PDA

View Full Version : Taylor King Theory



houstondukie
03-22-2008, 04:43 PM
I'm sure everyone will have their "theories" on why Duke struggled the second half of the season. But one thing I think few have talked about, in large part because most view him as a "luxury" is Taylor King.

Have people forgetten that King was a DOUBLE-DIGIT scorer in the first half of the season? Have people forgetten how much we loved our bench? King is not just a role player and his 3 point shooting is not a luxury.

I don't blame King at all; he is a freshmen afterall who will continue to get better and who I expect will make a big jump next yr. But he peaked early in the season and its not coincidental that so did Duke. In my opinion, he covered up many of Duke's weaknesses. We could get away with our lack of size, etc because King would erase all that with double digit scoring. Without him, we have lost that and our weakness are more evident.

battierfan
03-22-2008, 04:45 PM
I'm sure everyone will have their "theories" on why Duke struggled the second half of the season. But one thing I think few have talked about, in large part because most view him as a "luxury" is Taylor King.

Have people forgetten that King was a DOUBLE-DIGIT scorer in the first half of the season? Have people forgetten how much we loved our bench? King is not just a role player and his 3 point shooting is not a luxury.

I don't blame King at all; he is a freshmen afterall who will continue to get better and who I expect will make a big jump next yr. But he peaked early in the season and its not coincidental that so did Duke. In my opinion, he covered up many of Duke's weaknesses. We could get away with our lack of size, etc because King would erase all that with double digit scoring. Without him, we have lost that and our weakness are more evident.

No we haven't forgotten. But King did or did not do something such that K was displeased and basically shut him down this season. I wish K would relax more and that feeling would extend to the team. He's such an uptight perfectionist that our players don't seem to respond to that when the whole season is on the line.

houstondukie
03-22-2008, 04:48 PM
No we haven't forgotten. But King did or did not do something such that K was displeased and basically shut him down this season. I wish K would relax more and that feeling would extend to the team. He's such an uptight perfectionist that our players don't seem to respond to that when the whole season is on the line.

I'm not sure I agree becuase King has not performed ON the court.

DukeCO2009
03-22-2008, 05:05 PM
I think King either needs to sit the entire game or get at least twice the amount of time he's getting now. He gets so few opportunities to play that he's ice-cold when he comes off the bench; he misses shots, and then he goes right back to the bench. Give him some time to warm up and get into the flow of the game and he'll be good for 7-10 points and a few boards per contest.

battierfan
03-22-2008, 05:11 PM
I'm not sure I agree becuase King has not performed ON the court.

Like you, I am not sure. I've seen this debate for years on this board: sometimes there's a trade-off between letting the team learn from errors in games and actually winning the game. K has to make a choice. If King was not doing something he was told and not working hard to improve on that, then maybe you're right. But some people don't respond well to being benched, while others do. It's something that is done on a case-by-case basis, and K knows what he's doing, as far as I'm concerned. The thread was started with the point that King went from being a significant contributor to a marginal player. This is tough to explain and we can only guess.

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 05:44 PM
FWIW, King scored in double digits 6 times this season, all in games prior to beginning the ACC schedule.

He also missed 3 wide open shots in the first half of the loss to WV.

houstondukie
03-22-2008, 05:46 PM
FWIW, King scored in double digits 6 times this season, all in games prior to beginning the ACC schedule.

He also missed 3 wide open shots in the first half of the loss to WV.

That's my point...where did his offense go? It wasn't just this game but the second half of the season. Maybe we overachieved at the start of the season, but that had a lot to do with King's success.

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 05:59 PM
That's my point...where did his offense go? It wasn't just this game but the second half of the season. Maybe we overachieved at the start of the season, but that had a lot to do with King's success.

Not sure, but I'd guess that a combination of the level of competition guarding him coupled with his reduced minutes due to his own defensive shortcomings and his general streakiness probably contributed.

IMO, King will get better, but I'd be astonished if he were ever more than a role player coming off the bench for an occasional offensive spark. I'd love to be wrong, though.

trinitydevil
03-22-2008, 06:01 PM
I'm not sure I agree becuase King has not performed ON the court.

Or was he even given a chance to perform on the court. Let me say this, in the Belmont game, he hit a big shot at the end of the half, and we never saw him in the 2nd. He hit a nice jumper today, and did not play in the 2nd half.

I think it's more that he wasn't given a chance as opposed to not performing when given one. I kid cannot get into a flow when playing 3 minutes at a time. Ask ANY of them...

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 06:06 PM
Or was he even given a chance to perform on the court. Let me say this, in the Belmont game, he hit a big shot at the end of the half, and we never saw him in the 2nd. He hit a nice jumper today, and did not play in the 2nd half.

I think it's more that he wasn't given a chance as opposed to not performing when given one. I kid cannot get into a flow when playing 3 minutes at a time. Ask ANY of them...

Along with that shot, he also missed 3 wide open misses and a defensive miscue during that limited stretch.

Fair or not, he's really only in the game to hit those shots. He's a streaky shooter and, as such, when he's not hitting those it's tough to keep with him in the game at this stage in the season.

houstondukie
03-22-2008, 06:09 PM
Or was he even given a chance to perform on the court. Let me say this, in the Belmont game, he hit a big shot at the end of the half, and we never saw him in the 2nd. He hit a nice jumper today, and did not play in the 2nd half.

I think it's more that he wasn't given a chance as opposed to not performing when given one. I kid cannot get into a flow when playing 3 minutes at a time. Ask ANY of them...

I see your point and agree with you for the most part. But I have to say that at the beginning of King's downward progression, he was given playing time. And during those games his shooting % was very poor. Perhaps the argument could be made that Coach K should of let King play through his struggles, but for whatever reason, he didn't. And when King continued to play poorly, he just didn't stick with him, especially since King doesn't have much more to offer at this point in his career other than shooting.

trinitydevil
03-22-2008, 06:23 PM
I also saw a couple of good defensive plays TK made. I'm not saying he is a star, I am saying as a shooter has to be in the flow, and playing 2-3 minutes will not allow that to happen. Ask any expert and they will tell you the same. If you pull a kid after he misses a shot or two, his confidence is destroyed. Ask any shooting coach and they will tell to shoot well, you must have confidence and to keep shooting.

Ok, you talk about he missed 2 shots, take a look at Markies shooting percentages, rebounding and turnover stats and tell me why he should have played considering those facts. At one point this afternoon, he was 3 of his last 17 shots! That's a lot worse than 1 of 3. I don't care what a guy HAS done, unfortunately, it's what can you do for me NOW. There was, and is, NO tomorrow. It's over...

DukeColonial
03-22-2008, 06:27 PM
It may be blasphemous, but JJ in his early career was just as streaky and just as much of a liability on defense as King is, yet he played tons of minutes. I think King could definitely have helped the team today. Even if he was out there missing shots and playing poor defense, would the outcome of the game really have changed? Would his misses have counted for double or something? I didn't exactly see Paulus, Nelson, Singler or Henderson lighting it up out there or playing particularly strong defense.

trinitydevil
03-22-2008, 06:27 PM
It occurred when he came to offer weak side help, and a pass was made to the man he left. Had he not left the man, the other player would have dunked. So, was it TK's fault, or the player who was beat in the first place. Many (not saying you) see the ball, and not what happens to actually create that situation. Yes. TK's man scored, but it was because he left to offer help. Watch the replay....

houstondukie
03-22-2008, 06:39 PM
It wasn't just his individual scoring that made us dangerous earlier in the season, but also the fact that driving lanes were created for Henderson, Nelson etc. In my opinion, this team became too one-on-one oriented. Yes, we are a drive and kick team, but you can't just lower your head and drive. You need ball movement to create openings and 3 point shooting to extend the defense. King provided the 3 point shooting and made opportunities for our penetrators. The other dimension that we lost with King's struggles was the "knockout punch." He was so good at extending a 5-6 point duke lead to a blowout. He was that explosive and the perfect spark off the bench.

It's unbelievable how little we talk about our bench now, when at the start of the year, everyone was in love with our bench and pointed to it as our greatest strength.

DukeHoopsGuru
03-22-2008, 06:41 PM
Couldn't agree more. We're not at practice so nobody can say for sure, but King rebounds, and he also is around the ball a lot. Shooters need some time. All I know is when he was in the game a lot this year Duke's +/- seemed to be in the positive. So he missed 2 threes. Big freaking deal. So did everyone else. Give the kid some burn.

The shortening of the bench made no sense this season. Especially with a team that needed to run to mask patently obvious weaknesses.

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 06:42 PM
Ok, you talk about he missed 2 shots, take a look at Markies shooting percentages, rebounding and turnover stats and tell me why he should have played considering those facts. At one point this afternoon, he was 3 of his last 17 shots! That's a lot worse than 1 of 3. I don't care what a guy HAS done, unfortunately, it's what can you do for me NOW. There was, and is, NO tomorrow. It's over...

I agree, Demarcus was off and I would've liked to give him less minutes. IMO, Coach K is loyal to a fault with his seniors. Think JJ Redick, Trajan Langdon, etc.

I'm not saying King shouldn't have played some in the second half, I'm just saying that he didn't do too much in the first half to give us any indication that he would have been a savior. That said, I would not have minded give him a few minutes when we couldn't hit the broad side of the barn, however (between the first 3:00 minutes of the first half and the last 1:50 in the second half, we were 0-15 on threes).


It occurred when he came to offer weak side help, and a pass was made to the man he left. Had he not left the man, the other player would have dunked. So, was it TK's fault, or the player who was beat in the first place. Many (not saying you) see the ball, and not what happens to actually create that situation. Yes. TK's man scored, but it was because he left to offer help. Watch the replay....

I was aware of that. Not saying he was the only one at fault. Problem is, when he came over to give help defense he did it without cutting off the obvious passing lane. It does little good to help on defense if you don't position yourself to cut off the passing lane as you come over. To me, he appears to "amped" on offense and defense, which may be the cause of some of his woes. Fortunately, I think he'll get over this (and yes, more minutes may help him settle in to a comfort zone). Still, unlike others, I don't see anything in his overall game that screams anything other than offensive spark role player. I truly hope I'm wrong.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-22-2008, 06:55 PM
Still, unlike others, I don't see anything in his overall game that screams anything other than offensive spark role player. I truly hope I'm wrong.

We've got three seasons to see what Taylor can become, and I'm with you that I can't predict one way or the other what that will be.

I am confused about his role this season. If we think of him as a little more than a "spark plug", why didn't we try him in numerous games where we sorely needed a spark? In the second half of today's game, for example, nobody could hit a shot. Why not bring TK in after a timeout and run a double screen to get him an open look? If he misses, oh well, someone else has one fewer miss and we've got a good shot at the long rebound. If he hits, the entire team get energized, we cut into the lead, he draws more defensive attention, etc.

This won't pay off every time, in fact it may only work 1/4 of the time, but it costs so little why not spin the wheel? As it was TK got 4 minutes total, none, iirc, in the second half. Personally, I'd love to give him 10-12 minutes since he at least draws a defender outside and opens up lanes for G, Jon, and Nelson. But given the way Kyle, Nelson, etc were playing, what's the downside to 1-2 shots just to see?

TampaDuke
03-22-2008, 07:07 PM
If we think of him as a little more than a "spark plug", why didn't we try him in numerous games where we sorely needed a spark? In the second half of today's game, for example, nobody could hit a shot. Why not bring TK in after a timeout and run a double screen to get him an open look? If he misses, oh well, someone else has one fewer miss and we've got a good shot at the long rebound. If he hits, the entire team get energized, we cut into the lead, he draws more defensive attention, etc.

I agree. Not sure why he didn't get some time in the second half. Couldn't have hurt.

trinitydevil
03-22-2008, 07:36 PM
I agree, Demarcus was off and I would've liked to give him less minutes. IMO, Coach K is loyal to a fault with his seniors. Think JJ Redick, Trajan Langdon, etc.

I'm not saying King shouldn't have played some in the second half, I'm just saying that he didn't do too much in the first half to give us any indication that he would have been a savior. That said, I would not have minded give him a few minutes when we couldn't hit the broad side of the barn, however (between the first 3:00 minutes of the first half and the last 1:50 in the second half, we were 0-15 on threes).



I was aware of that. Not saying he was the only one at fault. Problem is, when he came over to give help defense he did it without cutting off the obvious passing lane. It does little good to help on defense if you don't position yourself to cut off the passing lane as you come over. To me, he appears to "amped" on offense and defense, which may be the cause of some of his woes. Fortunately, I think he'll get over this (and yes, more minutes may help him settle in to a comfort zone). Still, unlike others, I don't see anything in his overall game that screams anything other than offensive spark role player. I truly hope I'm wrong.

I didn't say he was our savior, and I know you didn't say I said that. I'm just a bit miffed that he allowed Markie so much freedom when others get none. I think it really hurt us. Good points though, and thanks for the fair rebuttal!

Cameron
03-23-2008, 12:53 PM
I think King either needs to sit the entire game or get at least twice the amount of time he's getting now. He gets so few opportunities to play that he's ice-cold when he comes off the bench; he misses shots, and then he goes right back to the bench. Give him some time to warm up and get into the flow of the game and he'll be good for 7-10 points and a few boards per contest.

I certainly agree with this sentiment. While Taylor didn't exactly step in and hit his open three looks the last few weeks of the season (and yesterday his shot looked beyond off, it was packed up and in the summer gym), as others have pointed out, he also didn't exactly get the best of opportunities some nights to turn on that switch. (Yesterday was the exception. K gave Taylor a decent amount of time to get things rolling, but he just couldn't.)

I can recall numerous games where Taylor wouldn't enter the game until the 7, 8 minute mark, expected to come right in and produce. Well, that's a very hard thing to do when you've been sitting stiffly on the bench for nearly 45 minutes. I'm sorry, but even the best of shooters, especially freshman who are already unproven and a little tentative to begin with, would find this a difficult task. Not everyone can be Steve Kerr and come in off the bench after sitting for ten years and lead the Spurs on to the NBA Finals.

If you would go back and look to earlier in the year, when Taylor was receiving BIG minutes, which was translating into BIG Taylor confidence, against great clubs like Wisconsin and decent ACC ones like Virginia Tech, he was producing quite nicely and quite assuredly. He believed in himself, because Coach was believing in him. Once Taylor's minutes went to Hell, I think he became very shaky and lost a lot of that confidence, finding game time situations more like a pressure cooker than anything resembling fun. In a sense, I believe Taylor was "playing not to lose," or, rather, "playing not to sit." Nobody is going to play well sporting that type of ideology. Just not going to happen.

Now I certainly don't know the entire situation that resulted in Taylor's playing time decrease. From the outside looking in, a good guess as any would simply be the fact that Taylor's defense was not quite up to par (but, in the end, whose was, really?) Or perhaps Taylor's work ethic in practice wasn't befitting of K's standards. I don't really know. I would guess it had nothing to do with the kid's attitude, however, as he seems to love Duke University and his opportunity of playing there just as much, if not more, than anyone on the team. He's a Blue Devil through and through. You can just see it. He never takes a play off cheering for his teammates. He's a great kid.

Was Taylor's playing decrease the reason we are not going to be winning a national title this season? Of course not. But, I do think there is some sort of connection to our early season success as a team and Taylor's early season success as an individual. I mean, when he scored 15 points against Wisconsin, hitting five long range bombs, we destroyed a club that has become just as much a favorite as anyone to reach San Antonio in the next couple of weeks. Wisconsin is a solid, solid club, especially defensively, and Taylor lit them up. He can play folks, against good competition. So get that "But he played against soft comp early in the year" crap out of here.

I'd just like to end by saying, What happened since Wisconsin?

topps coach
03-23-2008, 01:28 PM
I hope that TK does a JJ over the summer and decides to totally commit himself to workout program that redefines his body and helps his overall quickness so he becomes more than a 3-point shooter.

JBDuke
03-23-2008, 01:32 PM
I hope that TK does a JJ over the summer and decides to totally commit himself to workout program that redefines his body and helps his overall quickness so he becomes more than a 3-point shooter.

Supposedly, one of the reasons Taylor chose to come to Duke was that he saw how JJ transformed himself from a one-dimensional player into a multi-dimensional scorer, and he hoped to do the same. It will require a lot of hard work, but if he's truly dedicated to making this change, it can happen. He won't be a JJ clone, obviously, but he's got size and skills that JJ didn't have that can be fostered to really impact the game in different ways. Here's hoping he makes it happen.

tech9127
03-23-2008, 01:39 PM
One question and one thought....
First in relation to this back and forth about Taylor King....
We're getting our tails handed to us on the boards during the entire second half and sitting on the bench is the one guy in the entire game who made an impact while he was in both defensively and on the boards. Why was David McClure glued to the bench in the second half?
Second, you know the really ironic part of this Taylor King discussion is that we were beat today primarily by the performance of one Joe Mazzulla, a non starter who probably wouldn't be given the opportunity had he been wearing Duke blue or black or whatever it is. i.e. Nolan Smith

JasonEvans
03-23-2008, 01:46 PM
We're getting our tails handed to us on the boards during the entire second half and sitting on the bench is the one guy in the entire game who made an impact while he was in both defensively and on the boards. Why was David McClure glued to the bench in the second half?


Not sure it belongs in this thread, but in answer to the above-- I do recall McClure playing in the second half some and his D was still very solid. But, if he did not play as much as you would like-- I would answer that our biggest struggle in the 2nd half was putting the darn ball in the hoop. I love McClure, but he is not the guy you turn to when your team is struggling to score the ball.

--Jason "If King had hit 1 or 2 of those wide open 3s in the first half, I think the entire game goes differently" Evans

topps coach
03-23-2008, 01:51 PM
David can not see much playing time until he gains enough confidence in his offensive game that we are not playing 4 on 5 when he is in the game

johnb
03-23-2008, 01:54 PM
If the regulars were sick/exhausted and if King were not, 10 minutes in the second half might have helped, but, for some reason none of the players or coaches called to tell me how they were feeling.

Bluedog
03-23-2008, 01:59 PM
Supposedly, one of the reasons Taylor chose to come to Duke was that he saw how JJ transformed himself from a one-dimensional player into a multi-dimensional scorer, and he hoped to do the same. It will require a lot of hard work, but if he's truly dedicated to making this change, it can happen. He won't be a JJ clone, obviously, but he's got size and skills that JJ didn't have that can be fostered to really impact the game in different ways. Here's hoping he makes it happen.

Once during the WVU game and once during Clemson, Taylor made a great head fake from 3-point land, dribbled past his defender and pulled up for a 17-footer. They were beautiful moves. I didn't see him making shots off the dribble ever early in the year, so perhaps he's already progressed a bit. He definitely could improve a lot more on this, but I think he most definitely has the potential to be much more than a catch-and-shoot player and agree with your sentiment.

johnb
03-23-2008, 05:28 PM
Once during the WVU game and once during Clemson, Taylor made a great head fake from 3-point land, dribbled past his defender and pulled up for a 17-footer. They were beautiful moves. I didn't see him making shots off the dribble ever early in the year, so perhaps he's already progressed a bit. He definitely could improve a lot more on this, but I think he most definitely has the potential to be much more than a catch-and-shoot player and agree with your sentiment.

Agree with that. He's clearly working very hard to be a better all-around player, and I think there is a good chance that he will turn out to be super.

Huh?
03-23-2008, 05:33 PM
A weapon like TK should not be on the bench.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-23-2008, 06:04 PM
If the regulars were sick/exhausted and if King were not, 10 minutes in the second half might have helped, but, for some reason none of the players or coaches called to tell me how they were feeling.

IIRC, Taylor was one of the players that was down with the flu. I'd have loved to see him get a few more chances, but if he was as sick as everyone else I can (sort of) understand not rolling the dice. I also suspect (although I have no inside information) that Dave spent a lot of this season injured but decided not to go the Matt Christiensen route and didn't opt for another redshirt season. Dave's disappearance is just too mysterious for me to imagine any other explanation.

Cameron
03-23-2008, 09:54 PM
-Jason "If King had hit 1 or 2 of those wide open 3s in the first half, I think the entire game goes differently" Evans

Same could be said about that Paulus 30 foot pull up that drilled the inside of the cylinder and flew out, heading in the direction of a West Virginia lay up. If that shot falls, giving Greg his third straight triple and Duke a sizable lead, I think we open the game wide open. We would have been on top of the world as a team. I believe the miss caused a five point swing, just like that.

We just seemed to hang onto that eight point lead the first half for far too long. In the end, our inability to open the game up after we built that initial cushion cost us the chance at playing this coming weekend. A problem we've been having for awhile now.

gannon4429
03-24-2008, 08:00 AM
FWIW, King scored in double digits 6 times this season, all in games prior to beginning the ACC schedule.

He also missed 3 wide open shots in the first half of the loss to WV.

Let's not start counting and throwing stones at people who missed wide open shots v. WV; that's a bit disengenuous.

whereinthehellami
03-24-2008, 11:23 AM
When Taylor is in the game he is often targeted by the other teams with their offense. His slower foot speed and freshman anticipation made it easy for other teams to go after him. Marty gets the same treatment from other teams.

I think King shoots out of the flow of the offense too much. Part of the problem comes from him being more of a catch and shoot player. He did have some nice mid-range moves towards the end of the year.

I'd like to see Taylor reshape his body in the off-season. Really work on his quickness and dribbling.

Duvall
03-24-2008, 11:31 AM
We're going to need a new board just for backup quarterback threads once Pocius comes back, aren't we?

TampaDuke
03-24-2008, 11:50 AM
Let's not start counting and throwing stones at people who missed wide open shots v. WV; that's a bit disengenuous.

Agreed. My post wasn't laying any blame on TK or anyone else, just responding to earlier posts by pointing out that his few minutes in the first half were not so productive as to obviously warrant extensive minutes later in the game. Unfortunately, no one seemed able to make a shot. As I mentioned earlier (perhaps in the other thread), between about 2 minutes into the game and 1:45 left in the game, we were 0-15 on 3 point shots, most of them open.

trinity92
03-24-2008, 03:33 PM
We've got three seasons to see what Taylor can become, and I'm with you that I can't predict one way or the other what that will be.

I sure hope you're right-- with all his potential and so much time spent on the bench this year, I'm worried TK could go the way of Mike Boateng and Jamal Boykin. Would have been nice to have them out there on Saturday-- eh?

JasonEvans
03-24-2008, 04:19 PM
I sure hope you're right-- with all his potential and so much time spent on the bench this year, I'm worried TK could go the way of Mike Boateng and Jamal Boykin. Would have been nice to have them out there on Saturday-- eh?

Who is Mike Boateng?

;)

I think it worth pointing out that the number of kids who have transferred from Duke and turned into significantly better players at their new school is extremely small. Some of them start a few games, some of them become role players, but I think Billy McCaffrey is the only one to really become a star at his new school (and it was clear that McC was on his way to being a star at Duke, though not as a PG and McC's transfer to Vandy did nothing to help his NBA stock anyway).

That said, I wish Eric "Mike" Boateng and Jamaal Boykin the best and hope they break the mold. They both seem like really good kids who just wanted something Duke could not give them. Boykin, especially, looks like a kid who could carve out a decent career for himself at Cal.

Still, I would be quite surprised if Taylor "gave up on Duke" so quickly.

--Jason "Taylor had far more success this year than anyone else who has transferred in the past decade or so" Evans

Highlander
03-24-2008, 04:21 PM
I sure hope you're right-- with all his potential and so much time spent on the bench this year, I'm worried TK could go the way of Mike Boateng and Jamal Boykin. Would have been nice to have them out there on Saturday-- eh?

Well, it's Eric Boateng first of all, not Mike. Secondly, neither of those guys have set the world on fire this year playing for much less competitive teams, so I doubt they would have added much on Saturday had they been here. IIRC, Boateng plays off the bench for Arizona State. Boykin's at Cal, and he's 6'7" 230. That makes him an inch shorter than Kyle/Lance, and an inch taller than Dave/Taylor. I'd submit there wasn't anything Jamal would have been able to do that those four couldn't have also done. Season statistics for those guys are below.

2007-08 Statistics:
ASU - Boateng, Eric PPG 3.9 APG 0.2 RPG 2.7 BPG 0.3 SPG 0.1
Cal - Boykin, Jamal PPG 7.8 APG 1.3 RPG 4.0 BPG 0.3 SPG 0.3

Thomas, Lance PPG 4.3 APG 0.3 RPG 3.3 BPG 0.4 SPG 0.6
Zoubeck, Brian PPG 3.8 APG 0.5 RPG 3.4 BPG 0.7 SPG 0.4

I would also hate to see King transfer as he has a lot of promise. We will be loaded again next year at SG/SF with Scheyer, Henderson, King, Pocius, and Williams capable of playing what essentially amounts to 2 spots on the court. King is going to have to beat out Williams and Pocius to be a backup guard, or Czyz/Thomas (whichever one doesn't start) to be a backup 4. Right now he's Kyle's primary backup, so it's his job to lose. I don't think he cracks the starting lineup next year unless we are injured or he gets quicker on his feet this summer, but he can definitely be part of the rotation. The bottom line is that minutes are earned, and King can earn his just like everyone else.

On a side note, wouldn't it be ironic if, with the lack of elite post players we have, we end up losing guard/small forwards to transfer?

I look at UNC's roster for next year, especially if Hansbrough stays, and can't figure out how in the world all those post guys will get minutes.

whereinthehellami
03-24-2008, 04:33 PM
I look at UNC's roster for next year, especially if Hansbrough stays, and can't figure out how in the world all those post guys will get minutes.

Could be an interesting off-season for the folks down the road. If everyone comes back.....don't want to try and wrap my mind around that one. It scares me.

trinity92
03-24-2008, 04:45 PM
Well, it's Eric Boateng first of all, not Mike.

LOL leave it to DBR's name/spelling police. I think Michael Thompson's transfer to MSU was in my mind when I switched with Eric.

Kdogg
03-24-2008, 05:49 PM
LOL leave it to DBR's name/spelling police. I think Michael Thompson's transfer to MSU was in my mind when I switched with Eric.

He went to Northwestern. Mike Chappell went to MSU.

Lulu
03-24-2008, 07:11 PM
The focus of this thread seems to have turned to why King didn't play in the final game, rather than the whole second half of the season.

We honestly have more talent on our bench than many teams who play deeper than us (and would have likely beaten us in that final game). As has been said many times, one of the reasons we are very much hated is because of the McD AA's riding our bench, and the view that we do not accomplish what we should with such a roster. I do not mean this as an attack in any way, it is simply what is often said about us, and I honestly can't find any way of disputing this whenever one of my friendly foes decides to mention it yet again.

I wish I knew the reason for this, and so that's what I'm asking. Is it everyone's opinion that this is just part of K's philosophy about earning playing time, or should these guys really be on the bench sacrificing their time to our presumably better starters? (And if our starters are that much better than the McD's on the bench, shouldn't we be unstoppable?) Does King lose his playing time in practice? or does he lose it within the very small margin of error we seem to observe during games? I really wish I knew if it was game performance or practice time that ultimately determines the better part of our guys' PT.

We might get tired during a game occasionally, but I don't believe in the season-long tired-legs theory that every ESPN analyst seems to promote. We crack under pressure, from a team-wide viewpoint regarding season-ending do-or-die games, to individual players throughout the season who perhaps cannot afford a single mistake else ride the bench.

Yes, we were "young". But not as young as we were last year. And there seems to be a lot of comparably young teams achieving more. Perhaps with less. What's going on?

This post contains multiple ideas all thrown together willy-nilly. I make no apologies.