PDA

View Full Version : Man of the Match vs. NC State



Jumbo
03-01-2008, 01:20 PM
Who was the Man of the Match in the 3/1 game at NC State?

Edit: The correct answer is "Jon Scheyer." Those who don't vote for Jon Scheyer will be hunted down by Karl Rove. I'm Jumbo, and I approve this message.

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 01:22 PM
To answer my own question, there's no doubt in my mind that it was Scheyer. He kept Duke from ever falling too far behind, scored when he had to, got to the line and made a ton of nice passes that either led to assists, or wide-open jumpers that guys missed. Add in some really good defense on the wing (including a key steal late in the game) during an afternoon where the team struggled on that end, and it was an easy pick for me.

freedevil
03-01-2008, 01:24 PM
I went with Scheyer as well, for the same reasons as Jumbo.

Saratoga2
03-01-2008, 01:24 PM
To answer my own question, there's no doubt in my mind that it was Scheyer. He kept Duke from ever falling too far behind, scored when he had to, got to the line and made a ton of nice passes that either led to assists, or wide-open jumpers that guys missed. Add in some really good defense on the wing (including a key steal late in the game) during an afternoon where the team struggled on that end, and it was an easy pick for me.

Scheyer played a great game and kept the team in it all the way. While Henderson, Paulus and Nelson did well, Scheyer was superb

throatybeard
03-01-2008, 01:25 PM
there's no doubt in my mind

Did Gary steal your login? :D

Wander
03-01-2008, 01:28 PM
Demarcus and Jon had similar numbers. So the tiebreaker is - who expected to see Demarcus hit the winning free throws in a close game?

WeepingThomasHill
03-01-2008, 01:30 PM
He just keeps getting better in every facet of the game. He can hit the 3, the mid range and finish around the goal. I love his new ball fakes. He is our glue on D. He is just so much tougher this year than last. He is a becoming a bigger Juan Dixon.

weezie
03-01-2008, 01:32 PM
But, Demarcus making that late 3, looking down and stepping back and then NAILING it?!
Holy smokes.

VTBaller03
03-01-2008, 01:33 PM
I have to go with Demarcus, despite Scheyer's excellent play and Paulus' shooting, it was Nelson's FT shooting that sealed #800.

STLDukeFan4
03-01-2008, 01:34 PM
I went with Nelson..his 3 at the end of the game, then the 2 freethrows...Great game by Jon too though.

Ben63
03-01-2008, 01:36 PM
Nelson. W/o him, we have chance at the end. He hit the FT's, made some 3balls, and was the senior leader that we needed in adversity.

Could have voted for Jon as well.

PumpkinFunk
03-01-2008, 01:39 PM
Nelson, but barely. Scheyer played superbly, and kept us alive, but DMarc won us the game.

Bob Green
03-01-2008, 01:39 PM
I voted for DeMarcus Nelson as his step back 3-pointer and FTs were critical. However, Scheyer definitely played a tremendous game.

Madrasdukie
03-01-2008, 01:41 PM
Torn between Mr.Consistent and and Mr. Clutch (there's something to be said for someone who overcomes a sub-par game, and not only plays better but does things he usually doesn't do well (DeMarcus: free-throws and that awesome three).
However, I think consistency shouldn't weigh against anyone and therefore, my vote is for Jon with a huge pat on the back to Nelson and kudos to everybody on the team esp. Lance.

Chard
03-01-2008, 01:43 PM
Demarcus shot so well at the free throw line that I can't overlook the effort. The shots wouldn't fall for most of the game but he took a big one at the end and then hit at the free throw line when needed most. With out the great team performance from the charity stripe Duke wouldn't be leaving Raleigh with a W.

This would be a great time for a co-MOM as I believe both deserved it.

rthomas
03-01-2008, 01:47 PM
Lance Thomas

juise
03-01-2008, 01:48 PM
Jon was MOTM for the first 30 minutes and Markie was MOTM for the last 10. I had to go with Jon because I don't think Duke has a chance to steal this one without his perfect start.

juise
03-01-2008, 01:52 PM
Lance Thomas

I loved his attitude after that hard fall. I wish he would have knocked the FT's down, but he got up and clapped... and showed the fighting spirit our team needed.

bluepenguin
03-01-2008, 01:57 PM
This would be a great time for a co-MOM as I believe both deserved it.

I agree - we need an option to vote for more than one!

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 01:59 PM
Another reason to vote for for Jon:
Scheyer's plus/minus = +12
Nelson's plus/minus = -9

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 02:01 PM
I voted for DeMarcus Nelson as his step back 3-pointer and FTs were critical. However, Scheyer definitely played a tremendous game.

Hey Bob, who made the pass that drew the entire defense, leaving Nelson wide open for said three-pointer? ;)

dyedwab
03-01-2008, 02:01 PM
I voted for Demarcus Nelson because of his senior leadership and poise down the stretch. But we don't have that shot to win unless Jon Scheyer keeps us in the game and involved in the first 32 minutes.

loran16
03-01-2008, 02:03 PM
I'm going to abstain. This was one of our worst games, and while we pulled it out, they all need to get to work and figure this out.

(Unlike say the Wake game where nolan looked good)

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 02:03 PM
I voted for Demarcus Nelson because of his senior leadership and poise down the stretch. But we don't have that shot to win unless Jon Scheyer keeps us in the game and involved in the first 32 minutes.

It was more than just the first 32 minutes. How about down 8 with about 3:50 left, Scheyer steals an entry pass and starts the break that ends up in Paulus nailing a three to cut the deficit to five?

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 02:04 PM
I'm going to abstain. This was one of our worst games, and while we pulled it out, they all need to get to work and figure this out.

(Unlike say the Wake game where nolan looked good)

Geez, Loran. We did win and pull off a major comeback. No one impressed you?

dukegirlinsc
03-01-2008, 02:09 PM
I wanted to vote for D, Jon, and Greg here. They all played pretty big roles, some in different parts than others.

But D...wow...I'm gonna miss him a lot. Games like this are SO crucial right now. Congrats boys.

WeepingThomasHill
03-01-2008, 02:12 PM
Great comeback and great showing by the boys down the stretch, and you can't vote for someone?

My anti-man of the match is Loran.

ArkieDukie
03-01-2008, 02:13 PM
Our Captain stepped it up in the last 8 minutes. I credit the win to his leadership.

Madrasdukie
03-01-2008, 02:29 PM
anti-man of the match .

Funny.

SilkyJ
03-01-2008, 02:43 PM
didn't play great but thought he played pretty good d considering how quick gonzalez is...i mean the guy was blowing by nolan. (In general, I think greg's defense is going unnoticed this year) I know he's shooting some semi-questionable shots that are contested, but he's got that killer instinct and I love it, and frankly, he does hit a lot big shots and contested shots, so I'm ok with this.

Also loved taylor's play in this game. he's improving on defense and moving without the ball tremendously.

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 02:47 PM
didn't play great but thought he played pretty good d considering how quick gonzalez is...i mean the guy was blowing by nolan. (In general, I think greg's defense is going unnoticed this year) I know he's shooting some semi-questionable shots that are contested, but he's got that killer instinct and I love it, and frankly, he does hit a lot big shots and contested shots, so I'm ok with this.

Also loved taylor's play in this game. he's improving on defense and moving without the ball tremendously.

Silky,
I'll disagree with you on Greg's D. He hit some big shots, but he did not do a good job defensively. He lost Gonzalez a lot (and Gonzalez is not a good point guard) and also got lost in Duke's defensive rotations. He made some questionable decisions on when/where to double. In fact, a real turning point was when Gavin Grant fouled up, which allowed Nelson to pick up Gonzalez late in the game and State had trouble initiating its offense. Greg brings some real positive attributes to this team, but defense isn't one of them, and it's been that way all year. It's just something we have to live with.

_Gary
03-01-2008, 02:55 PM
There's no doubt in my mind. LOL

I did vote for DeMarcus, but it was really close. I thought Jon forced a couple of shots and a pass or two and I've come to expect him not to make those mistakes. Of course he's only human (although Jumbo might disagree - :p) so I shouldn't hold him to such a high standard, but I do. I thought Markie showed some real leadership at the end so my vote goes to him.

Gary

captmojo
03-01-2008, 02:58 PM
I voted for Nelson due to his rise back from some poor previous outings, and due to a great free throw job today. Yes, he missed a few lay-ups, but he was fouled on more than one of those chances.

Nothing taken away from Jon. His game was crucial to this win.

_Gary
03-01-2008, 02:58 PM
Silky,
I'll disagree with you on Greg's D. He hit some big shots, but he did not do a good job defensively. He lost Gonzalez a lot (and Gonzalez is not a good point guard) and also got lost in Duke's defensive rotations. He made some questionable decisions on when/where to double. In fact, a real turning point was when Gavin Grant fouled up, which allowed Nelson to pick up Gonzalez late in the game and State had trouble initiating its offense. Greg brings some real positive attributes to this team, but defense isn't one of them, and it's been that way all year. It's just something we have to live with.

I agree that Greg got smoked by Gonzalez too, but then so did Nolan. Neither of our points could keep the guy in front of them today. Kinda scary come tournament time. Our guards have got to keep opposing points from blowing by them like Gonzalez did today.

Gary

CDu
03-01-2008, 03:05 PM
Another reason to vote for for Jon:
Scheyer's plus/minus = +12
Nelson's plus/minus = -9

Come on, now, Jumbo. You know fully well that single game plus/minus numbers can produce weird results. They are often skewed by things that the individual can't control. Single-game plus/minus stats really should not be used for any logical discussion about player of the game honors.

In my opinion, it's Scheyer, but it's not a runaway, and it has nothing to do with plus/minus. Sheyer was player of the game for the first 29 minutes, and Nelson was player of the game for the last 11 minutes. Thus, it goes to Scheyer. And they were both indispensable today, despite what the plus/minus says.

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 03:06 PM
There's no doubt in my mind. LOL

I did vote for DeMarcus, but it was really close. I thought Jon forced a couple of shots and a pass or two and I've come to expect him not to make those mistakes. Of course he's only human (although Jumbo might disagree - :p) so I shouldn't hold him to such a high standard, but I do. I thought Markie showed some real leadership at the end so my vote goes to him.

Gary

We talked about this during the game, but Jon missed four shots. These were the shots:
1) The three-pointer with a second left on the shot clock on Duke's last possession of the game. It was a desparation shot and it almost went down. Not a force.
2) A twisting, fall-away jumper in the lane with 12:11 to go. It was a bit of a force, but there were seven seconds left on the shot clock. It's hard to fault him for that.
3) A wide-open three pointer off a high screen with 9:43 left. It was a no-brainer and I was sure it was going in (would have cut the deficit to four). It was in no way a force.
4) A drive with 8:28 to go win which he tried to draw a foul and ended up flipping the ball up with his left hand. This was a force, although if he goes up strong, I think he draws a foul. Still, I'll give that to you.

So, that's really one, maybe 1.5 forced shots. He hit his four other FGs easily, and drove aggressively to get to the line for eight FTs, all of which he hit. I'm not sure how anyone can say that he forced shots.

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 03:08 PM
Come on, now, Jumbo. You know fully well that single game plus/minus numbers can produce weird results. They are often skewed by things that the individual can't control. Single-game plus/minus stats really should not be used for any logical discussion about player of the game honors.

In my opinion, it's Scheyer, but it's not a runaway, and it has nothing to do with plus/minus. Sheyer was player of the game for the first 29 minutes, and Nelson was player of the game for the last 11 minutes. Thus, it goes to Scheyer. And they were both indispensable today, despite what the plus/minus says.

Sometimes they are revealing, sometimes they are misleading. I don't think Scheyer's numbers were misleading today. Duke started slowly without him. He came in and stabilized the game. He came out and NCSU [NOTE: This once said Marquette because I'm a moron] went on a run. And so forth. Yes, you'll see weird results in one-game samples, but others also made sense. Jon played great today, and his numbers reflected that. Singler played great last game, and he was a +18 (meaning Duke got outscored when he was out). Don't forget that Markie got himself into some early foul trouble, which not only limited him to 27 minutes, but also contributing to putting NCSU on the line early and often.

_Gary
03-01-2008, 03:13 PM
We talked about this during the game, but Jon missed four shots. These were the shots:
1) The three-pointer with a second left on the shot clock on Duke's last possession of the game. It was a desparation shot and it almost went down. Not a force.
2) A twisting, fall-away jumper in the lane with 12:11 to go. It was a bit of a force, but there were seven seconds left on the shot clock. It's hard to fault him for that.
3) A wide-open three pointer off a high screen with 9:43 left. It was a no-brainer and I was sure it was going in (would have cut the deficit to four). It was in no way a force.
4) A drive with 8:28 to go win which he tried to draw a foul and ended up flipping the ball up with his left hand. This was a force, although if he goes up strong, I think he draws a foul. Still, I'll give that to you.

So, that's really one, maybe 1.5 forced shots. He hit his four other FGs easily, and drove aggressively to get to the line for eight FTs, all of which he hit. I'm not sure how anyone can say that he forced shots.

Well, I did NOT dvr the game so I'm at a major disadvantage at this point. Going off my memory I think #2 was where he dribbled into the lane and then forced that shot even though there were a couple of guys on the wing that were open. I remember thinking to myself, "Jon! You know better than to force that shot." But again, I don't have the game in front of me so I can't say for sure. I also thought one of the three's he took was something where he might have had a chance to get a better shot with a head fake and dribble, but I'm not sure. My only issue with Jon is his driving into the teeth of the d and forcing a few shots here and there. This isn't the first game I've noticed this. It's not horrible and he does make good things happen more times than not when he drives. But he's not perfect and he has forced some really bad shots to my way of thinking.

Gary

DangerDevil
03-01-2008, 03:14 PM
Duke started slowly without him. He came in and stabilized the game. He came out and Marquette went on a run. And so forth.

Someone else is watching the end of the Georgetown game.

diesel
03-01-2008, 03:18 PM
My MOTM is someone not listed: Coach K. Props on the first 800, Big Guy!

The fact that the rest of you aren't sufficiently poltically correct to recognize this is a big disappointment.

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 03:43 PM
Someone else is watching the end of the Georgetown game.

Sorry, I'm not following you. What do you mean?

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 03:44 PM
Well, I did NOT dvr the game so I'm at a major disadvantage at this point. Going off my memory I think #2 was where he dribbled into the lane and then forced that shot even though there were a couple of guys on the wing that were open. I remember thinking to myself, "Jon! You know better than to force that shot." But again, I don't have the game in front of me so I can't say for sure. I also thought one of the three's he took was something where he might have had a chance to get a better shot with a head fake and dribble, but I'm not sure. My only issue with Jon is his driving into the teeth of the d and forcing a few shots here and there. This isn't the first game I've noticed this. It's not horrible and he does make good things happen more times than not when he drives. But he's not perfect and he has forced some really bad shots to my way of thinking.

Gary

Come on, Gary. Just once, please utter the following phrase: "I was wrong." I'm begging you. Just once. Pretty please? ;)

_Gary
03-01-2008, 03:44 PM
Sorry, I'm not following you. What do you mean?

You had Duke playing Marquette today in your previous post.


Gary

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 03:49 PM
You had Duke playing Marquette today in your previous post.


Gary

What can I say? I'm losing my mind. At least I didn't have them playing the Spurs (yet)!

_Gary
03-01-2008, 03:49 PM
Come on, Gary. Just once, please utter the following phrase: "I was wrong." I'm begging you. Just once. Pretty please? ;)

Amazing, because I'd love to hear you do the same thing. Seriously. :)

Oh wait! You just said you were losing your mind. I guess that counts. ;)

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 03:51 PM
Amazing, because I'd love to hear you do the same thing. Seriously. :)

Yeah, but I just showed you that Jon didn't force shots today. Here, though: I was wrong -- Duke did NOT play Marquette today! ;)

_Gary
03-01-2008, 03:55 PM
Yeah, but I just showed you that Jon didn't force shots today. Here, though: I was wrong -- Duke did NOT play Marquette today! ;)

LOL. Since "shots" [plural] means more than one, and I think he forced two, I'm still not going to budge. Heck, even you said 1.5, so lets just call it even and leave it at that. :D

Jumbo
03-01-2008, 04:19 PM
LOL. Since "shots" [plural] means more than one, and I think he forced two, I'm still not going to budge. Heck, even you said 1.5, so lets just call it even and leave it at that. :D

I'll get you to crack someday. I'm not sure how, but it'll happen!

_Gary
03-01-2008, 04:43 PM
I'll get you to crack someday. I'm not sure how, but it'll happen!

Wow. I read that first sentence too quickly the first time and thought you said you'd "get me some crack one day." :eek: Guess I'm losing my mind too. So there you go. ;)

dukestheheat
03-01-2008, 04:43 PM
I am voting for Greg today because of his shooting but also with his three point shots, he completely shut up the many people around me who were making so much fun of him as he lay on the floor, bleeding, from the thug elbow he took in that first half.

Thank you, Greg, for representing Duke like you do and for hanging in there and hitting those shots.

He's my player of the game today.

dukestheheat

TNTDevil
03-01-2008, 05:14 PM
I voted for Jon.

I was at the game today, with my son, and while it looked bleak for a while, it was a great win.

Man, were the State fans sitting around us pissed!

I think Jumbo is right on with his assessment of Scheyer, without him today we wouldn't have been close enough in the game for Nelson's three to matter. Markie was awesome but, again, Jon just did everything we needed today to win.

I have to wonder if once Coach Lowe got back to the locker room and relieved himself of that red blazer if he didn't ask his team: "Where the hell was that effort all season?"

mgtr
03-01-2008, 05:18 PM
First choice: Jon. Second choice (but close): DeMarcus. We were very, very lucky.

Devilsfan
03-01-2008, 05:19 PM
Scheyer!!! Without his play we might have been down twenty three with five to play and there would be no DeMarcus heroics. This team doesn't wake up until 2P.M. Those 12 noon games are awful. He (Jon) kept us in the game until the rest of the team woke up. DeMarcus did what was expected of a captain.

tropical storm
03-01-2008, 05:51 PM
What a great game... Although it took several hours for my blood pressure to return to normal.

I thought Jon and Demarcus both played terrific, but I gave this award to Greg. I will take a 5-9 performance from 3 point land any day, and he seemed to take the shots when we were really struggling to find our offense.

I thought the game really goes to show that you can't take any game for granted, NC State played terrific today and while we may have given them a few open looks, they sure didn't miss any of them today. Their point guard is a 29% shooter but today he went 4-4 from three point land. Given the way State played, this was a great win for our kids. :)

SilkyJ
03-01-2008, 06:09 PM
Silky,
I'll disagree with you on Greg's D. He hit some big shots, but he did not do a good job defensively. He lost Gonzalez a lot (and Gonzalez is not a good point guard) and also got lost in Duke's defensive rotations. He made some questionable decisions on when/where to double. In fact, a real turning point was when Gavin Grant fouled up, which allowed Nelson to pick up Gonzalez late in the game and State had trouble initiating its offense. Greg brings some real positive attributes to this team, but defense isn't one of them, and it's been that way all year. It's just something we have to live with.

I may not have picked the best game to bring this up again, b/c I agree that he made some bad decisions on doubles. i remember at least two that lead to 3s on a pass out of the double. I disagree though about him losing gonzalez a lot. We were playing super aggressive and I thought he dogged him pretty well in the half court. gonzalez did get in the lane a bit and hit some tough shots, but it looked to me like greg was playing good d on those shots and that gonzalez just made a tough play.

I dont think gonzalez is a very good pg, but i think he a decent one, and if nothing else he is pretty quick and above all else greg has struggled to guard smaller, quicker guards. I think throughout the year greg has shown a marked improvement over last year in terms of staying with quicker PGs. he still gets beaten more often than I would like, but I see a huge improvement from last year. (at the same time he seems to make some really risky gambles with double-teams that lead to 3s or at least good looks...but I'm trying to focus on the positive, I guess)

And there's the clutchness. I feel like he forced some stuff late, but at the same time he hit the 3 to tie it and we ended up winning so I have to give him props...

ugadevil
03-01-2008, 08:41 PM
I voted for Greg because I couldn't believe the 3's that he made. However, if I could have a 2nd vote it would go to Scheyer (so as not to offend Jumbo;) ).

SilkyJ
03-01-2008, 09:04 PM
However, if I could have a 2nd vote it would go to Scheyer.

oh yea, forgot to mention that. agreed.

DukeDevilDeb
03-01-2008, 09:07 PM
I agree that Greg got smoked by Gonzalez too, but then so did Nolan. Neither of our points could keep the guy in front of them today. Kinda scary come tournament time. Our guards have got to keep opposing points from blowing by them like Gonzalez did today.

Gary

I love Greg and his fire and think he has done some remarkable things... but Gonzalez did blow by both of them... and he isn't even a great point guard. We're best off when DeMarcus is on the point... but then we don't have him to guard someone else.

I voted for Greg because of his 3 point shooting and the hit he took to the head which he played through. But I LOVE Scheyer...!!! And it was a tough choice.

CDu
03-01-2008, 09:09 PM
Sometimes they are revealing, sometimes they are misleading. I don't think Scheyer's numbers were misleading today. Duke started slowly without him. He came in and stabilized the game. He came out and NCSU [NOTE: This once said Marquette because I'm a moron] went on a run. And so forth. Yes, you'll see weird results in one-game samples, but others also made sense. Jon played great today, and his numbers reflected that. Singler played great last game, and he was a +18 (meaning Duke got outscored when he was out). Don't forget that Markie got himself into some early foul trouble, which not only limited him to 27 minutes, but also contributing to putting NCSU on the line early and often.

No argument from me that Scheyer played a great game. In fact, as I said, I voted for him. But it just seems to me that you say that plus/minus stats are misleading only when they don't verify what you felt from the game. But when they support your concepts, they are revealing?

In my opinion, the stat is just too sensitive to random variation to be of any use in a single game situation. Maybe Nelson's plus/minus was due to bad play. Or, maybe Nelson happened to be on the floor when some of his teammates had their worst moments. Or maybe he happened to be in during a stretch in which State caught fire. There are just so many possibilities.

I happen to think both players played very well. I agree that Scheyer played better. But he didn't play 21 net points better. Nelson had a terrific game as well.

DukeDevilDeb
03-01-2008, 09:10 PM
My MOTM is someone not listed: Coach K. Props on the first 800, Big Guy!

The fact that the rest of you aren't sufficiently poltically correct to recognize this is a big disappointment.

You are 100% correct. Jumbo, that option should be there!

4decadedukie
03-02-2008, 07:23 AM
Scheyer played a great game, and he is a WONDERFUL young man; not just a stellar athlete, but the kind of undergraduate I am proud -- without constraints -- to have at Duke. I was surprised and somewhat taken aback a few weeks ago when a DBR poll did not identify Jon as a future NBA presence; I disagree. He probably has as fine an understanding of basketball details and nuances as any of our terrific players have had in many years, and I will be unsurprised to see him in a critical "front office" NBA role (including coaching).

With all this said, I voted for our Captain (but wish I could have cast two ballots). When we needed it most, DeMarcus came through (including at the charity stripe).

Jumbo
03-02-2008, 10:08 AM
No argument from me that Scheyer played a great game. In fact, as I said, I voted for him. But it just seems to me that you say that plus/minus stats are misleading only when they don't verify what you felt from the game. But when they support your concepts, they are revealing?

In my opinion, the stat is just too sensitive to random variation to be of any use in a single game situation. Maybe Nelson's plus/minus was due to bad play. Or, maybe Nelson happened to be on the floor when some of his teammates had their worst moments. Or maybe he happened to be in during a stretch in which State caught fire. There are just so many possibilities.

I happen to think both players played very well. I agree that Scheyer played better. But he didn't play 21 net points better. Nelson had a terrific game as well.

CDu, I'm not sure why you seem so aggressive in attacking my opinion. Let me take a step back and try to explain a little better.

Single-game plus/minus numbers can be both revealing and misleading. Much of that has to do with minutes played. A guy who plays 35 minutes will have a plus/minus rating that is less subject to random fluctuations than someone who plays 10 minutes. That much is obvious. So, in this case, Nelson and Scheyer both played substantial minutes. It's a lot different than the people who were advocating Taylor King earlier in the season based on limited playing time.

I'm not saying Scheyer was 21 points better than Nelson. But his plus/minus advantage wasn't the result of his simply being on the floor for one pivotal run. There were several points during the game where Duke gained points with Nelson on the bench and several points where Duke lost points when Scheyer went out. For instance:
-Duke was down four when Scheyer replaced Nelson. Duke was down one when Nelson came back in.
-Duke was down three when Nelson went back out again. When he came back, Duke was down one. (Scheyer was in this whole time.)
-Duke was up one when Scheyer finally came out again. By the time he came back in, Duke was down four.
-In the second half, Duke went on a quick 5-0 run to cut the deficit from 10 to 5 when Henderson replaced Nelson.
There were a few other examples. But the point was that, for whatever reason, Duke functioned better on multiple occasions with Scheyer in the game and with Nelson out. Obviously, Nelson was awesome at the end of the game and equally obviously, I have no desire for Nelson's minutes to get cut or anything like that. But Markie was not a consistent force against State (the plus/minus numbers support that hypothesis) and Scheyer was (again, the numbers back that up). That's all.

Jumbo
03-02-2008, 10:09 AM
I was surprised and somewhat taken aback a few weeks ago when a DBR poll did not identify Jon as a future NBA presence...

What poll are you talking about. I've been singing this tune for a while, but everything I've heard tells me that Jon will indeed play in the NBA.

CDu
03-02-2008, 10:18 AM
CDu, I'm not sure why you seem so aggressive in attacking my opinion. Let me take a step back and try to explain a little better.

Single-game plus/minus numbers can be both revealing and misleading. Much of that has to do with minutes played. A guy who plays 35 minutes will have a plus/minus rating that is less subject to random fluctuations than someone who plays 10 minutes. That much is obvious. So, in this case, Nelson and Scheyer both played substantial minutes. It's a lot different than the people who were advocating Taylor King earlier in the season based on limited playing time.

I'm not saying Scheyer was 21 points better than Nelson. But his plus/minus advantage wasn't the result of his simply being on the floor for one pivotal run. There were several points during the game where Duke gained points with Nelson on the bench and several points where Duke lost points when Scheyer went out. For instance:
-Duke was down four when Scheyer replaced Nelson. Duke was down one when Nelson came back in.
-Duke was down three when Nelson went back out again. When he came back, Duke was down one. (Scheyer was in this whole time.)
-Duke was up one when Scheyer finally came out again. By the time he came back in, Duke was down four.
-In the second half, Duke went on a quick 5-0 run to cut the deficit from 10 to 5 when Henderson replaced Nelson.
There were a few other examples. But the point was that, for whatever reason, Duke functioned better on multiple occasions with Scheyer in the game and with Nelson out. Obviously, Nelson was awesome at the end of the game and equally obviously, I have no desire for Nelson's minutes to get cut or anything like that. But Markie was not a consistent force against State (the plus/minus numbers support that hypothesis) and Scheyer was (again, the numbers back that up). That's all.

My disagreement isn't with your opinion that Scheyer was the player of the game. We share that opinion. My disagreement is with your use of plus/minus as evidence of him being better. Sorry for sounding aggressive about it. It's just that the use of single-game plus/minus is a pet peeve of mine.

I think you're understating the problems of single-game plus/minus by stating that more minutes means less risk of random fluctuation. Sure, there's less risk, but there's still a LOT of risk - too much to take the numbers too seriously, in my opinion. There just aren't enough minutes in a single game to control for all the variables that go into plus/minus. So much can happen in a single game while a player is on the floor (or not on the floor) that is out of that player's control. Hence, I don't think single-game plus/minus is useful for any analytical purposes. It's just too difficult (even for the very educated basketball mind) to weed through all of the variables and accurately control for them.

As such, I think the post comparing the two players' plus/minus values was irrelevant to the comparison. That's all. Again, I think plus/minus has the potential for being a very interesting and useful tool. But I think it's useful over a 25+ game season - not over a single game. Over a longer stretch, it's reasonable to assume that the random uncontrollable events that happen from game to game sort of even out, allowing us to get a picture of the player's true worth to the team. But a single game plus/minus doesn't provide that opportunity. Is it possible for a single-game plus/minus to exactly match up with a player's true value in that game? Sure, but I'd say it's VERY unlikely.

Sorry again for sounding antagonistic. It's just a hot-button issue with me. We agree that Scheyer was the player of the game. We just disagree on the value of single-game plus/minus.

Jumbo
03-02-2008, 10:30 AM
My disagreement isn't with your opinion that Scheyer was the player of the game. We share that opinion. My disagreement is with your use of plus/minus as evidence of him being better. Sorry for sounding aggressive about it. It's just that the use of single-game plus/minus is a pet peeve of mine.

I think you're understating the problems of single-game plus/minus by stating that more minutes means less risk of random fluctuation. Sure, there's less risk, but there's still a LOT of risk - too much to take the numbers too seriously, in my opinion. There just aren't enough minutes in a single game to control for all the variables that go into plus/minus. So much can happen in a single game while a player is on the floor (or not on the floor) that is out of that player's control. Hence, I don't think single-game plus/minus is useful for any analytical purposes. It's just too difficult (even for the very educated basketball mind) to weed through all of the variables and accurately control for them.

As such, I think the post comparing the two players' plus/minus values was irrelevant to the comparison. That's all. Again, I think plus/minus has the potential for being a very interesting and useful tool. But I think it's useful over a 25+ game season - not over a single game. Over a longer stretch, it's reasonable to assume that the random uncontrollable events that happen from game to game sort of even out, allowing us to get a picture of the player's true worth to the team. But a single game plus/minus doesn't provide that opportunity. Is it possible for a single-game plus/minus to exactly match up with a player's true value in that game? Sure, but I'd say it's VERY unlikely.

Sorry again for sounding antagonistic. It's just a hot-button issue with me. We agree that Scheyer was the player of the game. We just disagree on the value of single-game plus/minus.

Right, I was focusing on the plus/minus issue as well. I think what you aren't recognizing is that, if this were research, I wouldn't be using plus/minus as a primary source. It's purely supporting evidence to back up a point established in other ways. In this case, I observed that Duke played better with Scheyer in the game from the first second he stepped on the court, that he played consistently well throughout the game, and that DeMarcus Nelson had a rough first half, including some silly fouls that put him on the bench and State at the line. After noticing those trends, and already deciding that Scheyer was my MOTM, I added up the plus/minus numbers. Sure enough, they matched my hypothesis.

All I'm saying is that while it's silly to use plus/minus stats for a single game as the primary tool for evaluation, it's also silly to dismiss them out of hand because a single game is a small sample size. In some cases, those stats are still telling.

CDu
03-02-2008, 12:23 PM
Right, I was focusing on the plus/minus issue as well. I think what you aren't recognizing is that, if this were research, I wouldn't be using plus/minus as a primary source. It's purely supporting evidence to back up a point established in other ways. In this case, I observed that Duke played better with Scheyer in the game from the first second he stepped on the court, that he played consistently well throughout the game, and that DeMarcus Nelson had a rough first half, including some silly fouls that put him on the bench and State at the line. After noticing those trends, and already deciding that Scheyer was my MOTM, I added up the plus/minus numbers. Sure enough, they matched my hypothesis.

All I'm saying is that while it's silly to use plus/minus stats for a single game as the primary tool for evaluation, it's also silly to dismiss them out of hand because a single game is a small sample size. In some cases, those stats are still telling.

And my point is that it seems like people (not just you, so don't please don't take it personally) assume plus/minus is misleading when it doesn't support their hypothesis and telling when it does support their hypothesis. That's a completely natural stance, but without analyzing every single possession it lends itself to being a faulty conclusion.

Your argument that Scheyer was man of the match stood strong without the plus/minus argument in, my opinion. It is also my opinion that the plus/minus in this case may very well be exaggerating the difference between the two players for this game.

Chitowndevil
03-02-2008, 12:42 PM
I give it to Demarcus, because he went 8-9 from the line, where he hasn't exactly been automatic, and more importantly scored 7 of Duke's points during an 11-3 run to close out the game, including 4-4 from the stripe. As K said after the game he just has an amazing will to win. As nice as his season stat line looks I don't think it even comes close to capturing his value to the team this season.

But really there's no wrong answer, as without Scheyer that 11-3 run doesn't matter in the outcome.

kidslow
03-02-2008, 06:00 PM
DeMarcus stepped up and put the team on his shoulders to close that game out. Without his leadership example, there's no way Duke would have won. I believe he scored most of his points during the final 10 minute crunch, when they mattered most. After Lance missed those free throws and the lead had been stretched back to near double-digits, the announcers were faulting Duke for sitting back and taking 3s instead of taking the ball at the defense. Nelson then took the ball right at the hole as if on queue and drew the foul. I can easily recall at least 10 of his points coming in the final 8 minutes of the game. That 3-pointer when he stepped back over the line was clutch. I don't know how anyone can lobby for another MotM here, because Markie took charge and willed the win yesterday. It was evident to me as an observer that he made all the difference between a W and a L yesterday. Stats (+/- etc) never accurately reflect small but meaningful contributions nor the intangibles like leadership and such.