PDA

View Full Version : Discussion of 2008-09



feldspar
03-22-2008, 04:25 PM
1. Find a way to develop an offense that isn't so reliant on the 3.

2. If we're going to miss on so many big man, let's go out and find the best big-man assistant coach in the nation we can get and have him work with what we have to work with.

3. I love Paulus. But he's a shooting guard.

4. A re-commitment to hard-nosed defense for 40 minutes.

I'm sure there are others, but that's all I can think of for right now.

freedevil
03-22-2008, 04:27 PM
Maybe Duke needs to start scheduling more true road games because this whole neutral court thing during the regular season to emulate the postseason doesn't work when no matter where you play the entire crowd hates you.

feldspar
03-22-2008, 04:28 PM
Maybe Duke needs to start scheduling more true road games because this whole neutral court thing during the regular season to emulate the postseason doesn't work when no matter where you play the entire crowd hates you.

Agreed. There's no such thing as a neutral court for us in the NCAA Tourney anymore.

And calling MSG and Charlotte Coliseum vs. Davidson road games is a joke.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-22-2008, 04:32 PM
Can we improve?

battierfan
03-22-2008, 04:34 PM
1. Find a way to develop an offense that isn't so reliant on the 3.

2. If we're going to miss on so many big man, let's go out and find the best big-man assistant coach in the nation we can get and have him work with what we have to work with.

3. I love Paulus. But he's a shooting guard.

4. A re-commitment to hard-nosed defense for 40 minutes.

I'm sure there are others, but that's all I can think of for right now.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1) agreed. Even with JJ we underperformed in 2005 and 2006

2) agreed. Our coaches have a guard's mentality because they were all guards. Pete Newell's big man camp in the offseason is not enough.

3) agree kind of. I think when we've had good inside players, especially Shelden, Paulus did better. But I think he's a combo guard. Still, too slow to put us over the top.

4) In the first half, we had this. I don't think we need a recommitment. We just need to recruit more players with killer instinct who can bury the opposition when the whole season is on the line.

YmoBeThere
03-22-2008, 04:34 PM
Yes, but the limitations will continue to be there...

keithg
03-22-2008, 04:35 PM
We really need to commit to improving big men once they get on campus.

Perhaps a special roving instructor to mentor them

Duke76
03-22-2008, 04:35 PM
what was in common was they all had quality big men

Singler's a great forward,,, he isn't a center and it was a joke that that he played center

YmoBeThere
03-22-2008, 04:36 PM
3. I love Paulus. But he's a shooting guard.


He's a good guard to pass back out to when someone is driving and dishing. But he can't create his own shot in the lane. Well, kind of...but not really:D

Saratoga2
03-22-2008, 04:37 PM
Yes, but the limitations will continue to be there...


Now the season has drawn to a close we have nothing to do on the board until the fall except consider recruiting and perhaps state expectations for the 2008/2009 season. The hope is that none of our players will jump to the NBA over the summer and that Henderson’s wrist surgery will be successful. If that occurs, the team will be added to by Elliot Williams and Olek Czyz. We should also get Marty back in top shape, while we will lose a really good guy in Demarcus Nelson.
Starting lineup options:
Paulus Paulus Smith
Scheyer Scheyer Scheyer
Henderson Henderson Henderson
Singler Singler Singler
Thomas Zoubek Czyz

In addition, we will have a very solid bench of Pocius, Williams, King, McClure
That represents 11 capable players with Paulus in his final year, (McClure and Pocius may be eligible for another year if they choose), Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas and Zoubek with two more years and Singler, Smith and King with 3 more years of eligibility. I doubt if all will stay the entire 4 years, but such is life at the top college programs.

What we lacked this year we will again lack next season, a strong inside presence. The defense of Demarcus will be missed, but we will have Smith and Williams who are thought of as good defenders with speed and length. It is hard to know how well freshmen will react, but Czyz offers at least the hope of a strong inside player with athleticism, who can provide minutes as he works into the lineup.

With Scheyer, Henderson, Paulus, Smith, Pocius and Williams we are bulletproof at the guard position. We should expect Zoubek to pick up next year with least at his recent level of play. King should show great improvement. McClure is a very good defender who may also pick up his offense. Thomas is kind of an unknown as will be Czyz.

All in all a talented team with a guard oriented attack and limitations in the front court. They will probably a little less turnover prone due to the experience level rising. It will be interesting to see how coach K adapts to team strategy to his talent level.

feldspar
03-22-2008, 04:37 PM
4) In the first half, we had this. I don't think we need a recommitment.

That's the point. We had it for 20 minutes. We didn't have it after that. We need a re-commitment to not 20 minutes, not 30, not 35, but 40 minutes of hard-nosed, in your face defense.

YmoBeThere
03-22-2008, 04:38 PM
That's the point. We had it for 20 minutes. We didn't have it after that. We need a re-commitment to not 20 minutes, not 30, not 35, but 40 minutes of hard-nosed, in your face defense.
Coach Cut critiqued our conditioning program on the football side, perhaps the same can be said about basketball?

ArtVandelay
03-22-2008, 04:38 PM
I happen to think we will be very good next year. Everyone back and better, except D-Marc. G and Kyle have the potential to be all-ACC performers next year. Zoubek needs to stay healthy and develop this summer. Hopefully we can figure out how to not limp into the tournament.

Channing
03-22-2008, 04:39 PM
Well, thats a real stinger. Like I said in the chat - the negativity, at least on my end, stems entirely from a deep seeded passion for the Duke jersey.

Do their need to be changes? Probably, as a first weekend exit cannot be up to Coach K's standards. Perhaps changing the offense, revamping substitution patterns . . . I dont know.

However, I am really hopeful that we can keep things to constructive criticisms. I hate seeing a post that merely says Duke Sucks or Paulus Sucks or something like that. Everyone is aware of the shortcomings of this team.

Just remember the primary reason so many of us are so passionate is because this team has given us such excellence in the past.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-22-2008, 04:40 PM
I'de like to see this kid be just as explosive in college as he was in high school next year...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQNv_7IiqXk

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-22-2008, 04:42 PM
Who do we have coming in next year?

see the youtube video above

battierfan
03-22-2008, 04:42 PM
He's a good guard to pass back out to when someone is driving and dishing. But he can't create his own shot in the lane. Well, kind of...but not really:D

I agree. Duke needs to reevaluate their recruiting strategy. It's not that the players we have aren't good or great. But they seem to FEAR one-and-done situations like this. Part of me wonders whether they recruit kids who are simply too "nice" and want very badly to please K and the fans, uphold tradition, and graduate (the real reason there's a Duke University). We need players who just don't care about that, and have that killer instinct regardless of who, when or where they play.

dukelion
03-22-2008, 04:42 PM
What can be changed for next season?

It's not a stellar recruiting class that will provide the help we need.

It's hard to be constructive when we have to settle for "the coaches will figure it out".

We'll still be good but not elite........and elite is why we are fans.

Bluedawg
03-22-2008, 04:43 PM
Guard play is good but the game is won from the free throw line and underneath the basket. Duke needs big men!

With so many 3's bouncing off the front of the rim you can't tell me fatigue was not a factor. That is a pure sign that the legs are gone and they were gone the past 3 games.

dukeisawesome
03-22-2008, 04:43 PM
I wish K would stop teaching how to act as well. It's pretty obvious a lot of times our guys are more concerned with getting a call than making a shot, Paulus and Singler especially.

Dukefan03
03-22-2008, 04:43 PM
The only change I want to see for next year is one that's off the court. We need to get quality recruits again, especially in the front court. That is the primary reason we have been losing the last several years. Wright, Patterson, and Monroe. We can't keep wiffing on these prospects. Until we start out-recruiting the guy down the road we will continue to get our butts kicked.

Right now Roy Williams in the premiere coach in the ACC, and probably the entire nation. Coach K is, unfortunately, a distant second at this particular moment. Sorry to say that, but it's the stinkin' truth.


Completely agree. I don't necessarily agree that K hasn't been targeting the top guys as some have suggested. It's just that our top recruits haven't been panning out. He is ultimately accountable for this. Hansblah vs. McBob, Love vs. Singler, etc...

YmoBeThere
03-22-2008, 04:44 PM
Right now Roy Williams in the premiere coach in the ACC, and probably the entire nation. Coach K is, unfortunately, a distant second at this particular moment. Sorry to say that, but it's the stinkin' truth.
Coach K is a very different type of coach...I think he needs a leader out on the court to get it done, more so than Williams. He had that in Laettner and Battier. Give someone like Kyle a chance to step up in the future.

coastal1
03-22-2008, 04:45 PM
Not peak in Jan/Feb by bombing 3's against bottom tier teams only to flame out in March.

Consistent inside game is the surest way to avoid this recurring scenario. But Duke bigmen have a significant trend of getting worse or hitting a plateau rather than improving.

RockyMtDevil
03-22-2008, 04:45 PM
My question is, what actually can change? We've recruited what we have and the style and bulk down low isn't going to change one bit. Zoubs is never going to be Brand or Boozer and until we start landing stud post players again, we will continue to see games like today when we freakin pass the ball around the arch and heave up 30 3's even by folks who can't shot the ball.

I see absolutely nothing that will make this team any different from a weakness standpoint than this year.

Cyzk isn't the answer, Williams isn't the answer....Who else is coming in?

Like I said in another thread, we'll win a ton of games next year but in the end we'll still be the same team, limping into the tourny on our name, with no presence down low to stop anyone and I promise we will bow out early again.

I see nothing changing for a few years. We'll continue to get 2-4 seeds and lose in the first or second rounds.

Count on it.

Duke76
03-22-2008, 04:45 PM
did we get one offensive rebound n the second half

Exiled_Devil
03-22-2008, 04:45 PM
Coach Cut critiqued our conditioning program on the football side, perhaps the same can be said about basketball?

Not typically - think about the conditioning programs JJ, Demarcus and others have done over recent years. I don't think that it is a question of conditinoing programs.

I have an idea of what may be happening to us, but I want to wait a little while before putting it out there. The main point of it, though, is that we are getting hurt a lot in recent years and I think I have a reason why. I want to get some data first.

keithg
03-22-2008, 04:48 PM
I hope we go back to multiple captains. Perhaps 4?

arnie
03-22-2008, 04:48 PM
1. Find a way to develop an offense that isn't so reliant on the 3.

2. If we're going to miss on so many big man, let's go out and find the best big-man assistant coach in the nation we can get and have him work with what we have to work with.

3. I love Paulus. But he's a shooting guard.

4. A re-commitment to hard-nosed defense for 40 minutes.

I'm sure there are others, but that's all I can think of for right now.

I think you nailed it - reliance on the three and zero big man development does not work in tourney

Duke76
03-22-2008, 04:48 PM
remind me not too get excited when we win a bunch in the regular season...
we need 2-3 blue collar players. we have 0 now

pfrduke
03-22-2008, 04:49 PM
Maybe Duke needs to start scheduling more true road games because this whole neutral court thing during the regular season to emulate the postseason doesn't work when no matter where you play the entire crowd hates you.

I don't completely disagree with you, because I think it home and homes against good teams are a good thing. But playing in Blacksburg, Tallahassee, Chapel Hill, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, College Park, Miami, and Charlottesville is plenty of experience playing in buildings where the whole crowd hates us. We're "road-tested" by the time the tournament rolls around, and I'm not sure a December game at Pittsburgh, for example, would make us more likely to play well at tournament sites.

Next year we should have a game at Georgetown, and we'll be on the road (though possibly at a neutral site) for the ACC/Big 10.

northernduke
03-22-2008, 04:50 PM
what was in common was they all had quality big men

Singler's a great forward,,, he isn't a center and it was a joke that that he played center

In those years we had the go to guy...i.e. Laettner, Brand, Williams, Ferry, and Dawkins. We had balanced scoring this year, but no go to guy on the offensive end. In the game against WVU no one player looked like he wanted the ball in the clutch. To me, Scheyer was the best at putting the team on his back this season and driving the ball to the hoop, but we never saw that too much in late game situations (not a knock on just him). To me he was our most clutch player, with Paulus being the toughest.

On a side note, we need to follow our shots when we're jacking up 3s. We have one big inside to rebound b/c we spread the floor, but it'd be great to see shooters follow their shots.

It's always so hard to see them lose b/c we invest so much in the season, but remember, it is just a game and these kids ultimately need to be having fun. I hope to see more smiles next year, and later into March!

DoubleDuke Dad
03-22-2008, 04:50 PM
That's the point. We had it for 20 minutes. We didn't have it after that. We need a re-commitment to not 20 minutes, not 30, not 35, but 40 minutes of hard-nosed, in your face defense.
There is just so much you can do on defense when you have no offense.

battierfan
03-22-2008, 05:01 PM
That's the point. We had it for 20 minutes. We didn't have it after that. We need a re-commitment to not 20 minutes, not 30, not 35, but 40 minutes of hard-nosed, in your face defense.

We had this for major parts of this season, not just the first half. Your other points are a better explanation of events than lack of commitment to defense. They just ran out of emotional strength (for whatever reason) but I doubt there was a lack of commitment. My belief is that they are too uptight to just relax and play their best, and they don't enjoy the game when the whole season is on the line. I believe that K's coaching style is a factor in this. It's kind of like doing well on the mid-term and quizzes, then being so uptight for the final that you blow it. It doesn't mean you don't have any commiment - you still want to ace the class, but you aren't able to perform at your best.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-22-2008, 05:01 PM
The last top-tier college C we brought in was in 2002 (Shel). The last top-tier PG we brought in was in 2000 (C-Du). Until this changes, we can't be considered a serious championship contender. When our shots fall and our D is strong we can hang with anyone but if either of those aren't we're in trouble because we can't generate easy buckets, we foul/tire out the poor guys dragooned in to the post, and we give up lots of easy buckets with no shotblocking or rebounding. It's getting REALLY hard to watch our guys play their hearts out in a futile effort because our staff fails to arm us with a full compliment of players.

Next season we add 2 guys, lose 1, and can hope for better health. I'd love to see a 10-11 man rotation that presses teams to death a la 40 Minutes of Hell. That's a high risk/reward approach, but I just can't see any better way to use the pieces the staff has brought in.

Bluedawg
03-22-2008, 05:02 PM
Not typically - think about the conditioning programs JJ, Demarcus and others have done over recent years. I don't think that it is a question of conditinoing programs.

Disagree.

With so many 3's going off the front of the rim it is a true sign that the legs are gone. they have been gone for the past 3 games. living by the 3 means a uptick on conditioning.

sundown
03-22-2008, 05:02 PM
I hope (and expect) to see Gerald and Kyle back, and for each of them to make the jump to being top-flight players that they're capable of. Scheyer, too, has the opportunity to have a breakout year, and I hope he does. I also hope Zoubek and Lance become serviceable and reliable inside, providing reliable defense and rebounding; that Nolan returns to being aggressive on offense and a force on defense; and that TK gets his shot back and keeps it. I hope Dave gets back the decent jumper he once had. I hope GP keeps shooting well and improves on defense to the point where he's at least decent. And I hope the freshmen are good.

I also hope Marty comes back healthy and jumping over cars again.

Duke's gonna be really good next year. They may still lack a post option -- though Kyle could remedy that if he puts his mind to it -- and may still struggle to stop penetration and control the defensive boards; but they'll still be a very good team. And maybe they'll peak at the right time next year.

Bluedawg
03-22-2008, 05:03 PM
I hope we go back to multiple captains. Perhaps 4?

Why?

Bluedawg
03-22-2008, 05:06 PM
In those years we had the go to guy...i.e. Laettner, Brand, Williams, Ferry, and Dawkins. We had balanced scoring this year, but no go to guy on the offensive end.

Early in the year I did a thread on this and got blasted. I agree!

nicktonyg22
03-22-2008, 05:11 PM
Just a note about three pointers: As a percentage of total shots, 42% (1057-2530) of the 2001 Duke team's shots were 3's, while 39% (794-2034) of the 2008 Duke team's shots were 3's. It's not necessarily a matter of the number of 3's taken, its the style of play that allows opposing defenses to lock down on the perimeter because they know there isn't a post presence inside.

MrBisonDevil
03-22-2008, 05:18 PM
No big changes. I'm not worried. Duke roster 2008-09: 2 Fresh, 3 Sophs, 4 Juniors, 3 Seniors. 10 returning players averaged 8+min per game (8 players averaged more than 10min/gm)!

We lose 1 player (thx DeMarc) but we add (PF) Olek, (G) Elliot and we get (hopefully) Pocius back. Duke will have the deepest squad in the ACC and possibly the NCAA. No doubt we will be a preseason top-10 squad and an ACC #1 (depending on UNC pro attrition). Additionally, Coach K and staff will have the added experience of using a deep bench from USA Basketball.

I'll put our experienced core of Paulus (Senior PG!), Henderson, Scheyer & Singler against any 4 players in NCAA next year. At least 3 of them will be contenting for 1st team ACC and possibly NPOY.

What about our big men? Thomas + Zoubs had measurable improvement between Fresh & Soph seasons. This improvement will continue. Thomas gained a lot of confidence towards the end of the season. He will be much better next season.

I'm not worried. I'll still put big money on <5 losses for Duke in ‘09. I'm already excited about our 2008-09 experienced Duke team!

RelativeWays
03-22-2008, 05:18 PM
1. We need an emotional on the court leader who would rather die than lose (i.e. Laettner, Ferry, Battier even Williams and Duhon). They don't have to be super talented, just motivated, liked Wojo.

2. We need offensive diversity. I want to see Singler and King establish mid-range jumpers, smith and Hendo drive to the basket, Scheyer be the jack of all trades and Paulus shoot 3s or drive. Maybe Olek is a perimeter player that has a consistent jumper

3. REBOUND. Let all go buy some of those mastergrips hand exersizers and make the team use them on a constant basis. A reminder that they play basketball and not volleyball may help.

4. Quickness at the point and defensive adaptiveness. I'm hoping Elliot Williams pitches in here.

Well we did improve from last year, but not where we want to be. Lets keep moving forward.

_Gary
03-22-2008, 05:25 PM
I don't love him, but Doug Gottlieb has made some great points in the post-game on ESPNNews. I agree with everything he's said, including that Duke just doesn't have the talent they need to win. Especially front court talent. Our 2001 squad was loaded with true NBA talent in a way that just isn't true at this point. We were whipped on the boards badly, which I'm pretty sure would not have happened with a Boozer and Battier type combo. Not easy to come by, and while having five NBA players as your starting five is not going to happen very often, we need an upgrade in the front court.

Duke76
03-22-2008, 05:30 PM
I heard that too 4 NBA starters on that last championship team. I don't even see but one NBA player on our team,,,Henderson...no one else will be playing...
end of story

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-22-2008, 05:30 PM
I'd like to see us have one player that actually gets mad or is just plain mean and lets it show on their face.

Devil in the Blue Dress
03-22-2008, 05:30 PM
Most of the comments made about what has happened this season tend to look inward at the basketball team and coaches. As I step back a bit and think about whatever trends have developed since the last national championship, there is one which is easy to overlook or ignore.

Since Duke began to dominate men's basketball in the Coach K era, much has changed throughout the NCAA. We tend to be aware that more and more top players are leaving college before they graduate and more have gone straight to the NBA. The trend that may be overlooked is that the level of parity among colleges and universities has been rising rapidly in Division I. Coach K has had to figure out out to adjust to these changes and deal with them. A few years ago he commented at a Blue Devil Club gathering that he was going to change his recruiting strategy and go after really good players who are overlooked by the McDonald's AA but who can be coached to win. (I'm paraphrasing here.) The recent teams have been fun to watch and often achieve high rankings during the season. But these teams have not displayed the same dazzling brilliance associated with teams during the time we were getting to the Final Four and winning national championships.

Someone commented about how Coach Wooden's teams didn't get down on the floor to go after the ball the way Duke does and that maybe our team gets tired near the end of the season because of the way we play. These days teams are playing more and more up tempo games and that likely requires a different style of play to combat. Preventing mental and physical fatigue at the end of the season may require having enough very high caliber players to dominate other teams.

This is a time to be thankful for our wins and the successes this year and ponder what sort of new adaptations are required to stay at the top in today's Division I.

heath_harshman4
03-22-2008, 05:33 PM
some changes I would like...

1. As said earlier in this thread, more early season non-conference tough road games. Maybe going to a UCONN or Vandy or a team like that in a tough environment before the usual ACC games.

2. Better conditioning. It's two years in a row now that I believe conditioning has played a big role in the end of the year. Coach K admitted it was a factor last year, and this year the last 10 or so games were not even close to the Duke team I saw the first 20 or so.

3. MORE ZONE!?!? All those back-door cuts by Belmont and WVu were making me sick. THe presssure man to man is great, but mixing in some zone wouldn't hurt. I know he did earlier in the year, but I didn't see it at all down the stretch of the season, and I think it could help alot.

heath_harshman4
03-22-2008, 05:34 PM
I heard that too 4 NBA starters on that last championship team. I don't even see but one NBA player on our team,,,Henderson...no one else will be playing...
end of story


Singler?

Duke76
03-22-2008, 05:37 PM
maybe Singler, but he's only 6'8"...in between height and needs to bulk up and also improve his outside shot

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-22-2008, 05:38 PM
1. We need an emotional on the court leader who would rather die than lose (i.e. Laettner, Ferry, Battier even Williams and Duhon). They don't have to be super talented, just motivated, liked Wojo.


I think this describes Greg Paulus to a T. Greg's attitude and toughness should never, ever be questioned. Unfortunately his physical gifts are not in the same ballpark as his heart, and he still has shown no significant ability to create shots for others. As several people have noted, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.


2. We need offensive diversity. I want to see Singler and King establish mid-range jumpers, smith and Hendo drive to the basket, Scheyer be the jack of all trades and Paulus shoot 3s or drive. Maybe Olek is a perimeter player that has a consistent jumper

I'd also love to see some diversity, and if we can get Nolan to become a regular threat to slash (esp if he can both dish and score) we become significantly more dangerous. We have pretty good shooters, but we just don't have a catalyst to get them good shots.


3. REBOUND. Let all go buy some of those mastergrips hand exersizers and make the team use them on a constant basis. A reminder that they play basketball and not volleyball may help.

Our D just isn't built to rebound. We'd REALLY have to overhaul things to become competitive on the boards. The plan is for steals and denial to make up for a deficiency in rebounding. Without the steals or denial, things don't end very well.


4. Quickness at the point and defensive adaptiveness. I'm hoping Elliot Williams pitches in here.

Losing the ACC DPOY makes me uneasy about seeing improvement in this area.


Well we did improve from last year, but not where we want to be. Lets keep moving forward.

This we can agree on. Although the results were only marginally better (one shot in the NCAA's, one game in the ACC) I do think we're getting past the horrific mistakes of 2003-5 and should show some improvement. UNC is bringing in an all-time class for the next 2 seasons so we'll see how we do in the ACC.

Duke76
03-22-2008, 05:41 PM
I mean JJ player of the yr twice and he won't last much longer...
I am not even sure Tyler is gonna make it.... but maybe that's not really the point....we need now some strong physical players whose shots are not short at the end of the season that have mid-range games.....gerald and Singler the only ones with a mid range game

trinitydevil
03-22-2008, 05:42 PM
Completely agree. I don't necessarily agree that K hasn't been targeting the top guys as some have suggested. It's just that our top recruits haven't been panning out. He is ultimately accountable for this. Hansblah vs. McBob, Love vs. Singler, etc...

Of all the comments/excuses/reasoning talked about on here, the fact is responsibility lies at the top. At the pro level, who gets the axe, players or coaches? Sure, some players get traded, but the coaches get the axe. I'm not saying K get fired, but I am saying he should accept responsibility. It is his team that has performed miserably in post season for the past few seasons. Now say all you want about players being overrated ( talking about all 8 MCD AAs), but our staff either evaluated them, or went on their accolades. I for one don't blame kids, I bet they tried harder than any of us can possibly imagine. Someone started a tread earlier this afternoon (which was removed soon thereafter) that the staff should accept responsibility. I agree. Sorry, but I think I had a right to say that, and I hope it's not a rules violation.....

houstondukie
03-22-2008, 05:43 PM
I like what I see...

1st team:
PG G. Paulus
SG J. Scheyer
SF G. Henderson
PF K. Singler
C L. Thomas

2nd team:
PG N. Smith
SG E. Williams/ M. Pocious
SF T. King / O. Cryz
PF D. McClure
C B. Zoubek

Things I like...
Depth at every position.
Experience w/ 2 seniors and 5 juniors
Potential All-Americans in Henderson and Singler

OldSchool
03-22-2008, 05:46 PM
Our team next year will be deep and very, very good.

Whether next year's team can take a step beyond being a very good team to being a great team that can roll over opponents comes down to one person: Brian Zoubek.

In my view, there is legitimate potential for Brian to average ca. 25 minutes a game and consistently deliver double-doubles.

I know Brian has plenty of doubters on this board, but my opinion is that his limiting factors are first, that he is not physically strong enough and second, that his basketball skills are still relatively undeveloped. In other words, I do not see Brian's limitations as being that he is too unathletic and uncoordinated to become a top center in the ACC before he is done.

We will miss DeMarcus's heart, toughness and leadership. But Gerald will be more consistent, Kyle stronger, Lance further improved, Nolan a bigger contributor, Marty back, etc., etc.

So if through further strength training and work on his basketball fundamentals, Brian raises his game to the next level, we can be a great team. If he only improves marginally, we will still be a very good team, but we would not get back to a Final Four without some breaks falling our way.

Devilsfan
03-22-2008, 06:07 PM
Big man, Big mans' coach. Big man, big mans' coach.
It seems like such a simple solution.
Yes but even so two other things need to happen, imo.
1. Keep everyone healthy.
2. Stop wearing the team out before the end of March.
Now where's that 4th NC Banner?

battierfan
03-22-2008, 06:08 PM
I have nothing particularly new to offer but think I'll feel better if I just get it off my chest. Here's what I think:

1) Recruiting failures / misses are at the heart of the current problems (failures: Lance Thomas, Zoubek, etc / misses: Patterson / Monrole / etc.)

2) We are completely built to win in the regular season and not the post season. Kinda reminds me of the problems the New York Yankees have had over the last several years: glorious offense that always gets them to the playoffs but then it's all about pitching and they flame out every year.

Now I feel better.

HDB

Regarding (2) I agree with your analogy with the Yankees in terms of the results on the field/court, but I wonder if the "Suns" offense is even suited to the NCAAs. The teams that have had the most success recently seem to be teams able to play multiple styles with multiple strong/athletic types that don't necessarily specialize in one particular aspect of the game. The NCAAs are so physically brutal, match-ups so varied, and the calls so unpredictable that a coach needs to be able to adjust on the fly to win. Having at least 2 players that can bang inside and take punishment seems to be prerequisite to surviving and advancing. Duke's style of play can win if you have several NBA-caliber players. The last time we really had that was 2004, with Duhon, Deng, Reddick and Williams. You can count Shav too, I suppose since he certainly did well in 2004 and was/is in the NBA with the Sixers.

Singler and Henderson will not be enough. We need NBA-caliber PG and C/PF to help them out.

Sandman
03-22-2008, 06:09 PM
Speak for yourself. I am a fan because I attended Duke university. My loyalty to the team is not impacted one whit by this game.
I'm with you Gordog. My loyalty is to Duke University, win or lose. I have wayyyyy too much blood, sweat, and tears invested in the Gothic rockpile not to bleed deep, deep blue - no matter what! This is MY university and I love it, warts and all!!!

We'll play hard next year, beat Carolina, and win the National championship -- why not? A great coach, talented players, and a lot of heart.

I also think we will finally start wining some football games this year. Can't wait until August - go Cutcliff!

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 06:09 PM
We need to get a big man of the Brand/Boozer variety. That is, a 6-9 guy with a wide body who likes to bang. No more 6-11/7 foot super thin guys like Zoubek, Sanders, Boateng, Newton, etc.

Sure, they'll get a few blocks per game but at 18-21 years old, these guys usually are just not developed enough to bang with shorter centers in college. Teams like UConn found that out yeseterday. I wouldn't be surprised if Georgetown finds out later this tourney as well.

I don't hold out much hope that Zoubek will be anything other than a small role player for us (unless he could redshirt for about four years).

I know K has gone after several thick PFs without success recently. Hopefully, he turns that around soon.

dukerev
03-22-2008, 06:17 PM
So let's see if I can summarize what we "need" in order to be "successful" next year and into the future. This is from this thread and others only since the WVU game ended...

- a big man's assistant coach
- a recruiting coach
- a conditioning coach
- more blue collar players
- more superstar players because we have too many blue collar players
- stop shooting the 3 in our offense
- make the 3
- no more wing players
- more athletes
- an emotional on-court leader
- less emotion from our players during the season
- more NBA talent
- no 1-and-done players
- lots of tough road games early in the season
- don't get tired at the end of the season

I'm sure I missed something else we needed. Surely what we really need is for the conglomeration of great basketball minds inhabiting the DBR bulletin board to be made the new program directors of Duke basketball.

We'll be fine. This time last year (and especially after Josh went pro last year) we were worried that the roof had collapsed. If you told us we'd win 28 games and advance farther in the tournament relying on a freshman to be our 2nd best player, you'd have taken it. I would have. We expected this year to be one that would set up next year. Next year is on the horizon. Duke basketball will still be the envy of every other program in the country (and it is today). Remember: every day is a great day to be a Duke basketball fan. EVERY SINGLE DAY, including today. Wear your Duke togs tomorrow (or a Duke lapel pin to church). Go Duke!

battierfan
03-22-2008, 06:20 PM
During a press conference, K is asked what he told the team before they win their last game of the season (no matter how far they get!):

He replies: "Before the game, I told them to just play. I did this back in 2001 when we were down 20 to Maryland in the first half of the Final Four. And you all remember how that turned out.

I told them, look you guys are wonderful. I've enjoyed coaching you this season and I can't ask for better young men to join me in trying to accomplish something great. I trust you. You've gotten us this far with your heart, desire and skill. So, just go out there and play your best, enjoy yourselves, and see what happens. Don't play for me, or the fans, or the past glory, or to shut up the fans who hate Duke. Just play and we will win this game."

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-22-2008, 06:23 PM
Duke basketball will still be the envy of every other program in the country (and it is today).

There's a program 8 miles down the road that won a title 3 years ago, won both ACC championships (again), suits up the NPOY, won their first round game by 38 more points than we did, is still playing, and has a pair of amazing recruiting classes coming in over the next 2 seasons. I'm not sure they envy us very much . . .

mgtr
03-22-2008, 06:28 PM
I am aware that Paulus is a lightning rod for some, so I will leave him out of the following.
A simple question, really. How many coaches would jump at the chance to build a team around Singler, Henderson, and Scheyer? Now, I know we don't have a clean sheet of paper for the rest of the team, but we will have a bunch of pretty good other players.
Given the way people were playing the second half of the game, a good strategy might have been to restrict all shooting to the above three. (And maybe just Henderson and Scheyer).
Any way, if Zoubek, Thomas, and Czyz can be developed some over the summer, we should be pretty good next year.

dukerev
03-22-2008, 06:31 PM
Okay, fair point. Carolina doesn't envy us. But then again, they're Carolina. We don't care what they think. They aren't bright enough to realize that they should envy us. We wish they would go to hell. Furthermore, the Duke envy (and hatred) out there isn't about what has happened in the last year, three years or ever - it is about BEING Duke. But you're right. Carolina doesn't envy us.

But don't you know that for some of them, in their heart of hearts, and in the dark corners of their living rooms, they do envy us...and wish that they could admit it? :)

chrisheery
03-22-2008, 06:32 PM
remind me not too get excited when we win a bunch in the regular season...
we need 2-3 blue collar players. we have 0 now

mcclure. he just doesn't play enough. really. look at what he does in the limited minutes he gets.

mapei
03-22-2008, 06:40 PM
mcclure. he just doesn't play enough. really. look at what he does in the limited minutes he gets.

Dave was our only decent rebounder today.

Exiled_Devil
03-22-2008, 06:45 PM
Disagree.

With so many 3's going off the front of the rim it is a true sign that the legs are gone. they have been gone for the past 3 games. living by the 3 means a uptick on conditioning.

but my point is that we have had great conditioning regimens - maybe not enough (JJ fell short in his senior year, too), but excellent. I think that the issue of fatigue is more likely a question of minutes than conditioning.

Of course, given the flu thread, I think that this week it was extenuating circumstances. Conditioning doesn't hodl up well with reduced lung capacity.

Exiled

superdave
03-22-2008, 06:45 PM
It's amazing how so many people are ready to throw our coaches and players under the bus after a 28-6 season.

Sure it was a disappointing end, but this was about on par with what most of us forecast back in October.

Jumbo
03-22-2008, 06:49 PM
maybe Singler, but he's only 6'8"...in between height and needs to bulk up and also improve his outside shot

Singler, Henderson and Scheyer are all NBA locks. If you're going to rant, at least rant based on some solid information. Thank you.

chrisheery
03-22-2008, 06:49 PM
Of our top 10 players, 3 are freshman, 4 are sophmores. 3 (or 4?) had to have surgery over the summer last summer. Look at how much better this team is than last year. Yeah, they faded down the stretch and they also seemed to get tight when it meant the most, but they are YOUNG. There was a time in college hoops when people really didn't play until they were either 1. amazing or 2. juniors.

This team is suffering from 2 years where the recruiting classes were just a little off and that was in turn made worse by the fact that we had multiple transfers. I think Eric Boateng would have helped today. had Josh McRoberts fulfilled the promise we all thought he had as a player or if he had become a team player and not made a terrible decision to leave a year early, would this team not be more "complete?"

So, 2 "bad years" in which we all got to watch and enjoyed good times for much of the time. What was that 50 wins? Yeah that sucks.

I admit I was angry and complaining as soon as that game ended. Then, my wife asked me a question: "Should we pick another team to root for?" That question made me realize that I couldn't love another team like I love Duke if you paid me. I love what Duke stands for. I love that we do things the right way. I love that these players that everyone is complaining about never embarrass our school. They are examples of student-athletes. Yeah, we could lower our recruiting standards. We could win national titles with kids who could embarrass us. But would you trade a national title for Duke's good name to be ruined?

We had a tough ending to a good year. We will be better next year. Zoub will be better. Lance will be stronger. Look at how much Paulus improved this year, it was significant. Our sophomores will be juniors. Our freshman will be sophomores. Singler is primed to be a star. Don't forget how good he was before he started wearing down. Taylor King is going to be amazing, offering interior defense and spreading the court with range (also a midrange game seems possible). Nolan also has the look of a superstar, in a year or so. Give it time. Don't let the fact that someone at work is going to mock your team on Monday get you so angry that you forget how great it is to be a Duke fan.

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 06:50 PM
So let's see if I can summarize what we "need" in order to be "successful" next year and into the future. This is from this thread and others only since the WVU game ended...

- a big man's assistant coach
- a recruiting coach
- a conditioning coach
- more blue collar players
- more superstar players because we have too many blue collar players
- stop shooting the 3 in our offense
- make the 3
- no more wing players
- more athletes
- an emotional on-court leader
- less emotion from our players during the season
- more NBA talent
- no 1-and-done players
- lots of tough road games early in the season
- don't get tired at the end of the season

I'm sure I missed something else we needed. Surely what we really need is for the conglomeration of great basketball minds inhabiting the DBR bulletin board to be made the new program directors of Duke basketball.

We'll be fine. This time last year (and especially after Josh went pro last year) we were worried that the roof had collapsed. If you told us we'd win 28 games and advance farther in the tournament relying on a freshman to be our 2nd best player, you'd have taken it. I would have. We expected this year to be one that would set up next year. Next year is on the horizon. Duke basketball will still be the envy of every other program in the country (and it is today). Remember: every day is a great day to be a Duke basketball fan. EVERY SINGLE DAY, including today. Wear your Duke togs tomorrow (or a Duke lapel pin to church). Go Duke!

I see your point and the sky is definitely not falling. As the old adage says, however, you often learn more from a loss than a victory. Insinuating that nothing need be improved to succeed more than this year ignores the opportunity to learn from our losses over the past few years. A few tweaks might not hurt. After a cooling off period, I'm confident that Coach K will review the program as he does every year with an eye toward making whatever improvements are needed (some of which might just echo points made here, or not).

DukeColonial
03-22-2008, 06:55 PM
Depth doesn't matter unless the coach uses it. Duke had depth this year, plenty of it. They played the same 6 or 7 players all year, like they have the last 6 or 7 years. Until Coach K is willing to play his bench from November to March, even if that mean letting a player like Taylor King play through his deficincies and learn how to be better, then depth will mean nothing at Duke. Based on your listing, I really dont see Czyz getting much time if any, nor Pocius, and Zoubek/McClure won't play more than they already have, unless Zoubek makes a huge leap in skill from the past two years. Williams and King will come off the bench and play some, and Zoubek will spell Thomas a bit, but youre looking at having Paulus, Scheyer, Henderson, and Singler playing 30 plus minutes each, and then the other position being split between Thomas, Williams, and King mostly, with Zoubek getting a little time here and there.

Exiled_Devil
03-22-2008, 06:59 PM
There's a program 8 miles down the road that won a title 3 years ago, won both ACC championships (again), suits up the NPOY, won their first round game by 38 more points than we did, is still playing, and has a pair of amazing recruiting classes coming in over the next 2 seasons. I'm not sure they envy us very much . . .

Right. They hate us. But they have for years.

kinghoops
03-22-2008, 07:08 PM
Dave was our only decent rebounder today.

i agree. mcclure played great defense on alexander, but when he is in, we play 4 or 5 on offense

Saratoga2
03-22-2008, 07:09 PM
I like what I see...

1st team:
PG G. Paulus
SG J. Scheyer
SF G. Henderson
PF K. Singler
C L. Thomas

2nd team:
PG N. Smith
SG E. Williams/ M. Pocious
SF T. King / O. Cryz
PF D. McClure
C B. Zoubek

Things I like...
Depth at every position.
Experience w/ 2 seniors and 5 juniors
Potential All-Americans in Henderson and Singler

I think Thomas needs to improve not only physically but also in how he thinks about what is happening. Critical offensive fouls at a time when we are trying to make a come back are not the smartest way to handle the situation.

chrisheery
03-22-2008, 07:12 PM
i agree. mcclure played great defense on alexander, but when he is in, we play 4 or 5 on offense

any different than when lance or zoub is in? unless you think their addition of offensive fouls and travels provides a dynamic change to our otherwise smooth offensive machine.

kinghoops
03-22-2008, 07:20 PM
any different than when lance or zoub is in? unless you think their addition of offensive fouls and travels provides a dynamic change to our otherwise smooth offensive machine.

look i agreed about dave and his rebounding and defense, but at a school like duke, i dont see the need of anyone playing that cant help on the offensive end

sagegrouse
03-22-2008, 07:22 PM
Agreed. There's no such thing as a neutral court for us in the NCAA Tourney anymore.



IMHO, in the NCAAs and the ACCs, everyone roots for the underdog. So, if we started going to the tournament as a #10 seed, the problem could be solved.

Any takers?

sagegrouse

chrisheery
03-22-2008, 07:23 PM
look i agreed about dave and his rebounding and defense, but at a school like duke, i dont see the need of anyone playing that cant help on the offensive end

who do we have that could guard their best threat that can score effectively? if the answer is no one, i feel this discussion is over. if your answer is lance of zoub, we should probably talk about the definition of effective. we should remember that you can't beat the other team if they score every time they get it (because you can't get the ball back when they get every rebound). some days, you just have to go with the guy making the plays. today, mcclure was the guy. he was the only person who even made alexander uncomfortable. he can just as easily catch the ball when he is open and travel as either of the other two. (however, i think he is more likely to score in those situations than either of the other two).

jipops
03-22-2008, 07:27 PM
Next season we FINALLY don't have to heavily rely on a freshman or set of freshmen for success. For the '04,'06,'07, and '08 seasons we've had to put all our faith and hopes into the play of freshmen. That simply will not be the case next year. Elliot Williams could very well be an integral player for us next season, or maybe not. Point is, he won't have to be.

Saratoga2
03-22-2008, 07:31 PM
Singler, Henderson and Scheyer are all NBA locks. If you're going to rant, at least rant based on some solid information. Thank you.

At the beginning of the year I felt Henderson and Singler were NBA players. After watching Scheyer this season, I believe he is also set for the NBA based on his skills and his ability to all things well.

I saw flashes from Smith as well this year. He had a few games in which he looked like a solid NBA prospect. As he develops consistency, I expect he will join the three above as solid NBA players.

What we need to do is fins a way to get the other players to add to the mix with contributions. Paulus seems to do that best when he brings the ball up and lets Scheyer be the play maker. He can then become a shooting threat on the floor. He is gritty and a decent shooter.

We will have Marty and Elliot as subs and possibly could become really important players in a really deep fback court group.

We need more help for Singler though. We will have Thomas, Zoubek, Czyz, King and McClure. A lot of guys, but all with issues. Maybe the offseason coaching with make Thomas more aware in game situations and Zoubek more solid on his feet. King certainly should improve, McClure will be a big help and would be better still if he could get some kind of offensive game. Czyz is the unknown. May be a project or may contribute the first year.

SMO
03-22-2008, 07:33 PM
I happen to think we will be very good next year. Everyone back and better, except D-Marc. G and Kyle have the potential to be all-ACC performers next year. Zoubek needs to stay healthy and develop this summer. Hopefully we can figure out how to not limp into the tournament.

Something to look forward to over the next 2 years is experience. I think Duke will have the experience factor often seen in mid-majors that come into the tournament knowing each other very well. Add to that the talent level that Duke has and I think we'll see some very good ball. Depth should be great as well, but it would still be nice to nail down a really athletic big.

Jumbo
03-22-2008, 07:52 PM
Something to look forward to over the next 2 years is experience. I think Duke will have the experience factor often seen in mid-majors that come into the tournament knowing each other very well.

I think that is an excellent point.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-22-2008, 07:54 PM
Singler, Henderson and Scheyer are all NBA locks. If you're going to rant, at least rant based on some solid information. Thank you.

I'm really curious to why Scheyer is considered a lock.

sundown
03-23-2008, 01:12 PM
Singler, Henderson and Scheyer are all NBA locks. If you're going to rant, at least rant based on some solid information. Thank you.

Locks to get drafted, or to actually make a team and stick around? Henderson and Singler will obviously be drafted whenever they come out, and I imagine Scheyer one day will, too -- though I wouldn't call him a "lock," as he seems barely if at all on the NBA radar at this point. As to the question of whether these guys will have NBA careers: time will tell. Better prospects, surely better than Scheyer, have failed to make it. It seems worth noting that neither Singler nor Henderson is in Chad Ford's top 50 for NBA prospects this coming year, and draftexpress has Scheyer ranked 49th among sophomores. Ford probably has Henderson and Singler too low, as both (particularly G) would likely be first-rounders in the next draft, and Henderson could be a lottery pick next year. But to the extent this debate is about "solid information," I'm curious what information leads you to conclude all three are locks, and what exactly they're locks for.

SeattleIrish
03-23-2008, 01:16 PM
[thread hijack] BZE:

While I can understand lingering doubts about this team's potential, I think we will be a MUCH improved team next year. Does anyone really believe Henderson, Singler and Scheyer won't make an All-ACC Team next year? Injuries aside, I don't see that happening. We'll have a very experienced team, with great SR/JR leadership, and we'll benefit greatly from the usual soph-to-jr improvement.

We're gonna be VERY good next year, IMO. I don't believe "About the same as this year" will even be close. Let the haters enjoy the off season (they certainly will), 'cause Duke is going to be scary next year.

s.i.

[/thread hijack}


The only one who could realistically want to leave for the NBA is Henderson and his wrist injury pretty much kills his stock so I can't see him leaving. Singler is a late first round pick if he leaves, maybe even second round. I can't see him leaving unless he gets some really bad advice.

We should be about the same next year with Williams picking up most of what DeMarc gave us and everyone getting another year under their belt.

Keys for next year are developing Lance and Zoubek inside if thats possible. We need someone who can score inside everyone once in awhile and not turn the ball over so much. Singler will be better but I don't see him being a dominant inside guy at any point.

All in all I doubt anyone leaves and we're probably about the same next year, maybe a little better.

NYC Duke Fan
03-23-2008, 01:18 PM
I do not have the answer. Their style of play while making for a very successful season, in my mind cannot win an NCAA championship.

Next year I see the same year as this year...a very successful year but no chance of winning the tournament. It has been said ad nauseum that Duke does not have an inside presence and that is true and if you look at the last 4 year champions they all athletic big men and an inside presence...Florida had Horford and Noah, UNC had May and Williams and UConn had Okafor.

Duke will not have it next year unless Zoubek becomes one and Coach K gives him playing time.I don't think that Czyz will be the immediate answer either.

The one thing that puzzles me also was that this year was suppose to be different in that Coach K was going to have depth something he did not have in previous years. Yet it seems to me that for the most part lof the second half of the year and in the ACC tournament and NCAAs, McClure, Thomas, Smith and King did not provide any depth. Some of the commentators said that Duke looked tired.

SeattleIrish
03-23-2008, 01:26 PM
While Jon Scheyer putting on 7 inches and 100 lbs is probably a long shot, does anyone really think we won't have at least 3 players making the All ACC teams? Barring injury, Henderson, Scheyer and Singler are almost certain to make it (IMO), and Paulus probably will...who knows how good Elliot is going to be? I also am of the opinion Zoubek will be on the All ACC squad before he graduates (he really improved this year).

I think we'll be hella-tough to knock out next year.

I'm on board, baby!:)

s.i.

BlueintheFace
03-23-2008, 01:27 PM
So many of you have talked about recruiting and developing a traditional big man ..... well, Coach K doesn't seem to have the same vision as many on this board. His top big man recruit for the class of 2009 committed a few weeks ago- Mason Plumlee. The kid is 6'11" and thin as a pole. Plumlee is NOT a back to the basket player. He chose duke because he like's how K plays Singler. The other scholarship offered to a big man went to Greg Echenique who was at Duke for the Carolina game. He is 6'8" and 240. Echenique has the elton brand body type, but would need a lot of development. He is certainly not considered a "top flight" prospect.

There are no Elton Brands, Shelden Williams, or Carlos Boozers coming in the door in the near future. I truly believe K is committing his next 3 or 4 years to developing this new brand of basketball (mobile big men, drive and kick, three pointers, and strong guards).

The bad news--- We have no help in rebounding coming in next season.
The good news--- next year we have essentially the same team, but ONE YEAR OLDER. I hope none of you forget how much of a huge leap Duke players make from Freshman to Sophomore years (health willing). Plus, Mason Plumlee is a seriously good rebounder!! He will be a big help 2 years from now. We might even be talking about the twin towers of Zou and Plumlee in March of 2010.... ummmm maybe.

SeattleIrish
03-23-2008, 01:42 PM
I agree. Duke needs to reevaluate their recruiting strategy. It's not that the players we have aren't good or great. But they seem to FEAR one-and-done situations like this. Part of me wonders whether they recruit kids who are simply too "nice" and want very badly to please K and the fans, uphold tradition, and graduate (the real reason there's a Duke University). We need players who just don't care about that, and have that killer instinct regardless of who, when or where they play.

Battierfan:

You REALLY need to post that stuff with a smiley-winky. I'm going to assume you don't really mean we don't need player who want to please their coach, or uphold traditions, or graduate...it's gotta be a forgotten smiley-winky! It's just gotta be.

s.i.:confused:

Wander
03-23-2008, 01:42 PM
Here's what needs to change in 2009. When a player is sick as hell and clearly isn't fit to play a basketball game, you don't play him! That's all. If we can do this, I think we'll be just fine next year.

Deschet
03-23-2008, 01:47 PM
Battierfan:

You REALLY need to post that stuff with a smiley-winky. I'm going to assume you don't really mean we don't need player who want to please their coach, or uphold traditions, or graduate...it's gotta be a forgotten smiley-winky! It's just gotta be.

s.i.:confused:

It was... er... poorly phrased. But, I think we both know at what point he was getting. We need "ballers." And, though I am loathe to make this comparison, we need a Corey Maggette. Only taller.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-23-2008, 01:49 PM
So many of you have talked about recruiting and developing a traditional big man ..... well, Coach K doesn't seem to have the same vision as many on this board. His top big man recruit for the class of 2009 committed a few weeks ago- Mason Plumlee. The kid is 6'11" and thin as a pole. Plumlee is NOT a back to the basket player. He chose duke because he like's how K plays Singler. The other scholarship offered to a big man went to Greg Echenique who was at Duke for the Carolina game. He is 6'8" and 240. Echenique has the elton brand body type, but would need a lot of development. He is certainly not considered a "top flight" prospect.

There are no Elton Brands, Shelden Williams, or Carlos Boozers coming in the door in the near future. I truly believe K is committing his next 3 or 4 years to developing this new brand of basketball (mobile big men, drive and kick, three pointers, and strong guards).

The bad news--- We have no help in rebounding coming in next season.
The good news--- next year we have essentially the same team, but ONE YEAR OLDER. I hope none of you forget how much of a huge leap Duke players make from Freshman to Sophomore years (health willing). Plus, Mason Plumlee is a seriously good rebounder!! He will be a big help 2 years from now. We might even be talking about the twin towers of Zou and Plumlee in March of 2010.... ummmm maybe.

Not sure exactly if we'll be the same team. We are losing our leading scorer and rebounder in Nelson. Our starting "big man," Lance Thomas, only averages 3 rebounds and plays around 20 minutes a game.

A lot of our success next year - or the potential of next years team as compared to this years - lies in how much weight Lance can put on in the off season (and of course how well he can use that weight next year). Hopefully he's already half way done with a jar full of muscle milk.

Jarhead
03-23-2008, 01:50 PM
I agree. Duke needs to reevaluate their recruiting strategy. It's not that the players we have aren't good or great. But they seem to FEAR one-and-done situations like this. Part of me wonders whether they recruit kids who are simply too "nice" and want very badly to please K and the fans, uphold tradition, and graduate (the real reason there's a Duke University). We need players who just don't care about that, and have that killer instinct regardless of who, when or where they play.
One would think that since you are using of Shane Battier's name in your user name, you would not have that attitude.

Channing
03-23-2008, 01:54 PM
I don't know if Duke will necessarily be a final four team next year - but here is how I think the team will improve:

(1) Singler: As a sophomore, I am confident he will be able to retain a high level of play throughout the season. If my memory serves me correctly, Scheyer's production slumped at the end of last year. This year, however, Scheyer was one of our most consistent contributors down the stretch.

(2) Zoubek will hopefully be able to stay healthy. I know reports are reports, but last summer the reports were that Z had made great strides. Then he broke his foot and really regressed. The last few games I think he started to show positive production, and I hope with a full offseason he can really build his confidence. I know he has been criticized, but when I see him play and make moves I see talent and potential. More often than not, it seems he gets into trouble because he isnt strong enough (either getting bumped and walking or having the ball stripeed). With some good conditioning I think Z can be a very strong contributor

(3) King: If King dedicates himself to fitness this summer I think he can see a huge change. It seemed apparent to me that he suffered from a lack of confidence the second half of the season. Hopefully with some conditioning he can keep his defensive intensity up and become a much bigger weapon on offense. The shot he hit from the corner yesterday was much bigger than I think most people gave credit for. It proved that he is not just a set shooter, but rather that he can create off the bounce and create his own jumpshot, and shoot it confidently.

(4) Nolan Smith and Greg Paulus: I would like to see them play on the floor together sometimes. I know people say Greg is a defensive liability, but he is also one of our best shooters. I dont have a problem with him being on the floor, and if he is on the floor with Nolan, hopefully Nolan will take the quicker guard and Greg will take the other guard.

(5) G: Showed his metal in the tournament. A healthy wrist and another year of maturity and I think we can really see him shine. If he makes a leap from soph to jr like he did from fresh to soph he could be really special.

(6) E-Mail: I really dont know exactly what his game is, but I am picturing something like Josh Shipp out at UCLA. Remember when Markie was so effective getting to the rack earlier in the year - when he and G were on the court together it was a thing of beauty. Hopefully E-mail can bring another scorer's mentality with the ability to create and cause problems.

(7) X-Factor: Marty!!!!! Marty will ALWAYS be the X-factor.

The1Bluedevil
03-23-2008, 02:07 PM
Does anyone think their is any chance Duke will go big? Play Kyle, Lance and Z together. I just think that since Z has to be a big contributor next year to get to the 2nd weekend it's either play him 20-25 per or not at all.

JBDuke
03-23-2008, 02:11 PM
Not sure exactly if we'll be the same team. We are losing our leading scorer and rebounder in Nelson. Our starting "big man," Lance Thomas, only averages 3 rebounds and plays around 20 minutes a game.

A lot of our success next year - or the potential of next years team as compared to this years - lies in how much weight Lance can put on in the off season (and of course how well he can use that weight next year). Hopefully he's already half way done with a jar full of muscle milk.

FYI, Kyle was our leading rebounder this year - by a total of one rebound. And while Lance may have started, his role was hardly to be the lone "big man" on the team. Lance has some unique skills and abilities, and I, for one, want to see him exploit those to the greatest extent, not necessarily to try and become something else. And I don't think his body is made to become a bulky power forward.

JBDuke
03-23-2008, 02:13 PM
Does anyone think their is any chance Duke will go big? Play Kyle, Lance and Z together. I just think that since Z has to be a big contributor next year to get to the 2nd weekend it's either play him 20-25 per or not at all.

Almost certainly not, due to the profusion of talented guards on the team next year. I suspect Duke's rotation will look a lot like this year's, with maybe a little less of "Kyle and Four Guards" if Brian and Lance make big strides, or if Olek turns out to be a lot more ready to play than most expect.

Huh?
03-23-2008, 02:20 PM
Elliot Williams will be an upgrade, he will be a TRUE 6'4" with athleticism, he looks fluid with a nice stroke. Czyz (sp?) looks like an animal underneath when he gets around the rim. Even though he is listed 6'7" or 6'8" that doesn't matter, he's got hops. You can be 7'2", but if your vertical is 2 1/2 inches, it doesn't matter how tall you are.

Henderson and Singler should be our guys next year, and we all know Scheyer is going to do his thing. Hopefully TK will get more PT. I hope Lance Thomas calms down, we really need him on the glass, not on the bench. Nolan will be the "X" factor. He has all the tools to not be good, but a great PG. He finishes around the rim, gets rebounds, and will hit an open jumper. He is velcro on D and I love his feel for the game. As you can tell, i really like this guy.

Our team will be very talented, lets hope that translates to a deep tourny run...GO DEVILS!

Jumbo
03-23-2008, 02:23 PM
I'm really curious to why Scheyer is considered a lock.

Well, if you don't see it for yourself, it's hard to explain. ;) The short answer is that league sources have told me as much.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-23-2008, 02:23 PM
FYI, Kyle was our leading rebounder this year - by a total of one rebound. And while Lance may have started, his role was hardly to be the lone "big man" on the team. Lance has some unique skills and abilities, and I, for one, want to see him exploit those to the greatest extent, not necessarily to try and become something else. And I don't think his body is made to become a bulky power forward.

There is no question whatsoever in that Lance needs to put on some sort of weight. Unless he can become more explosive and athletic some how, but weight would be his easiest solution (and most beneficial for the team). We need him to double his rebound total from last year - and if you watched closely - he was constantly pushed off the blocks. He at least needs to get strong enough to hold his ground.

kydevil
03-23-2008, 02:25 PM
Not sure exactly if we'll be the same team. We are losing our leading scorer and rebounder in Nelson. Our starting "big man," Lance Thomas, only averages 3 rebounds and plays around 20 minutes a game.


Ya but we gain back Marty!

Jumbo
03-23-2008, 02:27 PM
I do not have the answer. Their style of play while making for a very successful season, in my mind cannot win an NCAA championship.

Next year I see the same year as this year...a very successful year but no chance of winning the tournament. It has been said ad nauseum that Duke does not have an inside presence and that is true and if you look at the last 4 year champions they all athletic big men and an inside presence...Florida had Horford and Noah, UNC had May and Williams and UConn had Okafor.

Duke will not have it next year unless Zoubek becomes one and Coach K gives him playing time.I don't think that Czyz will be the immediate answer either.

The one thing that puzzles me also was that this year was suppose to be different in that Coach K was going to have depth something he did not have in previous years. Yet it seems to me that for the most part lof the second half of the year and in the ACC tournament and NCAAs, McClure, Thomas, Smith and King did not provide any depth. Some of the commentators said that Duke looked tired.

Duke used its depth. Read Julio's essay on the main page today -- the guys were tired because they were sick. Only one guy (Nelson) averaged over 30 mpg this season. Against WVU, Duke played 10 guys and eight of them played double-digit minutes. Only two cracked the 30-minute mark, and they played 32 and 31 minutes, respectively. Meanwhile, WVY had Alexander play the whole 40 minutes, with two other guys playing more than 36. There are plenty of things to analyze as contributing to yesterday's loss, but depth isn't one of them.

siestadogz
03-23-2008, 02:34 PM
The loss to WVa was hard for all of us. Our expectations are high. It should be remembered that we had a slight down period between in the mid 90's before a second great run of championship teams. With Coach K at the helm our down periods are so slight that they are hardly noticed until tournament time when the format is one and done.
To win the NCAA again I believe we need more size. Not height but bulk. Our last championship team included Boozer, Battier, Nate James, and J. Williams. No one was going to push them around. At present we seem very skilled but not strong.
This is my opinion as a Duke alumnus and fan. I believe coach K knows what needs to be done and will rebuild the team. He is the best in the business. Duke will be back on top sooner rather than later.

OldSchool
03-23-2008, 02:39 PM
There is no question whatsoever in that Lance needs to put on some sort of weight. Unless he can become more explosive and athletic some how, but weight would be his easiest solution (and most beneficial for the team). We need him to double his rebound total from last year - and if you watched closely - he was constantly pushed off the blocks. He at least needs to get strong enough to hold his ground.

Lance's next step, in my opinion, should be to take his game above the rim.

Why is it that Gerald, at 6'4", does our jump balls instead of Lance at 6'8"? Yes, Gerald has amazing hops but Lance being so much bigger should be able to develop his jumping ability so that he would be more effective than G at jump balls and rebounding.

One of Lance's biggest goals this off-season should be to make a big improvement in his vertical jump. Yes, I know people say he should bulk up and become bigger in order to hold his space better down low, but in my view his rebounding would really improve if his leaping ability increased.

Lance, spend this spring squatting like a madman and doing plyometrics. And then spend next season playing above the rim.

The advice on squats and plyometrics goes double for Brian, who appears to have an extremely poor vertical jump for his size.

chrisheery
03-23-2008, 02:42 PM
Lance's next step, in my opinion, should be to take his game above the rim.

Why is it that Gerald, at 6'4", does our jump balls instead of Lance at 6'8"? Yes, Gerald has amazing hops but Lance being so much bigger should be able to develop his jumping ability so that he would be more effective than G at jump balls and rebounding.

One of Lance's biggest goals this off-season should be to make a big improvement in his vertical jump. Yes, I know people say he should bulk up and become bigger in order to hold his space better down low, but in my view his rebounding would really improve if his leaping ability increased.

Lance, spend this spring squatting like a madman and doing plyometrics. And then spend next season playing above the rim.

The advice on squats and plyometrics goes double for Brian, who appears to have an extremely poor vertical jump for his size.

really? you think he should learn to jump higher? good call. he should also grow 3 inches, develop point guard skills, shoot 60% from 3, and become a dynamite post scorer. what are you talking about? you can't just "learn" to jump higher. it is a talent that people generally cannot significantly improve.

OldSchool
03-23-2008, 02:49 PM
you can't just "learn" to jump higher. it is a talent that people generally cannot significantly improve.

No, that's not true at all - strength training plus plyometrics have been conclusively demonstrated to significantly increase vertical jumping ability. Sure, at some point the ultimate potential for the ability to increase jumping ability is limited by one's physical parameters and genetics, but neither Lance nor Brian appear to be anywhere near such a limitation at the moment.

JBDuke
03-23-2008, 03:47 PM
There is no question whatsoever in that Lance needs to put on some sort of weight. Unless he can become more explosive and athletic some how, but weight would be his easiest solution (and most beneficial for the team). We need him to double his rebound total from last year - and if you watched closely - he was constantly pushed off the blocks. He at least needs to get strong enough to hold his ground.

First, there's always a question. In your opinion, Lance needs to add weight. I take it you have a particular role for Lance in mind that requires him to be bulkier and stronger? FWIW, I agree with you that if Lance is going to be playing exclusively in the low post, strength and bulk would help him. But one of the most intriguing ways I saw Lance used this year was as the middle man in our press. He'd lurk near mid-court and come double team the ball handler, and then recover back to defense if we didn't get the turnover. To do this requires agility and quickness. Adding bulk is NOT going to help.

How about this? Let's let Lance and the coaching staff figure out what kind of player he can become and how we can best use him on the court? If that means getting bigger and stronger, then great. If that means working on his vertical, as another poster suggested, then let's hope he can do that. But maybe it's something totally different.

Troublemaker
03-23-2008, 03:57 PM
Some keys/questions for next season:

-- Can Jon, Gerald, and Kyle take the next step in their development and become great players? Great teams require great players, and I'm hoping to see a great team next season. At some point this offseason, I'll chime in on what I think our guys need to work on.

-- Likewise, can Nolan use the offseason to elevate his game to the point where he can at least split the PG minutes with Greg? That would significantly raise our ceiling, imo.

-- How do we protect Kyle's stamina? Obviously, some part of that responsibility lies with his offseason conditioning and him turning his freshman body into a sophomore's body. But do we discard the 4-guard lineup altogether because of the toll it takes on Kyle over the course of the season? A lot of that obviously depends on...

-- Can Zoubek become a consistent starter? The coaches have maintained that Z will eventually become a good player for Duke, while noting Aaron Gray's learning curve, for example. Well, Gray made a big leap his junior season, and if Z is going to become a good player at some point, it really should start next season as well. I'd like to see 20 min/gm from him.

-- What do we do about the defense? The WVU loss was much more about poor offense than poor defense. However, that doesn't change the fact that there was a significant decline in Duke's defense over the second half of this season. My guess is we just don't have the overall team quickness to play Duke's defensive system, and that will be exacerbated if Z gets consistent minutes next season. What I would do were I Coach K is pull back the pressure on defense. Don't contest the passing lanes, don't ball-you-man. Emphasize straight-up, guard-your-man, contest-the-shot defense instead of help-and-recover. This will allow teams to make entry passes and run offense and force our players to play good 1-on-1 defense, especially in the post, but I think I would rather try my luck with that (and, again, especially if Z increases his minutes substantially). Too many teams this season took advantage of our overplay and recover system. Poor defense on the point and no shotblocker makes it tough. Another added benefit of pulling back the pressure might be fresher legs at the end of the season.

-- Finally, hopefully we'll experience some better luck with regard to injuries/illness, especially during tournament time.

CALVET
03-23-2008, 04:40 PM
This might be an over simplification, but here goes.

First let me say that Coach K is loyal to his upperclassman and honors seniority for previous a year's starter. That may have scared off some of the big men Duke HAS recruited, but Mike is a principle first rather than win at all costs kinda guy. That is a big part of what I admire about Duke. A program that wins with integrity and with class players.

At the second half of games, Duke went with a small lineup because of seniority and commitments made during recruiting. Unfortunately, because of that arrangement, our wings (mainly Demarcus and Gerald) were forced to compensate in rebounding and did a magnificent job early in the season. As the season went on, Gerald hurt his wrist, Demarcus got sick, and both got worn down. And when Demarcus, the leading rebounder, took bad shots late in the game, Duke only got one shot. Basically, though, Duke overachieved. Playing a lineup of with only one 6'8" guy over 6'5"-6-4" is challenging, but I won't fault K for loyalty to his players.

Next year we will not play undersized lineups and we will still be quick. We will a lot of options in the backcourt next year and Zoubek will only be better and play more along side two 6'8" players. AND don't overlook the possible contribution from Czyz (a third 6'8" player) for rebounding and shot-blocking. All of the articles I've read says he's aggressive as they come which is definitely a frontcourt element we've missed. It's a little embarrassing when a 6'4" player jumps at tipoff and that wouldn't happen if Czyz started. Our three point shooting (Demarucs was not one of our best in that area) will only be better and you can believe our penetration, rebounding, shotblocking, and decision making will also be better.

pfrduke
03-23-2008, 04:54 PM
This might be an over simplification, but here goes.

First let me say that Coach K is loyal to his upperclassman and honors seniority for previous a year's starter. That may have scared off some of the big men Duke HAS recruited, but Mike is a principle first rather than win at all costs kinda guy. That is a big part of what I admire about Duke. A program that wins with integrity and with class players.

At the second half of games, Duke went with a small lineup because of seniority and commitments made during recruiting. Unfortunately, because of that arrangement, our wings (mainly Demarcus and Gerald) were forced to compensate in rebounding and did a magnificent job early in the season. As the season went on, Gerald hurt his wrist, Demarcus got sick, and both got worn down. And when Demarcus, the leading rebounder, took bad shots late in the game, Duke only got one shot. Basically, though, Duke overachieved. Playing a lineup of with only one 6'8" guy over 6'5"-6-4" is challenging, but I won't fault K for loyalty to his players.

Next year we will not play undersized lineups and we will still be quick. We will a lot of options in the backcourt next year and Zoubek will only be better and play more along side two 6'8" players. AND don't overlook the possible contribution from Czyz (a third 6'8" player) for rebounding and shot-blocking. All of the articles I've read says he's aggressive as they come which is definitely a frontcourt element we've missed. It's a little embarrassing when a 6'4" player jumps at tipoff and that wouldn't happen if Czyz started. Our three point shooting (Demarucs was not one of our best in that area) will only be better and you can believe our penetration, rebounding, shotblocking, and decision making will also be better.

Can you substantiate the highlighted statement in your post. What commitments? To whom? And how exactly do you know this?

I'm not saying you're wrong - I just haven't seen anything to suggest that our late game lineup was set by commitments made during the recruiting process.

ArtVandelay
03-23-2008, 06:22 PM
It's a little embarrassing when a 6'4" player jumps at tipoff and that wouldn't happen if Czyz started.

I'm going to go ahead and respectfully disagree that any part whatsoever of our rotation for next season should be based on the opening tip, mostly because that is one of the least significant events to occur during the course of a game. Second only maybe to the Rock Lobster. Also, if Olek Czyz is starting on this team next year that will mean that half of our team is injured, transferred, or quit playing basketball.

CALVET
03-23-2008, 06:26 PM
Can you substantiate the highlighted statement in your post. What commitments? To whom? And how exactly do you know this?

I'm not saying you're wrong - I just haven't seen anything to suggest that our late game lineup was set by commitments made during the recruiting process.

I have no secret inside information, only loyalties to players who stayed with the team and have played hard. I doubt very seriously K makes guarantees about playing time.

CALVET
03-23-2008, 06:28 PM
I'm going to go ahead and respectfully disagree that any part whatsoever of our rotation for next season should be based on the opening tip, mostly because that is one of the least significant events to occur during the course of a game. Second only maybe to the Rock Lobster. Also, if Olek Czyz is starting on this team next year that will mean that half of our team is injured, transferred, or quit playing basketball.

Totally out of context. Czyz will not start, but if he did he would out jump Henderson. Maybe it's more of a compliment of Henderson rather than an indictment of the front line, but it doesn't happen often because the bigs are supposed to jump higher.

battierfan
03-23-2008, 09:05 PM
Battierfan:

You REALLY need to post that stuff with a smiley-winky. I'm going to assume you don't really mean we don't need player who want to please their coach, or uphold traditions, or graduate...it's gotta be a forgotten smiley-winky! It's just gotta be.

s.i.:confused:

Of course you are right - I either should have intended to be sarcastic, or I should have paid more attention to my grammar.

Let me admit right now I have been following DBR since 1996 or so when it used to be called juliovision.com. It wasn't until 2005/6 that I started to post. I love this board and I love Duke basketball, so I figured I'd start trying to post more frequently. This was just a sloppy post because I wanted to post to about 6 threads at once and got carried away, and I was not paying attention. Yes we do want those players. It was simply poor grammar on my part.

What I would like to emphasize is this: I believe, flu or no, that we have GREAT players who are also great kids. They want so badly to represent Duke, please the Crazies, and please K that, as the season comes to an end, the thought of elimination and past NCAA performance, and dealing with the boos and catcalls from the Duke haters, becomes an extra burden for them to bear. Thus my other quote about what I'd like to hear K say in a press conference sometime. I think it would do the team a world of good in the NCAAs to hear such an incredible coach just give them them the ability to relax and enjoy the game more.

Thanks for your question - I am glad to clear this up!

battierfan
03-23-2008, 09:09 PM
It was... er... poorly phrased. But, I think we both know at what point he was getting. We need "ballers." And, though I am loathe to make this comparison, we need a Corey Maggette. Only taller.

but you understood me in spite of it. thanks for not hammering me on it.

Saratoga2
03-24-2008, 12:59 PM
Each team gets either the same number of for opportunities for possessions in a game. It is possible that the team that wins the opening tip with also get the last possession of the half, so that team may get one more. The other team gets the opening possession in the second half and may also get the last possession in the half, so there are either equal opportunities or one team gets an advantage of one.
It’s what the team does with its opportunities that matters. Teams can get a shot with their possession, they can turn the ball over in a variety of ways, they can get fouled either leading to foul shots or if it is a non-shooting foul will retain possession. There are also rare cases where a technical foul is called or an intentional foul is called where the team gets shots and retains possession. There is another fairly rare case where a team will have a possession where there is insufficient time to get a shot off and they don’t turn the ball over. This might occur at the end of either half. Finally, they can get an offensive rebound and retain possession and have an opportunity for another shot.
The time clock allows for 35 seconds for a team to get a shot off which at least hits the rim. It would seem that at a dawdling pace, a team may use 28 seconds a possession to get a shot off. I would assume that a rapid pace would allow a team to get a shot off in 14 seconds on the average. If both teams went at a rapid pace you might see 86 shots a game or if both teams were dawdling you might see 43 shots a game. As a frame of reference, against VWU, Duke appears to have had 66 shots while WVU had 73. Since they had one more turnover than Duke, the obvious difference was that WVU had 19 offensive rebounds to our 7. They also had a bench technical which reduced their total advantage.
The final difference is in shooting percentage, both from the foul line and from the field. From the foul line, you can look at shooting percentage but should also consider misses on the first shot of one and one situations. Those statistics don’t show up but I know we missed on at least one of those in the WVU game. WVU shot 86.4% while Duke shot 75% for the game.
For two point shots, you have to shoot 3/2 times better a percentage then from the 3 point line to see a benefit. We shot 14 for 28 or 50% from two point range, while it was 5 for 22 or 22.7% from 3 point range. Clearly our 3 point shooting was not a good bet against WVU. On the other hand, WVU shot 41% from 2 point range while they shot 36% from 3 point range. In their case, the three point shot was a better bet.

So if we are looking for areas of improvement, we need to turn the ball over less, force more turnovers, do a better job rebounding, shoot for a higher percentage from the three point line and from the free throw line.

Looking forward to next year, what changes will allow us to do those things? Will the guard/forward who replaces DeMarcus make less turnovers, while forcing more, and rebounding better? Will he shoot for a higher percentage from the three point line, from the 2 and from the free throw line?
Will the experience gained by Henderson, Paulus, Smith and Scheyer help them turn the ball over less while maintaining as good a defense as this year. Will they all make some improvement on their shooting? Will they rebound as well or better than this past season?

Will Singler have a better season, scoring, rebounding and defending than this past year? Will Thomas have a consistent presence in the paint with better rebounding, scoring and defense. Will all the starters keep down the foolish fouls?

Will McClure, Pocius, Williams and Czyz provide a positive alternative to the starters and allow us to pressure the ball for 40 minutes. Will King find his shot again and be the kind of scorer we had hoped him to be and will his defense improve having had the benefit of a season in a Duke uniform. Finally, and very importantly, Will Zoubek build on the good progress he made this year and provide the inside defensive presence, rebounding, scoring and passing that he showed flashes of this year?

Will the coaches utilize their players well and get the most out of the team? I only say that because the last few games we applied a lot of defensive pressure and then seemed to have a great deal of trouble maintaining our form throughout the games. Was it illness? Was it tiredness from chasing on defense? Whatever it was, are the coaches willing to make substitution when a high capability player is having an off game?

Sorry for the length of this one, but it is hard to put all of this together in a few words. I would guess the many questions here will have a lot of different answers from those people close to basketball and to the team. Hoping for the best next year.

gofurman
03-24-2008, 02:53 PM
Everyone keeps talking about how Duke needs a big man. Well, I agree but only in part. That is great but watching so many games it is more than apparent that you also/OR need:

A PG WITH SPEED. Now, this is no revelation but Duke was about beaten' by both Belmont and WVU NOT bc of their bigs (Belmont doesn't have a big) but bc of the abuse of Paulus. C'mon - the Belmont PG abused Paulus and the part-time PG at WVU looked like an all-world player against Duke.

IE, Duke is loaded with 2/3/4 players but no speed dynamo at the 1 like Ish Smith or Lawson. This alone would cover a lot of the lack of size problems. It was the key for wake and WVU. Someone who can take over with 6 seconds left in the shot clock and nothing working. Someone who can STOP DRIBBLE PENETRATION.

Like I said, this is no profound revelation but I don't think it gets the press it should vs the "we need a big man" routine. You give Duke a decent 6'0" guy (even Demontez Stitt level etc) and they have 2/3 more wins and are probably still playing.

This is my frustration - and our recruits for next year: 6'4" and 6'7". I just don't get that... Need to go taller AND SHORTER

pfrduke
03-24-2008, 06:19 PM
So if we are looking for areas of improvement, we need to turn the ball over less, force more turnovers, do a better job rebounding, shoot for a higher percentage from the three point line and from the free throw line.

To quibble a bit, Duke was excellent this year in the turnover department on both sides of the ball. We finished in the top 10% in both categories (i.e., most turnovers forced, fewest turnovers surrendered) on a tempo-free basis. In conference play only, we were the single most difficult team in the ACC to turn over, and finished just a hair behind Clemson (but well ahead of third place) in forcing turnovers. Of NCAA Tournament teams, only Tennessee was similarly good in both categories.

Also, Duke was a very good three-point shooting team all year. None of the 16 teams remaining in the tournament shot better than we did on the season, and that includes very poor shooting on our part in 4 of the last 5 games. On the season, we had 5 players shoot 37% or better from beyond the arc. And our shooting was not dependent on opponent quality - we had some bad nights against bad teams, and good nights against very good teams.

With regard to rebounding, it is very difficult to be good at both forcing turnovers and defensive rebounding. Only one team (Southern Illinois) finished in the top 10% of the country in both, and only 20 teams were even in the top-100 in both. We were a decidedly average rebounding team this year - not good, but not really bad either. We finished in the middle of the pack in the ACC in both offensive and defensive rebounding. Yes, some teams killed us on the glass - Illinois, UNC twice, West Virginia. But getting heavily outrebounded was really an anomaly for us - most games we held our own. Ordinarily, being average at rebounding and very good at forcing turnovers equals a strong defense.

dkbaseball
03-24-2008, 06:19 PM
if Olek Czyz is starting on this team next year that will mean that half of our team is injured, transferred, or quit playing basketball.

Don't be so sure. The principal impediment to him starting, IMO, will be the aformentioned deference to seniority. If you put the five most talented players out there, and you wanted one of them to be a physical big, he would be starting. I think the synergy with Singler could be something special. Czyz is not -- repeat NOT -- a project. He is a multi-skilled player, right now, and a superb runner and jumper.

BlueintheFace
03-24-2008, 07:22 PM
Don't be so sure. The principal impediment to him starting, IMO, will be the aformentioned deference to seniority. If you put the five most talented players out there, and you wanted one of them to be a physical big, he would be starting. I think the synergy with Singler could be something special. Czyz is not -- repeat NOT -- a project. He is a multi-skilled player, right now, and a superb runner and jumper.

I don't want to say that Scout.com is the end-all-be-all for the basketball recruiting world, but they almost always have good analysis on a player's strengths/weaknesses. Here is what they have to say about Olek-

Strengths-
Athleticism
Competitiveness
Plays Facing Basket

Weaknesses-
Perimeter Shot
Post Play

Ranked 27th best PF in the country!!!

"Native of Poland. Power forward has tons of bounce and determination. Thinks everything should be a dunk. Has some face up capabilities. Needs to round out his offense but has the potential to be considered a big conference player."

This profile would hardly support your contention. "27th best PF in his class" and "potential to be considered a big conference player" does not seem to scream "starting five talent as a freshman at Duke University"

Cali-Duke
03-24-2008, 08:26 PM
olek's scouting report on scout.com hasn't changed for a long time. it seems unfair to judge how he plays based on a scouting report conducted a relatively long time ago in his short basketball career.

plus, articles about his aau games seem very complimentary. i assume he has progressed significantly, although i can't say that i have seen him play live.

dkbaseball
03-24-2008, 08:31 PM
I don't want to say that Scout.com is the end-all-be-all for the basketball recruiting world, but they almost always have good analysis on a player's strengths/weaknesses. Here is what they have to say about Olek-

Strengths-
Athleticism
Competitiveness
Plays Facing Basket

Weaknesses-
Perimeter Shot
Post Play

Ranked 27th best PF in the country!!!

"Native of Poland. Power forward has tons of bounce and determination. Thinks everything should be a dunk. Has some face up capabilities. Needs to round out his offense but has the potential to be considered a big conference player."

This profile would hardly support your contention. "27th best PF in his class" and "potential to be considered a big conference player" does not seem to scream "starting five talent as a freshman at Duke University"

I've seen that analysis up on scout.com since well before the current high school season, during which I saw Czyz play 12 times. Certainly, everyone's entitled to his opinion, and I realize I am rating Czyz a lot higher than the consensus of the "recruiting gurus." But frankly, I give those people absolutely no credence whatsoever.

Honestly, I'm learning never to accept any evaluation except the one I make with my own eyes. I live in Nevada, and have been betting the tournament this year, looking very carefully for bargains on teams I'm familiar with. Doing pretty well so far -- 8 and 1. The one I missed was a game where I accepted Jim Boeheim's lowball evaluation of Xavier without having seen the team play. I took Purdue and three points, and Xavier's win by seven against what I think is a very good Purdue team was one of the most impressive performances of the tournament. Boeheim, a very seasoned and astute observer to be sure, misled me on them. And who knows more about college basketball than Bob Knight? Who's he been pushing in the tournament? Pitt; and they're gone.

Hey, I could be wrong on Czyz. But I think I can evaluate talent. My best call ever? In 1989 I watched the Univ. of Arizona baseball team play, and after seeing their shortstop throw over to first twice decided that he needed to be on the mound. A couple years later, when he was about to flame out of the minors as an infielder, somebody else had the idea of trying him on the mound. His name: Trevor Hoffman, current major league career saves leader.

DukieInBrasil
03-24-2008, 08:42 PM
My bet for the starting 5 at the beginning of next year to be Paulus-Smith-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek. Scheyer will be an exceptional 6th Man again and LT will sub early for Singler or Z if either gets in foul trouble. Outside that core of 7 we'll still be able to call on Pocius, King as a post-guarding super-duper 3pt shooter, and McClure for additional post defense. Plus freshmen Williams and Czyz.
As K showed this year, he is willing to use his whole bench if they can bring it, and we will have 10 scholarship players, not including the Fr. We didn't make it this year due to lack of experience, but this team mos def has the talent to be in the F4 next year, providing Singler and Henderson stay (thankfully no one is talking 'bout Scheyer jumping).
I am hopeful for next year because Scheyer and Henderson both played excellent ball when it counted and when hardly anyone else could be consistent. I'm looking for Jon to play so well, that idiot TV announcers will finally have the courage to mention how athletic he is. I'm looking for The Gerald to be so athletic that everyone will just say, damn he's good.
I think that Nolan may be the key difference from this year's team and next. He may move into Nelson's spot in the starting line-up with Scheyer as 6th Man again. Whereas Nelson played a 2G-with-a-PF-mentality, Smith brings more of a 2G/PG style to the table, which ought to complement Paulus better. He showed that he can handle the ball, rebound and score, just rarely in the same game. If the improvement in consistency Gerald made from Fr. to So. is an indicator for Nolan, I think he's gonna be really good next year.
Paulus played above average ball at the end as well. His improvement in ballhandling was unmistakable and I'm looking for him to have a very solid Sr. year. It's never bad to have a PG who can shoot the 3 and make his FTs.
I mos def liked what I saw from Singler right up until the end, when he hit the wall, like Scheyer did his Fr. year. If Scheyer's improvement from Fr. to So. is an indicator for Singler's play next year, he may join Jon and Gerald as All-ACC.
Despite missing those 9 games, Z showed real improvement and will hopefully have a healthy off-season. To me Z is the most enigmatic aspect of this team going in to next year because conventional wisdom says post presence is essential but this team played its best when Z was out, and slumped when Z came back and was playing his best ball as a Devil. There must be a way to utilize a relatively-mobile-yet-non-gazelle-like7'1 dude effectively.
LT is also mysterious. I have no clue what to expect from him next year as he seemed to improve but then finished the season in a black hole. He'll be the alternate PF to Singler and Z.
Taylor played exceptional basketball at times during the OOC, but couldn't get much going in the ACC. He'll probably play exceptional ball during the OOC next year too, but at what level will he play in the conference? My bet is that he plays better, but not much so. He'll probably get more PT corresponding to things like rebounding and hitting FTs than increased PPG.
Martynas Pocius will be back and I'm looking for him to pick up more PT as the alternate attack-the-rim player to Henderson and Smith.
McClure will also have a chance to heal and will hopefully stay healthy as well.

Saratoga2
03-24-2008, 09:12 PM
To quibble a bit, Duke was excellent this year in the turnover department on both sides of the ball. We finished in the top 10% in both categories (i.e., most turnovers forced, fewest turnovers surrendered) on a tempo-free basis. In conference play only, we were the single most difficult team in the ACC to turn over, and finished just a hair behind Clemson (but well ahead of third place) in forcing turnovers. Of NCAA Tournament teams, only Tennessee was similarly good in both categories.

We had some players who were very good but others had a propensity to turn the ball over often enough to be a problem. Paulus did much better in that regard after a rocky start. Scheyer was very good at that but Nelson and Smith were not particularly good that way. There is a good possibility that Smith will make big improvements by next year, while Nelson is leaving to be replaced probably by Scheyer in the starting lineup. I see both a plusses.

Also, Duke was a very good three-point shooting team all year. None of the 16 teams remaining in the tournament shot better than we did on the season, and that includes very poor shooting on our part in 4 of the last 5 games. On the season, we had 5 players shoot 37% or better from beyond the arc. And our shooting was not dependent on opponent quality - we had some bad nights against bad teams, and good nights against very good teams.

You would never know it by our performance in the tourneys. There is a good possibility that we will improve in 3 point shooting, but our best during the year was Nelson and he is leaving. Maybe King will regain his form.

With regard to rebounding, it is very difficult to be good at both forcing turnovers and defensive rebounding. Only one team (Southern Illinois) finished in the top 10% of the country in both, and only 20 teams were even in the top-100 in both. We were a decidedly average rebounding team this year - not good, but not really bad either. We finished in the middle of the pack in the ACC in both offensive and defensive rebounding. Yes, some teams killed us on the glass - Illinois, UNC twice, West Virginia. But getting heavily outrebounded was really an anomaly for us - most games we held our own. Ordinarily, being average at rebounding and very good at forcing turnovers equals a strong defense.

Our team spread on offense and does leave a lot for our inside players, who gave away strength and size in many games. On the defensive side, we were giving up a lot of offensive rebounds in the tourney. It looked like our guys were tired from chasing on defense. We seemed to get beat to many rebounds in the second half.

BlueintheFace
03-24-2008, 10:10 PM
I've seen that analysis up on scout.com since well before the current high school season, during which I saw Czyz play 12 times.

Fair enough. I'm glad to hear he has improved.

bhop22
03-24-2008, 10:53 PM
I'm not really sure if I'm adding anything that hasn't been discussed already, but here goes. Duke had a young team. They still are a very talented team without Nelson.Scheyer, Paulus, and Henderson are extremely good players. Smith will also be good. That being said penetration will be the key next year. Us penetrating and kicking for the 3, and on defense stopping the penetration. I know all the negative stuff about Paulus, but he is a natural leader. I think on offense he and Smith can be a solid backcourt. Both can handle the ball and Paulus is a good shooter. If Smith can get into the paint and make good decisions I think Duke will be fine. I know the rebounding will be tough, but a lot of rebounding is desire. I think McClure will make a difference in this department. If Zoubek is healthy he can be a solid role player. On defense, Smith should be able to lock down the penetration, while Henderson and Scheyer can overplay the passing lanes. I would still like to see more zone. The more it's played the better it will become. I haven't mentioned King, Thomas, Marty or the incoming group. Lance has made great strides in two years and I look forward to seeing his improvements next year. Also, King will find his place in the rotation. He showed heart and emotion this season. Those are qualities you can't teach. I really believe he will do good work for this team. I know this is choppy, but it's hard to put all my thoughts in order.

pless55
03-24-2008, 11:36 PM
Is there any chance of us getting Stephen Van Tresse to commit to Duke? He plays at Lawrence North and is 6-8. Do you know if we have offered him?

pless55
03-24-2008, 11:39 PM
We should take a chance on a recruit like David Chadwick from Charlotte. A three star recruit who has alot of upside and potential. But is he a true post player? Is Van Tresse a true post player?

wisteria
03-25-2008, 01:18 AM
Just realized that Ech is coached by Dan Hurley.
And I thought we've always recruited well from NJ?
hmmm..now that sounds like a blow.
I mean....Rutgers.

arnie
03-25-2008, 07:49 AM
We should take a chance on a recruit like David Chadwick from Charlotte. A three star recruit who has alot of upside and potential. But is he a true post player? Is Van Tresse a true post player?

Didn't David Chadwick's father play at UNC for Deano? If that is true, don't think he'll be coming to Duke.

mgtr
03-25-2008, 08:12 AM
Everybody seems to think we are dead without a big banger, but John Wooden's first championship team (in the 60s) was a bunch of small players. Great players, but I think the tallest was about 6' 5". Of course, then he got Alcindor and then Walton, so they didn't stay small. But it is possible with the right players.

Indoor66
03-25-2008, 09:07 AM
Everybody seems to think we are dead without a big banger, but John Wooden's first championship team (in the 60s) was a bunch of small players. Great players, but I think the tallest was about 6' 5". Of course, then he got Alcindor and then Walton, so they didn't stay small. But it is possible with the right players.

That first UCLA championship was won defeating Duke in the final game. Duke started a much bigger lineup. Duke started G-Harrison - 6'3", G-Mullins - 6'4", F-Tison - 6'11", C-Buckley - 6'11", F-Marin - 6'6". Size is not always the cure-all.

http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/seasons/season-stats.php?season=1963-64

Check out the game here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament

wolfpackdevil
03-25-2008, 03:16 PM
I still don't know why ELIOTT WILLIAMS is not in the mix of next years rotation, he is one of the most athletic guys duke has ever had.

He is a 5 star recruit and reminds me a lot of a OJ Mayo.

And if John Reik, a 5 star recruit, 7-2, 260 lbs. comes to Duke, that will deffinatley have to be the starting big man.

Duke will have the same problem against big teams like Clemson, and UNC next year if we dont get more big men in the conversation

VaDukie
03-25-2008, 03:54 PM
I still don't know why ELIOTT WILLIAMS is not in the mix of next years rotation, he is one of the most athletic guys duke has ever had.

He is a 5 star recruit and reminds me a lot of a OJ Mayo.

And if John Reik, a 5 star recruit, 7-2, 260 lbs. comes to Duke, that will deffinatley have to be the starting big man.

Duke will have the same problem against big teams like Clemson, and UNC next year if we dont get more big men in the conversation

John Riek has been off the radar for awhile. He's not coming to Duke or likely any college for that matter.

Franzez
03-26-2008, 01:58 PM
I know there is another thread for this discussion but I'd like our starting 5 to be

PG-Paulus
SG-Henderson
SF-King
PF-Singler
C-Zoubek
6th Man-Jon Scheyer
Bench-
Nolan Smith
Elliott Williams
Lance Thomas
David McClure

Im sorry but until I really see how good Olek Czyz is he should only play at least 4 minutes per game next season.

I would like to see us play more of a mid-major style of basketball next season with a lot more high posts and pick & rolls with Zoubek at C and 4 shooters on the court at the same time in Paulus,Smith,Scheyer,and King.

Blueequalslife23
03-26-2008, 03:19 PM
Ok Duke junkies as this season is almost over we have had alot of good signs of future sucess. With Henderson and Singler staying, the great recruiting class and the amount of passion this team has showed we are looking strong for 2008-2009. Now to recruiting, we have missed out on alot of good big men.But Duke's recruiting always seem to pan out in the end. But Duke is running low on options i Think it is time for Coach K to expand his offering strategy. This is our Season!! Also Congrats to Elliot Williams on his 2nd place finish in the dunk contest.

PG- Paulus
SG-Williams
SF-Henderson
PF-Singler
C- Thomas

shadowfax336
03-26-2008, 03:32 PM
I think the starting lineup speculation at this time is pretty useless.
I mean if we had to trot out a starting lineup at this second with Nelson taken away and the two frosh added, the lineup probably has to be Lance, Singler, Scheyer, Henderson, and Paulus...
but its quite possible that won't be true in the fall. Guys are going to get better, Williams and Czyz will have a chance to compete for jobs. Lets be honest, none of us really know how good they are compared to the current players, I don't think even Coach K could tell you for sure right now. Lets see how they come together over the summer, and then try again in the fall. For now, lets just be clear that we have a very talented core of guards (Paulus, Henderson, Smith, Scheyer, Williams) a stud forward (Singler), 3 project big men at various stages of development (Zou, Lance, Czyz) , a defensive leader (McClure), and an athletic X-Factor (Marty) for next year. Thats a pretty good start. We'll see who has progressed where next year, but for now lets be excited about the depth of options we're going to have, as well as the potential for growth.

mr. synellinden
03-26-2008, 04:13 PM
If you want a preview of OC, watch this. He is number 90. http://prepballerstv.com/olekczyz.html


He looks to me strong and athletic enough to be a significant factor in the frontcourt. I am sure Lance Thomas would look just as good if he were playing against high school all stars, but OC looks stronger, more athletic and more assertive than Thomas already.

matrix1686
04-08-2008, 09:32 PM
I know everybody has been disappointed with the past two seasons. I know I said more than my share of expletives at the end of the WVU game, but what we need to realize is that we had a pretty good year considering our roster and we have a really bright future ahead.

After last year nobody expected much from us and we went out and won 28 games with no post presence and got a #2 seed. I would say the season as a whole we overachieved some. Now obviously expectations change over the course of the year and it was disappointing losing in the second round, but we have to look at how we have recruited. The '03 and '04 classes were not even top 10 classes according RSCI. DeMarcus Nelson was good but nobody else was really recruited of any significance. That meant we should have expected these last two years due to a lack of senior leadership.

Now the upside, look at our last three years of recruits. We had top four classes in each of those years. Now obviously '05 fizzled out a bit as we lost McRoberts, Boykin, and Boateng, but we still have Paulus and Pocius. Paulus while he has his problems is a natural born leader and will provide quality senior leadership. The '06 class features Henderson, Scheyer, Zoubek, and Lance Thomas. This class has showed mixed results but I think your about to see a big improvement from Zoubek and Thomas. Big men can usually take awhile to make an impact in college unless they are stocky and strong which neither Z or Lance is. Henderson and Scheyer are both ballers. Finally, '07 brought us Singler, Smith, and unfortunately King who quit on us. Singler is the probably the most talented player we've brought in since Deng. So that's three straight top 4 recruiting classes. That adds up to a really bright future.

Next year's class isn't ranked nearly as high, but Elliot Williams should be a more than capable replacement for Nelson. Cyzk wasn't as highly regarded as King but he does fill more of a need. After analyzing everything there is no reason Duke can't make the Final Four next year. With a combination of 7 upperclassmen we should have more leadership than most other teams across the nation. I'll go one step further and say that Duke really looks like a Final Four contender for the next three years. If Singler stays all four which is very possible and Henderson stays two more which is less possible than we could be looking at possibly one of the brightest times ever in Duke basketball.

dukie8
04-08-2008, 09:37 PM
After last year nobody expected much from us and we went out and won 28 games with no post presence and got a #2 seed. I would say the season as a whole we overachieved some.

we were preseason #11 so i don't know who you are referring to. A LOT of people expected us to be very good -- not nc contending good but certainly better than almost every other team. let's not go completely revisionist and act like we just had drake's season.

Scorp4me
04-08-2008, 10:37 PM
Not sure where we finished in the rankings, but a #2 seed should put us somewhere between #5 and #8 so I'd say we overachieved.

CDu
04-08-2008, 10:42 PM
Not sure where we finished in the rankings, but a #2 seed should put us somewhere between #5 and #8 so I'd say we overachieved.

I'd say we basically met expectations. We certainly overachieved for the first half of the year. Then, we ran out of gas. We were probably the worst of the #2 seeds, but because we weren't going to be put in UNC's region we got sent to the West. So finishing the regular season #8 versus a preseason ranking of #11 is more or less meeting expectations. It certainly isn't wildly outperforming expectations, as the original poster seemed to imply. Even though it was really a tale of two seasons for us.

geraldsneighbor
04-08-2008, 10:47 PM
We really need to get back to penetration in the lane. Open up 3's, and allows plays to be made. LT needs to emerge. Him and Z hold the fate in next season.

dukie8
04-08-2008, 11:01 PM
Not sure where we finished in the rankings, but a #2 seed should put us somewhere between #5 and #8 so I'd say we overachieved.

fwiw, we finished #16.

matrix1686
04-09-2008, 09:00 AM
I didn't mean we overachieved by a lot and that we weren't supposed to be very good. The facts are we lost 11 games the year before and to be ranked at #11 in the preseason was a little ridiculous. Now, I thought we were probably closer to #15 or #16 at the beginning of the year which is where we ended up finishing.

I do agree it was a tale of two seasons. We were consistently overachieving throughout much of the regular season and playing at a top 5 to top 10 level, and obviously the second half was much harder and disappointing. Before the year I thought a Sweet 16 would have been good, and by the end of the year I had Elite Eight expectations. So obviously very disappointing, but I am just saying we still had a solid to good year for all our deficiencies (like I said earlier we didn't have a strong senior class and most of the players on our team were still very young). My whole point was to say we shouldn't be too disappointed, but we should be excited because these next three years could be special with everybody becoming older and improving.

CDu
04-09-2008, 09:18 AM
I do agree it was a tale of two seasons. We were consistently overachieving throughout much of the regular season and playing at a top 5 to top 10 level, and obviously the second half was much harder and disappointing. Before the year I thought a Sweet 16 would have been good, and by the end of the year I had Elite Eight expectations. So obviously very disappointing, but I am just saying we still had a solid to good year for all our deficiencies (like I said earlier we didn't have a strong senior class and most of the players on our team were still very young.

I agree that we had a pretty solid to good season, despite our deficiencies. I think you're missing the point on our deficiencies. Inexperience and lack of senior leadership wasn't a problem, in my opinion. We had a senior leader who played great for us, and we had a junior starter and two sophomore starters. It was lack of post play and lack of a great point guard (Paulus was essentially a shooting guard).


My whole point was to say we shouldn't be too disappointed, but we should be excited because these next three years could be special with everybody becoming older and improving.

I think it's fair to be disappointed in how we finished based on where we were in early February. At the same time, I agree that it's important to consider the progress made over the course of the season.

As far as next year, I don't know that I'd expect us to make a quantum jump next year like we made early this year. Ultimately, I think we'll run into the same questions next year that we had this year. We'll need to either have someone step up and fill those voids, or we'll need to find a way to continue to mask the weaknesses. Otherwise, we'll be similar to this team - capable of beating any team on any given night (if we're hot from the field), but likely to be the underdog against an elite, well-balanced team.

matrix1686
04-09-2008, 10:29 AM
You are exactly right when you say that our real weaknesses were post play and lack of a true point guard. I think we can get improved post play next year from Zoubek. The foot injury doesn't help but I just feel like he will develop a lot more this summer. If he could just learn not to walk then we would have a consistent 10 ppg scorer maybe more, so I think we can develop there. I also think Lance will improve too. Next year they'll have two seasons in the program and two full summers of conditioning and strength training, so there is hope there. Point guard play isn't horrible. I think Paulus is good but I feel like he has listened to doubters too much when they say he is unathletic and can't drive. I think he has practically stopped trying to drive to the basket. If he would drive more I think we would see a better PG. I'm not saying he has to finish but I know he can drive and find other teammates for open shots. I think Paulus will make strides. Will he ever reach his HS potential, who knows?

Now, I know I said senior leadership, but what I really mean is upperclassmen as a whole. We had Nelson, Paulus, and McClure who doesn't play much. Looking at our NC teams you can see that is not enough leadership. Next year we will have Paulus, McClure, Pocius, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas, and Zoubek as upperclassmen. That's a lot more maturity for the team. The difference between freshman & sophomores and then a junior mentally and physically can be quite big so I mean there is a good chance we make another jump next year.

Originally after WVU beat us I felt the same as you that we won't improve much. We would be practically the same team next year and would falter again. While that is still a good possibility, I would say it's a 50/50 chance that happens, we could also improve quite a bit it's really all on the players and how hard they work this offseason. Most of our players have plenty of areas they could improve on. Zoubek and Lance can improve their bodies and their post games, Singler can improve his body, McClure could improve his shot, and on and on. So I mean we don't have to stay status quo. If these kids get out and work hard which I'm sure they will then there is no reason we don't improve. We will have more upperclassmen than many teams in America. These cinderella squads in the NCAAs usually are junior and senior laden teams so think about how good we could be with mostly juniors and seniors especially considering our players have more raw talent.

CDu
04-09-2008, 10:58 AM
Point guard play isn't horrible. I think Paulus is good but I feel like he has listened to doubters too much when they say he is unathletic and can't drive. I think he has practically stopped trying to drive to the basket. If he would drive more I think we would see a better PG. I'm not saying he has to finish but I know he can drive and find other teammates for open shots. I think Paulus will make strides. Will he ever reach his HS potential, who knows?

Paulus more or less stopped being a playmaking point guard last year. I will be very surprised if he makes major strides in this area next year. If he does, then our prospects look a lot brighter. He's a solid shooter and offensive weapon, but he's far from the playmaking point guard we need. And it's not just driving that is the issue. It's confidence against pressure defense and it's ability to defend quicker players on the perimeter.


Now, I know I said senior leadership, but what I really mean is upperclassmen as a whole. We had Nelson, Paulus, and McClure who doesn't play much. Looking at our NC teams you can see that is not enough leadership. Next year we will have Paulus, McClure, Pocius, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas, and Zoubek as upperclassmen. That's a lot more maturity for the team. The difference between freshman & sophomores and then a junior mentally and physically can be quite big so I mean there is a good chance we make another jump next year.

I think the thing that the Final Four squads had was more talent, not simply more experience. Without Rose, Memphis' veterans don't sniff the final four. Without Love, the same is true at UCLA. Those two were the best players on their team, and were largely the reason for their success. UNC wasn't that much more experienced than us, playing one senior sparingly and three juniors regularly, along with a bunch of sophomores. Their advantage was in depth and balance.


Most of our players have plenty of areas they could improve on. Zoubek and Lance can improve their bodies and their post games, Singler can improve his body, McClure could improve his shot, and on and on. So I mean we don't have to stay status quo. If these kids get out and work hard which I'm sure they will then there is no reason we don't improve. We will have more upperclassmen than many teams in America. These cinderella squads in the NCAAs usually are junior and senior laden teams so think about how good we could be with mostly juniors and seniors especially considering our players have more raw talent.

I agree that our team has many areas in which we can improve internally. But I'm less optimistic that we'll see huge strides. Hopefully I'm wrong. But McClure has needed to improve his offensive game for three summers already, and hasn't made substantial improvements. Zoubek has lost possibly half of his summer with another foot surgery, and he had a lot to work on to begin with. I really doubt Paulus is ever going to be a good perimeter defender, so unless we face teams in which we can hide him, he's going to be a liability on that end. I guess I disagree that there's no reason we won't improve if the guys simply work hard this offseason. I think it would take a lot of things going right even with the hard work for us to improve this offseason.

That's not to say that no improvement next year is a terrible thing. We'll still be a top-15 team, just like this year. In fact, we may or may not be better next year (relative to the competition) simply due to attrition of some of the better programs. And even with the holes we have, we could underdog our way to the Final Four with a good draw and good fortune. But I don't see us jumping into the category that this year's final four teams had - being sure-fire top-5 and strong favorites to make the final four. There are far worse positions to be in, of course.

matrix1686
04-09-2008, 11:17 AM
I think the thing that the Final Four squads had was more talent, not simply more experience. Without Rose, Memphis' veterans don't sniff the final four. Without Love, the same is true at UCLA. Those two were the best players on their team, and were largely the reason for their success. UNC wasn't that much more experienced than us, playing one senior sparingly and three juniors regularly, along with a bunch of sophomores. Their advantage was in depth and balance.



But McClure has needed to improve his offensive game for three summers already, and hasn't made substantial improvements.


I agree that Rose and Love had a big part in UCLA and Memphis' Final Four runs and that all four teams had more talent than everybody else, but next year we could have more talent than most of the nation. Many teams are probably going to lose a lot of players. I would expect UCLA to lose Collison, Love, and Westbrook. Kansas should lose Rush, Arhtur, and probably Chalmers. Memphis loses Rose and CDR. Then look at the incoming freshman class. There really aren't any major studs like Love, Rose, Beasely, and Gordon. Jennings is good, but Arizona will prob lose Bayless and Budinger. So who does that leave near the top of the standings? UConn could lose Thabeet so I mean there should be a lot of attrition from major schools this offseason. That is not even mentioning UNC where hopefully Hansbrough, Lawson, and Ellington leave. When you look at these things then you have to think Duke will have as much talent as anybody next year with Singler and Henderson.

Just a quick note on McClure. I think he was really coming along offensively the year before. He was starting to knock down open jump shots and even three pointers, but then he got injured and obviously regressed to the point of not shooting at all last year. I think if he can just get back to that level of having confidence to take an open shot and hit it than that would be a major help because he's such a great hustler.

jimsumner
04-09-2008, 03:13 PM
"But McClure has needed to improve his offensive game for three summers already, and hasn't made substantial improvements."

Yea, that whole walking around on crutches thing is just such an excuse. I mean, three knee operations is nothing.

CDu
04-09-2008, 03:24 PM
"But McClure has needed to improve his offensive game for three summers already, and hasn't made substantial improvements."

Yea, that whole walking around on crutches thing is just such an excuse. I mean, three knee operations is nothing.

Knee operations or no knee operations, do you expect him to have an offensive game next year?

I'm not trying to badmouth anyone. Far from it - I love the effort McClure has put in and wish everyone gave what he gives to the program. I'm just trying to point out that hard work doesn't guarantee a new and improved player.

As is, we've got a really good team. I'm going to be cautious in my optimism about some of the pieces we have getting substantially better.

Saratoga2
04-09-2008, 03:27 PM
I didn't mean we overachieved by a lot and that we weren't supposed to be very good. The facts are we lost 11 games the year before and to be ranked at #11 in the preseason was a little ridiculous. Now, I thought we were probably closer to #15 or #16 at the beginning of the year which is where we ended up finishing.

I do agree it was a tale of two seasons. We were consistently overachieving throughout much of the regular season and playing at a top 5 to top 10 level, and obviously the second half was much harder and disappointing. Before the year I thought a Sweet 16 would have been good, and by the end of the year I had Elite Eight expectations. So obviously very disappointing, but I am just saying we still had a solid to good year for all our deficiencies (like I said earlier we didn't have a strong senior class and most of the players on our team were still very young). My whole point was to say we shouldn't be too disappointed, but we should be excited because these next three years could be special with everybody becoming older and improving.

Nelson recently played and starred in a high level all star type game. His game was obviously back to excellent mid season form. I still tend to attribute his lack of quality play for the last few games to illness, even though he said no. If Nelson played anywhere near his best in the last couple, Duke would have at least advanced to the Great 8. We would have thought that accomplishment to be outstanding. It was just the way we lost that caused all the anguish.

Not only was Nelson way off his game but it appeared Thomas was also. He was probably ill as well.

My point is we will have equal talent next year and if we keep them healthy we will likely be a Great 8 team. Once at that level, who knows. Get them flu shots next season.