PDA

View Full Version : Predict men's starting 5, minutes, in 2007-08



Pages : [1] 2 3

jsimmons
03-16-2007, 08:15 AM
I thought we would have some fun, and see who you think the starting five will be next year. Here are my choices.

Paulus
McRoberts
Henderson
Singler
Nelson

When Conference play beings I think there will be a transition to this group.

Nolan
McRoberts
Henderson
Singler
Nelson/ Pocious/ McClure.

this gives us Schier, Paulus, Z, King, off the bench.

Bob Green
03-16-2007, 08:19 AM
Sorry,

1. McRoberts is gone!

2. You misspelled Scheyer and Pocius' names.

Next thread.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

CMS2478
03-16-2007, 08:20 AM
Sorry,

1. McRoberts is gone!

2. You misspelled Scheyer and Pocius' names.

Next thread.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

I think Nolan is going to be pretty good but starting over Paulus??? Doubt it.

Duke15304
03-17-2007, 04:57 PM
greg
Schyer
Nelson
Singler
Mcroberts

I know Gerlad is a great athlete and scorer, but i get this feeling w/ a strong jon, he will go w/ him b/c he brings so much to the table

Duke15304
03-17-2007, 04:58 PM
meant stronger jon

Bay Area Duke Fan
03-17-2007, 05:13 PM
Paulus
Scheyer
Henderson
Singler
Patterson

Fish80
03-17-2007, 05:23 PM
Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Henderson
Zoubek

Cameron
03-17-2007, 05:27 PM
Greg
Jon
Gerald
Kyle
Patrick (praying)

I agree with pretty much the rest of you, DeMarcus needs to take a seat. And, though many don't think he'll see much PT, I think Taylor King sees lots of minutes at the wing/forward spot. He's way too good a shooter to keep dusting on the pine. Let him fire away in bunches.

Fish80
03-17-2007, 05:33 PM
Greg
Jon
Gerald
Kyle
Patrick (praying)

I agree with pretty much the rest of you, DeMarcus needs to take a seat. And, though many don't think he'll see much PT, I think Taylor King sees lots of minutes at the wing/forward spot. He's way too good a shooter to keep dusting on the pine. Let him fire away in bunches.

No way that DeMarcus doesn't start. He's our best on the ball defender, a great rebounder and was our leading scorer this year. Next year he is a star, First Team All ACC, defensive POY, averaging > 20 points.

DukeBlood
03-17-2007, 05:33 PM
I disagree with those of you who have Demarcus out.

1. He is Dukes best perimeter defender.

2. He makes a few mistakes, but there were plenty of other players who made them.

3. He is our lone senior.

If i had to guess a lineup.

Greg Paulus
Gerald Henderson
Demarcus Nelson
Kyle Singler
Patrick Patterson/Brian Zoubek/Lance Thomas

Jon struggled the second half of the season. I believe he isnt as good of a defender as GH or DN. He may be a little better shooter.

jimbonelson
03-17-2007, 05:50 PM
as good as the guys coming in next year are will any of them be ready to start at the next level this years class was very good also but it takes time to adjust to not being the best player on the floor so with that said theres no way nelson doesnt start and no way smith starts as pg

Channing
03-17-2007, 06:39 PM
I think Gerald Starts just because he can do so much on the court. His 3-ball got a little more consistent as the season went on and he can create better than anyone else on the team. While this is the starting I predict - I just hope that we see a team that runs and pushes it all season. I thought that was when this years team was their most effective -in transition and not in the half court:

Greg
Demarcus
Gerald
Jon
Josh (if he's gone Zoubek)

grossbus
03-17-2007, 06:42 PM
"He's way too good a shooter to keep dusting on the pine"

that didn't work for marty

"No way that DeMarcus doesn't start. He's our best on the ball defender"

people keep saying this, but i remember him getting beat a lot.

pacificrounder
03-17-2007, 06:49 PM
Paulus
Henderson
Nelson/Scheyer
Singler
Patterson

If PP doesn't end up at Duke, I hope Zoubek improves his footwork over the summer, a lot, cause he'll be starting. I think Lance Thomas will be a solid contributing 6th/7th man if he can put on 15+ pounds - remember Lance, muscle weighs more than fat!

Indoor66
03-17-2007, 07:36 PM
Paulus
Henderson
Nelson/Scheyer
Singler
Patterson

If PP doesn't end up at Duke, I hope Uzbek improves his footwork over the summer, a lot, cause he'll be starting. I think Lance Thomas will be a solid contributing Th/Th man if he can put on 15+ pounds - remember Lance, muscle weighs more than fat!

I have never been one to believe that an incoming player will be the savior or "rule the world." That rarely happens. In any event, whether PP comes or not, I hope that Z works hard and improves over the summer. I hope all our boys work hard and improve their skills over the summer.

Incoming freshmen will be freshmen.

Duke15304
03-17-2007, 07:57 PM
has at least a chance to be somehwhat of an impact player, at least scoring wise

grossbus
03-17-2007, 08:34 PM
"Incoming freshmen will be freshmen."

wright, lawson, durant, reynolds, et. al.

some freshmen are different.

sometimes (hansbleep) they are older.

zoubek won't contribute or have large minutes until he is a jr., regardless of our situation.

WeepingThomasHill
03-17-2007, 08:38 PM
Bob Green, enough is enough with your McRoberts predictions. Everyone is sick of reading it. You have no inside information on whether he is leaving, so stop with your prognositications. Let's hope Josh comes back or next year will be very painful.

WTH

DukeBlood
03-17-2007, 08:53 PM
Bob Green, enough is enough with your McRoberts predictions. Everyone is sick of reading it. You have no inside information on whether he is leaving, so stop with your prognositications. Let's hope Josh comes back or next year will be very painful.

WTH

Who's sick of it? Bob Green is a great poster. Maybe you should try and follow his act?

People who do have "Inside information" are sure he will leave. We can hope and prey, But in the end he is likely gone. You should deal with it like the most of us.

WeepingThomasHill
03-17-2007, 09:04 PM
DukeBlood wrote:

"We can hope and prey, But in the end he is likely gone. You should deal with it like the most of us."

How do you know? Why don't you wait until he announces his intentions? And let's confine the title of "great posters" to Watzone and Jumbo.

WTH

jimbonelson
03-17-2007, 09:15 PM
if i listen to everybody here josh wasnt coming after high school he was going straight to the nba then after last season no way he was going to stay and he stayed now i am hearing the same thing from the same people maybe he goes maybe he stays duke basketball is duke basketball with him or without him..............we will just be better with him

BobbyFan
03-17-2007, 09:43 PM
Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Singler
McRoberts

If Josh leaves, replace him with Zoubek.

And Nelson starting won't imply a less than advertised freshman group.

3rd Dukie
03-17-2007, 10:35 PM
Who's sick of it? Bob Green is a great poster. Maybe you should try and follow his act?

People who do have "Inside information" are sure he will leave. We can hope and prey, But in the end he is likely gone. You should deal with it like the most of us.

Agreed. Except I think I will "pray."
Speculation and uninformed opinions are a vital part of these boards, in my opinion. That's why we are called "fans."
I think Bob is more level-headed than most of us.

Kewlswim
03-17-2007, 11:06 PM
DukeBlood wrote:

"We can hope and prey, But in the end he is likely gone. You should deal with it like the most of us."

How do you know? Why don't you wait until he announces his intentions? And let's confine the title of "great posters" to Watzone and Jumbo.

WTH

Hi,

I thought Kewlswim is a great poster too. :D And modest. In all seriousness, I think Josh is coming back because, hey, who would want to leave Duke before one really has to? The money will always be there, but a chance to play for Coach K and learn about things like economics from the best, well that only comes around once in a lifetime. NBA women (unless they are Dukies) aren't half as cute as our Duke women either, so Josh will come back.

GO DUKE!

Lord Ash
03-18-2007, 12:05 AM
Paulus
Nelson
Scheyer
Singler
Zoubek

Kilby
03-18-2007, 12:09 AM
1.Gerald Henderson - If I had to start a team with one player from this years team it would be Henderson. His athleticism and ability to create his own shot is the ingredient Duke has been missing the past two years.
2. Josh McRoberts - Needs to work on strength and go to moves but the only steady player that we have under the basket and a skilled player.
3. Demarcus Nelson - Great defense. Strong. Improved shot. Just needs to be a little less fearless under the basket.
4. Nolan Smith - I really don't know if he should start but we sure didn't have the answer at point this year. I long for another point that can create well enough that the other team is worried more than me. I hope that he can handle the ball well enough to make people pay for pressing. I hope Duke can get back to running.
5. Paulus for shooting guard. That is unless Pocius or Sheyer show that they are ready for full time action. This could even be Thomas.

I watched an old Hurley game mid season and was amazed at how different ball movement was. Most of the time Hurley came down he dished and cut as soon as he came past half court. After a couple more passes easy shot. There was not a lot of dribbling by one person.

dukediv2013
03-18-2007, 01:29 AM
Starting 5:
1-GP3
2-Hendu
3-D-Marc
4-Dave McSaveusagainstClemson- next shane battier
5-LT- Lance Thomas will be unstoppable next year

Bench(deepest in the ACC and at Duke in a long time)
Jon Scheyer
Marty Pocius
Brian Zoubek
Kyle Singler
Nolan Smith
Taylor King
Patrick Patterson(if Josh decides to leave)

Cameron
03-18-2007, 01:39 AM
Improved shot.

DeMarcus' shot may have been improved during the first five games, but it was horrific and pathetic the past two months, and I won't even comment on his free-throw shooting. His 20-footer was downright ugly the last month of play. And this is coming from a HUGE Demarcus fan.

Cameron
03-18-2007, 01:44 AM
Dave McSaveusagainstClemson- next shane battier

Far, far from that, but I think he'll have a nice last couple of years for us. He plays his a** off for us every night and is a great defender who can hit the open shot when needed. David is a great role player. But he'll never sniff the talent Shane had. Never. Shane was a once in a lifetime type of player for Duke, the guy who was the best offensive and defensive player in the nation as a senior. He was as close to the perfect player as you will ever find in college basketball.

Lulu
03-18-2007, 06:06 AM
Whoa, am I the only MCCLURE lover out there??? He's been great for us. A little work on his shot and I don't see how he doesn't start, and maybe even without any improvement on his shot, it's not terrible or anything.

I'm going to have to toot my own horn for a sec, because early this season I predicted McClure would work himself into a starting position, and sure enough he did. There were a lot of doubters at the time. I am always happy when he's on the floor.

Lulu
03-18-2007, 06:08 AM
Ok, so I missed someone's "Dave McSaveUsAgainstClemson" comment - nice

grossbus
03-18-2007, 07:39 AM
Whoa, am I the only MCCLURE lover out there??? He's been great for us. A little work on his shot and I don't see how he doesn't start, and maybe even without any improvement on his shot, it's not terrible or anything.

I'm going to have to toot my own horn for a sec, because early this season I predicted McClure would work himself into a starting position, and sure enough he did. There were a lot of doubters at the time. I am always happy when he's on the floor.

i was not a doubter at midseason, but i am now. he have us zip the last couple of weeks. was seemingly afraid to shoot. dribbled into bad situations. did not rebound or defend as he had. and fouled a lot.

could not carry shane's jock.

grossbus
03-18-2007, 07:41 AM
"Lance Thomas will be unstoppable next year"

based on what, exactly?

whereinthehellami
03-18-2007, 08:40 AM
Paulus 6-2 JR
Scheyer 6-4 SO
Nelson 6-4 SR
Mcclure 6-6 JR
Singler 6-8 FR

Henderson 6-5 SO
Smith 6-3 FR
King 6-7 FR
Thomas 6-8 SO
Zoubek 7-0 SO

MCclure gets the nod as we need some serious height, toughness, and rebounding down low. I think defense and rebounding is needed more than offense. I also like his maturity and that he NEVER takes a play off.

Nelson is pretty much a lock as he is the lone senior/returning scorer from this past season.

Henderson should start some games (replacing Scheyer, Nelson, and Mcclure) in various situations (motivational?) and will be like the 5.5 man playing over 25 minutes a game (might be limited due to his asthma). He will be unfortunately needed in the frontcourt a fair amount to. He might suprise and be the first frontcourt substituition used next year. His quickness and good rebounding (for 6-5) could pose some match-up problems for some teams.

Smith could see a fair amount of minutes as a defensive stopper to penetration and for his decent ballhandling/shooting. I think Smith is the first substituition for the backcourt.

I have a hunch that King could be a suprise with the amount of minutes that he receives, especially as the season goes on. His confidense and instant offense (3-point shooting) could overshadow his lack of foot speed on defense. His longs arms and desire to win (rebounds fairly well) might allow him some effective minutes down low.

I hope Thomas and Zoubek suprise next year with great improvement over the summer. I think that with their individual limitations (every player has them) and coach K's system/style they have a steeper road to climb in the off-season than some of the other players. I could see their time and production being somewhat similar to this year. They both showed some flashes of immense potential this year though.

I see the starting 5 playing around 30 minutes/game and Henderson getting around 25 minutes/game. Smith and King coming in around 10 plus minutes/game. Thomas and Zoubek getting under 10 minutes/game.

devildownunder
03-18-2007, 09:50 AM
as good as the guys coming in next year are will any of them be ready to start at the next level this years class was very good also but it takes time to adjust to not being the best player on the floor so with that said theres no way nelson doesnt start and no way smith starts as pg


Singler can and will start right away.

CDu
03-18-2007, 10:15 AM
It's tough to speculate, since (1) we don't know much about the freshmen relative to the current players, (2) we don't know what improvements the current players will make in the offseason, and (3) we don't know for sure which faces will be here and which won't. That said, I'll go ahead and speculate. :)

If McBobbies stays:

Paulus
Nelson
Scheyer/Henderson
Singler
McRoberts

If McRoberts leaves and Patterson comes:

Paulus
Nelson
Scheyer/Henderson
Singler
Patterson

If neither McRoberts nor Patterson are here:

Paulus
Nelson
Scheyer/Henderson
Singler
Thomas

I think Nelson, Henderson, and Scheyer will split the wing workload pretty evenly, and thus I don't think it matters so much who is the starter. I think Smith will split his minutes between backing up Paulus and backing up our top 3 wing players.

If we have McRoberts or Patterson, Thomas will get the primary minutes as the third big, with Zoubek being the fourth big. If not, then McClure and Zoubek will split the backup big man minutes.

grossbus
03-18-2007, 10:25 AM
"I think defense and rebounding is needed more than offense"

did you watch this year's team??? offensively challenged. we were losing games before our defense went in the tank because of this.

natedog4ever
03-18-2007, 11:08 AM
Some food for thought - Dave and Jon were the only ones that didn't turn the ball over at an alarming rate. I have seen a lot of problems mentioned, but the majority, besides poor free throw shooting, can be traced back to high team turnovers.

evrdukie
03-18-2007, 11:47 AM
You're right. Turnovers are surely among the biggest problems this team experienced. That was demonstrated again and again. Ball handling breakdowns have got to be addressed for this team to improve.

dukediv2013
03-18-2007, 02:15 PM
Dave McClure will be one of the greatest role players that Duke has ever had next season. He gives his all every play and doesn't settle for less. I said that he was the next Shane Battier, not based on talent, but leadership. He is the hardest working player on Duke's team and needs to become the vocal leader that Shane was during the 1999-2000 junior season. Duke's team is going to be extremely similar to that team... one senior leader (Chris Carawell compared to DeMarcus Nelson), many good juniors (Battier & Nate James compared to Paulus, McLure, and Pocius) great sophomores and freshmen (Jay Williams, Boozer, Dunleavy compared to next year with Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas, Zoubek, Smith, King, Patterson, and Singler) Chris Carawell shined in his senior campaign just like D-Marc will next year. Thomas will be awesome next year... with a offseason of weightlifting and battling for a position against Zoubek, Singler, and Patterson, LT will become a great big man for Duke.


Hopefully my prediction is correct because remember what happened with the 1999-2000 team... 2001 National Championship! Hopefully we will win two tournaments back-to-back in 08 and 09!

GO DUKE! GO DUKE! GO!

Saratoga2
03-18-2007, 03:12 PM
Personally, I hope that Bob Green does not have inside information relative to McRoberts. Without him back, this team will struggle.

My starters by mid year would be

McRoberts
Paulus
Scheyer
Singler
Nelson

As good as Nelson is on defense, rebounding and getting to the basket when one on one, his deficiencies in ball handling, shooting consistency and foul shooting are unlikely to be resolved. Big improvements in guard play when going from the junior to senior year are not the norm. Henderson is a great 6th man and might start in front of either Nelson or Scheyer by the end of the season.

Sir Stealth
03-18-2007, 03:53 PM
I think that Paulus and Nelson are about as close to locks as it gets. No way in a million years does Nolan Smith, who I have high hopes for but who is not gonna be Jason Williams, start as a freshman over someone who has started at point two years. No way does he start over a senior Paulus as sophomore for that matter either.

I wanted more out of Nelson this year, but no way is he out in his senior year either. We're talking about our leading scorer and only senior here. Doesn't matter whether you think he's as good a defender as the hype says or has an ugly shot or whatever, he's starting and getting a lot of minutes.

I haven't given up on McRoberts staying and think we will be much, much better if he's around, relative disappointment or not. If he's not around, I think that the last 3 spots are pretty much up in the air. I definitely take Henderson over Scheyer at this point. Henderson is the athletic scoring swingman answer that we need. I never thought that this season's Scheyer was all that some made him out to be, though for a freshman he did have a very solid season. Still, I don't think he'll start next year unless we have to play super small ball and Henderson ends up as the four, which is certainly possible though not comforting (this is why you shouldn't be at all happy about Josh moving on).

It seems to me like Kyle Singler is probably gonna start at one post spot. If McRoberts isn't around, the other post spot seems completely up in the air pending who develops best over the summer.

So, my holding out hope starting 5 would be:
Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Singler
McRoberts

My probably more realistic guess would be:
Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Singler
Thomas/Zoubek depending on the size/quickness of the other team's post players - would love for Patterson to be in the mix also)

I'm very afraid of throwing out something like:
Paulus Paulus
Scheyer Scheyer
Nelson or King
Henderson Singler
Singler Zoubek
(extreme (extreme
smallball) whitewash)

Gozza
03-18-2007, 03:58 PM
With 2 assumptions: (1) no McRoberts; (2) no Patterson.

Paulus
Henderson
Nelson
McClure
Singler

Greg and Demarcus are the only two locks to be the in the lineup next year. Greg's the leader, has K's trust, and Demarcus is one of the few perimeter players who gets after it on D the way K likes. Plus, he'll be a senior.

Without McBob or Patterson, it's going to be Zoubek vs. Singler to start at the 5. If Singler lives up to the hype, this competition will be over quickly: K likes guys who can play in the post and also play facing the basket (Laettner, Brand, Battier, etc.), and move without the ball in the flow of his offense.

McClure, if he's healthy and back to his 1st half of this season form, seems likely to start over Lance Thomas. He's got experience, IQ, is willing to play a role, and can stay in the game w/o picking up cheap fouls.

The other really interesting call is Scheyer or Henderson at the 2. K has clearly fallen in love with Scheyer, which is fine b/c he seems like a great kid, but Henderson just has a higher upside. If Henderson overcomes these asthma problems, he will be a defensive force. He will also be able to create on the offensive end with his athleticism. K doesn't alter his evaluations of kids quickly, which is why my gut still thinks Scheyer will start next year. But if Henderson comes out healthy and has a strong November, K just might decide there's too much ability there to not have him starting.

Gozza
03-18-2007, 03:59 PM
For the record, w/ McBob:

McBob
Singler
Nelson
Henderson
Paulus

w/ Patterson:

Patterson
Singler
Nelson
Henderson
Paulus

w/ Patterson & McBob:

McBob
Patterson
Nelson
Henderson
Paulus

lavell12
03-18-2007, 04:33 PM
If Josh stays and Patterson comes
Paulus PG
Nelson SG
Singler SF
Patterson PF
McRoberts C

If Josh stays and Patterson goes some where else
Paulus PG
Nelson SG
Henderson SF
Singler SF/PF
McRoberts C/PF

If Josh leaves and Patterson comes
Paulus PG
Scheyer SG
Nelson SF/SG
Singlers SF/PF
Patterson PF/C

If Josh leaves and Patterson goes some where else (were screwed)
Paulus PG
Scheyer SG
Nelson SF/SG
Singler SF/PF
Zoebeck C

WeepingThomasHill
03-18-2007, 04:44 PM
DukeDiv 2013 wrote:

"Dave McClure will be one of the greatest role players that Duke has ever had next season."

Look, McClure plays hard, but McClure and "greatest at Duke" don't belong in the same sentence. Ever. Let's tone down the hyperbole and hope that McClure can come back with at least a 10 foot jumper and some handle next season, and hopefully he can be our greatest role player for the 2007-2008 season. I'd love if McClure could just be John Smith or Marty Clark for us.

jimbonelson
03-18-2007, 04:48 PM
i like dave mclure a lot. his heart is unmatched. he needs a shot,teams know he is not going to shoot. i remember in his freshman year before he got hurt he was way more agressive did his surgury have any thing to do with this

Demosthenes
03-18-2007, 05:17 PM
We DEFINITELY need more from that "4" spot offensively. Take a guess at how many points Dave and Lance contributed in the last 4 games (all losses).

8.

8 points... total... in 4 games... that's 2 pts per game from our "4" position.

Admitedly, Duke went with 4 guards at times, but they played 119 minutes and had a total of 8 points. Yikes!

Jumbo
03-18-2007, 09:27 PM
DukeBlood wrote:

"We can hope and prey, But in the end he is likely gone. You should deal with it like the most of us."

How do you know? Why don't you wait until he announces his intentions? And let's confine the title of "great posters" to Watzone and Jumbo.

WTH

I'm not a "great poster." But I can tell you that Josh McRoberts is gone. People can keep clinging on to false hope if they want, but Bob knows what he's talking about here. Accept it and move on.

Waynne
03-18-2007, 10:16 PM
Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Singler
God help us

If Josh leaves and Patterson goes elsewhere, we are in big trouble. We have 2s and 3s galore, but no 4s or 5s who will be ready next year. Z-man and Lance are both a year away, and that's assuming they both work very hard.

weezie
03-18-2007, 10:43 PM
DukeDiv 2013 wrote:

"Dave McClure will be one of the greatest role players that Duke has ever had next season."

Look, McClure plays hard, but McClure and "greatest at Duke" don't belong in the same sentence. Ever. Let's tone down the hyperbole and hope that McClure can come back with at least a 10 foot jumper and some handle next season, and hopefully he can be our greatest role player for the 2007-2008 season. I'd love if McClure could just be John Smith or Marty Clark for us.

Totally agree, absolutely. It's as if a big "5 on 4" light flashes whenever he's out on the court. Opposing teams know he's rarely going to take the shot and that's such a shame.

Heelo
03-18-2007, 11:11 PM
Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Singler
Thomas

whereinthehellami
03-19-2007, 09:13 AM
"I think defense and rebounding is needed more than offense"

did you watch this year's team??? offensively challenged. we were losing games before our defense went in the tank because of this.

Yeah I watched this year and I saw alot of the pieces needed for a potent offense already in place. Two big things that were lacking were experience and chemistry. I think the experience issue will be fixed significantly next year (in the ACC alot of teams are losing alot of experience) by most of our players paying their due this year. I think (hope?) the chemistry issues are solved in the off-season and expect that Paulus becomes the clear cut leader. I'm not too big on expecting alot from freshman but I have a feeling about Singler (as do many others) especially on the offense of end. I don't see him being the go-to guy but as the year goes on I see him becoming a huge asset with his court IQ and bball savy (a real student of the game).

My two reservations on offense are ball handling and rebounding. Paulus must improve his speed and handle. Nelson also must be much more consistent with his decision making in respect with when to put the ball on the floor. We could be a sneaky good rebounding team so that might be not as big of an issue.

Now defense makes me really nervous, especially without McRoberts or Patterson.

husWagner1983
03-19-2007, 10:20 AM
Paulus
Nelson
Scheyer
Thomas
Henderson

-We won't be running a lot with Paulus/Scheyer backcourt
-Z may replace LT depending on matchups
-Singler, if as advertised, to play a lot as a big to create matchup issues
-If Patterson comes, he starts at the "5" if he gets the defensive concept...he's the real deal

JJweMISSu
03-24-2007, 02:37 PM
Whos gonna be the boys basketball starting five? With or without patterson what freshmen will be starters? Anyone getting down graded? I mean we have Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, Pocious, Henderson, Thomas, Zoubek, Singler, King, Smith, and maybe P Pat.

Im saying
PG: Paulus
SG: Scheyer
SF: Nelson
PF: Henderson or Singler
C: P Pat or Thomas

I really don't know on PF or C

phaedrus
03-24-2007, 04:40 PM
I'm not a "great poster." But I can tell you that Josh McRoberts is gone. People can keep clinging on to false hope if they want, but Bob knows what he's talking about here. Accept it and move on.

no particular reason for this jumbo, but i'd be interested to hear how long you've been 100% convinced that josh was leaving. since before this season?

Houston
03-24-2007, 09:53 PM
If Duke wants to play deeper into March, they need to become more athletic. Another season of Scheyer logging 35 minutes at the 2 (this assumes Henderson comes off the bench) means another 10+ loss season, an early exit from the big dance and more Globetrotter weave. Duke has been a dominant team when they can lock you up on defense and run on offense.

W/o PP

Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
McClure (Smith if we are forced to play small)
Singler

W/PP

Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Patterson
Singler

I hope Marty stays and plays a major role in 07/08. After watching the tourney Duke is not close to contending unless the philosophy changes. Duke <> mediocre!

Jumbo
03-24-2007, 09:55 PM
no particular reason for this jumbo, but i'd be interested to hear how long you've been 100% convinced that josh was leaving. since before this season?

Yes. It wasn't the best-kept secret.

JJweMISSu
03-24-2007, 11:42 PM
If Duke wants to play deeper into March, they need to become more athletic. Another season of Scheyer logging 35 minutes at the 2 (this assumes Henderson comes off the bench) means another 10+ loss season, an early exit from the big dance and more Globetrotter weave. Duke has been a dominant team when they can lock you up on defense and run on offense.

W/o PP

Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
McClure (Smith if we are forced to play small)
Singler

W/PP

Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Patterson
Singler

I hope Marty stays and plays a major role in 07/08. After watching the tourney Duke is not close to contending unless the philosophy changes. Duke <> mediocre!

I agree with you 100% on making scheyer the 6th man. he would become like a lee humphrey and that is just what every team needs to make it long.

CDu
03-25-2007, 09:48 AM
Well now that McBobs has declared, it's a little clearer. Although it still comes down to whether or not Patterson arrives. Here's my guess, with or without Patterson:

w/ Patterson:
Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Singler
Patterson
with Smith, Henderson, King, and Thomas playing the key roles off the bench (Henderson essentially being the sixth starter), and Zoubek playing a similar role as this year.

w/o Patterson:
Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Singler
Thomas
with Smith, Henderson, King, and Zoubek playing the key roles off the bench (Henderson essentially being the sixth starter).

On the perimeter, I think we'll see big improvements from Henderson and Scheyer. In the post, I think we'll see vast improvement from Thomas and (hopefully) Zoubek, and Singler will bring a better and more diverse scoring game than McRoberts has. If we get Patterson, that'd be icing on the cake.

I think we'll be substantially better than this year's team, although we'd have been even better with McRoberts coming back. But, there's no crying over spilled milk. McRoberts wasn't staying, so we've got to move forward.

Boston Dukie
03-25-2007, 01:00 PM
I am not sure how anyone could be down on Nelson. He was the team's best perimeter defender by far, and expended and ton of energy constantly having to gaurd the other team's best perimeter threat because Paulus and Scheyer could not stop any dribble penetration (for evidence of this just watch the last 5 VCU possessions, or really tape of any game this season - Paulus and Scheyer can't gaurd anyone). At the same time Nelson was a great rebounder for his size, and our best scorer. His scoring tended to fade in the 2nd half of games, but that was because he had to kill himself on defense to cover for Scheyer and Paulus. He used to drive into the lane a bit out of control, but he has greatly improved here by adding a little tear drop pull-up. Nelson is a very good player and should get as many minutes as anyone next year. He was a warrior this year and without a doubt he should be starting. He could be all ACC next year if he keeps improving.

On Scheyer, I am not sure what he brings to the table? He is a very heady and smart player, and works his butt off, but that is about it. He is not a great shooter (just look at his percentages from 3 point range, and this was taking wide open 3s, not the in your face 3s JJ would take), has a slow and low shooting release, cannot defend on the perimeter, cannot finish at the basket, cannot create his own shot and is not a good rebounder. He is a very smart and mature player, who is solid at a lot of things, but not really strong at any. If the team needs a spot of 3 point shooter, Paulus can provide this. Paulus has actually turned into a great spot up shooter.

It was pretty clear that by the end of the year that coach K was favoring Henderson over Scheyer since Henderson can create his own shot, finish at the rim and is a much better rebounder. Henderson could be a superstar and he needs as many minutes as the team can get him.

So I think next year's starters are:

Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Singler
Patterson (Thomas if Patterson goes to Kentucky).

Bench - Smith, Pocius, Thomas, King, McClure, Scheyer

I would love to see Nolan Smith start over Paulus because he has so much more upside, but no way as a freshman he will be ready (kind of like Will Avery playing behind Wojo his freshman year. Will was much more talented, but Wojo started with Will getting lots of minutes and often playing at the same time).

I think without a doubt Patterson will come to Duke. He is the perfect fit for what Duke needs now that Josh is gone, and he is basically a lock to start from day one. Who could say no to that given they get to play for Coach K, play in Cameron, be on TV every game, and get an amazing education?

I think with Patterson and Singler on the team, and Thomas greatly improving (he just needs to get much stronger, but he can be a very good player), Zoubek will see very few minutes. There is a reason he didn't play in the VCU game.

duke.kahanamoku
03-25-2007, 01:22 PM
I agree with the Boston post but will go even farther on Nelson.

The one conclusion of which I am most certain after watching the games this season is that Nelson is the cornerstone of whatever success we are to have next year:
- He is our best defender and capable of shutting down an opponents best scorer.
- He is a quality scorer who would become even stronger if he made this his focus (this would require a better team defense).
- He is a very strong rebounder for a player at his position.
- He brings these strengths with zero liabilities.

Like many others, I expect Henderson to take great strides forward next year on the basis of some of the flashes of brilliance he showed this year as well as the continuous improvement he made over the season. He is the next piece in the foundation, presuming he achieves this expected improvement.

After Nelson and Henderson, we have some questions:

- How good can the freshmen be, and how fast? We have had super-freshmen in the past like Elton, Jayson, and J.J. and hopefully one or more of this year's group will reach those heights to move the team forward. There is opportunity for one or more of next year's freshmen to take a premier, starring role on this team if they are up to the challenge.

- How fast can the sophomores improve? Paulus, Scheyer, Pocius, McClure, Zoubek and the others each have unique strengths and roles to play but must make significant improvements to firm up less strong parts of their game to move the team forward.

I look forward to seeing all of the progress the guys will make over the summer as well as the talented new faces in the fall,

Go Duke!

throatybeard
03-25-2007, 01:40 PM
^ best new screen name

Jumbo
03-25-2007, 02:22 PM
(for evidence of this just watch the last 5 VCU possessions, or really tape of any game this season - Paulus and Scheyer can't gaurd anyone).
This is just wrong. As I posted earlier in one of these arguments, Scheyer was on Maynor for much of the night and, contrary to popular belief, Maynor did nothing for a huge stretch of the second half. In fact, a couple of Maynor's moves in the final two minutes came when Scheyer was out of the game with his cut eye. Maynor's plays in the last two minutes obscure the fact that VCU's comeback came by virtue of three-pointers in transition (off awful transition D). Scheyer consistently stuck perimeter players of various sizes and speeds all season, and did a remarkable job on a number of them (ask Thaddeus Young or Derek Raivio what it's like to be guarded by Scheyer). More on this in a bit.


On Scheyer, I am not sure what he brings to the table? He is a very heady and smart player, and works his butt off, but that is about it. He is not a great shooter (just look at his percentages from 3 point range, and this was taking wide open 3s, not the in your face 3s JJ would take), has a slow and low shooting release, cannot defend on the perimeter, cannot finish at the basket, cannot create his own shot and is not a good rebounder. He is a very smart and mature player, who is solid at a lot of things, but not really strong at any.
I've been patient with this for a long time now, but I'm tired of this. Anyone who thinks that Scheyer is a) slow b) a poor defender and is simply c) some kind of a smart, heady player who works hard but doesn't have talent doesn't understand the game of basketball. Period. The staff loves Scheyer's defense. Basketball officials I've spoken to love his defense. I've never heard anyone who has coached or scouted refer to him as "slow." If anything, he's an above average athlete and somewhat of a freak, if you remember the story DBR linked about his VO2 test being better than Lance Armstrong's. (Link is dead from the Chicago Tribune, but here's the relevant paragraph:
"To create a baseline medical history, Duke puts freshman athletes through a litany of tests.
One of the more arcane exams is the VO2 Max test, which measures an individual's maximal rate of oxygen consumption—essentially, how well one's body produces the energy necessary for endurance activities.
So doctors at Duke's K Lab hooked Scheyer up to the electrodes. They shoved a breathing apparatus into his mouth—"When you're done, you pull it out and there's drool everywhere," Scheyer says—and told him to start pedaling.
World-class male athletes typically exceed a VO2 Max test score of 80. According to a University of Texas study, seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong's score is 85.
Scheyer registered an 89."

Anyway, back to your bashing of Scheyer's game. He's actually quite a good rebounder for a guard -- he had seven big ones against VCU. He absolutely can create his own shot; the problem is he doesn't shoot often enough. I can't count the number of times, in the VCU game alone, he pump-faked, had a step on his man, and elected to kick the ball rather than shoot a pull-up. That's not a lack of physical ability, it's a lack of confidence or a go-to mentality. You know, the type of thing a lot of freshmen don't own. But, he did create his own shot in those occasions. He just didn't take the shot. I agree that he can become a better shooter -- his percentages were below what they should be. But I think a large part of that comes from the ball-handling responsibilities he had to endure, and the general struggles of Duke's offense to get easy baskets. Plus, if you're going to excuse Nelson's offense for guarding tough guys, Scheyer often had to guard perimeter players just as skilled as Nelson's man, and did a very good job on them. It had to affect his offense. Finally, he finished in traffic on a number of occasions and attempted 136 FTs (second on the team and more than Nelson, so I guess he can get to the rim after all). Oh, and he did that with an upper body that was as frail as Gumby's. Imagine what he'll look like when he puts on a few pounds.
I'm going to say this again: Every single complaint and pseudo-compliment you made about Scheyer is stereotypically white-biased. People can claim race has nothing to do with this until they are blue in the face, but there is simply no other explanation for the complete misrepresentation of Scheyer's game. Every single comment about him has been used to describe every "typical white player" for years. It's like people aren't even watching him play; they're just watching his skin. I'm tired of it.



It was pretty clear that by the end of the year that coach K was favoring Henderson over Scheyer since Henderson can create his own shot, finish at the rim and is a much better rebounder. Henderson could be a superstar and he needs as many minutes as the team can get him.

I don't think that's clear at all. See the minutes played for both guys in the VCU game. And how many shots did Henderson create in that game? He scored on the fast break and the offensive boards.

I apologize if my tone was overly harsh here, but I'm getting fed up with some of this supposed "analysis." If this is truly the way people are evaluating players, they aren't watching the games.

throatybeard
03-25-2007, 02:32 PM
Well Jumbo, if we learned anything from the whole expansion debate a few years ago, it's that when people lack evidence for what they're saying, they use the phrase doesn't bring anything to the table a lot.

Houston
03-25-2007, 03:36 PM
I thought Boston's analysis was excellent (your rantings only serve to perpetuate racism). Scheyer is heady but he is not a lock down defender, a great shooter or someone who can create of the dribble. How do you create your own shot and not take it? If you don't take the shot, you have not created a shot. Jon is a good player who will get better each year, but another year of 35 mpg at the 2 will mean another early exit in March.

I think Marty is a freakish athlete who needs to play. His skills are well suited for Duke's offense and his defense can not be so much worse than what we have on the perimeter.

A-Tex Devil
03-25-2007, 04:13 PM
Sure, a quick guy like Maynor beat John occasionally, but if you really WATCHED Scheyer this year, especially off the ball defense, he was trememdous at fighting through screens to stay on his man. In fact he was probably our best off the ball defender last year - and one of the best in the conference. He only guards the point when other guys on the team simply weren't cutting it.

Scheyer absolutely ruined Raivio against Gonzaga. He's the guy we'd have guaridng JJ if we had to play that hypothetical game. Replay any game this year and watch him - he's glued to the other teams shooter. That's why he got 35 minutes a game. He needs to be more aggressive on offense, but that will come.

With Mcroberts gone, I think all 5 spots, with the exception of maybe Paulus at point guard, should be up for grabs next year. Including DeMarcus' starting spot. "Starters" may not necessarily mean "closers" for next year's team, though, and I think you could see a bench player or 2 with more minutes than a starter or 2. But, assuming Patterson doesn't come, we'll need 27-30 minutes/game from LT or Brian if we don't want to get slaughtered o nthe boards and inside.

Hopefully, Henderson can become a McCants type of scorer - whether he starts or not. We've seen flashes, and now that we don't have to force an offense to/through McRoberts that simply didn't work this year, I'd really love to see us highlight him (and let him highlight himself) next year.

CDu
03-25-2007, 04:13 PM
There is a difference between having great endurance (which Scheyer certainly has) and being quick. Similarly, you don't have to be quick to be a good defender. So, I think you both are right in some respects and wrong in some respects.

Scheyer is a great athlete in terms of endurance. He is freakishly gifted actually. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean he's quick, explosive, or a good leaper. In fact, he rarely showed any explosiveness. He was able to shake his man momentarily with the pump-fake, but the reason he didn't shoot was because his man frequently recovered quickly. When his man didn't recover, we saw Scheyer go to the basket (slowly).

However, despite not being overly quick, Scheyer was absolutely a good defender. As I said before, this isn't necessarily surprising. Defense is about effort and positioning moreso than quickness (though quickness certainly helps). Scheyer was terrific both as an on-ball and off-ball defender all year. Jumbo is also correct that until late in the game, Maynor wasn't schooling Scheyer at all. It was just that small sample of possessions late where Maynor stepped up big.

dukestheheat
03-25-2007, 04:31 PM
ok, here is a mid-season prediction as to whom we start, and other nuggets:

Patterson (Duke is going to put on a major offensive to bring him in)
Singler
Henderson
Scheyer, annnnnnnnd
Smith!

yes, I know that's quite a change from this year, BUT, we need quite a change from this year.

and, free throw practice for the summer: it's mandatory for each player to shoot at least 50 free throws per day, including Sunday, each day to prep the team for the upcoming season.

Seeing that we lost six or seven games by six points or less, toss in the free throws that we usually hit (and should hit), and Duke is much more competitive.

a shekel, dth.

CDu
03-25-2007, 04:44 PM
ok, here is a mid-season prediction as to whom we start, and other nuggets:

Patterson (Duke is going to put on a major offensive to bring him in)
Singler
Henderson
Scheyer, annnnnnnnd
Smith!

yes, I know that's quite a change from this year, BUT, we need quite a change from this year.

and, free throw practice for the summer: it's mandatory for each player to shoot at least 50 free throws per day, including Sunday, each day to prep the team for the upcoming season.

Seeing that we lost six or seven games by six points or less, toss in the free throws that we usually hit (and should hit), and Duke is much more competitive.

a shekel, dth.

That's a bold prediction, but I doubt it happens. For one, Nelson is our best defender, and a senior. It's not unprecedented for a senior to lose his job, but probably less likely these days. I'm guessing Coach K wants to promote the idea that staying around is rewarded, whereas in the past this wasn't an issue. Also, Paulus is a two-year starter at point guard, and Smith is a freshman and not a natural point guard to begin with. It's rare that a 2-year starter loses his job, much less to a guy who hasn't shown he's suited for the role.

We DO need a change, but I think you'll see that change come with the scoring punch provided by Singler/King, the versatility added by Smith, and improvements by Scheyer, Henderson, and Thomas.

I do agree on free throws. We gotta do better with that.

Jumbo
03-25-2007, 05:11 PM
I thought Boston's analysis was excellent (your rantings only serve to perpetuate racism). Scheyer is heady but he is not a lock down defender, a great shooter or someone who can create of the dribble. How do you create your own shot and not take it? If you don't take the shot, you have not created a shot. Jon is a good player who will get better each year, but another year of 35 mpg at the 2 will mean another early exit in March.
If you think Boston's analysis was "excellent," more power to you. I guess you also believe that coaches from various programs, and scouts, don't have the ability to judge quickness, defensive ability, etc. I guess you also believe that leading the team in scoring in ACC play as a freshman equates to "bringing nothing to to the table. Got it. It is absolutely amazing to me that people can't recognize Scheyer's gifts and are now actually knocking the kid after one of the more successful freshman seasons in the K era.
You may consider my responses to be "rantings." You may believe that they perpetuate "racism." But the critique Boston offered of Scheyer's game is the same default stuff said about nearly every white player. It's also plain wrong. I guess it's just a coincidence, though.
Finally, you absolutely can create a shot without taking it. Guys who penetrate often create opportunities to shoot a runner, thus creating their own shot, but dish it off to someone else for a layup. Scheyer makes moves that enable him to shoot; he doesn't shoot often enough. That's a confidence issue, not a skill one. Sorry.

phaedrus
03-25-2007, 05:42 PM
ok, here is a mid-season prediction as to whom we start, and other nuggets:

Patterson (Duke is going to put on a major offensive to bring him in)
Singler
Henderson
Scheyer, annnnnnnnd
Smith!

i think if there's one 100% guarantee to be made it's that paulus will be starting.

Cameron
03-25-2007, 05:52 PM
JOSH YOU MIGHT HAVE LEFT, BUT WE WONT BE MAD FOR LONG ONCE SINGLER IS HERE

[paragraph redacted]

This is probably just depressed Duke fan talking, but I still am not sad Josh left. I knew he was going to, and I knew I wouldn't be too upset. We have a great team returning and more great players coming in the fall. Duke Basketball is in great hands!!!

Jumbo
03-25-2007, 06:44 PM
There is a difference between having great endurance (which Scheyer certainly has) and being quick.

Obviously. But people have been talking about Scheyer's general lack of athleticism (and the idea that he wore down), so I thought it was a good point to reference the story we all read a few months ago about his freakish endurance (which is certainly a facet of "athleticism").
Regardless of that, though, I happen to think Scheyer is more than quick enough. Is he Jason Williams-quick? No. Is he as slow as J.J. Redick or Trajan Langdon? No. His athleticism is vastly underrated, especially considering the fact that he's just a freshman and is bound to put on some muscle (allowing him to finish more of his moves).

throatybeard
03-25-2007, 07:39 PM
I wonder if there's some sort of Einstein-relativity thing going on here, where if people see white skin, they perceive slow movement regardless of whether it's occurring or not.

Teton Jack
03-25-2007, 09:29 PM
If Duke does not have Patterson, I expect K to go small and try to push tempo:

Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
McClure
Singler

This scenario means that Smith, Pocius, and Thomas would be the key reserves and that the line-ups could become fairly fluid depending on match-ups.

Troublemaker
03-25-2007, 09:49 PM
Is there any general consensus / word on how long Singler will stay in school? Obviously, nobody knows for sure (Deng was supposed to be a 3 or 4 year guy), but is Kyle expected to be 1-and-done? 2-and-done? 3-and-done? In projecting future lineups, I've been assuming 2-and-done, but I'm not sure whether that's way off according to general consensus. If he's likely to be 1-and-done like Durant or Wright, let me know. Thanks.

dukestheheat
03-25-2007, 10:00 PM
troublemaker-

the great players today (heck, even the good players or in some cases, the marginal impact players...if they're big, mobile and can rebound or block shots) really don't come to college to stay in college; I know that that is probably an unfair and sweeping statement on the state of the college game today, but i see that this much has changed over the past ten years:

the early exits to the L have brought parity into the college game quickly.

the elites want to go to college for one year or two at most; if a perceived 'elite player' doesn't go pro, it's almost like something is wrong with the player or that the draft status is in question for some reason.

and the truly elite players (oden for one) probably don't want to come to college at all, and only have to now b/c of the one-year rule.

well, the game we all love has suffered b/c of the L early defections, even with the one year rule. and, it hits the elite programs very hard to lose their players early and then have to live with holes in the lineup for several years thereafter (duke, for example). makes me wonder if we should alter our landscape for recruiting; instead of going for the very top players, how about going for more guys 30-60 and see if they'll stay around a little longer?

i know i'm ranting, but the game that is so precious to me has, imo, suffered from the influence of the L.

so, sorry for being long, but i'm not surprised McBob left after 2 and i'm not surprised if kyle singler will leave after one.

dth.

dukestheheat
03-25-2007, 10:03 PM
phaedrus-

you are probably right on paulus in the starting role, and in my opinion, he serves us best (looking at it right now, and not really looking ahead at how he might change over the summer..) as an established shooting guard.

i was very impressed with greg's shooting from about mid-way through the year throughout the rest of the season. guy can fill it up!

dth.

Boston Dukie
03-25-2007, 10:10 PM
I am not sure it has anything to do with race. Pocius and McRoberts are great athletes and are white, Scheyer is not, and he is white. Race is just meaningless in this discussion. The real racism is that assuming because Scheyer is white, he must be the next JJ (like every anouncer says every game by comparing the 2 of them). JJ was an amazing player with much better athleticism than people believe (it takes a great athlete to get off shots as quickly and accurately as he did with people in your face the entire time).

Go back and watch the tape of the Gonzaga came and you will see Demarcus Nelson playing Ravio for very long stretches. It was a team effort shutting him down, but Nelson bore as much of the workload as anyone. Just because the announcer at the end of the game attributes it to Scheyer, doesn't mean it is true. And Ravio is small (at least smaller than Scheyer) and not that quick diring to the basket (except his release), so he is the type of player Scheyer matches up well with. You need to chase him around screens, keep a hand in his face, and be relentless. These are the things Scheyer is good at, especially given his endurance. But this endurance does not help you gaurd elite 2 gaurds who are quick off the dribble. If it did, than Lance Armstrong would be the best on ball defender in the world, and I am pretty sure he is not.

Scheyer started out the season very well, because he "got it" more quickly than all the other freshman, and frankly more quickly than most Duke freshman. As the season wore on he was less and less successful. If his endurance is as good as advertised, than it was not from being worn out. It was simply a matter of the other players figuring out his strengths, and adjusting to them.

Henderson on the other hand got better and better. His VCU game was not great, but he did create his own shot a few times and finished very well (this after missing a game and being out of rythym). He is the opposite of Scheyer in many respects, including the fact that he didn't "get it" right away and he has the asthma problem.

Scheyer is a very solid player, but his upside is limited. I think as you see other players (Henderson, Smith, Thomas, King, Singler) progress, you will see less and less PT for Scheyer.

The question isn't how good is Scheyer on an absolute basis anyway, its how good he is relative to Nelson and Henderson (and others on the team)? And right now, I think both Nelson and Henderson are better players than Scheyer, with more upside.

If you think at the end of 2008 we will look at Scheyer and look at Henderson and say Scheyer is a better player and more deserving of minutes, great, I hope you are right. That probably means Scheyer has really improved in many aspects of the game, but my money is on Henderson - better rebounder, better finisher, better defender, and he is the best on the team at creating his own shot (although Singler and Smith could change this). I for one would much rather have the ball in Henderson's hands with 8 seconds left and we need a bucket than in Scheyer's hands.

At least UNC lost (although I hope that doesn't mean Tyler, Lawson and Wright all return because if they do, look out).

OldSchool
03-25-2007, 10:12 PM
I'll say this: If Zoubek is not starting (purely for defensive purposes) by mid-season or so we are going to get torched by any team that can feed the ball into a legitimate big.

We don't even need Z to give us much scoring next year, as I don't think next year's team (with Singler, Henderson, Scheyer and hopefully Paulus continuing to hit from 3 and hopefully Markie learning to put some arc on his jump shot) will be as offensively-challenged as this year's team.

But we will need 25-30 minutes a game from Z. Lance ain't gonna become the incredible hulk in one off-season, and we have absolutely no one else to match up defensively with any good 6'9"+ opponent.

RockyMtDevil
03-25-2007, 10:27 PM
Greg 33 min
Jon 28 min
Gerald 27 min
Singler 27 min
Patterson 26 min

Slacker
03-26-2007, 09:50 AM
The results of a VO2 test tells nothing about one's ability to play defense on a basketball court. It probably isn't always an indicator of an "world-class" athlete. I'd be willing to bet that there are some heavy duty smokers out there that score above 80 on a VO2 test.


The staff loves Scheyer's defense. Basketball officials I've spoken to love his defense. I've never heard anyone who has coached or scouted refer to him as "slow." If anything, he's an above average athlete and somewhat of a freak, if you remember the story DBR linked about his VO2 test being better than Lance Armstrong's. (Link is dead from the Chicago Tribune, but here's the relevant paragraph:
"To create a baseline medical history, Duke puts freshman athletes through a litany of tests.
One of the more arcane exams is the VO2 Max test, which measures an individual's maximal rate of oxygen consumption—essentially, how well one's body produces the energy necessary for endurance activities.
So doctors at Duke's K Lab hooked Scheyer up to the electrodes. They shoved a breathing apparatus into his mouth—"When you're done, you pull it out and there's drool everywhere," Scheyer says—and told him to start pedaling.
World-class male athletes typically exceed a VO2 Max test score of 80. According to a University of Texas study, seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong's score is 85.
Scheyer registered an 89."



Scheyer isn't a perimeter defender of the same quality of Sean Dockery or Robert Brickey. Even Wojo is a better defender than him. Scheyer did not always draw the toughest defensive assignment this season. That usually fell to Nelson. He's just not a lock down defender.

It's great that Scheyer scored an 89 on the VO2 test as compared to the 85 that Lance Armstrong got. That means when he graduates he'll have the option of riding in the Tour de France instead of going to the NBA.

gw67
03-26-2007, 10:52 AM
First, there are no “lock down perimeter defenders” on the Duke roster. If you watched Kansas, UCLA and SIU this weekend, you saw several of the best perimeter defenders in college and all of them were beaten often on drives to the hoop. IMO, Nelson is the best Duke perimeter defender. He makes the opposition work hard for their shots and rebounds well in traffic. Scheyer was the second best perimeter defender this past year, IMO.

As far as starters for next year, I see Paulus, Nelson and Scheyer being the core of the team. All three need to protect the ball better and reduce their turnovers but I see no reason to replace any of these experienced players. The same cannot be said for the power forward position. I hope that both Thomas and McClure improve significantly but, IMO, it was clearly the weakest position on the team this past year. I expect that the replacement will be chosen from Henderson, Singler or King. The center position is a void at this time. Hopefully, Zoubek improves and/or Patterson comes to Duke. Although they may not all be starters, I expect Paulus, Nelson, Scheyer, Henderson and Singler to play starter minutes (25+).

gw67

The Gordog
03-26-2007, 11:38 AM
First game:
PG: Greg
SG: Jon
SF: Demarcus
PF: Gerald
C: Brian

By mid-season:
PG: Greg
SG: Jon
SF: Demarcus
PF: Kyle
C: Pattrick (assuming he comes)

Jumbo
03-26-2007, 11:50 AM
The results of a VO2 test tells nothing about one's ability to play defense on a basketball court. It probably isn't always an indicator of an "world-class" athlete. I'd be willing to bet that there are some heavy duty smokers out there that score above 80 on a VO2 test.



Scheyer isn't a perimeter defender of the same quality of Sean Dockery or Robert Brickey. Even Wojo is a better defender than him. Scheyer did not always draw the toughest defensive assignment this season. That usually fell to Nelson. He's just not a lock down defender.

It's great that Scheyer scored an 89 on the VO2 test as compared to the 85 that Lance Armstrong got. That means when he graduates he'll have the option of riding in the Tour de France instead of going to the NBA.

Thanks for the lesson. I was actually under the impression that at the end of a basketball game, each team was given a VO2 test, and if you scored higher than the guy you were guarding, five points would be deducted from his team. Silly me!

As Paul Simon once sang, "The man hears what he wants to hear (and disregards the rest)." It's clear, at this point, that some of you are completely unwilling to see Jon Scheyer as either athletic of a good defender, no matter what he does. When he does something good, there's an excuse for it (For instance, Boston starts going on about J.J.'s quick release, then dismisses Scheyer's job guarding Raivio -- whom he admits has a quick release -- because Raivio's too small). No one's even mentioned the job he did against Thaddeus Young -- guess that's too tough to argue against. So, even though he regularly guarded top perimeter players as a FRESHMAN, despite a frail frame that will definitely bulk up, Scheyer is a lousy defender. Despite the fact that he played out of position for a good portion of the year and got into the lane as much as J.J. ever did, despite the afforementioned lack of physical strength, he can't create on the offensive end. Got it. I'll be willing to bet a bunch of you will have a sudden epiphany circa next season. Good thing this board has an archive.

ACCBBallFan
03-26-2007, 01:36 PM
Assuming no Patterson, I am expecting small ball which has worked for Nova, VCU. and others:

Though I would prefer to see Paulus as the SG, I doubt Nolan Smith will be the starting PG.

Just look at this year's minutes, and no doubt Scheyer (1112), Paulus (1068) and Nelson (1052) start. I would expect a top 5 player like Singler starts.

So, under the K will use his best 5 theory, the question is who the 5th starter is among: Henderson, McClure, Lance, Zoubek, Pocius, King and Smith. My guess is defense will prevail over height and traditional 5 spot, and it will be Henderson, Smith, McClure, Lance with Zoubek, Marty and King seeing spot duty but contributing a lot as practice players who can score.

Paulus/Smith
Scheyer/King
Nelson/Pocius
Henderson/McClure
Singler/Lance/Zoubek

With Patterson, I think Henderson gets relegated to sixth man:

Paulus/Smith
Scheyer/Pocius/King
Nelson/Henderson/Pocius
Singler/McClure
Patterson/Lance/Zoubek

K could have some interesting Defense versus Offense scrimmages with

Smith/Paulus
Scheyer/King
Nelson/Pocius
(Henderson or McClure)/(Singler or Henderson)
Lance/(Singler or Zoubek)

and even more interesting with Patterson, with at least three of the 5 defenders being very good on offense as well.

Smith/Paulus
Nelson/Scheyer (interchangeable Offense/Defense)
Henderson/Pocius/Singler
Lance or McClure/King/Singler
Patterson/Singler/Zoubek

While the addition of Patrick Patterson would make Duke's linup more traditional, Duke could do well with a center by committee approach. Though I surmise it would somewhat be a waste of Kyle Singler's many talents. it would also present match up nightmares for the opponent, more so than Josh who was not an outside threat.

RepoMan
03-26-2007, 02:04 PM
I think Marty is a freakish athlete

A. What does this mean?

B. What makes you think this? I know it isn't from watching him play in Duke basketball games because I have seen them all and have seen no "freakish" athletic ability, whatever that means.

bluedevil
03-27-2007, 04:55 AM
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/6596652

"McRoberts had met with Coach K after his freshman season and the two had pretty much decided that he would leave after this season."


All the insiders said all season that there was zero chance McRoberts would be here next season. That makes sense since otherwise everyone on the team would be returning and Duke would be adding 3 bigtime recruits and scorers to make McRoberts' stats worse. So if Zoubek was the only center for next season and struggling big time, why didn't coach K recruit another center for next season? K backed off Kevin Love, considered by some the #1 recruit in the nation, even though Love grew up dreaming about playing for Duke. K also backed off a mcdonalds allamerican named JJ Hickson. Duke didn't even have a single decent center this season, since McRoberts wasn't capable of scoring or defending in the paint and was clearly more suited to the power forward role. Unless Zoubek is a hundred times better or a miracle happens with another power forward Patterson, Duke won't have anything even resembling a center for next season. K got involved with Patterson very late, at the 11th hour like he suddenly realized we needed a center. What happened with Love and Hickson and all the other potential center recruits, and do we always have to have a power forward playing center?

The thing that's great about Coach G is she always has at least 2 players at every position and everyone plays. Since center and point guard are the most important positions and with K's aggressive switching man to man defense, Duke centers tend to foul out or play passive with 3 or 4 fouls at the end of games. Duke should have at least 3 or 4 centers at all times since all 3 centers fouled out in one half trying to defend Okafor and UConn in 2004. How does having 1 or zero quality centers help Duke?

Jumbo
03-27-2007, 08:58 AM
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/6596652

"McRoberts had met with Coach K after his freshman season and the two had pretty much decided that he would leave after this season."


All the insiders said all season that there was zero chance McRoberts would be here next season. That makes sense since otherwise everyone on the team would be returning and Duke would be adding 3 bigtime recruits and scorers to make McRoberts' stats worse. So if Zoubek was the only center for next season and struggling big time, why didn't coach K recruit another center for next season? K backed off Kevin Love, considered by some the #1 recruit in the nation, even though Love grew up dreaming about playing for Duke. K also backed off a mcdonalds allamerican named JJ Hickson. Duke didn't even have a single decent center this season, since McRoberts wasn't capable of scoring or defending in the paint and was clearly more suited to the power forward role. Unless Zoubek is a hundred times better or a miracle happens with another power forward Patterson, Duke won't have anything even resembling a center for next season. K got involved with Patterson very late, at the 11th hour like he suddenly realized we needed a center. What happened with Love and Hickson and all the other potential center recruits, and do we always have to have a power forward playing center?

The thing that's great about Coach G is she always has at least 2 players at every position and everyone plays. Since center and point guard are the most important positions and with K's aggressive switching man to man defense, Duke centers tend to foul out or play passive with 3 or 4 fouls at the end of games. Duke should have at least 3 or 4 centers at all times since all 3 centers fouled out in one half trying to defend Okafor and UConn in 2004. How does having 1 or zero quality centers help Duke?

What is a center? What is a power forward? What's the difference? Was Carlos Boozer a center? Elton Brand? Shelden Williams? Tyler Hansbrough? How about some national championship teams? Sean May? Lonny Baxter? A.J. Granger?
This notion of having a "true center" is antiquated. Very few teams have one, those that do experience widely divergent levels of success, and those that don't can win national championships. And asking for 3 or 4? Thats like asking K to find 3 or 4 llamas with three-point range as well.

throatybeard
03-27-2007, 09:02 AM
And asking for 3 or 4? Thats like asking K to find 3 or 4 llamas with three-point range as well.

I tell ya, all the Braves needed in the last fifteen years was two more relief pitchers, mentally stable, handsome, about '6-10," with 98mph fastball, good movement, and about 3 other pitches. I don't understand why that hard-headed Schuerholz won't go out and get them. :D

whereinthehellami
03-27-2007, 09:08 AM
I don't see how Zoobs is going to be the answer next year in the frontcourt. Unless Coach K goes zone which i don't see happening, Zoobs is still going to be a huge liability in the defense that Duke plays. I think he can help but I think we are going to have to take our lumps next year on defense and hope that we get alot of steals/turnovers (not a good team for that though). Sounds uncomfortably familiar, doesn't it?

As far as Patterson goes, again I don't think he will be the answer in the frontcourt. I think through his size and athletiscm he will definately help but he is a freshman and from the games (limited and only on TV) that I saw he was not a dominator in the key (like the landlord was in HS).

I think we look to Mcclure and Singler (not sure about his defense) as the answers in the froncourt and hope that their savy and effort pays off. From there I think you mix in Henderson/Thomas/Zoobs/Patterson and plug as many holes as you can.

Alot of guys are going to be playing out of position, especially on defense.

bluedevil
03-27-2007, 11:01 AM
Brand, Boozer, Shelden, Hansbrough, May, and Baxter, were all college centers. McRoberts was a college power forward and Duke had no decent centers this year which is one reason why it was a 7 seed in the ACC tournament. The situation should be even worse next year unless K's 11th hour recruiting of Patterson is successful. Duke should have 3 or 4 college centers at all times, a couple of them could be Horvath or Christensen types, and a couple should be big time post players separated by a year or two depending on potential for leaving early. Why did K back off Love, Hickson, and other centers then suddenly start recruiting power forward Patterson at the last minute? I guess K wanted at least one quality post player next season but shouldn't Duke have several players for the 4 and 5 positions at all times, especially since K is using all 13 scholarships now?

Troublemaker
03-27-2007, 11:13 AM
Brand, Boozer, Shelden, Hansbrough, May, and Baxter, were all college centers. McRoberts was a college power forward and Duke had no decent centers this year which is one reason why it was a 7 seed in the ACC tournament. The situation should be even worse next year unless K's 11th hour recruiting of Patterson is successful. Duke should have 3 or 4 college centers at all times, a couple of them could be Horvath or Christensen types, and a couple should be big time post players separated by a year or two depending on potential for leaving early. Why did K back off Love, Hickson, and other centers then suddenly start recruiting power forward Patterson at the last minute? I guess K wanted at least one quality post player next season but shouldn't Duke have several players for the 4 and 5 positions at all times, especially since K is using all 13 scholarships now?

How is Patterson any less of a "college center" than those other guys you mentioned?

feldspar
03-27-2007, 11:17 AM
How is Patterson any less of a "college center" than those other guys you mentioned?

Agreed. From what I understand Patterson's game is comparable to Boozer's.

bluedevil
03-27-2007, 11:26 AM
How is Patterson any less of a "college center" than those other guys you mentioned?

Those other centers I mentioned weighed 250 or more, Patterson is built like Boykin at 6'8", 230, and scout.com says he plays facing the basket with his weaknesses being defensive presence and scoring on the low block. People who have seen him play say he's no savior for Duke's center problems. Again, confused as to why K backed off Duke fan Love, Hickson, and other centers so early, then scrambled to recruit Patterson late. And why Duke never seems to have enough depth at the center position.

throatybeard
03-27-2007, 11:43 AM
Those other centers I mentioned weighed 250 or more, Patterson is built like Boykin at 6'8", 230, and scout.com says he plays facing the basket with his weaknesses being defensive presence and scoring on the low block. People who have seen him play say he's no savior for Duke's center problems. Again, confused as to why K backed off Duke fan Love, Hickson, and other centers so early, then scrambled to recruit Patterson late. And why Duke never seems to have enough depth at the center position.

This thread may or may not have some answers:
http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1167

Troublemaker
03-27-2007, 11:45 AM
Those other centers I mentioned weighed 250 or more, Patterson is built like Boykin at 6'8", 230, and scout.com says he plays facing the basket with his weaknesses being defensive presence and scoring on the low block. People who have seen him play say he's no savior for Duke's center problems. Again, confused as to why K backed off Duke fan Love, Hickson, and other centers so early, then scrambled to recruit Patterson late. And why Duke never seems to have enough depth at the center position.

Uh, I wouldn't trust that scout.com blurb. From virtually every other source, he's supposed to be an excellent defensive presence and rebounder. While 6'8", he has the long arms and timing to be a shotblocker inside. As for weight, he will need to add some but that's true virtually all young posts. Do you remember what Shelden weighed when he arrived (http://scout.scout.com/a.z?s=218&p=8&c=1&nid=10929 )? The same as Patterson.

bluedevil
03-27-2007, 12:09 PM
Gimme a break, Love averaged 34 ppg, 18 rpg, 6 apg, and swept the national player of the year awards. It's great that he has an ego, all great players do like Christian Laettner. Shelden was accused of gang rape and K couldn't wait to get him on campus then retire his jersey, so let's not act too high and mighty about our players. I mean I hate to bring him into this but people will take some lame little comment and act like it's reason enough to throw next season and beyond into the garbage. We could have won a national title with Love, or that kid Kris Humphries who K dumped off to Minnesota in 2003-4. Think he would have made a difference in that 04 UConn game when Shelden, Shav, and Horvath fouled out?? How many big men has K backed off of or had transfer or go pro early recently? Thompson, Humphries, Shav, Boykin, Boateng, Love, McRoberts, etc. What is it with Duke and big men, aren't they all dying to work with Wojo and the rest of K's staff? You'd think with all the uncertainty about UK and UF, Patterson would at least mention Duke in a recent article about his college destination instead of just talking about Tubby and Donovan.

feldspar
03-27-2007, 01:03 PM
Gimme a break, Love averaged 34 ppg, 18 rpg, 6 apg, and swept the national player of the year awards. It's great that he has an ego, all great players do like Christian Laettner. Shelden was accused of gang rape and K couldn't wait to get him on campus then retire his jersey, so let's not act too high and mighty about our players. I mean I hate to bring him into this but people will take some lame little comment and act like it's reason enough to throw next season and beyond into the garbage. We could have won a national title with Love, or that kid Kris Humphries who K dumped off to Minnesota in 2003-4. Think he would have made a difference in that 04 UConn game when Shelden, Shav, and Horvath fouled out?? How many big men has K backed off of or had transfer or go pro early recently? Thompson, Humphries, Shav, Boykin, Boateng, Love, McRoberts, etc. What is it with Duke and big men, aren't they all dying to work with Wojo and the rest of K's staff? You'd think with all the uncertainty about UK and UF, Patterson would at least mention Duke in a recent article about his college destination instead of just talking about Tubby and Donovan.


What's the term for someone who joins a team message board posing as a fan of said team but is actually an opposing fan in disguise?

Clipsfan
03-27-2007, 08:47 PM
What's the term for someone who joins a team message board posing as a fan of said team but is actually an opposing fan in disguise?

I think that they're either little dolls with green hair, or creatures that live under bridges...now what do you call them again?

throatybeard
03-27-2007, 08:52 PM
I think that they're either little dolls with green hair, or creatures that live under bridges...now what do you call them again?

http://www.thoughttheater.com/upload/2006/04/troll%20doll.jpg

feldspar
03-27-2007, 08:57 PM
http://www.thoughttheater.com/upload/2006/04/troll&#37;20doll.jpg

Eh, I think it was actually a different term, though. Not a poser, not a troll, but kind of a hybrid of the two. Can't remember for the life of me where I heard it.

Bob Green
03-28-2007, 05:08 AM
Is "parody poster" the term you are seeking?

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

feldspar
03-28-2007, 11:05 AM
Is "parody poster" the term you are seeking?

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

Yeah, maybe that's it. Sure wish I could think of something more creative, though.

DukeUsul
03-28-2007, 11:27 AM
I wonder if there's some sort of Einstein-relativity thing going on here, where if people see white skin, they perceive slow movement regardless of whether it's occurring or not.

So ..... perceived velocity = actual velocity * sqrt(1- (whiteness)^2/c^2)

throatybeard
03-28-2007, 12:17 PM
So ..... perceived velocity = actual velocity * sqrt(1- (whiteness)^2/c^2)

Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

How do we account for the fact that UNC's Lawson seems to break the speed of light?

DukeUsul
03-28-2007, 12:54 PM
Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

How do we account for the fact that UNC's Lawson seems to break the speed of light?

Well let's see.... the only theory I can think of that accounts for this is inflation theory, during the first step, Lawson is able to accelerate to a speed greater than the speed of light, clearly due to the presence of negative-pressure vacuum energy in his legs.....

Indoor66
03-28-2007, 05:21 PM
Is this a troll type post?

chris13
03-28-2007, 06:27 PM
You know, I always heard Einstein called smart but never athletic, and he was white.

phaedrus
03-28-2007, 09:47 PM
You know, I always heard Einstein called smart but never athletic, and he was white.

he had outstanding basketball iq. not really a penetrating/slashing athlete though. could have played for duke i guess.

pamtar
03-28-2007, 10:41 PM
Lets hope that we dont fall into the same trap that the holes did this year and over-rotate what will be the deepest team in Duke history (especially w/ PP, and with tubby and josh gone that seems pretty likely!!) With their talent they should have won it all - but poor coaching throughout the season gave them a lack of cohesivness and caused that beautiful choke against GU. Obvioulsly, we need to have a rotation set by conference play or the players will not fit into their late season roles properly. With that said, here is my starting five and sub list for next year at tournament time - and you can quote me.

Paulus (who has just begun to fight)- 30 mpg, Smith subbing 10-12min early
Henderson - 38mpg, will be our best player (think g. hill)
Patterson - 25 mpg, Pocius subbing 7-15mpg, Lance 7-15min
Nelson - 30 mpg, again Lance and Pocius subbing
Scheyer - smart players dont sit - 25 mpg, King subbing 12 mpg.

So where is Dave, Z, Singler? I dont know either. Thats how good we'll be next year! We'll be so deep I literally forgot to add them. Yes my picks are completly wrong. Hell, Dave is my faverorite player. Rambling now. Undefeated ACC, ACC tourney champs, National Champs by 17 over Maryland in quaterfinals, 15 over UCONN in semis, and 20 over the toreholes in the championship game!

Boston Dukie
03-29-2007, 12:12 AM
Its always hard to tell how players will be based on the MacDonald's game, but its always fun to try.

Nolan Smith seems like he is going to be a great player - long arms, quick, very athletic, good passer, etc. Will be hard to keep him off the court.

Singler - seemed very quick compared to the other big guys, all his shots looked smooth, and he clearly has a scorer's mentality. The team will need his scoring, and he should start.

King - he actually looked a bit out of shape, so not clear he is ready for huge minutes in college. Amazing range on his shot though.

Patterson - quiet game, but lot's of rebounds and finished well. He also had 2 huge blocks, which seems to suggest he can play D inside.

Very exciting, and just hope coach K uses this depth.

YmoBeThere
03-29-2007, 07:03 AM
With their talent they should have won it all

Pamtar, I hate to stick up for the Holes, but that statement could have been made about several teams...and we are not immune to similar statements(Top 3 ACC) given the results of our season. Calling others stupid doesn't make me any smarter, except in my own mind.

whereinthehellami
03-29-2007, 10:07 AM
Paulus 6-2 JR
Scheyer 6-4 SO
Nelson 6-4 SR
Mcclure 6-6 JR
Singler 6-8 FR

Henderson 6-5 SO
Smith 6-3 FR
King 6-7 FR
Thomas 6-8 SO
Zoubek 7-0 SO

MCclure gets the nod as we need some serious height, toughness, and rebounding down low. I think defense and rebounding is needed more than offense. I also like his maturity and that he NEVER takes a play off.

Nelson is pretty much a lock as he is the lone senior/returning scorer from this past season.

Henderson should start some games (replacing Scheyer, Nelson, and Mcclure) in various situations (motivational?) and will be like the 5.5 man playing over 25 minutes a game (might be limited due to his asthma). He will be unfortunately needed in the frontcourt a fair amount to. He might suprise and be the first frontcourt substituition used next year. His quickness and good rebounding (for 6-5) could pose some match-up problems for some teams.

Smith could see a fair amount of minutes as a defensive stopper to penetration and for his decent ballhandling/shooting. I think Smith is the first substituition for the backcourt.

I have a hunch that King could be a suprise with the amount of minutes that he receives, especially as the season goes on. His confidense and instant offense (3-point shooting) could overshadow his lack of foot speed on defense. His longs arms and desire to win (rebounds fairly well) might allow him some effective minutes down low.

I hope Thomas and Zoubek suprise next year with great improvement over the summer. I think that with their individual limitations (every player has them) and coach K's system/style they have a steeper road to climb in the off-season than some of the other players. I could see their time and production being somewhat similar to this year. They both showed some flashes of immense potential this year though.

I see the starting 5 playing around 30 minutes/game and Henderson getting around 25 minutes/game. Smith and King coming in around 10 plus minutes/game. Thomas and Zoubek getting under 10 minutes/game.

Thats right I'm quoting myself. Actually revising some things after watching last night's game. I know its one game and a glorified "streetball" show but its still fun to speculate. Anyways, here are my revised thoughts;


There is no way Singler and Mcclure can hold down the frontcourt.



We need Patterson to help hold down the frontcourt and provide size/athletiscm/rebounding/shotblocking.



If we don't get Patterson we are going to be in alot of trouble next year with the players Duke has and the system that Coach K runs. If Duke doesn't get Patterson, can anyone remember the last time that Duke was in such a hole in the frontcourt?

pamtar
03-29-2007, 11:07 AM
Pamtar, I hate to stick up for the Holes, but that statement could have been made about several teams...and we are not immune to similar statements(Top 3 ACC) given the results of our season. Calling others stupid doesn't make me any smarter, except in my own mind.

Good point but dude they went twelve deep with two starting fives. We on the other hand had no chance to win the national championship from day one. The only other team with a sure fire chance is/was Florida - as we shall see next monday. There are no excuses for UNC, if K had that team we would win it all, no doubt. Yes we also underachieved this year, but not on the same scale as the holes.

The Gordog
03-29-2007, 11:16 AM
1996. Newton and Donzalski held down the frontcourt

Next year's team is more talented than that one overall, and at every position.

ACCBBallFan
03-29-2007, 08:27 PM
cniedringhaus, while I agree with what you are saying back on page 4 about small ball if no Patrick Patterson, you left out a key player, Gerald Henderson.

My guess is Gerald starts instead of Mcclure, but if not, he is surely a key reserve along with Nolan Smith, Lance, and possibly Marty. Taylor King and Brian Zoubek have something to offer on Offense and lack something on Defense. So situations will dictate how much they play.

whereinthehellami
03-30-2007, 04:34 PM
How about this starting lineup;

Paulus 6-2 JR
Nelson 6-4 SR
Henderson 6-5 SO
Mcclure 6-7 JR
Singler 6-8 FR

They all rebound well for their size, can handle the ball (excepting Mcclure), and play decent defense. Of course a decent center will kill us (gonna happen anyway) but it could be an interesting mix. They've got some good experience also.

feldspar
03-30-2007, 04:43 PM
If we don't land Patterson, I hope the coaching staff has the best conditioning program ever conceived lined up for the off-season, because if we're going to win next year without PP, it's going to be because of our speed and quickness.

johnb
03-30-2007, 05:07 PM
Newton and Domzalski may not have been as talented as Singler seems to be, but they were pretty equivalent in some sort of talent contest to McClure. The difference is that the guys from 1996 were both 6'10" or thereabouts, and Taymon was a bruiser. I would be quite happy to have Taymon around next year to man the lane, and I agree that without someone new, we'll be counting heavily on Zoubs and a guard-heavy lineup. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Gozza
03-30-2007, 06:21 PM
Already weighed in on what K's most likely to do (IMHO), but here's what I'd like to see next year:

Patterson
Thomas
Nelson
Henderson
Smith

That's a unit that could pressure the heck out of the ball, turnover the opponent, and run the floor. And three guys that can penetrate and at least try and get to the line when the shot clock is running down.

0% is too high for the likelihood that such a unit would start, but that just shows how K has evolved over the years. He's gone from the maxim of "score more free throws than your opponent attempts" to liking his jumpshooters.

whereinthehellami
03-31-2007, 05:30 PM
If we don't land Patterson, I hope the coaching staff has the best conditioning program ever conceived lined up for the off-season, because if we're going to win next year without PP, it's going to be because of our speed and quickness.

That makes you and me both. If that scenario does happen, I'd love to see Duke not settle for the 3 and really try to focus on the mid range/penetrating game. They could cause some real matchup problems with their speed, passing, and ball handling. I'd love to see some of the other team's bigs trying to contain Singler off the dribble.

Troublemaker
04-01-2007, 12:42 AM
Already weighed in on what K's most likely to do (IMHO), but here's what I'd like to see next year:

Patterson
Thomas
Nelson
Henderson
Smith

That's a unit that could pressure the heck out of the ball, turnover the opponent, and run the floor. And three guys that can penetrate and at least try and get to the line when the shot clock is running down.

0% is too high for the likelihood that such a unit would start, but that just shows how K has evolved over the years. He's gone from the maxim of "score more free throws than your opponent attempts" to liking his jumpshooters.

Any lineup next year needs to include Singler. Hey, nobody loves athletes more than me, but
(1) Singler IS athletic (just not superduper athletic) and
(2) We need him to play the 4 to open up the offense (driving lanes, room in the post, etc)

Jumbo
04-01-2007, 12:54 AM
Already weighed in on what K's most likely to do (IMHO), but here's what I'd like to see next year:

Patterson
Thomas
Nelson
Henderson
Smith

That's a unit that could pressure the heck out of the ball, turnover the opponent, and run the floor. And three guys that can penetrate and at least try and get to the line when the shot clock is running down.

0% is too high for the likelihood that such a unit would start, but that just shows how K has evolved over the years. He's gone from the maxim of "score more free throws than your opponent attempts" to liking his jumpshooters.

This doesn't quite make sense to me. You want Duke to get back to getting to the line (and not putting the other guys on the line). Yet your starting lineup doesn't include Duke's top returning player in FT attempts (Scheyer) and does include the guy who led the team in fouls per minute (Thomas). Also missing is the guy who might have the most offensive skill on the whole team (Singler), whose style is perfect for getting to the line. Throw in the idea of putting installing a freshman shooting guard at the point over a guy who has started there for two years, finished the season on a scoring tear despite a foot that needed surgery and I don't understand your lineup at all.

VaDukie
04-01-2007, 01:21 AM
*I'm guessing Patterson isn't coming here.

What I'd like to see.
Thomas
Singler
Henderson
Nelson
Paulus

What I wouldn't be too suprised to see
Zoubek
McClure
Nelson
Scheyer
Paulus

whereinthehellami
04-01-2007, 08:45 AM
*I'm guessing Patterson isn't coming here.

What I'd like to see.
Thomas
Singler
Henderson
Nelson
Paulus

What I wouldn't be too suprised to see
Zoubek
McClure
Nelson
Scheyer
Paulus

I've seen quite a few people mention Thomas being in the starting lineup. I had hoped prior to this year that Thomas would have been starting as he had some height, was athletic, and was known for really getting after it. But after seeing him play this past year I don't see him breakng into the starting lineup next year. Did some people see something that I didn't see or are they hoping for some dramtic off-season improvement? Or are they penciling him in again on potential?

Cameron
04-01-2007, 11:36 AM
I like this lineup:

Greg
Jon
Gerald
Lance
Kyle

I know DeMarcus will start, but I really do think he'd be a great spark off the bench with his great defense and ability to be a spurt scorer when he's on. When he's off, though, he does very little for us offensively. His shot was just ugly the last half of the year and his free-throw shooting down the stretch absolutely killed us. I think Gerald could step in and play pretty good in DeMarcus' defensive role as a starter--he's quick, strong, athletic--which would mean we could keep Jon in the lineup. And I really do believe we need to keep Jon in the lineup (although, this is really not up for debate anyway as Coach K will never take Jon out of the starting five). Jon is the smartest on court player we have on the team; he has an unbelievable knowledge for the game of basketball. He's a solid defender, very good ball-handler, can shoot lights out at times, great at getting to bucket for two, etc. We need him on the floor. With another summer to improve upon, in not only his basketball skills but in weight training and endurance as well, Jon will be amazing next winter. I think he'll be our best overall player for the next three years. Even with Kyle, Nolan, and Gerald. I really believe that.

If we get Patterson, something I also don't think will happen, then you simply would remove Thomas and insert PPat. Simply enough.

Just my opinion on things. I am usually wrong, though.

Houston
04-01-2007, 02:44 PM
A. What does this mean?

B. What makes you think this? I know it isn't from watching him play in Duke basketball games because I have seen them all and have seen no "freakish" athletic ability, whatever that means.


Marty can create his own shot (for himself). He can penetrate and jump. You got me on the hyperbole. However, I think his skills are well suited for the motion offense. I haven't spoken with coaches ranging from the CYO to the ACC to VCU about Jon, but the 2 needs to be upgraded. Henderson, Smith or Marty give us a better chance of playing deeper into March.

Saratoga2
04-01-2007, 07:38 PM
I like this lineup:

Greg
Jon
Gerald
Lance
Kyle

I know DeMarcus will start, but I really do think he'd be a great spark off the bench with his great defense and ability to be a spurt scorer when he's on. When he's off, though, he does very little for us offensively. His shot was just ugly the last half of the year and his free-throw shooting down the stretch absolutely killed us. I think Gerald could step in and play pretty good in DeMarcus' defensive role as a starter--he's quick, strong, athletic--which would mean we could keep Jon in the lineup. And I really do believe we need to keep Jon in the lineup (although, this is really not up for debate anyway as Coach K will never take Jon out of the starting five). Jon is the smartest on court player we have on the team; he has an unbelievable knowledge for the game of basketball. He's a solid defender, very good ball-handler, can shoot lights out at times, great at getting to bucket for two, etc. We need him on the floor. With another summer to improve upon, in not only his basketball skills but in weight training and endurance as well, Jon will be amazing next winter. I think he'll be our best overall player for the next three years. Even with Kyle, Nolan, and Gerald. I really believe that.

If we get Patterson, something I also don't think will happen, then you simply would remove Thomas and insert PPat. Simply enough.

Just my opinion on things. I am usually wrong, though.

My mid season starting 5 will definitely include the following:

Paulus
Scheyer

After watching the NCAA's this year, I think having a big center is important in winning and we have only one guy who has the size. So I hope that Zoubek comes along enough to start and to get about 24 minutes a game minimum.

Singler is expected to be so talented that he will be able to start early on, if not right away.

The final spot is up for grabs in my opinion. Nelson will probably start in the early season, but I expect either Smith or Henderson to start at mid season. Smith appears to be a player very much in control of his game, with an excellent pull up shot, a good outside shot and is good from the foul line. If he can learn coach K's defense, he may take Nelson's starting spot. Then there is Henderson, who is also a candidate, but may be best as a 6th man due to his exercize induced asthma.

So my expected starting 5 at mid season are:

Paulus (Smith, Scheyer as backups)
Smith (Nelson, Pocius as backups)
Scheyer (Henderson, Nelson and Pocius as backups)
Singler (Thomas, King, McClure as backups)
Zoubek (Thomas, King, McClure as backups)

There are a lot of talent on this squad but it is lacking in inside strength. Patterson would change the completion of this team by adding another strong inside player. I would expect him to get a lot of PT, both at the 4 and 5 positions.

Boston Dukie
04-01-2007, 09:35 PM
He's a solid defender, very good ball-handler, can shoot lights out at times, great at getting to bucket for two, etc. We need him on the floor. With another summer to improve upon, in not only his basketball skills but in weight training and endurance as well, Jon will be amazing next winter. I think he'll be our best overall player for the next three years. Even with Kyle, Nolan, and Gerald. I really believe that.

Wow, if Scheyer ends up being Duke's best player for the next 3 years, that would mean the program is in total shambles. Scheyer is a guy with zero chance to play in the NBA, if he is our best player for the next 3 years, Duke is doomed. The "rule of thumb" is that NCAA champion teams generally have 3future NBA players in their starting line-up, and if you look back historically, this almost always is the case. Scheyer's 4 years would end up being worse than Wojo's 4 years (which was 4 years with no Final 4 appearances, unthinkable under coach K). I really hope this isn't the case.

On next year's team, I would project the following as the "best players".

1) Singler
2) Henderson
3) Nelson
4) Smith
5) Patterson (if he comes)
6) Paulus
7) Scheyer
8) McClure
9) Pocius
10) Thomas
11) King
12) Zoubek


Or something like that.

On basketball IQ, its probably something like:

1) Scheyer
2) Smith
3) Singler
4) McClure (if he comes)
5) Paulus

What coaches and fans of other team's (who are not blinded by Duke Blue) think of Scheyer is not quite as good as Duke Nation for sure. I have a friend who coaches a Div. 1 women's team and is a basketball nut. The scouting report he gave me on Scheyer was decent across the board, but very flat (i.e., jack of all trades, master of none). I realize women's basketball is not men's, but you would think the women's game which is much less reliant on athletcisim would value basketball IQ more, where Scheyer is clearly very strong.

whereinthehellami
04-02-2007, 08:40 AM
For those who penciled in Zoubek as a starter, I don't see how that is going to happen from what we saw this year. I think everyone that has Zoobs starting is just thinking that we need a froncourt player and he is our biggest player, so he gets the nod. That doesn't fit Coach K's MO of starting the best 5 players. I definately see Zoobs getting some time next year but as to whether its situational or not depends largely on how much he improves his reaction time in the off-season (and for a big man that takes time).

JasonEvans
04-02-2007, 09:27 AM
Wow, if Scheyer ends up being Duke's best player for the next 3 years, that would mean the program is in total shambles. Scheyer is a guy with zero chance to play in the NBA, if he is our best player for the next 3 years, Duke is doomed. The "rule of thumb" is that NCAA champion teams generally have 3future NBA players in their starting line-up, and if you look back historically, this almost always is the case. Scheyer's 4 years would end up being worse than Wojo's 4 years (which was 4 years with no Final 4 appearances, unthinkable under coach K). I really hope this isn't the case.

On next year's team, I would project the following as the "best players".

1) Singler
2) Henderson
3) Nelson
4) Smith
5) Patterson (if he comes)
6) Paulus
7) Scheyer
8) McClure
9) Pocius
10) Thomas
11) King
12) Zoubek


Or something like that.

On basketball IQ, its probably something like:

1) Scheyer
2) Smith
3) Singler
4) McClure (if he comes)
5) Paulus


Ummm, if you think Jon Scheyer has zero chance of playing in the NBA then you are just dead wrong. The kid has the shot and ballhandling to be a 2 guard and he even has legit NBA size for a 2-guard-- something which is truly rare. In fact, I think he is a virtual lock to play in the NBA someday. By the way, the NBA does value basketball IQ... A LOT!

I think your view of Scheyer may be clouded by the fact that he was just a freshman. We sometimes forget how rare it is to have a freshman who contributes the way Scheyer did this past season.

Here are a could quiz questions-- see how many you get right:

1) Who started a higher percentage of games as a freshman, Scheyer or JJ Redick or Luol Deng?
2) Who averaged more minutes per game as a freshman, Scheyer or Hurley or Mark Alarie?
3) Who averaged more points per game as a freshman, Scheyer or Grant Hill or Trajan Langdon?

I think you know the answers to all of these.

Jon Scheyer made the ACC All-Freshman team ahead of such NBA locks as Wayne Ellington and Thadeus Young. He is going to do nothing but get stronger over the summer with the Duke conditioning coaches working on sculpting his body. I won't be even a little bit surprised if he is Duke's leading scorer next season.

Kids almost always make a big leap between freshman and sophomore seasons. I think you will be regretting your criticism of him next year at this time and, at some point, we will have to worry a bit about whether Scheyer will leave Duke early for the NBA.

-Jason "I agree that Scheyer faded the final few weeks of the season-- but you may be forgetting how good he was for a freshman before that" Evans

baltimoron
04-02-2007, 09:50 AM
I like this line-up:

Nelson
Henderson
Paulus/ Smith
Patterson- if he comes
Singler

As evidenced by what happend to us against more athletic teams that could penetrate, we need athleticism. Nelson and Henderson are the best athletes on the team. Smith will be great, but will need some exerience, so I give it to Paulus. Hopefully, he will be healthier and the help defense will be better next year. Paulus gets beat off the dribble too much. He has developed a nice shot, and is a tough player though, so he gets the nod now. Scheyer, while smart, is just not quick enough, and his shot is not where Paulus' is. A good role player off the bench. I don't care what his VO2 max is, he doesn't have a quick first step. VO2 max is related to endurance more than speed. Sounds like Singler has a good chance to make an impact immediately, as does Patterson, if he comes.

gw67
04-02-2007, 10:19 AM
Jason,

I couldn’t agree with you more. Scheyer, along with Paulus and Nelson, form the core for next year’s team. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but ranking Scheyer the 7th best player on next year’s team behind three freshmen and Henderson doesn’t make sense to me. Henderson has wonderful potential but folks on this board describe him in terms that apply to Grant Hill. Henderson averaged 6.8 ppg, had a poor a/TO ratio for a perimeter player, and was poor from both the free throw line and three point line last year. I hope and expect him to improve, have a terrific year next year and to play starter minutes but he has yet to prove himself, IMO. I like Singler and Smith and expect them to play a lot next year. By necessity (one of the few tall players on the team), Singler will likely start. He reminds me of Dunleavy but I hope that he turns out to be more like Deng and Alarie, and is an inside/outside player. Still, he is unproven.

gw67

feldspar
04-02-2007, 10:25 AM
1.) Paulus
2.) Nelson
3.) Scheyer
4.) Henderson
5.) Thomas

first off the bench:

6.) McClure
7.) Singler
8.) Smith
9.) Zoubek
10.) Pocuuiueous
11.) King

We will be very small. But, we could be very fast.

whereinthehellami
04-02-2007, 11:16 AM
1.) Paulus
2.) Nelson
3.) Scheyer
4.) Henderson
5.) Thomas

first off the bench:

6.) McClure
7.) Singler
8.) Smith
9.) Zoubek
10.) Pocuuiueous
11.) King

We will be very small. But, we could be very fast.

How about this lineup as a change of pace;

Paulus 6-2 JR
Scheyer 6-4 SO
Pocius 6-5 JR
Singler 6-8 FR
Zoubek 7-0 SO

You can almost hear the sound of the other teams tripping over themselves. Duke might be able to get some unforced turnovers.

Cameron
04-02-2007, 12:01 PM
Boston Dukie:

I said Jon would be the best OVERALL player on our team, not the greatest, most talented or most athletically gifted. These are entirely different things. Jon excels in almost all facets of the game. He can handle the ball at point when needed, penetrate as well as anyone on our team, pass extremely well, score in bunches, shoot lights out from three, defend, etc. Jon can do it all. There is no one else on our team, not even Gerald nor the five other guys you mentioned ahead of Jon, Boston Dukie, that excels in all of these categories. And on top of all of that, Jon is our smartest basketball player. He is an incredible student of the game.

For you to call Jon the 7th best player on our team, is pretty insane. No offense, but it is insane.

Boston Dukie
04-02-2007, 01:01 PM
You are right that Scheyer is not the 7th best player on the team right now, he is higher than that, but I do think he has the 7th best potential at best. So given next year is another rebuilding year, we have basically two full seasons to get ready for the 2009 NCAA tourney. If we want to win that Tourney, I think a better investment is to give more minutes to the 5 guys listed ahead of him on that list (not Nelson since he will be gone) - Singler, Henderson, Patterson, Paulus, Smith. I would also play Nelson ahead of Scheyer because he is a warrior and to me brings more to the table in spite of his turnovers and poor FT shooting.

My big fear with Scheyer is that he got worse as the year went on and the competition stiffened, not better. He came to Duke very well prepared, and came out of the gates quickly in terms of undertsanding spacing, understanding the defense scheme, communication, etc. and he filled in well for Paulus during a time of need. But I think he is a glue guy, a very heady player, but no way an elite player.

Sure he finished ahead of Ellington and other more talented players for all freshman in the ACC, but I fear those other players are going to lap him as time goes. You can teach spacing, communication, defensive schemes, etc. but you can't teach size, quickness, explosiveness, strength, and even shooting (you can teach it a little, but you sort of either have it or you don't). Let's remeber Ed Nelson was ACC freshman of the year over McCants, Felton, May, Redick, etc. and look what happened to Ed Nelson. He basically came on to a very weak team, and was very mature and prepared from day one and did very well in his role. As G-tech got more talented with Bosh, etc Nelson lost his PT and disappeared. I would expect the same with Scheyer. Singler, Smith, Patterson, and Henderson all have way more potential and should eat up a lot of Scheyer's minutes imho.

Scheyer did a very commendable job with the minutes he was given on a very weak team (especially weak when Paulus and Henderson were struggling with the injuries early on), but to elevate him over Grant Hill, Loul Deng, or Trajan because he had more minutes and points as a freshman is just crazy for a few reasons.

1) Scheyer was on a very weak team, that also had injury issues

2) Grant, Deng, and Trajan were all great at doing at least one (or more things), there is nothing Scheyer is great at

3) You could look at Grant, Deng, and even Trajan (pre knee injury) and see tremendous upside, hence the NBA buzz in mock drafts and attention from scouts, etc.

So, I agree Scheyer is a very solid player right now, but not a superstar in the making, and not NBA caliber. I hope I am dead wrong, and he has the option of leaving for the NBA early, but I have never, ever heard of anyone use the word's Scheyer and NBA in the same sentence.

Jumbo
04-02-2007, 02:51 PM
So, I agree Scheyer is a very solid player right now, but not a superstar in the making, and not NBA caliber. I hope I am dead wrong, and he has the option of leaving for the NBA early, but I have never, ever heard of anyone use the word's Scheyer and NBA in the same sentence.

Well, sorry for you, I have heard people use the words "Scheyer" and "NBA" in the same sentence. They also happen to be affiliated with the National Basketball Association. And their consensus? He's a lock to play in the league. So, I think I'll take their word over that of a girls high school basketball coach.
No offense, but you have no idea what you're talking about on this issue.

duke.kahanamoku
04-02-2007, 03:23 PM
Dear VO2 enthusiasts,

Vo2 is not the issue. We all know the key to high performance basketball is the Citric Acid Cycle and Electron Transport Chain. I have read that Kobe Bryant's body contains 1000% more Acetyl CoA than that of a normal human and nearly 25% more than can be found in a Blue Whale.

Boston Dukie
04-02-2007, 04:08 PM
Ok, then let's see a single published piece that talks about Scheyer as a lock to be an NBA player. One scouting site, one NBA draft projection, anything?

In exchange for every link you post, I will send you one that says Scheyer has zero chance - deal?

The great thing is that it really doesn't matter as we will see what Scheyer ends up doing. But I do know the NBA isn't that fond of slow guys, who can't shoot (the numbers speak), have a slow release, can't create their own shot, can't beat anyone off the dribble, can't stop dribble penetration, and don't have a good enough handle to play PG.

Scheyer will probably end up being a great NBA coach, not player.

BTW, nice way to slam girls basketball (he is a Division I Women's basketball coach for a mid western team).

Cameron
04-02-2007, 04:23 PM
In exchange for every link you post, I will send you one that says Scheyer has zero chance - deal?

Why you'd even want to do this as a Duke fan is beyond me. But, to each his own, I guess...

Not to mention, you now have 8 total posts and at least 4 of them have been dedicated to proving Jon is not that good. I'm beginning to have my suspicions...

feldspar
04-02-2007, 04:30 PM
Ok, then let's see a single published piece that talks about Scheyer as a lock to be an NBA player. One scouting site, one NBA draft projection, anything?


Well...time to change my sig back.

duke.kahanamoku
04-02-2007, 05:10 PM
Bill Simmons of ESPN puts Scheyer on his 2008 olympic team.

"... it's not too late for the USA Basketball Committee to switch gears and send an under-22 squad to represent us in the 2008 Olympics. Would you rather root for NBA stars stuck in an impossible "if we win, we're supposed to win, and if we lose, we screwed up" situation ... or an underdog team of college kids/NBA rookies featuring a starting five of Durant, Greg Oden, Julian Wright, Jon Scheyer and Darren Collison, with Brandan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Chase Budinger, Daequan Cook, Chris Lofton and D.J. Augustin or Mike Conley Jr. (we could only have one of the two) coming off the bench? Seriously, is there one basketball fan on the planet who wouldn't rather root for the kids next summer?"

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?entryDate=20070305&name=simmons[/url]


Some caveats:
1) Bill Simmons is a freaking idiot.
2) I no longer read Simmons in part due to his irrational anti-Duke bias.
3) If you like Simmons you can create your own Simmons articles from a short list of standard words ("The O.C.", "Celtics", "Maxim", "Kournikova" etc.), as in "The Celtics are more focused on getting Durant than my buddy Wedgie, a writer for the O.C., was at the Maxim superbowl party when Anna Kourakova walked by."

Boston Dukie
04-02-2007, 05:22 PM
Why you'd even want to do this as a Duke fan is beyond me. But, to each his own, I guess...

Not to mention, you now have 8 total posts and at least 4 of them have been dedicated to proving Jon is not that good. I'm beginning to have my suspicions...
Look, I think Schere is a very solid player, and wish him the best. I hope he wins 3 NCs and is the MVP in each one!

Just not sure that when I say I think Henderson is much better than Scheyer and deserves more minutes, people jump all over me with statements like "you are wrong", and "you don't know what you are talking about".

Those aren't arguements, facts or opinions, they are name calling, you know, what we all did in the 5th grade

I thought this was a discussion board where you could have an opinion?

Boston Dukie
04-02-2007, 05:35 PM
Bill Simmons of ESPN puts Scheyer on his 2008 olympic team.

"... it's not too late for the USA Basketball Committee to switch gears and send an under-22 squad to represent us in the 2008 Olympics. Would you rather root for NBA stars stuck in an impossible "if we win, we're supposed to win, and if we lose, we screwed up" situation ... or an underdog team of college kids/NBA rookies featuring a starting five of Durant, Greg Oden, Julian Wright, Jon Scheyer and Darren Collison, with Brandan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Chase Budinger, Daequan Cook, Chris Lofton and D.J. Augustin or Mike Conley Jr. (we could only have one of the two) coming off the bench? Seriously, is there one basketball fan on the planet who wouldn't rather root for the kids next summer?"

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?entryDate=20070305&name=simmons[/url]


Some caveats:
1) Bill Simmons is a freaking idiot.
2) I no longer read Simmons in part due to his irrational anti-Duke bias.
3) If you like Simmons you can create your own Simmons articles from a short list of standard words ("The O.C.", "Celtics", "Maxim", "Kournikova" etc.), as in "The Celtics are more focused on getting Durant than my buddy Wedgie, a writer for the O.C., was at the Maxim superbowl party when Anna Kourakova walked by."
I remember this same link, and if you go back you will see that Simmons updated his entry saying he must have been drunk when he wrote it. In the update he actually has some unfair criticisms of Scheyer (because Simmons hates Duke)

edensquad
04-02-2007, 11:44 PM
I am a long time lurker (new poster on the new board), former Duke student, though, alas, not alumnus. Given these assumptions: Patterson doesn't come, and all our returnees improve/bulk up in the off season, I could see this lineup:

Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Henderson
Thomas

Key subs:

Singler
McClure
Smith
Pocius

As a brief aside: I am weary of Jumbo's dismissive, patronizing 'tude towards those who dare view the state of Duke hoops with anything other than his point of view. Once one ventures beyond mere stats into the nebulous territory of "upside" and "potential" (see "NBA"), one gets into totally subjective "pissin'" contests.... part of the charm of the Internet, no?!!?

So, I would like to suggest that Jumbo take all his "sick of this" comments and stick them in his back pocket and keep them there. There would be no need for this BB if his perspective were the end-all. I enjoy the diversity of opinions on ths BB... even if folks don't always have "officials" and "NBA scouts" to (anonymously, of course), back them up.

FWIW, I believe this is a really fine group of players who, for whatever reason, did not get it done in "winning time" this season. In the last 3 minutes, missed free throws, turnovers, missed shots, etc. killed this team. I suspect a years' physical and emotional maturity will cure a lot of these ills no matter who starts.

Jumbo
04-03-2007, 12:09 AM
First, edensquad, welcome to the board. Now, to address your points:


As a brief aside: I am weary of Jumbo's dismissive, patronizing 'tude towards those who dare view the state of Duke hoops with anything other than his point of view. Once one ventures beyond mere stats into the nebulous territory of "upside" and "potential" (see "NBA"), one gets into totally subjective "pissin'" contests.... part of the charm of the Internet, no?!!?

No, I don't find that charming at all. I think if you're going to give your opinion on something, you should know what you're talking about. In this case, the poster who has attempted to rate Scheyer's NBA chances literally has no idea what he's talking about, and I can state that with 100&#37; certainty, because I've actually spoken with people who make those decisions for a living. I have no problem with people expressing different opinions. I have a problem with people expressing opinions that are off-the-wall and based on no objective facts. I wouldn't attempt to debate GV Tucker on oil prices, for instance. I'm sorry if you find that "dismissive" or "patronizing." Sometimes, you have to call a spade a spade.


So, I would like to suggest that Jumbo take all his "sick of this" comments and stick them in his back pocket and keep them there. There would be no need for this BB if his perspective were the end-all. I enjoy the diversity of opinions on ths BB... even if folks don't always have "officials" and "NBA scouts" to (anonymously, of course), back them up.

Sadly for you, I'll keep my back pocket empty. One of the hallmarks of the DBR board over the years has been the fact that it's been more than a place for just spouting opinions; it's been a place to actually find valuable information. I can't tell you how much I've learned about Duke/ACC basketball from posters like Olympic Fan or Watzone (with whom I've frequently sparred). I can't tell you how much about economics I've learned from GV Tucker, science from DURFC Viking or random television shows from Jason Evans. Additionally, arguments with smart basketball posters on subjective topics have often changed my opinions over time. People like Troublemaker, even when I disagree with them, make me think.

What doesn't make me think is stuff like, "Scheyer is slow." No, he isn't slow. This is an objective, measurable fact. At some point, if a bird is sitting outside your window, and someone keeps screaming, "Look, it's a monkey" there's not much else you can do except say, "No, dude, it's a freaking bird!" Opinions are great, and we can discuss the virtue of the motion offense or the value of depth and so forth until we're blue in the face. But there's a certain burden we each carry to at least argue in good faith and have some understanding of the topic at hand. And that hasn't been the case with Boston Dukie.

edensquad
04-03-2007, 12:32 AM
Jumbo,

Thanks for the welcome. My dad, two uncles, aunt and sister are Duke grads.... it was a lil' harder than I wanted to work, lol!!

You can only state with 100&#37; certainty that the folks (however many) with which you have spoken believe Scheyer isn't slow. That, sadly for you, does not prove he is not slow. (I happen to agree w/ you, btw). Slow is a relative term: compared to whom?? My point being this: you may see a play as a "charge" and I see it as a "block"..... you may say I am an idiot for seeing it that way, and you may have "referee" friends who back you up... but, if I see it that way, it is, nonetheless, my take, and, as a subjective opinion, subject to debate. If I am secure in my point of view, well, we will have to agree to disagree on said play. Same with "upside" and "potential" and "slow."

My beef with your posts is this: you seem to take folks "to the woodshed" for expressing opinions on a public forum that you deem "uninformed." I submit the following: Given that most of us here have Duke BB's best interests at heart, why not lighten up and entertain the notion that some of us might actually see something valid that does not align perfectly in your universe? Some things that cannot be empirically "proved." You have seemed a tad confrontational to me for the past year or so.

Just sayin.'

Jumbo
04-03-2007, 12:39 AM
Jumbo,

Thanks for the welcome. My dad, two uncles, aunt and sister are Duke grads.... it was a lil' harder than I wanted to work, lol!!

You can only state with 100% certainty that the folks (however many) with which you have spoken believe Scheyer isn't slow. That, sadly for you, does not prove he is not slow. (I happen to agree w/ you, btw). Slow is a relative term: compared to whom?? My point being this: you may see a play as a "charge" and I see it as a "block"..... you may say I am an idiot for seeing it that way, and you may have "referee" friends who back you up... but, if I see it that way, it is, nonetheless, my take, and, as a subjective opinion, subject to debate. If I am secure in my point of view, well, we will have to agree to disagree on said play. Same with "upside" and "potential" and "slow."

My beef with your posts is this: you seem to take folks "to the woodshed" for expressing opinions on a public forum that you deem "uninformed." I submit the following: Given that most of us here have Duke BB's best interests at heart, why not lighten up and entertain the notion that some of us might actually see something valid that does not align perfectly in your universe? Some things that cannot be empirically "proved." You have seemed a tad confrontational to me for the past year or so.

Just sayin.'

I don't think our opinions are that far off. My problem is with posts that rip a kid to shreds (like the Scheyer one here, the Paulus ones earlier in the year, etc.) with little-to-no knowledge expressed. Those threads, I think don't exactly have Duke BB's best interests at heart. I'd also say a better example of the "informed opinion" concept isn't the "Scheyer is slow" thing I first picked, but the "Scheyer won't play in the NBA" concept (which was part of a nasty, rambling argument about how his four years would be as "bad" as Wojo's four years if he were Duke's best player, or something). In that case, when I hear from people in the NBA that he's an NBA player, that means something to me. When Boston Dukie talks about a friend who coaches DI women's basketball, that means a lot less to me. And when he's simultaneously describing the player at hand in terms that are just remarkably far from accurate, it's hard to take his opinion seriously.

Uncle Drew
04-03-2007, 12:42 AM
"Look, it's a monkey" there's not much else you can do except say, "No, dude, it's a freaking bird!"

LMAO! No IT'S A MONKEY!!!!! ........with feathers.

edensquad
04-03-2007, 12:50 AM
Given that Coach K praised both Greg and Marty for playing through injuries this year, I look forward to seeing them both play post-surgery. We may not have seen the best from them yet!

baltimoron
04-03-2007, 09:45 AM
Nobody's ripping on Scheyer. Listen, we are all Duke fans, and because of that, we are biased- let's admit it. We want to think Scheyer is the next JJ or whomever. However, this kind of tunnel vision does not help in the long run. Let's have a little objectivity here, and admit our weaknesses. We're better for it in the long run. Of course, Scheyer is a good athlete, just like all the basketball players are good athletes- much better than you or I. Saying Scheyer is slow is relative. I don't think anyone would argue with the statment that Scheyer is slower than Nelson and Henderson (but faster than Zoubek). Boston Dukie isn't attacking Scheyer, he's just trying to introduce some objectivity. Henderson has much more upside than Scheyer due to his incredible athletic ability. I think Scheyer is a good kid and a smart player, but not as athletic as Henderson.

Jumbo
04-03-2007, 09:51 AM
Nobody's ripping on Scheyer. Listen, we are all Duke fans, and because of that, we are biased- let's admit it. We want to think Scheyer is the next JJ or whomever. However, this kind of tunnel vision does not help in the long run. Let's have a little objectivity here, and admit our weaknesses. We're better for it in the long run. Of course, Scheyer is a good athlete, just like all the basketball players are good athletes- much better than you or I. Saying Scheyer is slow is relative. I don't think anyone would argue with the statment that Scheyer is slower than Nelson and Henderson (but faster than Zoubek). Boston Dukie isn't attacking Scheyer, he's just trying to introduce some objectivity. Henderson has much more upside than Scheyer due to his incredible athletic ability. I think Scheyer is a good kid and a smart player, but not as athletic as Henderson.

This is not an introduction of objectivity: "Wow, if Scheyer ends up being Duke's best player for the next 3 years, that would mean the program is in total shambles. Scheyer is a guy with zero chance to play in the NBA, if he is our best player for the next 3 years, Duke is doomed. The "rule of thumb" is that NCAA champion teams generally have 3future NBA players in their starting line-up, and if you look back historically, this almost always is the case. Scheyer's 4 years would end up being worse than Wojo's 4 years (which was 4 years with no Final 4 appearances, unthinkable under coach K). I really hope this isn't the case."

It is a warped rip job. I can assure you that when it comes to Duke hoops, I'm pretty much as objective as it comes. Maybe you're new to the boards, but I've had no problem criticizing Duke over the years. I don't think Scheyer is the next J.J., the next Wilt or the next Bea Arthur. I think Scheyer is a darn good basketball player, is way more athletic than posters like Boston Dukie (or you) give him credit for, and is going to have a terrific carere. And I'd consider that an objective stance. I think Henderson has some terrific upside too. However, if athleticism were all that mattered, Michael Wilson would have been the greatest player in history. Objectivity isn't at issue here. Common sense is.

gw67
04-03-2007, 10:21 AM
Jumbo - Do you mean track star, Michael Johnson?

We are on the same side of this discussion. Many posters for the past few months have constantly ripped Paulus and Scheyer. IMO, some have gone overboard to tear down these youngsters' games in order to build up the players that they would like to see playing. This sort of sports argument has been around for decades (My dad and I used to argue the merits of Kilmer and Jurgensen.) but, IMO, the negativity and nastiness associated with some of the arguments is not necessary for those of us who root for the same team. One of my favorite Duke players was Billy McCaffery. I wanted to see him play more but I didn't rip Hurley and Hill in discussions with friends. I think Paulus and Scheyer are better players than many give them credit for being but if Smith and Henderson beat them out and the team is better then so be it.

gw67

CMS2478
04-03-2007, 10:43 AM
Ok, then let's see a single published piece that talks about Scheyer as a lock to be an NBA player. One scouting site, one NBA draft projection, anything?

In exchange for every link you post, I will send you one that says Scheyer has zero chance - deal?

The great thing is that it really doesn't matter as we will see what Scheyer ends up doing. But I do know the NBA isn't that fond of slow guys, who can't shoot (the numbers speak), have a slow release, can't create their own shot, can't beat anyone off the dribble, can't stop dribble penetration, and don't have a good enough handle to play PG.

Scheyer will probably end up being a great NBA coach, not player.

BTW, nice way to slam girls basketball (he is a Division I Women's basketball coach for a mid western team).

How Sheyer averaged 12 ppg this year as a Freshman and JJ averaged 15 his first year........NOT THAT FAR OFF HUGH??? and JJ turned out ok. Just relax and give the kid a chance. It is not HIS fault that we (as fans) put outrageous expectations on him. I think you will be shocked at how good he ends up being.

Jumbo
04-03-2007, 11:53 AM
Jumbo - Do you mean track star, Michael Johnson?

We are on the same side of this discussion. Many posters for the past few months have constantly ripped Paulus and Scheyer. IMO, some have gone overboard to tear down these youngsters' games in order to build up the players that they would like to see playing. This sort of sports argument has been around for decades (My dad and I used to argue the merits of Kilmer and Jurgensen.) but, IMO, the negativity and nastiness associated with some of the arguments is not necessary for those of us who root for the same team. One of my favorite Duke players was Billy McCaffery. I wanted to see him play more but I didn't rip Hurley and Hill in discussions with friends. I think Paulus and Scheyer are better players than many give them credit for being but if Smith and Henderson beat them out and the team is better then so be it.

gw67

No, I mean Michael Wilson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wilson_(basketball)), who played at Memphis (and then for the Globetrotters). He put the "freak" in freak athlete -- one of the most amazing verticals ever, super quick, etc. Not a particularly good basketball player.

Boston Dukie
04-03-2007, 01:06 PM
Yes - it is true, Jumbo is the only one with common sense

It is also true that Jumbo has more NBA scouting contacts that let's say Michael Wilbon (sp?), Bill Simmon's or Gary Parish, who have all had negative things to say about Scheyer's game. Even though of course these three guys all cover the NBA for a living, have access to the coaches and players to interview, and press passes to match. None of them have ever had a conversation with an NBA talent evaluator, and therefore when they have negative or positve comments on any player's NBA future (Scheyer included) they are just plain wrong and haveno common sense

Thanks for correcting, it all makes perfect sense now

I was going to say that I also think Singler and Smith and have more NBA potential than Scheyer (not just Henderson), but I now realize that would be dumb and completely lacking in common sense

Gozza
04-08-2007, 09:09 PM
First of all, while I like to rip on Terps as much as the next guy, nothing is quite as quite as satisfying as a slider and fries while surrounded by chrome. Maybe it's just me though.


This doesn't quite make sense to me. You want Duke to get back to getting to the line (and not putting the other guys on the line). Yet your starting lineup doesn't include Duke's top returning player in FT attempts (Scheyer) and does include the guy who led the team in fouls per minute (Thomas). Also missing is the guy who might have the most offensive skill on the whole team (Singler), whose style is perfect for getting to the line. Throw in the idea of putting installing a freshman shooting guard at the point over a guy who has started there for two years, finished the season on a scoring tear despite a foot that needed surgery and I don't understand your lineup at all.


As I've been posting for the past few weeks (my short tenure as a poster), my concern with this year's team was not that Scheyer and Paulus aren't worthy of being starters on a top tier program--they clearly are. It's that they're not a particularly great fit for the style of D that K likes to run. From the little I've seen of Smith (2 all-star games), he seems to have great quickness and good defensive intensity. With Nelson and Henderson, the perimeter quickness would be scary. Our interior D is going to get badly exposed next year without McBob if opposing guards are able to blow by defenders like they did this year. McBob's length saved the day frequently, but will Z or Thomas be able to do likewise?

As far as offense goes, I'll agree it's always tough integrating a freshman PG, particularly one who's more of combo guard. But you can't tell me that my perimeter would earn less FT attempts than Paulus/Scheyer/Nelson will. There's just no way, since Paulus & Scheyer simply don't look to take the ball to the basket in most cases. Scheyer may have led the team in FT's, but that's a relative stat--the team didn't shoot many. Check out FTA's in the ACC this past season:

UNC 940
Wake 810
BC 791
MD 787
VA 784
NC St 756
V Tech 747
Duke 698
FSU 657
GT 652
CU 612
MI 577

Note that with the exception of Wake, this stat pretty effectively gauges who played when it counted. NCSU of course, in the ACC tourney and NIT, and the rest of the NCAA tourney teams were all in the top half. The non-NCAA teams and GTech (a quick bounce in the postseason) were all in the bottom half. Not saying the stat is a be-all-end-all, but the ability to get to the line sure bails out teams that are in tight games and managing clock in crunch time (the kind of games we lost this year).

Also, since we set our sights high, our competition should be final-four caliber teams, and not just tourney teams. Compare where we were this year in FTA's to where UNC, the only final-four threat (thankfully unrealized) in the league was, and the shortfall is painfully obvious.

I'm not going to go back and look, but I'll bet in the 7-final-fours-in-9-yrs era we were at least in the top 3 in FTA's.

Wander
04-08-2007, 11:30 PM
Compare where we were this year in FTA's to where UNC, the only final-four threat (thankfully unrealized) in the league was, and the shortfall is painfully obvious.


This stat as you present it is actually entirely worthless because it doesn't take tempo into account. What you're looking for is something like "free throw attempts per possession." If you use something like that, your argument is much better, and I agree with the general idea of what you're saying.

Gozza
04-08-2007, 11:38 PM
This stat as you present it is actually entirely worthless because it doesn't take tempo into account. What you're looking for is something like "free throw attempts per possession." If you use something like that, your argument is much better, and I agree with the general idea of what you're saying.

"entirely worthless", eh? Guess I should pack up my stuff and go home.

Actually, while the per possession stat would be revealing, the FTA stat is meaningful on its own merits. The reason that UNC was able to play so uptempo was its athleticism, which is of course linked to its ability to get to the basket and draw fouls.

Jumbo
04-09-2007, 12:17 AM
"entirely worthless", eh? Guess I should pack up my stuff and go home.

Actually, while the per possession stat would be revealing, the FTA stat is meaningful on its own merits. The reason that UNC was able to play so uptempo was its athleticism, which is of course linked to its ability to get to the basket and draw fouls.

If athleticism is what is what leads to drawing fouls, why did Tyler Hansbrough (arguably UNC's least "athletic" player) lead the team in FTs by far (more than double his closest teammate)?

Wander is exactly right that pace of play has to be taken into account in determining FTAs. Plus, I hold that Duke's FTAs were down not because of some "lack of athleticism," but because Duke lacked a low-post scorer. Josh McRoberts shot 146 FTs -- only 10 more than Scheyer. The year before, Shelden attempted 270 FTs.

Finally, once again, athleticism doesn't lead to FT attempts nearly as much as skill does. Good players force defenders into awkward situations. J.J. Redick wasn't exactly athletic, but he attempted 256 FTs as a senior. I'm almost positive that Kyle Singler will lead the team in FT attempts next year, even though he won't be the most "athletic" player on the team. Why? Because he's got a great set of moves, fakes and body control, enabling him to catch defenders off balance and draw contact.

Wander
04-09-2007, 12:32 AM
Actually, while the per possession stat would be revealing, the FTA stat is meaningful on its own merits. The reason that UNC was able to play so uptempo was its athleticism, which is of course linked to its ability to get to the basket and draw fouls.

I suppose your FTA stat could be useful for something, maybe, but not for what you're trying to get at. I think what you're saying is mostly right, but FTA per possesion (or something like that) is a better way to argue it.

UNC was able to play uptempo because they had depth and because they have a coach who is very good at using depth and a fast style of play. Athleticism is only part it.

Jumbo is exactly right in that skill is more important when it comes to drawing fouls than athleticism is, and his examples of Hansbrough and Redick show this very well.

Jumbo
04-09-2007, 12:53 AM
UNC was able to play uptempo because they had depth and because they have a coach who is very good at using depth and a fast style of play. Athleticism is only part it.

I think depth leading to up-tempo play is somewhat of a misnomer. Some of Duke's most up-tempo teams have had the least depth. The J-Will teams played at an extremely fast pace and never went more than seven deep. Davidson, this year, had the 12th-highest adjusted Tempo/Pace rate according to kenpom.com, yet played eight guys. Texas was fifth in the nation in ppg, yet only used seven guys, for instance, in the Big 12 championship game. We all know that Florida can get out and run, won back-to-back national titles, and only went seven deep.

Gozza
04-09-2007, 01:01 AM
If athleticism is what is what leads to drawing fouls, why did Tyler Hansbrough (arguably UNC's least "athletic" player) lead the team in FTs by far (more than double his closest teammate)?

Just a guess, but probably b/c Ty Lawson's athleticism allowed him to break down the opposing guard for the 1000th time, draw a help defender, and drop a pass to Hansbrough, now in great position and getting run at by another out-of-position defender. Repeat 300 times and you get some meaningful FTA stats.

Wander
04-09-2007, 01:13 AM
Just a guess, but probably b/c Ty Lawson's athleticism allowed him to break down the opposing guard for the 1000th time, draw a help defender, and drop a pass to Hansbrough, now in great position and getting run at by another out-of-position defender. Repeat 300 times and you get some meaningful FTA stats.

Your guess is wrong. Hansbrough drew fouls just as well his freshman year, when Lawson wasn't around.

Wander
04-09-2007, 01:17 AM
I think depth leading to up-tempo play is somewhat of a misnomer. Some of Duke's most up-tempo teams have had the least depth. The J-Will teams played at an extremely fast pace and never went more than seven deep. Davidson, this year, had the 12th-highest adjusted Tempo/Pace rate according to kenpom.com, yet played eight guys. Texas was fifth in the nation in ppg, yet only used seven guys, for instance, in the Big 12 championship game. We all know that Florida can get out and run, won back-to-back national titles, and only went seven deep.

I guess Florida "can" get out and run, but they were not an uptempo team in general.

Obviously there are exceptions (like Davidson - good catch) but for the most part, having a deep team makes it easier to run a fast-paced game. I agree with you that it doesn't automatically lead to uptempo play. I do think there is some correlation though, even if as you say it isn't as strong as some think.

Jumbo
04-09-2007, 09:53 AM
I guess Florida "can" get out and run, but they were not an uptempo team in general.

Obviously there are exceptions (like Davidson - good catch) but for the most part, having a deep team makes it easier to run a fast-paced game. I agree with you that it doesn't automatically lead to uptempo play. I do think there is some correlation though, even if as you say it isn't as strong as some think.

Yeah, I mean, I just did a cursory look. But I think sometimes people don't realize that most teams around the country don't play more than 7-8 guys, including many up-tempo teams (which includes some of Duke's best teams from the past). Even at the NBA level, the Suns, for instance, are a 7-8 man team in the playoffs. Obviously, they play quite fast, and their games are 48 minutes long as opposed to the 40 minutes that college guys play. Yet Steve Nash and co. still have plenty left in the tank to run, run, run.

Wander
04-09-2007, 12:25 PM
Good points Jumbo. It would be interesting to go through a lot of numbers, which I'm a bit too lazy to do, and actually see the strength (or lack thereof) of the correlation between depth and tempo.

Gozza
04-09-2007, 12:28 PM
Your guess is wrong. Hansbrough drew fouls just as well his freshman year, when Lawson wasn't around.

If by "just as well" you mean he attempted almost 25&#37; more FT's his Soph year (315 vs. 253), I guess you're right. Must have just been my imagination watching Hansbrough receiving passes under the basket all year.

BTW, that's no disrespect to TH. He knows where to go, battles for position and quite often finishes despite being fouled. But it sure does help having teammates who get the defense out of position and mid-rotation all the time.

Wander
04-09-2007, 12:49 PM
If by "just as well" you mean he attempted almost 25% more FT's his Soph year (315 vs. 253), I guess you're right. Must have just been my imagination watching Hansbrough receiving passes under the basket all year.


Once again, you've used a meaningless stat. He attempted more free throws his sophomore year because he played in more games because UNC went deeper into the ACC and NCAA tournament.

Hansbrough shot 253 free throws in 31 games his freshman year and 315 free throws in 38 games his sophomore year. That's 8.2 free throws per game his freshman year and 8.3 free throws per game his sophomore year.

So, like I said, he got to the line just as well his sophomore year as he did his freshman year.

Gozza
04-09-2007, 01:09 PM
Once again, you've used a meaningless stat. He attempted more free throws his sophomore year because he played in more games because UNC went deeper into the ACC and NCAA tournament.

Hansbrough shot 253 free throws in 31 games his freshman year and 315 free throws in 38 games his sophomore year. That's 8.2 free throws per game his freshman year and 8.3 free throws per game his sophomore year.

So, like I said, he got to the line just as well his sophomore year as he did his freshman year.

Conceding your point about FTA/game (because you're right so I have no choice), I don't see how that ties into perimeter quickness. Hansbrough's ability to get to the line does not to me seem analagous to the question of whether perimeter quickness helps guards get to the line. The answer to that question seems an obvious yes. Why you and Jumbo are willing to fight with me to the death on the point I can't understand. Is skill and intelligence valuable in getting to the line? Of course. Can marginally athletic players compensate in other ways? Of course. Will a more athletic team get to the line more, on average, than a less athletic, team? Again, I would say "of course." So my druthers would be to see us get back to getting our quickest players on the floor (which gets back to my original post that got Jumbo into a nasty mood).

I don't know if your (or Jumbo's) intention is to say that, despite the quickness Scheyer and Paulus give up to Henderson and Smith (again, based on a small sample size of opportunities to see Nolan play), they are smarter players and hence, that will make up for the reduced athleticism. If so, I'm not sure how you can make that evaluation without really having had the opportunity to see Smith play with and against ACC-level talent. I certainly don't see Scheyer as having a higher basketball IQ than Henderson (I think they're pretty equal). My $.02.

Jumbo
04-09-2007, 05:11 PM
I don't know if your (or Jumbo's) intention is to say that, despite the quickness Scheyer and Paulus give up to Henderson and Smith (again, based on a small sample size of opportunities to see Nolan play), they are smarter players and hence, that will make up for the reduced athleticism. If so, I'm not sure how you can make that evaluation without really having had the opportunity to see Smith play with and against ACC-level talent. I certainly don't see Scheyer as having a higher basketball IQ than Henderson (I think they're pretty equal). My $.02.

And this brings me back to my original question: Why, then, did Scheyer get to the FT line more often than anyone other than McRoberts? He had more total FT attempts than Nelson and Henderson (supposedly Duke's two most "athletic" players). What, you say? He played more minutes? OK. But Scheyer averaged a FT attempt every 8.2 minutes. Nelson got to the line once every 8.7 minutes. Henderson got to the line once every 10.5 minutes. Anyway you slice it, Scheyer was more adept at getting to the FT line than the other guys. So, you're left with the following options:

A) Scheyer is more "athletic" than you (and others) give him credit for.
B) Athleticism isn't the primary consideration in getting to the FT line.
C) Nelson and Henderson aren't "athletic."

Personally, my answer is A, with a healthy dose of B mixed in.

Bob Green
04-09-2007, 05:34 PM
So, you're left with the following options:

A) Scheyer is more "athletic" than you (and others) give him credit for.
B) Athleticism isn't the primary consideration in getting to the FT line.
C) Nelson and Henderson aren't "athletic."

Personally, my answer is A, with a healthy dose of B mixed in.

I agree with Jumbo. Scheyer is more athletic than many fans accept. He demonstrated the ability to play strong defense and to work for/create open shot opportunities. His overall offensive production was limited by the fact he missed many open shots not by a lack of athleticism. I expect Scheyer to steadily improve over the next three seasons. He has the size, skill, and athleticism required to develop into a star!

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

CDu
04-09-2007, 09:42 PM
And this brings me back to my original question: Why, then, did Scheyer get to the FT line more often than anyone other than McRoberts? He had more total FT attempts than Nelson and Henderson (supposedly Duke's two most "athletic" players). What, you say? He played more minutes? OK. But Scheyer averaged a FT attempt every 8.2 minutes. Nelson got to the line once every 8.7 minutes. Henderson got to the line once every 10.5 minutes. Anyway you slice it, Scheyer was more adept at getting to the FT line than the other guys. So, you're left with the following options:

A) Scheyer is more "athletic" than you (and others) give him credit for.
B) Athleticism isn't the primary consideration in getting to the FT line.
C) Nelson and Henderson aren't "athletic."

Personally, my answer is A, with a healthy dose of B mixed in.

I'd go with with B, with a dose of A mixed in. I think Scheyer's athleticism lies somewhere between where Jumbo rates it and where many on this board rate it (although I realize that this is clearly an abstract unmeasurable difference).

Boston Dukie
04-09-2007, 11:09 PM
Wow, you are really missing many of the real drivers here

D) Scheyer took more shots (what does the data say?) and shooting leads to getting fouled shooting, which leads to 2 foul shots
E) Scheyer played point gaurd when Paulus was out and also was the team's best FT shooter, so in situations when Duke was closing out games and was going to get fouled, Scheyer got the ball to bring up since he was the best FT shooter on the team
F) Because Scheyer was the best FT shooter, he converted his 1 and 1s and guess what, he got another shot
G) Scheyer shot more 3s than Henderson and Nelson, and was fouled in the act of shooting 3s more often (I think this happened zero times for Henderson and maybe zero as well for Nelson), giving him 3 shots instead of 2
H) Coach K had Scheyer shoot all the technicals when he was on the court

Actually E, F, G and H probably explain all the difference and then some

Players who take a lot of shots and attack the rim will end up shooting a lot of FTs. The point that it is easier to attack tehe rim if you are more athletic is definitely part of the equation, but lots of factors, including how heady a player is and how good they are at drawing fouls

Scheyer certainly isn't shooting FTs because he is athletic. It was Jumbo who originally said JJ was slow and not athletic, yet look how many he shot?

Sorry, but guys who are 6-5 and athletic (as some beleive Scheyer to be) do not go entire season without dunking the basketball

Wander
04-09-2007, 11:22 PM
Wow, you are really missing many of the real drivers here

D) Scheyer took more shots (what does the data say?) and shooting leads to getting fouled shooting, which leads to 2 foul shots
E) Scheyer played point gaurd when Paulus was out and also was the team's best FT shooter, so in situations when Duke was closing out games and was going to get fouled, Scheyer got the ball to bring up since he was the best FT shooter on the team
F) Because Scheyer was the best FT shooter, he converted his 1 and 1s and guess what, he got another shot
G) Scheyer shot more 3s than Henderson and Nelson, and was fouled in the act of shooting 3s more often (I think this happened zero times for Henderson and maybe zero as well for Nelson), giving him 3 shots instead of 2
H) Coach K had Scheyer shoot all the technicals when he was on the court


These are good and observant points Boston but the difference in the Free Throw rates between Scheyer and Nelson/Henderson is too great to be entirely explained by these alone. For me, it definately comes down to point B, in that athleticism helps but isn't quite as much of a factor in getting to the line as some make it out to be.

Boston Dukie
04-10-2007, 11:13 AM
Much of the difference is D through H (very hard to quantify)

Than a big bulk of it is B) since athleticism is just one of the factors driving FT attempts. Maybe its even the biggest factor, but even at that, it can't explain more than like 20-30% of the causality, since so many factors come into play

Corey Maggette is a great example - he lead the NBA in FT attempts for at least 2 years, and this was due to 1) his athleticism paired with 2) his style of play in which he was always attacking the basket, 3) his strength with the ball and ability to get a shot off after he was fouled (NBA continuation helps a lot here), 4) his tendency to shoot every time he got the ball (not a lot of assists out of Corey), 5) his role as a ball handler on what used to be a weak ball handling team, and a few other factors

The Gordog
05-16-2007, 05:28 PM
Now that we know we're not getting PP, let's return to our regularly scheduled programming and speculate about the division of minutes on next year's team.

Here's my pick for the total season - assuming no extended outages due to injury.

Paulus - 30
Scheyer - 30
Nelson - 27
Henderson - 25
Singler- 22
Zoubek - 18
McClure - 16
Thomas - 15
Smith - 9
Pocius - 4
King - 4

Classof06
05-16-2007, 05:54 PM
Lance: 16-20mpg (averaged just under 15 last year, should be better at staying out of foul trouble and HAS to have an increased role offensively. Singler will diminish Lance's minutes, but only if Zoubek can't stay on the floor).

Demarcus: 24mpg (averaged 32 last year, but with the emergence of Gerald and the return of Scheyer, there are only so many minutes in a game. Don't think he'll be asked to play as many different positions with Singler coming in, but he can if need be)

Jon Scheyer: 24mpg (averaged almost 34 last year, but I think with the athleticism Gerald, Demarcus, and Nolan bring to the table, his numbers will naturally diminish. He's also not the greatest defender).

Paulus: 24 mpg (averaged about 32 last year, but almost has to see a reduction in minutes with Nolan Smith coming in).

Henderson: 25 mpg (just under 20 last year, I think this is his breakout year. Still concerned about the asthma though)

Singler: 30mpg (you heard it here first; this kid HAS to be our workhorse next year. The scary part is I think he's more than capable).

Zoubek: 18mpg (averaged 7 last year; this is my starting point, but it's subject to how well Brian can stay out of foul trouble and how much his offense improves).

McClure: 15 mpg (Brings way too much to the table not to play).

Nolan Smith: 15mpg (you see 24 mpg for Paulus, do the math. 15 is another starting point, because I still don't think it's impossible for this kid to start. I think Nolan will surprise fans the most out of anyone, I really do).

Taylor King , Pocius: 7-10 mpg (Love Marty, but there is such a logjam at the 2-3 spots that I just don't see it. I think King's minutes are totally based upon matchups and foul trouble; he's a very good post defender so he'll get minutes if Zoubek and Lance can't stay on the floor).


I know this might not work out mathematically (probably doesn't), but there are so many different lineups Krzyzewski can use and this is just a "guesstimate".

Lord Ash
05-16-2007, 06:07 PM
Singler will play a LOT of minutes next year. A LOT.

VaDukie
05-16-2007, 06:14 PM
Now that we know we're not getting PP, let's return to our regularly scheduled programming and speculate about the division of minutes on next year's team.

Here's my pick for the total season - assuming no extended outages due to injury.

Paulus - 30
Scheyer - 30
Nelson - 27
Henderson - 25
Singler- 22
Zoubek - 18
McClure - 16
Thomas - 15
Smith - 9
Pocius - 4
King - 4

Switch Scheyer and Henderson, a little less for Zoubek, a little more for Marty, and none for King - I think he'll only play in blowouts.

Va "We're going back to 97 - Wojo, Capel, Langdon, Carawell, McLeod - smallball style" Dukie

kydevil
05-16-2007, 06:16 PM
Now that we know we're not getting PP, let's return to our regularly scheduled programming and speculate about the division of minutes on next year's team.

Here's my pick for the total season - assuming no extended outages due to injury.

Paulus - 30
Scheyer - 30
Nelson - 27
Henderson - 25
Singler- 22
Zoubek - 18
McClure - 16
Thomas - 15
Smith - 9
Pocius - 4
King - 4

Agreed, on most but for us to be succesful Singler and Thomas will both have to play more minutes! Also, Nelson and Scheyer IMO shouldn't be playing more than G.H. He will breakout this season I believe.

and why were at it why not throw some suggestions for a starting lineup---

IMO this is our best starting lineup(however with certain teams may need Thomas instead of Z)

Paulus
Scheyer
Henderson
Singler
Zoubek

I think that lineup is scary and that with this lineup and a solid bench we can challenge that school 9 miles down the road with gay @ss blue for the ACC.

ACCBBallFan
05-16-2007, 08:43 PM
Realistically, the best thing K could do is say Zoubek is my center and make the best of it. He has to build Zoubs' confidence rather than yank him out of the game the first mistake he makes, just as he did when Greg Paulus was a freshman (and sophomore).

Lance is no taller and no heavier than Singler. Can't risk losing Singler off the floor due to foul trouble.

Taylor King's best defensive position may be at the 5. There are plenty of other perimeter threats so leverage the match up problems King would create. His defense against perimeter guys would not be as good as Smith, Henderson, Nelson, Scheyer, McClure Lance Thomas or even Pocius and Singler but Taylor King has as much size as anyone besides Zoubek.

Center by committee.

Greg Paulus/Nolan Smith
Gerald Henderson/Jon Scheyer
Demarcus Nelson/Marty Pocius
Kyle Singler/Lance Thomas/Dave McClure
Brian Zoubek/Taylor King/Dave McClure/Lance Thomas/Kyle Singler

Not the ideal without Patterson but have to deal with it.

Same thread, different names, about UF having to play small ball BTW is happening on the UF Gatorcountry.com board.

Duke will be a tough team to prepare for. Any centers out there who can guard a 7' 2" guy and then when he subs out the same center has to guard a deadly 3 point shooter?

speedevil
05-16-2007, 09:04 PM
Duke has 11 players that can play, but coach K usually goes to 7-8 main players rotating during the game.

This is what I think the starting lineup will be to begin the season.
Small ball time just like the Golden State Warriors.

PG: Paulus, that's a given.
G: Nelson, he's the lone senior on the team.
G: Scheyer, we need his shooting and play making abilities on the court.
F: Thomas or McClure, hustle, rebounding; either one will earn a starting spot.
F: Singler, he's going to be the man, (hopefully).

Top 3 reserves off the bench.

G/F: Henderson, he's going to be the man too, (hopefully) coming in for either Nelson, Scheyer or one of the forwards.
C: Zoubek, I cant wait to see his improvements. Must stay out of foul trouble and limit TOs so he can stay on the court.
F: Either Thomas or McClure, which everone isnt starting.

Limited playing time off the bench.

PG/SG: Smith, I would like to see him get into the game more, but coach K hardly goes 9 deep.
F: King: I saw him play in the CA championship game, he's a tough kid and will get a few minutes here and there because of his outside shot and rebounding abilities.
G: Pocious: Along with Paulus, the only remaining player from '08 class, I saw only a limited improvements last year from his freshman year, must continue to improve defensively and recover from injuries to earn more playing time.

cspan37421
05-16-2007, 09:05 PM
that school 9 miles down the road with gay @ss blue for the ACC.

That's hilarious! Not. By any chance are you a Liberty Univ. graduate? Their late founder thought he had a talent for determining sexual preference from apparel color.

jipops
05-16-2007, 09:49 PM
I actually think we'll see a revolving/evolving starting five throughout the season. The biggest question is who will be starting in late January when the lineups and roles are mostly set. I really don't think there is one player who we can definitively say will be starting every game.

Though we lost out on Patterson we do still have decent size on the frontline:
7-0, 6-9, 6-8, 6-7, 6-6. The problem there is very little bulk, athleticism and very little upper body strength amongst those players. Don't expect us to be ruling many backboards. Foul trouble will be what makes us tiny, and foul trouble is inevitable. My biggest concern of the frontcourt guys is their ability to defend.

We're ridiculously loaded with guards especially if Nolan Smith turns out to be a player who can contribute early. I fully expect to see a lineup of 4 guards and McClure out there at times - relentlessly running the floor and getting killed on the boards. But we do have 4 guards who can legitimately score.

Our most talented five would be this:
Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Henderson
Singler

kydevil
05-16-2007, 11:28 PM
Duke has 11 players that can play, but coach K usually goes to 7-8 main players rotating during the game.

This is what I think the starting lineup will be to begin the season.
Small ball time just like the Golden State Warriors.

PG: Paulus, that's a given.
G: Nelson, he's the lone senior on the team.
G: Scheyer, we need his shooting and play making abilities on the court.
F: Thomas or McClure, hustle, rebounding; either one will earn a starting spot.
F: Singler, he's going to be the man, (hopefully).

Top 3 reserves off the bench.

G/F: Henderson, he's going to be the man too, (hopefully) coming in for either Nelson, Scheyer or one of the forwards.
C: Zoubek, I cant wait to see his improvements. Must stay out of foul trouble and limit TOs so he can stay on the court.
F: Either Thomas or McClure, which everone isnt starting.

Limited playing time off the bench.

PG/SG: Smith, I would like to see him get into the game more, but coach K hardly goes 9 deep.
F: King: I saw him play in the CA championship game, he's a tough kid and will get a few minutes here and there because of his outside shot and rebounding abilities.
G: Pocious: Along with Paulus, the only remaining player from '08 class, I saw only a limited improvements last year from his freshman year, must continue to improve defensively and recover from injuries to earn more playing time.

I think Henderson is just to talented not to start, I believe he plays over Nelson even if he is the lone senior.

heyman25
05-17-2007, 04:45 AM
Starting Lineup
Singler
Thomas
Henderson
Nelson
Paulus
Bench
6th man Scheyer
7th Smith
8th McClure
9th Pocius & King
11th Zoubek
Unless Brian makes drastic improvements he won't get much pt just because he is 7'1.McClure is good at defense and rebounding but is a liability on offense.Pocius and King will go in to get some points on the board.I hope Zoubek proves me wrong, but he was painful to watch in his freshman year.

Bob Green
05-17-2007, 06:23 AM
Now that the PP saga is over:

Starters: Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, Singler, & Thomas.

Minutes per game:

Paulus - 30
Thomas - 25
Nelson - 22
Singler - 22
Henderson - 22
Scheyer - 20
Smith -18
McClure - 14
King - 12
Zoubek - 9
Pocius - 6

Predictions:

1. As the 6th man, Henderson will have a breakout year and average more mpg than Scheyer.

2. Zoubek will show improvement, but he is one year away from being a major contributor. Watchout for Zoubek in his Junior and Senior season.

3. Singler will make us forget McRoberts.

4. Smith will vastly improve our backcourt's ability to defend the ball and stop dribble penetration.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

ACCBBallFan
05-17-2007, 07:47 AM
Duke needs to force the opponent to react rather than blinking first.

With no ideal center the way to do that is to play Paulus/Henderson/Nelson/Singler (and Scheyer/Pocius/Smith as wings and Lance/McClure as reserve forwards) with starter type minutes and then:

1. Either play Zonebusters with Taylor King as the defensive center (gimmick), or
2. Make them react to a 7' 2" center (primary option)

If both foul out then you can revert to guys like Lance and McClure that are steady Eddie's and do the dirty work at forward but are not enough of an offensive threat to get the opposing center in foul troble or burn him from 3 land.

Lance has more upside and should be the reserve forward behind Singler. David McClure can be used in gimmick lineups when fouls mount up. He has a knack for the ball but is not tall enough or heavy enough to put in front of Zoubek King, Lance or Kyle as the phantom center.

The Gordog
05-17-2007, 09:58 AM
I think Henderson is just to talented not to start, I believe he plays over Nelson even if he is the lone senior.

He will indeed start, but he will n all probability be limited to 25 minutes per game. K has said he has to play in 4 minutes stretches. I see him playing the first 4, the middle 4 and the last 4 of each half, with an extra minute at the end of the game because there are more time outs and breaks as both teams get to the bonus. That adds up to 25 per game and I just don't see it going much above that. He may very well be our most productive player on a per minute basis, but I think Paulus, Jon, Singler and DeMarcus will all play more minutes.

kramerbr
05-17-2007, 10:24 AM
Is Reggie Love available?

Classof06
05-17-2007, 10:33 AM
Don't forget about Nolan Smith. I think a lot of people are going to be VERY surprised at what he brings to the table. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Greg Paulus starting is NOT a given. Not this year...

1Devil
05-17-2007, 10:36 AM
He will indeed start, but he will n all probability be limited to 25 minutes per game. K has said he has to play in 4 minutes stretches. I see him playing the first 4, the middle 4 and the last 4 of each half, with an extra minute at the end of the game because there are more time outs and breaks as both teams get to the bonus. That adds up to 25 per game and I just don't see it going much above that. He may very well be our most productive player on a per minute basis, but I think Paulus, Jon, Singler and DeMarcus will all play more minutes.


I don't think this exercise-induced asthma is supposed to be a permanent condition. I believe they expect Henderson to grow out of it. My expectation is that it's not a factor this year, but that's based on squat. Anybody with a medical background who can comment?

RepoMan
05-17-2007, 11:01 AM
Now that the PP saga is over:

Starters: Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, Singler, & Thomas.

Minutes per game:

Paulus - 30
Thomas - 25
Nelson - 22
Singler - 22
Henderson - 22
Scheyer - 20
Smith -18
McClure - 14
King - 12
Zoubek - 9
Pocius - 6


Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

Bob: You just about have 10 guys playing 10+ minutes. I doubt we see that much shared PT. I'll be very surprised in we see 12 MPG for King and 9 MPG for Zoub. It wouldn't suprise me to see McClure under 10 as well. Last, I agree with the starting lineup, except, I bet we see Henderson instead of Thomas in most games.

ScreechTDX
05-17-2007, 11:08 AM
I hope Zoubek proves me wrong, but he was painful to watch in his freshman year.

Agreed in full.

SilkyJ
05-17-2007, 12:45 PM
Anyone who think Gerald/Scheyer might start over Demarcus is absolutely out of their mind. Before I even get into offense, Demarcus is our BEST defender and a GREAT rebounder for a guard. He can guard the 1,2,3 and sometimes 4.

He is also every bit as good a 3 pt shooter as Scheyer, and the BEST scorer on the team. Gerald may very well emerge as the best scorer on the team, but that will take more away from Scheyer than Demarcus, because of the teams needs: we will be small and will need Demarcus' athleticism, versatility, and rebounding. Someone else hit it on the head when they said our best 5 are: Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, Gerald, Singler, and I wouldn't be surprised to see that lineup used (probably not often) and see Nelson have to guard the 4 like he did his freshman year.

While gerald has hops, so does demarcus, and demarcus can really bang, which we will need.

1Devil
05-17-2007, 01:24 PM
Anyone who think Gerald/Scheyer might start over Demarcus is absolutely out of their mind. Before I even get into offense, Demarcus is our BEST defender and a GREAT rebounder for a guard. He can guard the 1,2,3 and sometimes 4.

He is also every bit as good a 3 pt shooter as Scheyer, and the BEST scorer on the team. Gerald may very well emerge as the best scorer on the team, but that will take more away from Scheyer than Demarcus, because of the teams needs: we will be small and will need Demarcus' athleticism, versatility, and rebounding. Someone else hit it on the head when they said our best 5 are: Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, Gerald, Singler, and I wouldn't be surprised to see that lineup used (probably not often) and see Nelson have to guard the 4 like he did his freshman year.

While gerald has hops, so does demarcus, and demarcus can really bang, which we will need.

I disagree completely. I'll take Scheyer's 3-pt shot over Nelson's anytime. And other than maybe rebounding, there's nothing that Nelson does well that I don't think Henderson is going to be able to do better. We haven't seen it yet, but I think it will be there. I'm not down on Nelson. He's a very good player. But he's not a great player, like a Redick or Battier...so good he just has to play no matter what.

6th Man
05-17-2007, 02:47 PM
My biggest concern is who is going to step up and be the man when we have to have a bucket. We did not have that at all last year. I think Gerald is the player most capable of doing it. I'm tired of seeing Demarcus dribble off his foot or crash his body into a defender for a charge.

My starting five would be:

Paulus, Nelson, Henderson, Thomas, Singler. And I would push the ball up the court for fast break opportunities as much as possible. It's not Duke's philosophy to play a deep bench, but they could do it this year and just try to create havoc and run like crazy. Pocious, Smith, Scheyer........we have plenty of guards to run, run, run. I'd like to see Tyler H. wheezing trying to chase us around.

rsvman
05-17-2007, 03:03 PM
I don't think this exercise-induced asthma is supposed to be a permanent condition. I believe they expect Henderson to grow out of it. My expectation is that it's not a factor this year, but that's based on squat. Anybody with a medical background who can comment?

If he were going to grow out of his asthma, in all probability he would have done it by now. Most kids who "grow out" of asthma do so in the first decade of life, usually around ages 8-10 years. I'm not a pulmonologist, but I've never heard of anybody growing out of asthma around age 20.

So, don't count on it.

mepanchin
05-17-2007, 03:22 PM
My biggest concern is who is going to step up and be the man when we have to have a bucket. We did not have that at all last year. I think Gerald is the player most capable of doing it. I'm tired of seeing Demarcus dribble off his foot or crash his body into a defender for a charge.

My starting five would be:

Paulus, Nelson, Henderson, Thomas, Singler. And I would push the ball up the court for fast break opportunities as much as possible. It's not Duke's philosophy to play a deep bench, but they could do it this year and just try to create havoc and run like crazy. Pocious, Smith, Scheyer........we have plenty of guards to run, run, run. I'd like to see Tyler H. wheezing trying to chase us around.

Well, to be fair to Nelson, he was usually always guarding the opposition's best perimeter threat, who was moving constantly in the half-court or running breaks. Nelson always started off strong in games, but wore out down the stretch. My hope is that Smith and a defensively improved Henderson can help give Nelson a break so he is able to have some energy late in games.

Nelson actually was not terrible about turnovers. No worse than Gerald, at any rate, and much better than Paulus (though as PG, a higher TO rate is expected), Zoubek, Thomas and McClure. McRoberts and Scheyer were probably our best guys at not turning the ball over, but even McRoberts wasn't that much better than Nelson.

6th Man
05-17-2007, 03:50 PM
Mepanchin....thanks for the reply. I agree with you in that I hope he can get relief on the defensive end. I just wonder how he was wearing down so bad if he trained with a Navy Seal all summer. He seemed to be in peak physical condition. I really shouldn't criticize the man. I pull hard for all of these guys and hope they all do well. I guess if I was coaching I would give Henderson some chances to make the big plays based on what I saw last year. Gerald really was starting to come on with his scoring into the UNC game. To Nelson's defense on my comments.....I am sure the level of excellence required at Duke on all levels has to be very tiring. Hopefully Demarcus will make me look like a fool and tear it up next season.

mgtr
05-17-2007, 07:56 PM
I think Gordog has it pretty close for the beginning of the season. By game 10 or 15, I would expect things to change. Perhaps Henderson and Marty getting more minutes, maybe some the freshmen stepping up. But thats what makes it interesting!

pless55
05-17-2007, 08:10 PM
Shooting Guard- DeMarcus Nelson
Shooting Guard- Gerald Henderson or John Schyer
Point Guard- Greg Paulus
Forward- Kyle Singler
Center- Brian Zoubek or Lance Thomas

We will have a stacked bench.:cool:

natedog4ever
05-17-2007, 09:12 PM
Nelson actually was not terrible about turnovers. No worse than Gerald, at any rate, and much better than Paulus (though as PG, a higher TO rate is expected), Zoubek, Thomas and McClure. McRoberts and Scheyer were probably our best guys at not turning the ball over, but even McRoberts wasn't that much better than Nelson.

Not down on our guys, I love them all, but Dave and Jon were the only ones that didn't turn the ball over at an alarming rate. That was the root problem with last year's team.

Bob Green
05-17-2007, 09:46 PM
Bob: You just about have 10 guys playing 10+ minutes. I doubt we see that much shared PT. I'll be very surprised in we see 12 MPG for King and 9 MPG for Zoub. It wouldn't suprise me to see McClure under 10 as well. Last, I agree with the starting lineup, except, I bet we see Henderson instead of Thomas in most games.

I really believe we will see Coach K play a deep bench like he did during the years 87 - 91. The talent is there and Coach k is going to take advantage of it. The key will be the players staying healthy. Most players cannot contribute if they are hurting.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

ACCBBallFan
05-17-2007, 10:47 PM
Realistically, the best thing K could do is say Zoubek is my center and make the best of it. He has to build Zoubs' confidence rather than yank him out of the game the first mistake he makes, just as he did when Greg Paulus was a freshman (and sophomore).

Lance is no taller and no heavier than Singler. Can't risk losing Singler off the floor due to foul trouble defending the other team’s center. He did do a good job against Ohio State’s 7 foot recruit. The alternative is to roll the dice with Kyle and play best 5 which would be Paulus-Scheyer-Nelson-Henderson (weighs as much as anyone except Zoubek at 215)-Singler and sub in Lance-McClure-Smith-Pocius-King and Zoubek.

Taylor King's best defensive position may be at the 5. There are plenty of other perimeter threats so leverage the match up problems King would create. His defense against perimeter guys would not be as good as Smith, Henderson, Nelson, Scheyer, McClure Lance Thomas or even Pocius and Singler but Taylor King has as much size as anyone besides Zoubek.

Center by committee.

Greg Paulus/Nolan Smith
Gerald Henderson/Jon Scheyer
Demarcus Nelson/Marty Pocius
Kyle Singler/Lance Thomas/Dave McClure
Brian Zoubek/Taylor King/Lance Thomas/Kyle Singler/Dave McClure

Not the ideal without Patterson but have to deal with it.

Same thread, different names, about UF having to play small ball BTW is happening on the UF Gatorcountry.com board.

Duke will be a tough team to prepare for. Any centers out there who can guard a 7' 2" guy and then when he subs out the same center has to guard a deadly 3 point shooter?

Key is for Duke to force other team to react rather than blinking first and reacting to their advantages without exploiting their disadvantages. IF Brian Zoubek can play like Luke Schenscher steady but not a star, Duke’s other four guys on the floor can take care of the rest.

kydevil
05-18-2007, 09:17 AM
[QUOTE=1Devil;21370]I don't think this exercise-induced asthma is supposed to be a permanent condition. I believe they expect Henderson to grow out of it. My expectation is that it's not a factor this year, but that's based on squat. Anybody with a medical background who can comment?[/QUOT

Hopefully he will grow out, but I can't see him from his fresh. to soph. year losing his asthma problems. We can hope though.

ScreechTDX
05-18-2007, 09:28 AM
Realistically, the best thing K could do is say Zoubek is my center and make the best of it. He has to build Zoubs' confidence rather than yank him out of the game the first mistake he makes, just as he did when Greg Paulus was a freshman (and sophomore).


Touche'

That being said...i don't ever doubt what K does. Paulus became twice the player he was by the end of the year. A real scoring threat, which will open up his passing game.

mgtr
07-23-2007, 07:17 AM
I know there is a lot of sentiment for Nolan Smith and against Greg Paulus, but I believe a majority of the posters believe that Paulus-Nelson-Singler will get a bunch of time together, and will make up the nucleus of the team. I don't want to start yet another argument about Paulus or Nelson -- just assume those two, along with Singler, are in the starting five.
The question is then, who are the other two starters? The obvious candidates are Zoubek, Thomas, Scheyer, Henderson, McClure, Pocius, Smith, and King. So who do you like? Zoubek and Thomas? Zoubek and Henderson? Zoubek and Scheyer? Thomas and Henderson?
I don't think the answer is all that obvious.

1Devil
07-23-2007, 08:01 AM
In my view, the only untouchables in the starting lineup are Paulus, Singler and Henderson. Most likely we'll see Thomas and Nelson fill the other slots, though I'd be just as happy (maybe more) with Thomas and Scheyer.

Bob Green
07-23-2007, 08:12 AM
In the "Next Year's Starting Five" Poll, I voted for Zoubek, Singler, Nelson, Scheyer, and Paulus. Eventually, those five will be our starters, but due to the injury to Zoubek, I'll substitute Lance Thomas into my starting line-up for the beginning of the season. Therefore, the other two starters will be Lance Thomas and Jon Scheyer.

Gerald Henderson, Jr. will be the 6th man and will probably play more minutes than a couple of starters. Nolan Smith will play significant minutes. Dave McClure will be third off the bench. Pocius and T. King will play. We have significant depth.

Discussing playing time/starters in July is kind of like discussing recruiting. It provides me the opportunity to be as wrong as everyone else.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

mgtr
07-23-2007, 10:52 AM
I agree that it is sort of silly to discuss PT, starting positions in July, but what else is there to do?

jipops
07-23-2007, 01:01 PM
I kind of like the "untouchables" argument that 1Devil stated.

Though in my view there would be only two here: Paulus and Scheyer. Even then, if Paulus has a string of bad games where he turns it over or is continuously getting killed on D he may lose a starting nod for a game or two (ala Duhon), then maybe Scheyer is the only one.

I simply see Jon as being our best guy in terms of everything he can bring to the floor. If healthy, no way I see this guy not being on the floor at the opening tip and he'll definitely be in there in the crucial parts of games.

whereinthehellami
07-23-2007, 01:31 PM
Coach K goes by the philosophy that the best 5 will start. Zoubek and Thomas weren't there at the end of last year and I'm not sure that they will be there at the beginning of this year. Smith and Singler are freshman in the ACC, there will be some adjustments, especially with the mental aspects of the game. I think Singler is an exceptional talent and can be written in stone as a starter though. I guess I go:

Paulus 6-0 JR
Scheyer 6-4 SO
Nelson 6-3 SR
Henderson/McClure 6-5/6-6
Singler 6-8 FR

dw0827
07-23-2007, 03:03 PM
My guess is that Paulus and Singler are locks to start. Probably also Nelson. After that, it will depend on: a) who plays well in fall practices, b) how the chemistry develops, and c) what strategy/philosophy Coach K adopts with this team.

I think fall practice will determine a lot. i.e., who wins the jobs with their play.

Too bad that some of the guys are hurt right now and may (?) get slow starts . . .

My prediction: its going to be a lot of fun watching this team develop. For now, I go with Paulus, Singler, Scheyer, Thomas, and Nelson (or Henderson if Nelson isn't ready).

MulletMan
07-23-2007, 04:05 PM
Patrick Davidson
Patrick Davidson
Patrick Davidson
Patrick Davidson
Patrick Davidson

We will not use the bench.

ACCBBallFan
07-23-2007, 04:13 PM
Starters

Paulus
Nelson
Henderson
Singler
Zoubek

Rotation

Paulus/ (Scheyer/Smith will vary based on opponent)
Nelson/ (Scheyer/Smith will vary based on opponent)
Henderson/ (Nelson/Pocius)
Singler/ (McClure)
Zoubek/ (Thomas/King - center by committee that will vary based on opponent)

Classof06
07-23-2007, 05:15 PM
Coach K goes by the philosophy that the best 5 will start. Zoubek and Thomas weren't there at the end of last year and I'm not sure that they will be there at the beginning of this year. Smith and Singler are freshman in the ACC, there will be some adjustments, especially with the mental aspects of the game. I think Singler is an exceptional talent and can be written in stone as a starter though. I guess I go:

Paulus 6-0 JR
Scheyer 6-4 SO
Nelson 6-3 SR
Henderson/McClure 6-5/6-6
Singler 6-8 FR


You're right about the best 5 starting. I think this is the thing people are overlooking when they declare that so and so is a lock to start. That's just ridiculous. I have never heard of one player that was given a starting spot under Coach K. And with the depth we have, you better believe spots are going to be earned through good ol' competition. Saying you don't believe that means you indirectly question the integrity of the coaching staff. If Krzyzewski says he's going to play the 5 best players (which he's said numerous times), then I expect him to do so. Greg Paulus is not going to be the first Duke player to break Krzyzewski's rule. If Chris Duhon can get benched in his Junior year due to performance (albeit temporarily), then so can Greg Paulus. You have to earn it at Duke; moreso than at a lot of other schools. So, it shouldn't be a surprise that I believe the starting lineup is largely up for grabs.

1 - Paulus / Smith (The most anticipated question of Duke's season: Can Paulus bounce back? No benefit of the doubt, I need to see it to believe it. It's easy to me/you/Krzyzewski/whoever to look and say Paulus is the man when there was no viable alternative last year. Now there is one--who clearly provides some things Paulus cannot. That makes it very interesting. Either way, I believe Smith sees significant minutes)

2 and 3 - Scheyer / Henderson / Nelson (Nobody's a lock, but I'd be very surprised if Demarcus doesn't start. Unlike Paulus, his performance last year actually warrants that belief. Jon and Gerald present the most intriguing preseason subplot - right up there with how Paulus responds to last year. Scheyer started last year, but Gerald missed the majority of the preseason; Gerald was also playing better at the end of last season, IMO. I think many people assume K loves Jon so much that he has to start. But it's going to be very difficult for K to not start Gerald).

Frontcourt - Zoubek / Singler / Thomas (expect Singler to take one spot, but that doesn't necessarily mean Lance won't start. With the matchup problems Brian can cause, I believe Lance will have to show the most improvement between the 2 in order to crack the starting lineup. Just how far has he come along?)

dw0827
07-23-2007, 05:37 PM
I have never heard of one player that was given a starting spot under Coach K.

Bobby Hurley comes to mind. Jason Williams as well. These guys were given the ball from day one and were told, by Coach K, you are my point guard. (Actually, I wasn't there so I'm guessing.) But Coach K never wavered on these guys. Maybe a little pine time to make a point but they were locks.

My guess is that he's said the same to Paulus.

If Paulus is healthy, he is a lock. Maybe the only one.

But then, your quote says "given a starting spot." In deference to your point, you could easily say that they earned the spot . . . it wasn't merely "given" . . . so we may be differing over semantics.

mapei
07-23-2007, 05:56 PM
What Bob Green said.

Would K ever vary his starting 5 because of matchups? I can particularly see Zoubek being an asset against certain teams and a liability against others. If so, maybe there is no single "starting lineup."

Classof06
07-23-2007, 06:50 PM
Bobby Hurley comes to mind. Jason Williams as well. These guys were given the ball from day one and were told, by Coach K, you are my point guard. (Actually, I wasn't there so I'm guessing.) But Coach K never wavered on these guys. Maybe a little pine time to make a point but they were locks.

My guess is that he's said the same to Paulus.

If Paulus is healthy, he is a lock. Maybe the only one.

But then, your quote says "given a starting spot." In deference to your point, you could easily say that they earned the spot . . . it wasn't merely "given" . . . so we may be differing over semantics.


The difference between Hurley/Jason Williams and Paulus is performance. K never had to waver on these kids because they always performed at a high level. I said starting spots are earned...with performance. I think we can all confidently say that Greg Paulus' performance over the past 2 years shouldn't be mentioned within 3 threads of Hurley or Williams.

Simply put, Paulus held onto his job last year because he was the only primary ballhandler on the roster; he was tossed the keys because nobody else had their permit. Should Paulus slip to the point where he holds the team back (as he did as certain points last year), he will be sat

ACCBBallFan
07-23-2007, 08:52 PM
You're right about the best 5 starting. I think this is the thing people are overlooking when they declare that so and so is a lock to start. That's just ridiculous. I have never heard of one player that was given a starting spot under Coach K. And with the depth we have, you better believe spots are going to be earned through good ol' competition. Saying you don't believe that means you indirectly question the integrity of the coaching staff. If Krzyzewski says he's going to play the 5 best players (which he's said numerous times), then I expect him to do so. Greg Paulus is not going to be the first Duke player to break Krzyzewski's rule. If Chris Duhon can get benched in his Junior year due to performance (albeit temporarily), then so can Greg Paulus. You have to earn it at Duke; moreso than at a lot of other schools. So, it shouldn't be a surprise that I believe the starting lineup is largely up for grabs.

Frontcourt - Zoubek / Singler / Thomas (expect Singler to take one spot, but that doesn't necessarily mean Lance won't start. With the matchup problems Brian can cause, I believe Lance will have to show the most improvement between the 2 in order to crack the starting lineup. Just how far has he come along?)

Following your own premise, Taylor King's offensive firepower cannot be overlooked, though he will have to prove he can at least guard an immobile forward if not a wing.

You did not mention Marty either, but an awful uphill battle with Nelson-Scheyer-Henderson even before you give consideration to Nolan as SG or moving Greg to SG if Nolan earns PG slot sometime during the season.

McClure and Nelson have the most experience in the Duke system. So Dave cannot be dismissed lightly either.

For a change, maybe too many choices and not enough locks.

--------------------------

The more I think about it though and listen to others, the more I conclude four of the 5 are

Paulus-Nelson-Singler-Zoubek with 5-7 being any of Henderson-Scheyer-Smith whether Greg is the PG or the SG.

Zoubek even in people's wildest dreams of improvement can not go anywhere near 40 minutes, whether due to stamina, fouls, or poor play.

If King can defend a big, Taylor presents a greater challenge for the foe than Lance or McClure whereas playing them is playing into the opponent's stronger hand at forward slot since they are not outside threats and are shorter/frailer than most teams' forward when paired with Singler.

OTOH, if King can't guard his lunch, then Lance and Dave vie for other forward slot with Lance being bigger but Dave being more experienced.

In that non-King, non-Smith scenario though, Singler and Henderson have to be great rather than good or all games are close and could go either way, just like last year with the only change being Kyle for Josh which gives up size in exchange for outside threat, and Nolan giving Nelson a breather on defense and Scheyer a rest from so many minutes per game.

As much as I have this gut feel that Duke is missing out on Pocius, I don't see him getting much PT with all the other options.

When all else fails there is always small ball with Paulus-Nelson-Singler and then 2 of Scheyer-Henderson-Smith, but these other options need to be fully explored before just defaulting to small ball.

Lance-McClure-Pocius would be the subs and effectively King and Zoubek are not on the team, which is OK if they prove unable to compete as well with the other 9 for PT.

Nine players are plenty, but chances of success are greatly improved with more balance in size and shooting.

dw0827
07-24-2007, 08:15 AM
The difference between Hurley/Jason Williams and Paulus is performance. K never had to waver on these kids because they always performed at a high level.

Williams had a very rough start . . . and Hurley had many VERY rough patches in his first few years. But K stuck with them anyway. As he will with Paulus.

What I didn't see, however, was practice performance. Hurley may have been Gods gift in practice and therefore earned his spot . . . because his on-court performance really stunk at times. (His early years, that is).

ACCBBallFan
08-01-2007, 09:43 PM
Without getting into who starts, since it is situational, my target distribution of minutes would be:

2 Guards - Paulus 30/32 last year- Scheyer 30/34 - Smith 20/0)

2 Wings - Nelson 30/32 - Henderson 25/19 - Singler 25/0 and scraps for Marty ??/7

Post defender - Zoubek 10/7 - Lance 10/15 - McClure 10/22 - Kingsnoggle 10/0

or any other distribution that adds up to 40 for post defenders by committee.

So not enough time to go around to replace Josh's 35 min, and PT issues for Dave (-12), Marty (-7) and Lance (-5) assuming Henderson can go 25.

Marty would get as much time at wing as Singler has to play in the post, which would further diminish minutes for the other members of the post committee.

Or if Nolan is not as good initially as many expect he will be, Marty would get some of those minutes. So think of it as Nolan plus Marty = 20.

Other than micro ball with Singler in the post and Henderson at forward, this distribution is flexible enough to adapt to any opponent,

with the guys who played over 30 last year still getting 30 minutes for Paulus-Scheyer-Nelson and

next two best guys Henderson and Singler getting 25,

(Nolan plus Marty sum to 20) and all others 10,

which of course 10 guys averaging at least 10 is not going to happen, but it is a target.

STLDukeFan4
08-02-2007, 12:31 AM
I kind of like the "untouchables" argument that 1Devil stated.

Though in my view there would be only two here: Paulus and Scheyer. Even then, if Paulus has a string of bad games where he turns it over or is continuously getting killed on D he may lose a starting nod for a game or two (ala Duhon), then maybe Scheyer is the only one.

I simply see Jon as being our best guy in terms of everything he can bring to the floor. If healthy, no way I see this guy not being on the floor at the opening tip and he'll definitely be in there in the crucial parts of games.

I would have to agree with this. I think that Jon showed a lot of awesome stuff in his freshman year, and I am very excited to see where he goes from here. Paulus showed a lot of improvement as well. I could see K going with the best 5 starting lineup. Unless Zoubek or Thomas starts off the season very impressive, I think that the starting lineup will be:

Paulus
Scheyer
Nelson
Henderson
Singler

I love the ability of all of those players to score. Scheyer is a pretty decent defender, and so is Singler from what I have seen. Henderson is so athletic he should be able to get after it on Defense this year. We all have seen Nelson's defense and Paulus' tenacity on that side of the floor. It should be a fun season to watch with these guys.

ACCBBallFan
08-11-2007, 12:20 PM
Duke’s top 6 minutes played last year

34 Scheyer
32 Paulus
32 Nelson
22 McClure
19 Henderson
15 Lance
--- ------
154 before Zoubek-Pocius-3 frosh

Though all agree 34 for Scheyer is way too much, they also agree 19 for Henderson is too few. Most would agree the total of 53 for the combo Scheyer-Henderson is reasonable, and that Lance should get more minutes, so let that be the 2 from both Nelson and Paulus to bring their minutes to 30 each and Lance up to 19.

If Singler plays 26 minutes, that accounts for all 180 minutes, which spread across top 7 players would be 26 minutes each, leaving zero PT for Zoubek, Pocius, Smith and King which is problematic.

The more I ponder the problem, the more I think it may make sense to use the platoon system pairing Smith-Pocius-King-Zoubek and either Henderson-Singler whom most agree are Duke’s two most high potential guys at this point.

Whether that group deserves 5 minutes PT, 10 minutes PT or more minutes PT is not something everyone will agree on.

But while they are in as a unit, Scheyer, Paulus, Nelson, McClure, Lance and other of Henderson-Singler can be rested a couple minutes before a TV timeout to get a decent cumulative breather. Or Coach K can bring in his swat team after a time out to change momentum.

I think it is likely coach K’s starting unit, and the bulk of the minutes other than possibly Zoubek, comes from the 7 guys Paulus-Nelson-Scheyer-(Henderson-Singler)-(McClure/ Lance).

The swat team could have some interesting combinations and could also be the basis for the Blue-White lineup, now just two months away, with mostly returnees (Paulus-Nelson-Scheyer-[Henderson/Singler]-[Lance/McClure]) versus

Smith-Pocius-Henderson-King-Zoubek

Smith-Pocius-Singler-King-Zoubek

Smith-Pocius-Henderson-King-Singler

Smith-Henderson-Singler-King-Zoubek

Another way to look at the PT problem is to group the six smalls of (Paulus-Nelson-Scheyer-Henderson-Pocius-Smith) and the five “Bigs” of (Zoubek-Lance-McClure-Singler-King).

Using a simplistic 120 minutes for the smalls and agreeing it is virtually certain Paulus and Nelson secure at least 60 minutes, leaves 60 minutes to spread across Scheyer-Henderson-Pocius-Smith with the first two averaging 53 last year, leaving crumbs for Nolan Smith and Marty Pocius, unless some of these premises are challenged.

Similarly, with McClure (22) – Lance (15) and Zoubek (7) having averaged 44 minutes last year, that only leaves 16 for Singler and Kingsnoggle combined and they will surely rack up more than that. Hard to imagine Zoubek the lone true center getting less than 7, or even Lance getting less than 15, so that implies McClure’s PT takes a pretty big hit, despite the fact that he is a glue guy, knack for the ball, yada, yada.

Anyway, one solution is for Smith-Pocius-King-Zoubek to either succeed or fail as a group when they get into a game paired with (Henderson/Singler). If they are holding their own, they play more than token minutes each half against that opponent. If they are not, coach K reverts to his top 7, which is pretty much last year’s team with Singler instead of Josh.

In the latter scenario, unless that extra 6 man years of experience plus an injury free Paulus makes a big difference, or unless this year’s competition is significantly weaker than last year’s , Duke’s relative success pretty much depends on the second platoon making the bigger difference that last year’s bench could not. It was pretty much curtains for the Offense when Josh or Paulus was not on the floor last year.

Cameron
08-11-2007, 12:31 PM
If Brian Zoubek starts, and plays serious minutes, then we are in trouble.

He couldn't even get himself a good look in the pickup games this summer. When he catches the ball, he either a) travels as he's falling out of bounds, b) shoots the ball three feet past the bucket, or c) gets blocked by a 6'4 guard.

He's at least another year away from contributing seriously against teams not named Davidson.

On another note, I look for King Taylor (hopefully it catches on:)) to get much more time on the floor than what most are giving him credit for thus far. I think, similiarly to Jon last season, Taylor will surprise many people with the amount of time he sees and the amount of production he gives out. His shooting skills are amazing for a player his height. I mean, when you can casually knock down near 30 footers with guys flying in your face, you are something special. With his long and expansive body, he will be a nightmare matchup when he catches the ball within 25 feet of the bucket. Not too many players will be able to stop that. And even if team's do decide to put a taller forward up against Taylor out on the perimeter, he has enough ball handling skill to drive right around and pull up from mid range. Remember now, not many expected Jon to be as productive as he was in 2006-07. And he ended up being, arguably, our best player.

I look for King Taylor to see at least 20 to 24 minutes a game next year and to instantly become one of the most feared long range threats in the nation, much like JJ became as a freshman. Now I understand that JJ was a much more accurate threat, unlike Taylor who is certainly much more streaky, but I look for Taylor to shine. Call me crazy, but I think he could hit upwards of 80 or 90 triples this season. Let us hope so:)

ACCBBallFan
08-11-2007, 01:40 PM
I look for King Taylor (hopefully it catches on:)) to get much more time on the floor than what most are giving him credit for thus far. I think, similiarly to Jon last season, Taylor will surprise many people with the amount of time he sees and the amount of production he gives out. His shooting skills are amazing for a player his height. I mean, when you can casually knock down near 30 footers with guys flying in your face, you are something special. With his long and expansive body, he will be a nightmare matchup when he catches the ball within 25 feet of the bucket. Not too many players will be able to stop that. And even if team's do decide to put a taller forward up against Taylor out on the perimeter, he has enough ball handling skill to drive right around and pull up from mid range. Remember now, not many expected Jon to be as productive as he was in 2006-07. And he ended up being, arguably, our best player.

I look for King Taylor to see at least 20 to 24 minutes a game next year and to instantly become one of the most feared long range threats in the nation, much like JJ became as a freshman. Now I understand that JJ was a much more accurate threat, unlike Taylor who is certainly much more streaky, but I look for Taylor to shine. Call me crazy, but I think he could hit upwards of 80 or 90 triples this season. Let us hope so:) If King Taylor can play defense, either on the perimeter or in the post, you may be on to something.

Let's assume King Taylor gets 20 minutes. Who do you see him paired with?

Obviously not Zoubek from your comments.

You thinking

PG: Paulus-Smith
W(2): Henderson-Nelson backup up by Scheyer (Pocius?)
F: Singler - Lance/McClure
C: King - Lance/Zoubek

Mix and match the four "bigs" other than Zoubek at F/C any way you like.

With Zoubs being Duke's only true center-sized center,I am not ready to write him off just yet, but Singler-King do offer a lot more offensive potential than Lance-McClure.

McClure and Pocius seem to be the least highly ranked guys out of HS, not that that is an exact science. So I guessed Lance as the first big off the bench for Singler/King, and Scheyer as the 6th man, given that he led the returnees in PT last year.

Cameron
08-11-2007, 05:57 PM
ACCBBallFan:

This is what I am thinking as of now:

PG: Paulus, Smith
SG: Scheyer, Nelson, Pocius
SG: Henderson, Nelson
F: King, Thomas, McClure
F: Singler, Thomas, Zoubek

Now, obviously the problem with the above lineup is size. You are obviously lacking a true big man with this lineup, but, in my opinion, it's the best we can really do. Zoubek is not an answer, and Thomas is still maturing into his body (as well as too small to play a true big). What you do have with this lineup, though, is shooting. Paulus, Scheyer, and King can be lights out from beyond the arc when they are on. This would be our best trio of outside shooters since Williams, Duhon, and Dunleavy in '02. And outside shooting was something we weren't very good at as a team last season. This would be a major improvement. Singler isn't a slouch from downtown either.

Basically what we would be playing is a spread out offense, with Kyle floating around in the inside (now, Kyle is certainly not a Boozer, but he'll do). Now this could work, if we are shooting and penetrating well. Gerald is tremendous at breaking holes and getting into the lane to score (or to pass off to, say, Kyle, for a slam dunk on the opposite side), and I think could really benefit from a very spread out attack, much like Jason Williams used to do in the run-n-gun days of 2001 (Oh, what beautiful days they were:))

I think this lineup up could really run up and down the floor well, which would be of benefit to us since we don't have a true center--the more we run and score in transition, the less it matters that we lack a big man in the half court set.

Now as for why DeMarcus is sitting on the bench. In my opinion, DeMarcus has really slumped in his play. I know he's been injury plagued throughout his career but he just didn't perform during the end of last season. His shot was incredibly ugly. Clang. Clang. Clang. And when he's not hitting, his head just doesn't seem to be there. Don't get me wrong, I love DeMarcus as a player, and I always thought he would have an amazing last couple of seasons, but I'm just not seeing it. I do, however, think he could be a wonderful spurt scorer off the bench. Bench scoring is something we lacked last season outside of Henderson, when he didn't start, and we could really use it. Since Gerald can only play a limited amount of time because of his health issues, this would make a lot of sense. Nelson, who is a very similar player to Gerald athletically, can come right in and pick up the slack. And who knows, perhaps DeMarcus would play a little better with some of the spotlight off his shoulders...

In all honesty, though, I think Nolan Smith could be taking some major time away from either Scheyer or Henderson, as well. With Coach K firm on giving Greg the commanding role out front (and I think Greg has earned the spot as for now, especially with his instant offense from beyond the arc), Nolan may have to find time at the shooting guard position. And I think he may have what it takes to outdo anyone. Obviously you cannot judge much from pickup games, but Nolan may have out played every guard we have, except for maybe Paulus, during those contests in July. He definitely out played Scheyer and Nelson.

As for Jon, I really couldn't see him losing his starting job, unless he isn't showing much summer improvement for the coaches. Jon was probably our best all-around player last year, playing spectaculalry for a thin-framed freshman in the ACC. Without him leading the way offensively in some of our games, we probably wouldn't have won 18 or 19 games. Jon can be a pure scorer. He just needs to get stronger. The real question, however, will be whether or not he can adjust to being a marked man this season. His shot has a rather slow release on it, especially when he's setting up from beyond the arc, so he will definitely have to improve upon that, or he'll struggle at getting any looks. If he can start 2007-08 off were he left off in January of last season, and improve from there, then we'll have one hell of a player on our hands. And I am guessing he will, considering that he's had a full off-season to improve upon the poor stamina he had near the end of last year's brutal run. He was just a thin-framed freshman, after all.

Alright, that's just something I threw out there. I promise I am done babbling now.

Bob Green
08-11-2007, 06:33 PM
Basically what we would be playing is a spread out offense, with Kyle floating around in the inside (now, Kyle is certainly not a Boozer, but he'll do). Now this could work, if we are shooting and penetrating well. Gerald is tremendous at breaking holes and getting into the lane to score (or to pass off to, say, Kyle, for a slam dunk on the opposite side), and I think could really benefit from a very spread out attack, much like Jason Williams used to do in the run-n-gun days of 2001 (Oh, what beautiful days they were:))



I disagree with this particular point. Gerald's weaknesses as a Freshman included court vision and passing off to teammates. Once he started a move to the basket, he was committed to taking a shot.

I agree that Gerald will be much improved as a Sophomore and his PT & productivity will rise, but I do not see him replacing Nelson in the starting line-up.

Your theory on Taylor King is intriguing and could play out as highly accurate. Zoubek breaking his foot over the summer is a definite setback and could open the door for TK to grab increased PT.

ACCBBallFan
08-11-2007, 06:48 PM
Cameron, what you say has a lot of merit. Without Zoubek, Duke's lineup will always be small or micro, and no way can Zoubs go 40 minutes, while your contention is Zoubs should not get much PT at all.

My concern would be the defense with Paulus-Scheyer-King all on the floor at same time.

I think you have the parts that could work if you pretty much invoked an only two of those three on the floor at the same time rule

and had another which strived for at least two or three of Nelson-Henderson-Smith-Lance-McClure on the floor at all times.

So it kind of boils down to Jon and Taylor being mutually exclusive, except when Greg is resting and Nolan is the PG.

When Jon and Greg are paired, (Singler/Lance) plus two of (Henderson-Nelson-McClure), but not King.

If King starts, then pair him with Paulus-Nelson-Henderson-Singler (or Lance, not McClure since King/McClure is too small as two forwards) and not Jon for reason cited above - defense too porous.

Like Nelson-Henderson having many of the same traits, though one is a SG and the other is a forward by necessity this year Scheyer-King have many of the same positives on offense and same negatives on defense if Greg is also in the game.

When Greg is resting, Nolan is on the floor.

Twenty minutes is not enough PT for many of these guys or you could go with

Paulus-Nelson-Singler-King-Lance with Scheyer-Henderson in reserve half the time, (many claim both will start and almost all think at least one will).

So maybe it's Paulus-Nelson-(Henderson/Scheyer) and two of {Singler-King-Lance}

[Smith/Paulus]-Scheyer-two of [Henderson-Nelson/McClure] - one of [Singler/King/Zoubek] the other half of the time

with only spot duty again for Marty and Zoubs, and maybe even McClure if King is going to log so much time as you suggest.

Combined, that would be:

PG: Paulus (>=30)/Smith (<=10)
2W two of [Scheyer+Nelson+Henderson = 75] with crumbs for Marty (5)
F King (>=20)/Lance (<=20)
C Singler (25) / [McClure and Zoubs total 15 versus 29 last year].

You could mix and match F/C in any combination. I just split them to subtotal 40 each.

As Bob Green says, Zoubek losing some development over the Summer may open up more time for Kingsnoggle or Lance.

I originally had the parings somewhat differently

2G (Paulus+Scheyer=60, Smith + Marty = 20) whereas your equivalent is about 70
2 W (Nelson+Henderson+Singler = 80) whereas yours totals about 75
1 Post defender (ZoubLance+king+McCLure =40) whereas yours totals about 55

mapei
08-11-2007, 10:32 PM
Very interesting posts. I have a bit of trouble with all the permutations and equations, but that's just me. I think I get the gist. One point I question, though, is

>"What you do have with this lineup, though, is shooting. Paulus, Scheyer, and King can be lights out from beyond the arc when they are on. This would be our best trio of outside shooters since Williams, Duhon, and Dunleavy in '02. And outside shooting was something we weren't very good at as a team last season."

I would say yes and no. It's certainly a trio with a lot of potential, but two of those guys started and played big-time minutes last year, and as I recall Scheyer's shooting really slumped toward the end of the season. King definitely is an upgrade to our long-range arsenal, but I don't expect anything from the other two in long-range shooting that we didn't see last year.

I really think K is going to start everyone who started regularly last year. He likes his guys: Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, and Lance. Singler will take Josh's starting slot. Smith and Marty will back up Paulus and Scheyer, and maybe together get half as many minutes as the two starters (with Smith getting more than Marty). Gerald will back up Nelson and get roughly the same amount of playing time. King and Zoubek will back up Singler and Lance, and we may see a lot of them given Lance's propensity for foul trouble. Who comes in may depend on matchups. I see Singler getting regular starter minutes and the other three splitting it up more or less evenly among themselves. I don't know if I'm good at putting numbers to it, but something like this:

*Paulus - 35
*Singler - 30
*Scheyer - 25
*Nelson - 20
*Lance - 20
Henderson - 20
Zoubek - 12.5
King - 12.5
Smith - 12.5
Pocius - 12.5

Net result should be an improved offense but a weakened or neutral defense compared to last year.

mapei
08-11-2007, 10:39 PM
I just realized I posted a 10-man rotation. Not a chance. Two of those last four are probably going to get negligible minutes, though I hope I'm wrong about that.

Bob Green
08-11-2007, 11:28 PM
I just realized I posted a 10-man rotation. Not a chance. Two of those last four are probably going to get negligible minutes, though I hope I'm wrong about that.

I agree with your first post and disagree with the quote above. I'm fimly in the camp of those who believe Coach K will play a deep rotation this year. He has done it in the past when he had the talent available.

I expect all 11 scholarship players to get their minutes this year (if everyone stays healthy).

ACCBBallFan
08-11-2007, 11:50 PM
I don't know if I'm good at putting numbers to it, but something like this:

*Paulus - 35
*Singler - 30
*Scheyer - 25
*Nelson - 20
*Lance - 20
Henderson - 20
Zoubek - 12.5
King - 12.5
Smith - 12.5
Pocius - 12.5

Net result should be an improved offense but a weakened or neutral defense compared to next year.Left off McClure who avraged 22 last year.

Nelson averaged 32 going down to 20 may be too large a drop also, as might Scheyer 34 to 25.

I would assume you might change all the 12.5's to 10 and give dave 10 also.

mapei
08-12-2007, 12:12 AM
You're absolutely right, I totally blanked on Dave. I would expect him to get at least as much time as King, Zoubek and Pocius, and more given his experience. Taking that into account:

*Paulus - 35
*Singler - 25
*Scheyer - 25
*Nelson - 20
*Lance - 15
Henderson - 20
McClure - 15
Smith - 12.5
Pocius - 12.5
Zoubek - 10
King - 10

Duke has so many players with more or less the same talent level . . . it's hard to find the minutes to do them justice.

ACCBBallFan
08-12-2007, 12:47 AM
Averaging the numerical results from this thread and ignoring any without metrics that could not be quantified, I tabulated these results which are probably more accurate than most of our individual guesses:

Greg 30
Demarcus27
Jon 26
Gerald 25
Kyle 23-24
Lance 18-17
Dave 13
Nolan 12
Brian 11
Taylor 09
Marty 07
201

Throwing out the high score and low score and then averaging had the same results except Kyle 24 instead of 23 and Lance 17 instead of 18.

Cameron
08-12-2007, 11:15 AM
I would say yes and no. It's certainly a trio with a lot of potential, but two of those guys started and played big-time minutes last year, and as I recall Scheyer's shooting really slumped toward the end of the season. King definitely is an upgrade to our long-range arsenal, but I don't expect anything from the other two in long-range shooting that we didn't see last year.

I disagree with this. In my opinion, the only reason Jon's shooting fell off near the end of last season was because of his inability to adapt physically to the ACC's long and demanding schedule. At his slim size, Jon really got beat up near the end of the year, which resulted in his decline in performance.

I think this will change dramatically in 2007-08. With a long off-season in the weight room to up both his strength and his stamina, Jon should be ready to go the distance this season (or at least be better prepared). And as you may recall, Jon was shooting over 45 percent from beyond the arc until nearly January of last season before he dropped off. Now a lot of that drop had to do with the way ACC defenses started zeroing in on him, forcing him to make a shot for himself, rather than spotting up like he did earlier in the season. This is where I expect Jon to be improved this season. He's had a year to adjust to the ACC now, and I expect him to be ready for the challenge--better moving without the ball (something he wasn't particularly great at last year), more physical in getting room to get his shot off, quicker release, etc. Now he won't come in and be superman, especially not as a sophomore, but I think Jon will be able to play at a high level for a much longer run this year.

As for Paulus, I really expect his shooting to be exceptional this season. He shot 45 percent from beyond the arc last season, nailing 68 trifectas in all. And that's with the foot injury hampering him early in the year. He'll be entering 2007-08 very healthy and could turn a lot of people's heads in my opinion. He absolutely destroyed the pickup games in July with his deadly three-point shooting (now, again, it is only open gym, but it's a very good sign) and has really been improving his all-around game.

And Taylor King's long range ability speaks for itself.

I really think this trio could be something special when they are clicking on all cylinders. They might not be Battier, Williams, and Duhon, but who is? It will certainly be refreshing to have them prowling the perimeter, though. A much better improvement from a year ago with King added.

mapei
08-12-2007, 10:05 PM
>They might not be Battier, Williams, and Duhon, but who is?

For the purposes of this discussion, Dunleavy. ;)

BTW, I wonder how much the very low average number for Marty has to do with how we regard him and how much has to do with how we perceive that K regards him . . . Personally, I really struggled to find minutes for him: I believe he is really good (and growing, much as you project Jon and Greg to be); it just seems like suich a waste to have someone that good on the team when there are so many others ahead of him. I almost wish he would transfer, for his sake.

ACCBBallFan
08-13-2007, 11:00 AM
BTW, I wonder how much the very low average number for Marty has to do with how we regard him and how much has to do with how we perceive that K regards him . . . Personally, I really struggled to find minutes for him: I believe he is really good (and growing, much as you project Jon and Greg to be); it just seems like suich a waste to have someone that good on the team when there are so many others ahead of him. I almost wish he would transfer, for his sake. Marty could do well if given the opportunity, and the same may be true of Nolan Smith, but they have four outstandig guys in front of them vying for three positions with Nelson-Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson. They could easily chew up the whole 120 minutes PT by themselves.

But Marty and Nolan play a key role in practice this year making these four into even better players, and being ready if needed. They are exactly what Duke needs to practice against good quick guards.

From the article I read last year, sounds like Marty's mom is very happy with her son getting a Duke education for free and playing the game he loves for relaxation, even if only in practice setting.

He can still be a pretty rich guy playing for Euros after he secures his degree from Duke for insurance.

Cameron
08-13-2007, 12:02 PM
it just seems like suich a waste to have someone that good on the team when there are so many others ahead of him.

I absolutely agree with this statement, but, at the same time, he just isn't as good as DeMarcus, Jon, or Gerald. And we have yet to see what Nolan brings to the table in ACC play. My main point of reference about Marty on the other thread, though, was that King Taylor, despite having the same lack for defensive greatness as Marty, will see much more PT do to the fact that he is a lights out three-point shooter. While Marty is not. In the end, it comes down to the fact that Marty is out of control more times than he is in control. And if you aren't scoring very many baskets while at the same time not playing defense, then you probably aren't playing, either.

Don't get me wrong, I loved what Marty brought to the table against NC State in the ACC Tournament, as well as his thunderous dunk against VCU in the NCAAs, but, long term, his playing time will suffer being behind the aforemention players. I do think he deserves a fair shot this season to show off his game and what he has improved upon, but, in my opinion, it still won't be enough. Not with Scheyer, Nelson, Henderson, and Smith all vying for the wing slots.

Zeb
08-13-2007, 12:15 PM
In my opinion, the only reason Jon's shooting fell off near the end of last season was because of his inability to adapt physically to the ACC's long and demanding schedule. At his slim size, Jon really got beat up near the end of the year, which resulted in his decline in performance.

I think this will change dramatically in 2007-08. With a long off-season in the weight room to up both his strength and his stamina, Jon should be ready to go the distance this season (or at least be better prepared).

I saw Scheyer play at the end of July. He does not seem to have added any bulk whatsoever. I hope Jon has a great sophomore campaign, but he does not appear to have transformed his body in the off-season.

ACCBBallFan
08-13-2007, 12:50 PM
Depending on what happens with 2008 recruits, Marty may get some PT his senior year after Nelson has used up his eligibility, though I expect Henderson to still be on the team the year after this one.

If Elliot Williams chooses to go to TN or elsewhere than Duke, Duke still has Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Marty-Nolan-(Elliot Williams ??) to share the three spots, with Elliot or Boynton or whomever being needed more in 2009 when Greg and Marty and possibly Gerald are gone.

dball
08-13-2007, 03:12 PM
Preconference Play

Paulus 26
Scheyer 26
Nelson 25
Henderson 24
Singler 25
Zoubek 20
Lance 18
McClure 15
Marty 10
Smith 5
King 6

duketaylor
09-18-2007, 12:05 PM
Greg
Jon
Markie
Hendo
Singler

that will run and press/pressure the ball. Undersized, yes, but can run alot.
Thoughts?
And I don't need any of that "it's a bit early to..."

Practice begins in a few weeks, time to get revved up!!

mapei
09-18-2007, 12:15 PM
I don't know about starting, but maybe playing together situationally? They could be seriously outrebounded and commit a lot of fouls trying to defend down low. The ability to run appeals, and possibly Nolan Smith might be better than Jon at that, though Jon's experience and 3-pt shooting are valuable, too.

mgtr
09-18-2007, 02:12 PM
I now believe that the starters may be Paulus, Nelson, Singler, Scheyer, and Zoubek. If his foot is OK, Zoubek can be very helpful even if never, ever touches the ball on offense. If teams then play off him, he could get a few putbacks, if he doesn't bring the ball down. Lots of ifs there, however.