I was of the opinion he'd lost the fire in his belly and ability to adapt. But his adaptations have taken a team with obvious flaws and focused on the players strengths. Granted the Wake and Miami losses irked the crap out of a lot of us. But even the way Duke has handled those losses just shows Coach K is no stick in the mud.

mgtr
02-25-2008, 02:20 AM
The ideal go to guy is the guy who happens to have a decent shot. In other words, all five of your guys are go to guys.
Consider the alternative: We have one super go to guy who will save the game, America, and all that is right with the world: Captain JJ. Most nights he does an admirable job fulfilling his god-given role. But some nights, he just can't put the ball into the old peach basket, and we come up short. How much better off are we if we have two, three, four additional step-up guys who can get the job done if JJ has a hangnail or hangover.