PDA

View Full Version : 2009-2010 MBB team



Pages : [1] 2

houstondukie
03-30-2008, 02:47 AM
I think we will be very good next yr. but some are not as optomistic given that we don't have a true big man in the recruiting class. But even if you're not convinced next yrs. team has what it takes to win it all next yr., the Duke 2009-2010 team certainly will have a great shot.

I know, I know. This is way too early. But just for fun, imagine the possible roster:

C L. Thomas Sr.
PF K. Singler Jr.
SF G. Henderson Sr.
SG J. Scheyer Sr.
PG N. Smith Jr.

Key players off the bench:
C B. Zoubek Sr.
SF. T. King Jr.
SG. E. Williams So.
PF Mason Plumnee Fr.
SG M. Pocious Sr.
SF O. Cryz So.

What if we sign Kenny Boynton and Leslie McDonald? What if we also get a big guy like DeShawn Painter?

You can't tell me that if all these what ifs happen that Duke wouldn't be dominating.

I don't know what the point of my post is really, excepy maybe to say to those who think Duke is "down" that maybe Duke's next trip to the final four could be sooner than you think.

Maybe I'm just jealous of Carolina right now.

davekay1971
03-30-2008, 11:47 AM
Personally, I'm with you in your optimism about 2009-2010, and I'm actually pretty optimistic about next year as well.

Duke has a young team of players, all of whom will likely stay 4 years. Think about that. These are talented players, top recruits, who will stay 4 years. No one else has that. Think about the teams that "overachieve" in March, and how frequently you can trace it to experience - experience playing at the college level, and experience playing with each other.

The core of the 2008-2009 team will be juniors and sophomores, with a senior PG/SG and a senior "glue guy". Next year's team will be better than this year's. Unless Henderson goes pro after his junior year or Singler goes pro after his sophomore year, which I doubt, the 2010 will have a combination of depth, cohesiveness, and experience that is not likely to be matched by any other team in the nation.

JasonEvans
03-30-2008, 12:34 PM
I think we will be very good next yr. but some are not as optomistic given that we don't have a true big man in the recruiting class. But even if you're not convinced next yrs. team has what it takes to win it all next yr., the Duke 2009-2010 team certainly will have a great shot.

I know, I know. This is way too early. But just for fun, imagine the possible roster:

C L. Thomas Sr.
PF K. Singler Jr.
SF G. Henderson Sr.
SG J. Scheyer Sr.
PG N. Smith Jr.

Key players off the bench:
C B. Zoubek Sr.
SF. T. King Jr.
SG. E. Williams So.
PF Mason Plumnee Fr.
SG M. Pocious Sr.
SF O. Cryz So.


Umm, you are aware that with the exception of Plumlee, that is our roster for next year, right?

Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

Ignatius07
03-30-2008, 12:41 PM
2009-2010 should definitely be a good year, possibly regardless of how the rest of 2009 recruiting goes (of course, a bad year in 09 would hurt us down the road, but not really in the 09-10 season), if - as you mention - Henderson and Singler stay.

Just for fun, I would guess the odds of Gerald going pro after next season are above 50-50. From how I envision his career trajectory, he is going to have a monster year next year, both to make up for DeMarcus and because he'll continue his already considerable improvement. I would imagine he'd score above 15 or 16 points a game and be a likely candidate to go pro.

Singler is a much tougher read. I kind of think he is slightly below 50-50, of course depending on how the season unfolds. If, as I believe, next season becomes a sort-of three-headed monster on offense (Gerald, Jon, and Kyle), there is a good shot his stock will be pretty high. Would it be high enough (eg lottery) to make him go pro after his sophomore year? Tough to say - though it will supposedly be a weak draft.

mr. synellinden
03-30-2008, 12:52 PM
Umm, you are aware that with the exception of Plumlee, that is our roster for next year, right?

Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

And Paulus. But I agree with the point though ... as I've stated in other threads, Duke is a definite top 5 team next year and depending on who leaves other teams (e.g., UNC, Texas, UCLA) might be pre-season 1,2 or 3.

Saratoga2
03-30-2008, 01:43 PM
2009-2010 should definitely be a good year, possibly regardless of how the rest of 2009 recruiting goes (of course, a bad year in 09 would hurt us down the road, but not really in the 09-10 season), if - as you mention - Henderson and Singler stay.

Just for fun, I would guess the odds of Gerald going pro after next season are above 50-50. From how I envision his career trajectory, he is going to have a monster year next year, both to make up for DeMarcus and because he'll continue his already considerable improvement. I would imagine he'd score above 15 or 16 points a game and be a likely candidate to go pro.

Singler is a much tougher read. I kind of think he is slightly below 50-50, of course depending on how the season unfolds. If, as I believe, next season becomes a sort-of three-headed monster on offense (Gerald, Jon, and Kyle), there is a good shot his stock will be pretty high. Would it be high enough (eg lottery) to make him go pro after his sophomore year? Tough to say - though it will supposedly be a weak draft.

We will be very good at offense again with Henderson, Scheyer and Singler as you point out, but we will also have Paulus, Smith, Elliot and Pocius to provide additional scoring.

We do look questionable on front court defensive and offensive presence. We know Singler can play a good 4 but we need solid backups. Zoubek, Thomas, King and McClure are okay but they need to make a lot of progress to make this team competitive with the best. Since there is not new front court help coming this year except for Czyz, it doesn't appear that the problem will be solved. Plumlee comes a year later. Too early to tell what other changes will happen to the front court by then.

weezie
03-30-2008, 01:50 PM
Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

I dunno Jason. The media folks will be intent on keeping Duke down. I hope I'm wrong and you're right but they sure have enjoyed the pile on.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-30-2008, 03:01 PM
I think we will be very good next yr. but some are not as optomistic given that we don't have a true big man in the recruiting class. But even if you're not convinced next yrs. team has what it takes to win it all next yr., the Duke 2009-2010 team certainly will have a great shot.

I know, I know. This is way too early. But just for fun, imagine the possible roster:

C L. Thomas Sr.
PF K. Singler Jr.
SF G. Henderson Sr.
SG J. Scheyer Sr.
PG N. Smith Jr.

Key players off the bench:
C B. Zoubek Sr.
SF. T. King Jr.
SG. E. Williams So.
PF Mason Plumnee Fr.
SG M. Pocious Sr.
SF O. Cryz So.

What if we sign Kenny Boynton and Leslie McDonald? What if we also get a big guy like DeShawn Painter?

You can't tell me that if all these what ifs happen that Duke wouldn't be dominating.

I don't know what the point of my post is really, excepy maybe to say to those who think Duke is "down" that maybe Duke's next trip to the final four could be sooner than you think.

Maybe I'm just jealous of Carolina right now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if no one leaves and the above roster is correct, we will only have room for one scholarship player. A lot of that will have to do with how Henderson and Singler perform next year. Assuming we want a big man, we won't be able to take Boynton or McDonald. Would we take the best available player (Boynton) or would we go with Painter?

Cameron
03-30-2008, 03:24 PM
We will probably be lucky to keep Gerald around after his junior season, but, even if he leaves, what a nice thought it is to know that Elliot Williams will be ready and waiting. Wow, that is special.

Like Jason, I think we'll be a top five preseason next year. We have everyone back, are bringing in a scintillating freshman guard, and have a sophomore Kyle Singler. I know that sounds simple, but it's true. Singler could be an All-American next year, and I expect him to be in the running. He'll be our go to guy, that guy that we really lacked down the stretch (see? that thread saying we didn't need one was not quite right after all).

I really like our chances.

With that said, though, we would still be playing right now with one solid big man. Had we had that one big presence inside, we'd still be dancing. That might stop us from a Final Four next season. At least it could make it a lot tougher for us. If we can pull one in for 2010, or if Czyz or Mason or Lance or Brian really end up producing big in the paint (or if Kyle turns into that Laettner type leader), then I think we can win it all.

I'm hoping not, but I have a fear in the back of my head that says next season could spell out much of the same once we hit the later rounds (i.e Sweet 16 or Elite 8). Hope not, however.

chrisheery
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
Umm, you are aware that with the exception of Plumlee, that is our roster for next year, right?

Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

that's exactly what i was think . . . plus we will have a senior pg that shoots the lights out and an excellent role playing rebounder defender in mcclure. sounds like a nice team with plenty of big time experience from this year.

remember how much jason williams struggled early his freshman year? nolan will be a star.

houstondukie
03-30-2008, 04:47 PM
Umm, you are aware that with the exception of Plumlee, that is our roster for next year, right?

Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

Jumbo, I do realize this and that is why I am excited about next year too. But the key difference is the "class yr" that is next to everyone's name. Take Zoubek for example. Everyone hopes that by next yr. he will turn into a very good player, but by his senior yr. everyone will expect him to be one.

Plus, Kenny Boynton off the bench would be amazing.

DukeandKSUFanatic
03-30-2008, 04:53 PM
i have a question when i get the chance to watch Duke on tv i notice that King doesnt play much but when he does he always has a really good stroke from 3 range. There was one game a remeber were he could not miss.

chrisheery
03-30-2008, 04:55 PM
i have a question when i get the chance to watch Duke on tv i notice that King doesnt play much but when he does he always has a really good stroke from 3 range. There was one game a remeber were he could not miss.

thread on the taylor king topic. check it out. this and many other in depth thoughts are addressed. but the quick answer is, his defense was suspect early, then he got cold from long range later. next year, he will get more consistent playing time, but later in the year he had too much to catch up on to be part of the real rotation.

yancem
03-30-2008, 05:32 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if no one leaves and the above roster is correct, we will only have room for one scholarship player. A lot of that will have to do with how Henderson and Singler perform next year. Assuming we want a big man, we won't be able to take Boynton or McDonald. Would we take the best available player (Boynton) or would we go with Painter?

I'm counting 11 players listed and you;re allowed 13 scholarships, so that would leave 2 open spots assuming no one leaves early.

yancem
03-30-2008, 05:44 PM
Like Jason, I think we'll be a top five preseason next year. We have everyone back, are bringing in a scintillating freshman guard, and have a sophomore Kyle Singler. I know that sounds simple, but it's true. Singler could be an All-American next year, and I expect him to be in the running. He'll be our go to guy, that guy that we really lacked down the stretch (see? that thread saying we didn't need one was not quite right after all).

I really like our chances.

I generally agree that things look good next year but I think that the team needs to develop a solid chip on its shoulder. We seemed to have it earlier this year but lost it down the stretch. I'm hoping that Paulus, Scheyer and Henderson become strong leaders next year and carry an us against the world attitude through out the entire season.


With that said, though, we would still be playing right now with one solid big man. Had we had that one big presence inside, we'd still be dancing.

I don't know if we could hit 2 or 3 out of 15 3 pointers we would probably be dancing longer too.

Chicago 1995
03-30-2008, 06:11 PM
Umm, you are aware that with the exception of Plumlee, that is our roster for next year, right?

Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

Whether or not will be ranked in the top 5 -- and I don't think we will -- should we be?

We lose Markie. Markie was the best defensive player in the conference. He was our best rebounder outside of Kyle. More than that, he was a steadying influence for our team. We see how much we struggled the last couple of weeks when he wasn't effective, whether it nerves against UNC or the flu in the tourney.

Just as much, we see how important having two penetrating wings was for our offense when Gerald went down with his wrist injury. The character of our offense changed drastically when we only had one wing that could create off the bounce and get offense in the lane. Considering that we all seem to think that Jon's going to take the lion's share of Markie's minutes, we're going to need Jon to really develop his ability to score off the dribble and be able to do it pretty consistently like Markie did for our offense to continue to work as well as we'd like it to. Our offense this year really struggled when we had to have long stretches of Greg and Jon on the floor, and we're going to have to improve drastically to even be where we were when we were a top 5 team this year.

We're also not really adding parts that will help fill the holes this roster had even this year. We're going to have to count on Brian and Lance to improve more this offseason than they did the last -- and yes, if Brian's healthy, that will make a difference -- to fill the hole up front that was really problematic for us this year, especially in the last third of the season when we had no post offense at all.

I know there's a stark disagreement on this board about Greg, but even his defenders will (hopefully) admit that he's got limitations because of his lack of athleticism. Nolan Smith might well fill those holes in defense and creation of offense with the dribble, but Greg's going to get the lion's share of minutes. We all know that.

I know there will be improvement from season to season and development -- especially from Kyle, Nolan and Taylor -- but even with that development, we are what we were this year, a competative, talented but fatally flawed team. Even in a watered down college basketball world, that's not a top five team. At least it isn't if voters look beyond the name on the jersey and the Hall of Famer on the sideline.

I also don't think we'll be ranked in the top five -- although it's a lot of speculation until you see who will and won't reutrn.

I think for UNC to be ranked behind us, they'll have to lose all of Psycho-T, Lawson and Ellington.

UConn has no seniors of note and might only lose Thabeet to early entry.

Texas has no seniors of note, and even as important as Augustin is, I don't think they should be ranked behind us, whether DJ's in Austin or not.

Purdue was younger than we were, had a very good year and doesn't lose a player like Markie. Notre Dame only loses Rob Kurz.

Tennessee loses Lofton and one of the Smith's, but they bring back everyone else, and Lofton didn't carry that team much this year. He's a loss though.

Stanford could bring back everyone other than Finger -- who was pretty much a role player -- and Washington.

You've also got teams that suffer more substantial losses -- Michigan State for example -- that suffer losses, but were young, talented and more complete teams than we were. Michigan State should be ranked ahead of us going into next season. That's just one of those teams.

So I don't think we should be in the Top 5, and I actually don't think we will be in the Top 5.

And I know it doesn't matter.

I think we're all more worried about finishing strong, beating a team in the NCAA's seeded higher than an 8, seeing the second weekend of the tourney. Regardless of what the media ranks us next November, I'm more concerned about March, and I'm more concerned about overcoming the flaws that did us in this year, and will still be there next year.

SoCalDukeFan
03-30-2008, 06:16 PM
This is way too early.

I guess it is fun though.

davekay1971
03-30-2008, 06:21 PM
I don't think we'll be preseason top 5 either, and, franky, I hope we aren't. Duke needs to PROVE itself, and I don't want this team handed one thing. They need to come into the season with a chip on their shoulder. They need to be pissed about the 2nd half collapse against WVU. They need the media to dismiss them as the same team that lost to WVU, only without Nelson.

I do think, however, with the extra year of experience and development, they will contend at the end of the year. And, by that, I mean that they'll contend for the ACC title and be a factor in the NCAA tourney.

sagegrouse
03-30-2008, 06:42 PM
I dunno Jason. The media folks will be intent on keeping Duke down. I hope I'm wrong and you're right but they sure have enjoyed the pile on.

Weezie:

Duke is the poster child for an outstanding athletic program with a sensible balance between athletic excellence and academics. And the networks certainly bow in this direction in every program featuring Duke. With an improving football program, the picture would be complete.

Moreover, the leaders in the sports media appear to have enormous respect and evidently some affection for Coach K.

Now exactly how is the sports media keeping Duke basketball down or piling on? Are you talking about grads from the UNC School of Journalism, who have a lot of jobs in the Southeast? Or are we referring to a couple of guys at ESPN? To me, the locals seem to be more cheerleaders than anything else, which is true everywhere except the big city dailies and tabloids.

I thought the critical articles about last year and the NCAAT this year were justified and certainly predictable -- given duke's basketball pedigree. (That news hole for columnists is gaping and needs to be filled with something every couple of days.) And when you have as much success as Duke has had over the past 25 years, articles about the end of the dynasty are inevitable.

sagegrouse

mgtr
03-30-2008, 07:38 PM
I don't believe it is terribly important where we are ranked preseason. What matters is what we do postseason. When I was in high school in the midwest, we had a really, really good team (our center was Don Nelson). Our coach said, OK we can be ranked #1 all season (which we were), or we can we can win the state tournament (which we did not). We cannot do both, because it matters when we peak.
Many posters have made the point that we peaked too early this year. I agree. I don't know how to fix that problem, except by playing a whole lot of players a lot of time early. I don't think that Coach K wants to do that, and I would not dream of second guessing Coach K. So, I will go with him and hope for the best.

The1Bluedevil
03-30-2008, 07:38 PM
nbadraft.net's take on Elliot Williams.

http://nbadraft.net/2008mcdonalds002.asp

mgtr
03-30-2008, 07:43 PM
I am uncertain what it means that he cannot develop his "handle" at Duke, but then I am uncertain of the meaning of "handle."

Karl Beem
03-30-2008, 07:46 PM
The article is drivel.

"He also displayed a solid one-on-on ability using his handle, something that likely won't develop much at Duke considering their set play, ball control approach."


They apparently have never seen Duke play.

gofurman
03-30-2008, 07:47 PM
typically, when a team returns all starters except one - even with DNelson skills - they improve. Think Texas this year (no DURANT), Duke losing Carrawell, Kansas this year (Julian Vaughn), UNC (Marvin WIllim), ....

CDu
03-30-2008, 07:56 PM
We may or may not be preseason top 5. In my opinion, that's an irrelevant discussion. I'm more interested to see how good we actually are, not how good the media thinks we will be.

If Scheyer and Smith can take over the playmaking duties next year (allowing Paulus to play more SG) and at if either (a) one of Thomas/Zoubek/Czyz proves to be an impact player in the post or (b) two of Thomas/Zoubek/Czyz can provide consistent quality in the post next year, we'll certainly be among the best.

If neither of those things happen, we'll be a similar team to this year's team. If that happens, the question is whether teams figured out how to play us in the second half and thus we'll struggle more next year, or whether the second half was just a case of fatigue setting in (especially for Smith and Singler).

As for 2009, that's looking way too far ahead in my book. We have no idea how many of those guys will still be at Duke, and we have no idea who will get substantially better by then. And we have no idea what to expect from the freshman Plumlee. Too many question marks.

SupaDave
03-30-2008, 09:19 PM
I don't see Henderson, Singler, or anyone else leaving early for that matter. Why would they? Who needs the money? The situation looks pretty good from over here and this group will be VERY hungry next year.

We gets me geeked more than anything else is the fact that there IS room for improvement.

If Gerald's defense improves at the rate that it did in the last half of the season it should more than make up for the loss of Demarcus.

The beauty in it is that the Jr. year is the lightbulb year too. I'm pretty excited....

Charles Wicker
03-30-2008, 09:30 PM
It sounds redundant. We'll be awesome next year, more depth, more experience from current players, returning starters, AA freshmen class,
etc, etc. It's beginning to sound the same year after year, and some posters seem oblivious to the fact that DBB has had the same problems the past three to four years. I do believe the swagger is gone, and that beating Duke isn't that much of an upset anymore.

A fair assessment to date would be; we play great basketball during the season, as indicated by our conference and season record. Our players seem to have good character, great work ethic, a strong desire to develop and grow as a team, and are highly skilled at shooting from the perimeter, and using big runs to their advantage. So with that said, I too would have to agree with K; this was a great season.

But the reality of late seems to be; we lack the strong, aggressive physicality, and diversity of player/coach personnel to challenge for a title.
It pains me to see us get so excited about our regular season year in and year out, only to be eliminated by the same weaknesses that plague us to no end. Come on, we can't be that naive about the challenges this program faces. As a lifelong Duke fan, I'm starting to question the philosophy or the culture of the program to which I've been enamored with my w

My assertions may just be a far reach into something beyond basketball, but the weaknesses of this team seem quasi-philisophical.

It'll be better next season

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-30-2008, 09:50 PM
I was wrong then. I thought you only got 12.

Troublemaker
03-30-2008, 10:02 PM
We may or may not be preseason top 5. In my opinion, that's an irrelevant discussion. I'm more interested to see how good we actually are, not how good the media thinks we will be.

If Scheyer and Smith can take over the playmaking duties next year (allowing Paulus to play more SG) and at if either (a) one of Thomas/Zoubek/Czyz proves to be an impact player in the post or (b) two of Thomas/Zoubek/Czyz can provide consistent quality in the post next year, we'll certainly be among the best.

If neither of those things happen, we'll be a similar team to this year's team. If that happens, the question is whether teams figured out how to play us in the second half and thus we'll struggle more next year, or whether the second half was just a case of fatigue setting in (especially for Smith and Singler).

As for 2009, that's looking way too far ahead in my book. We have no idea how many of those guys will still be at Duke, and we have no idea who will get substantially better by then. And we have no idea what to expect from the freshman Plumlee. Too many question marks.

Agreed. Two keys are Nolan Smith and the outcome of the center situation. Re: Smith, I was saddened when he hyperextended his knee and was visibly affected by it down the stretch of the season. I think many of us believed at the beginning of the season that Nolan would being to challenge Paulus for the starting spot at the end of the season; instead, the knee injury happened and his average minutes went down. Hopefully he gets healthy this offseason, improves, and makes a big push next season. Re: center, we just have to cross our fingers. Entering their junior seasons, it's time for Z and LT to elevate their games and become consistently solid players if it's ever going to happen. If it doesn't happen, I'd like to see the coaching staff try King at the 5; it's stopgappish, but I think 20-25 minutes a game for Taylor where he has a chance to get into a shooting rhythm would strike a lot of fear into opposing teams, especially if a big has to guard him at 23 feet.

Troublemaker
03-30-2008, 10:23 PM
It sounds redundant. We'll be awesome next year, more depth, more experience from current players, returning starters, AA freshmen class,
etc, etc. It's beginning to sound the same year after year, and some posters seem oblivious to the fact that DBB has had the same problems the past three to four years. I do believe the swagger is gone, and that beating Duke isn't that much of an upset anymore.

A fair assessment to date would be; we play great basketball during the season, as indicated by our conference and season record. Our players seem to have good character, great work ethic, a strong desire to develop and grow as a team, and are highly skilled at shooting from the perimeter, and using big runs to their advantage. So with that said, I too would have to agree with K; this was a great season.

But the reality of late seems to be; we lack the strong, aggressive physicality, and diversity of player/coach personnel to challenge for a title.
It pains me to see us get so excited about our regular season year in and year out, only to be eliminated by the same weaknesses that plague us to no end. Come on, we can't be that naive about the challenges this program faces. As a lifelong Duke fan, I'm starting to question the philosophy or the culture of the program to which I've been enamored with my w

My assertions may just be a far reach into something beyond basketball, but the weaknesses of this team seem quasi-philisophical.

It'll be better next season

Anything's possible, of course, and it could be that Duke's elite days are over. The first thing that goes is always recruiting, and we've been shaky in that area recently, with Echenique being the latest miss. I'm still confident that recruiting will turn around, though; we would have to fare poorly (and, of course, everything is relative; our "shaky" or "poor" would be many a program's gold) in both the '09 and '10 classes before I'm convinced that Duke is done being a top dog. Also, there has to be some recruiting inertia built-in when you're on TV all the time like Duke is; if Duke has slipped or slips, it won't be far.

In the meantime, with the current players that we DO have, I continue to believe that they'll take another step forward next season. The '07 season basically set the baseline at 22-11 / 8-8 / 6-seed. This past season, we improved to 28-6 / 13-3 / 2-seed. Next season should see another uptick, albeit less dramatic, since there's less room to improve.

Because of the shakiness of recent recruiting, we don't have the out-and-out studs that can dominate early in their career like a Jason Williams or Elton Brand, or a Brandan Wright, Ty Lawson, or Tyler Hansbrough. But I still believe that the kids we have can compete for championships when they become older; next season is the proving ground for that belief, of course. Without studs, the reality is it just takes time for a team to develop; the cycle is longer.

So, to summarize, the way I see it:
(a) Looking towards the future, Duke's recruiting needs to improve or rather get back to the way it was for Duke to remain an elite top dog. Let's see how the '09 and '10 recruiting classes end up. Regardless, Duke will be a top 10 program because of recruiting inertia. The question really is whether we remain a top 3 program and Carolina's equal.
(b) In the meantime, the kids we DO have should get better and better each year. I'm hopeful for next season.

Ignatius07
03-30-2008, 10:58 PM
I think lots of fans on this board really over-dramatize our recruiting when it's described as poor or as having dropped off. Clearly big-man recruiting has hit a serious rut, though we still have plenty of opportunities to sign a big-time post guy in the 09 class. Until that happens, though, it's fair to say big-man recruiting is slipping.

We have not gotten truly elite-level (and by that I mean strong chance to be a one-and-done) talents in the past few years, but by and large we haven't tried. Other than Brandan Wright and Greg Monroe (who many people seem to think is looking like less and less of a one-and-done; we will see next season, but perhaps K recognized this and was prescient), there really haven't be any one-and-done threats on our recruiting radar. You can disagree with this strategy (I personally think it's important to supplement solid recruiting with an occasional one-and-done type), but it seems to be the case.

Given K's new strategy of recruiting 3-4 year players since the Deng/Livington debacle (and possibly even given that 2005 was an unmitigated disaster), this season is really the first year we would expect to see if K's idea is working. K seems to be trying to gather classes that are collectively top-5 caliber without filling that with guys who could ditch early. Is that enough? We will see. But to me it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect these types of players to begin to show their abilities more in their sophomore years rather than their freshmen years. After all, that is why they are not threats to leave after a year. Next year and presumably the year after, the team will literally be stock-full of this type of great-but-not-elite recruits (I realize that Singler is an elite recruit, but he wasn't really a one-and-done threat) - we will see if it works.

I tend to think it will. I completely agree with Troublemaker as to the keys of the offseason, though I would put more emphasis on whether Nolan is able to take the keys from Greg and allow Paulus to slide over to SG, because I think Zoubek and LT will make enough improvements to be solid contributors in the post. Anything more from them would be gravy if Nolan makes a big jump.

devildeac
03-31-2008, 03:36 PM
Umm, you are aware that with the exception of Plumlee, that is our roster for next year, right?

Duke will be preseason top-5 or higher next season.

--Jason "just sayin..." Evans

hey, JE, for next year you forgot to mention that senior point guard kid from upsate New Yawk. Think he used to be a QB or something on one of the HS AA teams several years ago... What's his name again?:D

Saratoga2
03-31-2008, 04:00 PM
I think lots of fans on this board really over-dramatize our recruiting when it's described as poor or as having dropped off. Clearly big-man recruiting has hit a serious rut, though we still have plenty of opportunities to sign a big-time post guy in the 09 class. Until that happens, though, it's fair to say big-man recruiting is slipping.

We have not gotten truly elite-level (and by that I mean strong chance to be a one-and-done) talents in the past few years, but by and large we haven't tried. Other than Brandan Wright and Greg Monroe (who many people seem to think is looking like less and less of a one-and-done; we will see next season, but perhaps K recognized this and was prescient), there really haven't be any one-and-done threats on our recruiting radar. You can disagree with this strategy (I personally think it's important to supplement solid recruiting with an occasional one-and-done type), but it seems to be the case.

Given K's new strategy of recruiting 3-4 year players since the Deng/Livington debacle (and possibly even given that 2005 was an unmitigated disaster), this season is really the first year we would expect to see if K's idea is working. K seems to be trying to gather classes that are collectively top-5 caliber without filling that with guys who could ditch early. Is that enough? We will see. But to me it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect these types of players to begin to show their abilities more in their sophomore years rather than their freshmen years. After all, that is why they are not threats to leave after a year. Next year and presumably the year after, the team will literally be stock-full of this type of great-but-not-elite recruits (I realize that Singler is an elite recruit, but he wasn't really a one-and-done threat) - we will see if it works.

I tend to think it will. I completely agree with Troublemaker as to the keys of the offseason, though I would put more emphasis on whether Nolan is able to take the keys from Greg and allow Paulus to slide over to SG, because I think Zoubek and LT will make enough improvements to be solid contributors in the post. Anything more from them would be gravy if Nolan makes a big jump.

Memphis has a team that could well win it all. They turned the ball over less than 10 times in the last 4 games. They play fast but with control and they have bangers. If you look at their recruiting, they don't have McDonald's All Americans up and down the lineup, but they have one truly exceptional recruit with a lot of other very good players who work well together. That isn't a bad model for Duke, and we have many pieces similar to Memphis, but we keep missing on top front court players. Better luck in 2009 or 2010.

MulletMan
03-31-2008, 04:28 PM
Memphis has a team that could well win it all. They turned the ball over less than 10 times in the last 4 games. They play fast but with control and they have bangers. If you look at their recruiting, they don't have McDonald's All Americans up and down the lineup, but they have one truly exceptional recruit with a lot of other very good players who work well together. That isn't a bad model for Duke, and we have many pieces similar to Memphis, but we keep missing on top front court players. Better luck in 2009 or 2010.


The reason that Memphis doesn't have a ton of AAs is because those players are not eligible for those honors after spending one, sometimes two years at "prep schools" (read: diploma granting basketball factories). Don't think that those guys aren't incredibly talented ball players... who are older than most of thier competition by a couple of years.

yancem
03-31-2008, 04:35 PM
nbadraft.net's take on Elliot Williams.

http://nbadraft.net/2008mcdonalds002.asp

Two things: 1) I'm starting to wonder if Monroe is going to look a lot like McRoberts in a year or two. 2) I'm getting the impression that Davis and Zeller might not get a lot of playing time next year for UNC unless Hansolo declares for the draft and maybe Stephens transfers. Zeller is very skinny and may have difficulty with more major (read: stronger/heavier) college players. Davis also needs to put on some muscle/weight and I wonder if he will have a similar learning curve as Lance Thomas. If the '09 class is as much better than the '08 class as people say than the Wear twins and Henson may simply bypass Zeller and Davis in a year also.

houstondukie
03-28-2009, 08:08 PM
...and if yes, is this a good or bad thing for Duke?

Personally, I really liked the move. Jon Scheyer is one the toughest and smartest players I have ever seen at Duke. The more he has the ball in his hands, the more good things happen.

Which is why I was suprised when Coach K said we needed a PG (I agree with him that we need a center). I know Scheyer doesn't have great quickness and doesn't get that many assists, but he runs the offense very efficiently and is taller than most other point gaurds.

Next year's team needs Henderson to return to be a Final Four team. And to win a national championship, they need a great center too.

CDu
03-28-2009, 08:20 PM
It's difficult to answer whether he will be or not. Obviously, if we don't add a PG this offseason, then Scheyer will handle a large part of the job of bringing the ball up the court next year (sharing the duties with Smith). If we add John Wall, then Scheyer will move back to SG. If we add a different freshman PG, then it simply depends on whether or not that PG is ready to start at PG at the college level as a freshman.

Is it a good thing? We'd be fine with him there. We're never going to ask Scheyer to be a true PG. Just like this year, he's going to just be asked to bring the ball into the frontcourt. At that point, the offense is run through all of the wings. Ideally, though, I'd rather have a true playmaking PG who can beat people off the dribble and create for himself and others. Scheyer is best suited as a counterpuncher, catching the ball on the wing, getting his man off-balance with a pumpfake, and then driving or shooting.

But wishing for that is probably pointless. Unless we somehow land a gem down the stretch, we're going to have Smith and Scheyer to work with. If that's the case, we'll still be okay.

DukieInBrasil
03-28-2009, 08:40 PM
K likes to say he doesnīt have positions, just players. Jon fits that description pretty well. He may not be called the PG but as you pointed out the offense flows much better through him. Whether we get a PG as a recruit in the next months will have a lot to do with how the minutes are allocated and how the ball moves. Even if we do land a top-notch PG, I think Jon will still be the focus pt for the offense, ie, usually the final scoring play will begin with him.
Having Nolan and EWill is nice since they both can handle the ball and have the talent to create, but neither has really shown that they can control the offense as well as Jon. But having 3 different guys who can be used as PGs is a good thing even if we donīt have a "true" PG, and even if it confounds fans.

houstondukie
03-28-2009, 08:43 PM
It's difficult to answer whether he will be or not. Obviously, if we don't add a PG this offseason, then Scheyer will handle a large part of the job of bringing the ball up the court next year (sharing the duties with Smith). If we add John Wall, then Scheyer will move back to SG. If we add a different freshman PG, then it simply depends on whether or not that PG is ready to start at PG at the college level as a freshman.

Is it a good thing? We'd be fine with him there. We're never going to ask Scheyer to be a true PG. Just like this year, he's going to just be asked to bring the ball into the frontcourt. At that point, the offense is run through all of the wings. Ideally, though, I'd rather have a true playmaking PG who can beat people off the dribble and create for himself and others. Scheyer is best suited as a counterpuncher, catching the ball on the wing, getting his man off-balance with a pumpfake, and then driving or shooting.

But wishing for that is probably pointless. Unless we somehow land a gem down the stretch, we're going to have Smith and Scheyer to work with. If that's the case, we'll still be okay.


Will we still be okay if Henderson goes pro? That would mean both Nolan Smith and Jon Scheyer start, neither having a backup.

CDu
03-28-2009, 08:44 PM
K likes to say he doesnīt have positions, just players. Jon fits that description pretty well. He may not be called the PG but as you pointed out the offense flows much better through him. Whether we get a PG as a recruit in the next months will have a lot to do with how the minutes are allocated and how the ball moves. Even if we do land a top-notch PG, I think Jon will still be the focus pt for the offense, ie, usually the final scoring play will begin with him.
Having Nolan and EWill is nice since they both can handle the ball and have the talent to create, but neither has really shown that they can control the offense as well as Jon. But having 3 different guys who can be used as PGs is a good thing even if we donīt have a "true" PG, and even if it confounds fans.

I think you're falling into dangerous logic here. The offense flowed much better with Jon at PG, but that's compared with other guys who aren't real PG. It remains to be seen how good we could be with an actual PG type.

CDu
03-28-2009, 08:47 PM
Will we still be okay if Henderson goes pro? That would mean both Nolan Smith and Jon Scheyer start, neither having a backup.

Yes, we'll still be okay. I didn't say we'd be in GREAT shape, but we'd be okay. If Henderson goes pro, we'd just see either a freshman PG get into the rotation for 15-20 minutes (if we got one) or we'd see a lot of Singler at the "3." In that scenario, Scheyer, Smith, and Williams would rotate at the two guard spots. We'd be thin, but we'd still be okay. It wouldn't be ideal, but it'd be functional. The approach would just look a lot different, as we'd play a lot of tall guys.

Coballs
03-28-2009, 09:01 PM
K likes to say he doesnīt have positions, just players. Jon fits that description pretty well. He may not be called the PG but as you pointed out the offense flows much better through him. Whether we get a PG as a recruit in the next months will have a lot to do with how the minutes are allocated and how the ball moves. Even if we do land a top-notch PG, I think Jon will still be the focus pt for the offense, ie, usually the final scoring play will begin with him.
Having Nolan and EWill is nice since they both can handle the ball and have the talent to create, but neither has really shown that they can control the offense as well as Jon. But having 3 different guys who can be used as PGs is a good thing even if we donīt have a "true" PG, and even if it confounds fans.

I think I might like it better if he had positions, like a true PG and a C. The rest of the positions don't have to be defined. Just my opinion.

Duvall
03-28-2009, 09:05 PM
Yes, we'll still be okay. I didn't say we'd be in GREAT shape, but we'd be okay. If Henderson goes pro, we'd just see either a freshman PG get into the rotation for 15-20 minutes (if we got one) or we'd see a lot of Singler at the "3." In that scenario, Scheyer, Smith, and Williams would rotate at the two guard spots. We'd be thin, but we'd still be okay. It wouldn't be ideal, but it'd be functional. The approach would just look a lot different, as we'd play a lot of tall guys.

It's hard to see how a lineup with Singler at the "3" could guard anyone, especially given the way this year's team struggled defensively down the stretch.

CDu
03-28-2009, 09:06 PM
I think I might like it better if he had positions, like a true PG and a C. The rest of the positions don't have to be defined. Just my opinion.

I think people make too much of the "Duke doesn't have positions" statement. I think Coach K knows quite well that it'd be nice to have a true PG and a true post presence. If we really didn't have positions, Coach K wouldn't have made so many references to switching Scheyer to the PG in the first place.

But yeah, I agree with you. In this day and age, life is a lot easier if you have a true PG and a true post presence (either a C or a PF). The rest are typically just wings of various sizes.

CDu
03-28-2009, 09:11 PM
It's hard to see how a lineup with Singler at the "3" could guard anyone, especially given the way this year's team struggled defensively down the stretch.

Singler would do okay defensively against many/most 3's, though I agree it's not an ideal matchup for him. Again, we wouldn't be great defensively, but we'd be okay.

And keep in mind that a team with Singler at the "3" would probably take on a different defensive identity. We'd probably be a better rebounding team and we would be able to challenge more shots with height (not necessarily great shotblocking, but we wouldn't be a bunch of 6'6" and under guys either).

I'm not saying it wouldn't hurt to lose Henderson. Obviously life would be better if Henderson returns. Life would be even better if Henderson returns and we get a freshman PG. Life would be way better if Henderson returns and we get John Wall. But we'd still be a good team.

Coballs
03-28-2009, 09:14 PM
I think people make too much of the "Duke doesn't have positions" statement. I think Coach K knows quite well that it'd be nice to have a true PG and a true post presence. If we really didn't have positions, Coach K wouldn't have made so many references to switching Scheyer to the PG in the first place.

But yeah, I agree with you. In this day and age, life is a lot easier if you have a true PG and a true post presence (either a C or a PF). The rest are typically just wings of various sizes.

I agree, you don't even need a true center...just a big PF who can bang and rebound.

gwwilburn
03-28-2009, 09:28 PM
Worst Case Scenario: Henderson Leaves, we don't get a frosh pg, neither Kelly nor the two Plumlees contribute at the 5 spot
2nd worst: Henderson Leaves, we get a frosh pg other than Wall, neither Kelly nor the two Plumlees contribute at the 5 spot
etc... try all combinations
Best Case Scenario: Henderson Stays, we get wall, and atleast two of the three young big men can help Zoubek and Thomas down low.
Just my opinion. Jon's a good point guard, but I think we'd be better with a legitimate PG.

CDu
03-28-2009, 09:30 PM
Worst Case Scenario: Henderson Leaves, we don't get a frosh pg, neither Kelly nor the two Plumlees contribute at the 5 spot
2nd worst: Henderson Leaves, we get a frosh pg other than Wall, neither Kelly nor the two Plumlees contribute at the 5 spot
etc... try all combinations
Best Case Scenario: Henderson Stays, we get wall, and atleast two of the three young big men can help Zoubek and Thomas down low.
Just my opinion. Jon's a good point guard, but I think we'd be better with a legitimate PG.

I completely agree.

jv001
03-28-2009, 09:57 PM
It's hard to see how a lineup with Singler at the "3" could guard anyone, especially given the way this year's team struggled defensively down the stretch.

We saw Kyle guarding everyone from the point guard to the center this year. While I did not like to see Kyle make the switch on every screen he did ok guarding his man. Where we were hurt was our guards having to guard a big down low. Kyle at the 3 will be ok. I don't think you could actually call Jon a true point guard. What he did was take care of the ball and not make many bad plays or costly turnovers. He did that by playing it safe. He did not drive to the basket and create plays like a true point guard. If we had a true point guard that drives and dishes, Jon would be much more valuable. I look for major improvement from several players by next year. We will be ok. Go Duke!

Saratoga2
03-28-2009, 10:57 PM
We saw Kyle guarding everyone from the point guard to the center this year. While I did not like to see Kyle make the switch on every screen he did ok guarding his man. Where we were hurt was our guards having to guard a big down low. Kyle at the 3 will be ok. I don't think you could actually call Jon a true point guard. What he did was take care of the ball and not make many bad plays or costly turnovers. He did that by playing it safe. He did not drive to the basket and create plays like a true point guard. If we had a true point guard that drives and dishes, Jon would be much more valuable. I look for major improvement from several players by next year. We will be ok. Go Duke!

People who think we can compete for the national championship in a meaningful way have not been following what is happening in the big East. Their teams are very physical and much more bumping and physical play goes on in the NCAA tournament than in the ACC.

We have Scheyer, Smith and Williams, who are good players, but are thin and may not stand up in a physical game. Certainly our loss to Villanova indicates that.

Henderson and Singler play a physical game but LT and Zoubek do not and they new guys are thin for inside play.

The best we can hope for is Henderson coming back, LT putting on 20 pounds of muscle, Our bigs all coming in stronger than they are now. They do have 7 months for that. Also that Scheyer, Williams and Smith also get a little stronger. The right point guard addition would also help a lot. I would prefer a big point guard who can see over most opposition.

OldSchool
03-28-2009, 10:57 PM
Assuming we don't get Wall, I don't think we've seen the last of Nolan as a starting PG for this team. IMO, Nolan's best shot at the pros is as a PG. We'll have to see how much work Nolan does in the offseason at PG skills and see what he brings when next season starts. He's got the physical skills, it's a question of cutting down on the mistakes, seeing the game a lot better and working plays with teammates.

speedevil2001
03-28-2009, 11:01 PM
Assuming Henderson leaves.
I got:
pg: n.smith
g: j.scheyer
g: e.williams
f: k.singler
f: l.thomas

With henderson, pocius, and paulus leaving duke looks really thin at the guard positions. scheyer can play point, but who else? who comes off the bench to play the guard spots?
We got more depth at the c/pf positions next year with zoubek, miles, czyzs on the bench and mason, and kelly coming in.

Whats your starting 5?

BlueintheFace
03-28-2009, 11:07 PM
Assuming Henderson leaves.
I got:
pg: n.smith
g: j.scheyer
g: e.williams
f: k.singler
f: l.thomas

With henderson, pocius, and paulus leaving duke looks really thin at the guard positions. scheyer can play point, but who else? who comes off the bench to play the guard spots?
We got more depth at the c/pf positions next year with zoubek, miles, czyzs on the bench and mason, and kelly coming in.

Whats your starting 5?

I don't understand. what are you talking about? Link?

DukieBoy
03-28-2009, 11:08 PM
It's kind of hard to speculate.

Will G leave?
Will Kyle leave?
Will Wall come?
Will Curry come? (I guess it has no effect on next year though)

I'm an optimist. I will say G and Kyle stay and Wall comes. Therefore...

PG - Wall
SG - Scheyer
SF - G
PF - Kyle
C - Z

I forsee Z making big improvements with a full, healthy off season. Improving his mobility and footwork should be high on the list. But I do see him and Lance switching in and out depending on the team. MP1&2 will both hopefully contribute and Kelly can hopefully give great minutes, giving us a relatively deep front court. In the back court, Nolan and E-Will both will have improved to give great minutes.

And hopefully Seth will have pushed them all during practice :D

BlueintheFace
03-28-2009, 11:09 PM
yah, you can't speculate if you don't know whether or not you will have two potential starters or not (Henderson and Un-named PG).

CDu
03-28-2009, 11:12 PM
Assuming Henderson leaves.
I got:
pg: n.smith
g: j.scheyer
g: e.williams
f: k.singler
f: l.thomas

With henderson, pocius, and paulus leaving duke looks really thin at the guard positions. scheyer can play point, but who else? who comes off the bench to play the guard spots?
We got more depth at the c/pf positions next year with zoubek, miles, czyzs on the bench and mason, and kelly coming in.

Whats your starting 5?

I think it's way too early to guess. There are too many things we don't know:

1. Will Henderson be here or not?
2. Will Wall/Bledsoe/Other PG be here or not?
3. Will either of the freshmen tall guys be ready to start?
4. Will one of our current big guys step up this offseason?

Your lineup is a possibility. There are any number of other feasible possibilities as well. It's just too early to tell without knowing for sure what the roster will be.

-bdbd
03-28-2009, 11:13 PM
I don't think you could actually call Jon a true point guard. What he did was take care of the ball and not make many bad plays or costly turnovers. He did that by playing it safe. He did not drive to the basket and create plays like a true point guard. If we had a true point guard that drives and dishes, Jon would be much more valuable. I look for major improvement from several players by next year. We will be ok. Go Duke!

People tend to project the line-up for next season with the players EXACTLY as they were at the time of the final game the year before. There's seven long ('very long' for some of us diehards) months before practice officially begins for next season. I absolutley EXPECT that Nolan is going to be doing some serious work over that time at PG-school.... He may well be our best chance, assuming some real development, of having an impact PG next year. Yes, I'd REALLY like to have Wall -- and as our last game showed, he could have a HUGE impact for us -- but that may be a long-shot right now. Bledsoe sounds good, but it is a legit question as to whether he'd be ready to start from day-1 (but I'd be very happy to have that decision to make...). The recruiting quandry is, of course, do you take the bird in the hand, or the superstar still in the bush?? (esp with at least one, and maybe two PG's coming in the HS class of 2010)

In the end, I expect Nolan Smith to develop quite a bit over the summer and have a greater role at the point next year. (Note: if Wall does happen to come our way then we obviously start him right away or soon into the season.) Scheyer and Nolan would BOTH play a lot at the Point, in most scenarios. Don't forget that Jon, for all of his wonderful abilities, isn't generally quick enough to keep ball-pressure on most traditional PG's we'll face. So SOMEONE has to play PG on D.

That said, even w/o Gerald (slide in E-Mail then) I think this team is still a top-10 level preseason pick next November; and top-5 with him. A Wall would take it even higher. In any event, we're looking at a likely #1 preseason for the ACC.

Only 201 days to go 'till practice starts again!!! Can't wait!



-BDBD :D
"It'll sure be nice having more post players next year."

scottie
03-28-2009, 11:22 PM
Duke could be very strong next year. They have the talent now and will have talented recruits next year ... but there's several obvious weaknesses which will prevent the team from going very deep in the NCAA tournament: (1) no man in the middle who can shoot, block and pass; (2) inadequate coaching in blocking out rebounders; (3) no guards that will drive to the hoop (Smith and Williams can drive, but apparently aren't encouraged as part of the offense; (4) inadequate training in preventing opposing penetrating guards from going to the hoop; and (5) relying too heavily on too few players Hendeerson, Scheyer, and Singlar) to score. With the exception of (1), the problems stem from coaching. Superior teams can "block out"; know how to be in a position to rebound; develop penetrating guard play (Williams and Smith can do it); minimize penetrating guard play by opposing guards by switching to zone defenses; and fielding a team where all players are scoring threats. At one time against Villanova, McClure, Thomas and Zoubec were on the court at the same time ... and they rarely shoot. I blame coaching.

speedevil2001
03-28-2009, 11:38 PM
I don't understand. what are you talking about? Link?

what dont you understand?
please read the heading

speedevil2001
03-28-2009, 11:39 PM
yah, you can't speculate if you don't know whether or not you will have two potential starters or not (Henderson and Un-named PG).

speculating is one of the best parts about being a fan.
its never too early to speculate.

speedevil2001
03-28-2009, 11:44 PM
...and if yes, is this a good or bad thing for Duke?

Personally, I really liked the move. Jon Scheyer is one the toughest and smartest players I have ever seen at Duke. The more he has the ball in his hands, the more good things happen.

Which is why I was suprised when Coach K said we needed a PG (I agree with him that we need a center). I know Scheyer doesn't have great quickness and doesn't get that many assists, but he runs the offense very efficiently and is taller than most other point gaurds.

Next year's team needs Henderson to return to be a Final Four team. And to win a national championship, they need a great center too.

scheyer can manage a game at the pg position but he can not take over the game. now can nolan take over a game ? i hope he can otherwise next years team will have the same problems this years team had.

BlueintheFace
03-28-2009, 11:48 PM
what dont you understand?
please read the heading

I was confused about your assumption that Henderson is leaving in the text of your original post.

hedgehog
03-29-2009, 12:13 AM
(2) inadequate coaching in blocking out rebounders; (3) no guards that will drive to the hoop (Smith and Williams can drive, but apparently aren't encouraged as part of the offense; (4) inadequate training in preventing opposing penetrating guards from going to the hoop; and (5) relying too heavily on too few players Hendeerson, Scheyer, and Singlar) to score. With the exception of (1), the problems stem from coaching. Superior teams can "block out"; know how to be in a position to rebound; develop penetrating guard play (Williams and Smith can do it); minimize penetrating guard play by opposing guards by switching to zone defenses; and fielding a team where all players are scoring threats. At one time against Villanova, McClure, Thomas and Zoubec were on the court at the same time ... and they rarely shoot. I blame coaching.

Man, good points. K should have just trained the players better. I wonder why all the teams that didn't make the NCAA tournament or the Sweet 16 didn't think do this. Who cares if they don't have the personnel. If they would just trained the guys they have, they could be a superior team!! I blame all of those coaches! Why didn't they think of training their players! It should have been obvious!

I wonder if Coach K will ask Williams to transfer after that dunk in the Nova game? I know K has told him numerous times not to drive to the hoop.

Man, we really should stop relying on Hendeerson and Singlar as well. Those guys are nowhere near as good as Henderson and Singler. I also wish we would stop putting Zoubec on the floor, he is not nearly as tall as Zoubek.

I guess "block out" is in quotes because... well, actually i don't know.

By the way, Henderson, Paulus, and Smith all had four fouls in that game, so it is not like we had that much choice about who to play. If we shouldn't have had Zoubek, Thomas, and McClure on the floor, who should we have had? The guys on whom you say that we depend too much?

Thomas and McClure did grab 10 rebounds in 34 minutes combined, however, and I thought you were making some reference to rebounding being important.

Also, the rebounding differential was 5 on the offensive glass and 9 on the defensive glass. I think a good bit of the rebounding differential can be attributed to are horrible outside shooting performance, giving them more defensive rebounds and us few put backs. Also, it was much easier for Nova to clog up the lane and make it difficult for us to drive when they did not have to respect our outside shot. This also gave them better rebounding position.

Duke and Coach K have a deliberate style to overplay guards to try to get steals and have other players rotate if we get beaten by guards. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Those are the breaks. No strategy is foolproof.

Nice first post. Really cheered me up after a tough loss to an excellent Villanova team that had just blitzed UCLA and is now in the Final Four after beating a #1 seed.

quickgtp
03-29-2009, 12:28 AM
I see:

Wall or Bledsoe
Henderson
Scheyer
Singler
Mason Plumlee

JDev
03-29-2009, 12:30 AM
I see:

Wall or Bledsoe
Henderson
Scheyer
Singler
Mason Plumlee

Talk about best case scenario! I like your optimism and I certainly hope you are right. Speculation at this point is difficult, but after the Spring signing period I would imagine much more would be clear, with G's decision and Wall and Bledsoe.

roywhite
03-29-2009, 12:32 AM
Duke could be very strong next year. They have the talent now and will have talented recruits next year ... but there's several obvious weaknesses which will prevent the team from going very deep in the NCAA tournament: (1) no man in the middle who can shoot, block and pass; (2) inadequate coaching in blocking out rebounders; (3) no guards that will drive to the hoop (Smith and Williams can drive, but apparently aren't encouraged as part of the offense; (4) inadequate training in preventing opposing penetrating guards from going to the hoop; and (5) relying too heavily on too few players Hendeerson, Scheyer, and Singlar) to score. With the exception of (1), the problems stem from coaching. Superior teams can "block out"; know how to be in a position to rebound; develop penetrating guard play (Williams and Smith can do it); minimize penetrating guard play by opposing guards by switching to zone defenses; and fielding a team where all players are scoring threats. At one time against Villanova, McClure, Thomas and Zoubec were on the court at the same time ... and they rarely shoot. I blame coaching.

Yeah, how did that stumblebum coach of ours (old whatshisname...starts with a K) manage to win 30 games this year and over 800 in his career?

COYS
03-29-2009, 12:34 AM
Yeah, how did that stumblebum coach of ours (old whatshisname...starts with a K) manage to win 30 games this year and over 800 in his career?

These players have been so confused and misguided by our incompetent coaching staff that we should fire all of the coaches, encourages all of our players to transfer and start again. Maybe we can find a coach that has actually won something of significance in his career a few times to get this program back on top . . .

heyman25
03-29-2009, 01:47 AM
It's kind of hard to speculate.

Will G leave?
Will Kyle leave?
Will Wall come?
Will Curry come? (I guess it has no effect on next year though)

I'm an optimist. I will say G and Kyle stay and Wall comes. Therefore...

PG - Wall
SG - Scheyer
SF - G
PF - Kyle
C - Z

I forsee Z making big improvements with a full, healthy off season. Improving his mobility and footwork should be high on the list. But I do see him and Lance switching in and out depending on the team. MP1&2 will both hopefully contribute and Kelly can hopefully give great minutes, giving us a relatively deep front court. In the back court, Nolan and E-Will both will have improved to give great minutes.

And hopefully Seth will have pushed them all during practice :D
Z making Big improvements, hmmm. The 2 Coreys for Villanova out rebounded him.I hope you are right,but Duke needs to stop recruiting projects. Everyone says he will be like Aaron Gray. We need big men that can start contributing in their 2nd year if not the first year. I would like to see Lance and Brian score when they get the ball inside.

whereinthehellami
03-29-2009, 09:01 AM
I've always enjoyed the speculation part of the off-season. Baseless speculations? Sure but why not. March madness has taken a hit for me and speculating on Duke's lineup for next year fixes my jones.

So without further adieu, I gots:


Scheyer 6-5 SR
Williams 6-4 SO
Singler 6-8 JR
Thomas 6-8 SR
Zoubek 7-0 SR (Plumlee 6-10 FR)



Smith 6-3 JR
Kelly 6-9 FR


I don't see Duke getting any more PGs (that are capable of getting into the top 8). I think Smith or one of the backcourt players will come off the bench at least to start the game. Although that will probably depend more on match-ups. This team has some definate holes, quickness and athletiscm being chief among them.

On the other hand next year's team will have some size and experience. The above starting five 5 has 3 SRs and 1 JR. Granted Thomas and Zoubek need to really take their games up a level in the off-season for Duke to be a team that could get past the Sweet 16 next year. And I think either Kelly or Plumlee has to become a double figure scorer or leader in rebounding for Duke to be a top 10 team next year. That is alot to ask of freshmen but Duke needs one of them to be special.

Coach K talks alot about adapting his style to his team. Well we will see for sure next year. In the past this usually involves Duke playing 3-5 guards/forwards. Well this time he has to go out of the box and come up with a style that fits a team with 5 out of the top 8 that are 6-8 or taller. This will be a challenge on both sides of the ball. If Duke had a bluechip PG, than on offense you could see some real fireworks with all the talented frontcourt players who could be fed for mid-range and low post points. Unfortunately Duke doesn't have a PG that can exploit that. And on defense this team will have alot of problems playing an agressive overplaying man-to-man. Foul trouble will be a buzz-word for our games next year.

Well my coffee is gone and my buzz has run its course.

davekay1971
03-29-2009, 10:39 AM
Next year we'll probably be pretty deep, and have a lineup which is flexible given our competition (ie: some games we'll go bigger, some smaller)

For argument's sake, here's a couple of possibilities...

Henderson comes back:

Backcourt: Henderson, Scheyer, Smith
Frontcourt: Singler, Kelly

Key reserves: Williams, Thomas, Zoubs, Plumlee, Plumlee


Henderson goes pro:

Backcourt: Scheyer, Smith
Frontcourt: Singler, Kelly, Thomas

Key reserves: Williams, Zoubs, Plumlee, Plumlee

Funny to think of Duke truly running 9-10 deep, but, assuming Zoubs and Miles Plumlee make some progress in the offseason and Mason Plumlee and Kelly come in ready to contribute, we'll have a very deep rotation.

Oh yeah, and then there's Czyz...

Hancock 4 Duke
03-29-2009, 11:41 AM
Even if Wall comes, there is no guarantee that he will start. Maybe instead of three guards next year (If Hendo leaves), we could have two PF's and a Center. We might actually have a dominant big man next year.

Bluedog
03-29-2009, 11:49 AM
Even if Wall comes, there is no guarantee that he will start. Maybe instead of three guards next year (If Hendo leaves), we could have two PF's and a Center. We might actually have a dominant big man next year.

Have you seen Wall play? He would DEFINITELY start, especially since we have no true PG. He's a true PG and is just ridiculously good. No question in my mind that he'd start.

whereinthehellami
03-29-2009, 12:31 PM
Its going to be a crowded frontcourt next year. I don't see Duke going 9-10 deep with 6-7 of those 9-10 being frontcourt players. There will be some frontcourt players who don't get any burn. Olek and Miles have a tough road ahead of them.

Olek has some physical traits that are ahead of the pack but his basketball IQ is just way behind alot of the other frontcourt players. He reminds me alot of Eric Boateng in that regard. Eric's basketball IQ just hasn't caught up to his physical attributes. I see Olek being another full year away from being a significant contributor.

And with Miles I think he is caught in the middle of two classes next year. Thomas and Zoobs are ahead of him with experience and Kelly and Plumlee are close behind with tons of potential and fanfare. If miles can be strong with the ball and develop some confidence than I could see him getting ahead of one of the other frontcourt players and taking some of their minutes. That is asking alot of him and as Coach K says, everyone is runing their own race.

houstondukie
03-29-2009, 01:28 PM
Worst Case Scenario: Henderson Leaves, we don't get a frosh pg, neither Kelly nor the two Plumlees contribute at the 5 spot
2nd worst: Henderson Leaves, we get a frosh pg other than Wall, neither Kelly nor the two Plumlees contribute at the 5 spot
etc... try all combinations
Best Case Scenario: Henderson Stays, we get wall, and atleast two of the three young big men can help Zoubek and Thomas down low.
Just my opinion. Jon's a good point guard, but I think we'd be better with a legitimate PG.

nail on the head.

houstondukie
03-29-2009, 01:35 PM
Assuming we don't get Wall, I don't think we've seen the last of Nolan as a starting PG for this team. IMO, Nolan's best shot at the pros is as a PG. We'll have to see how much work Nolan does in the offseason at PG skills and see what he brings when next season starts. He's got the physical skills, it's a question of cutting down on the mistakes, seeing the game a lot better and working plays with teammates.

I completely agree, as long as he has another offseason like he did last offseason (working out with best friend Michael Beasley). I have a lot of confidence in Nolan Smith.

Memphis Devil
03-29-2009, 01:42 PM
Its going to be a crowded frontcourt next year. I don't see Duke going 9-10 deep with 6-7 of those 9-10 being frontcourt players. There will be some frontcourt players who don't get any burn. Olek and Miles have a tough road ahead of them.

Olek has some physical traits that are ahead of the pack but his basketball IQ is just way behind alot of the other frontcourt players. He reminds me alot of Eric Boateng in that regard. Eric's basketball IQ just hasn't caught up to his physical attributes. I see Olek being another full year away from being a significant contributor.

And with Miles I think he is caught in the middle of two classes next year. Thomas and Zoobs are ahead of him with experience and Kelly and Plumlee are close behind with tons of potential and fanfare. If miles can be strong with the ball and develop some confidence than I could see him getting ahead of one of the other frontcourt players and taking some of their minutes. That is asking alot of him and as Coach K says, everyone is runing their own race.

While I agree that MP1 is kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place with the tenure and experience of Z and Thomas ahead of him and the alure of MP2 and Kelly coming in behind, I really like what I saw from this kid. The knock on MP2 and Kelly is that neither is a back to the basket low post scorer, more of a wing/forward type ala Kyle. The knock on Z and Thomas is that neither possesses the athleticism (Z) or size (Thomas) to be a dominate inside threat. MP1 showed some real potential to develop into a dominate force in the paint. Perhaps not as a go to scorer, but certainly as a rebounder and shot alterer if not blocker. He appears to be extremely athletic with great mobility and hops for a 6'10" player. I like to think of him possibly developing into a version of Cole Aldrich from Kansas. Even MP2 has said that his older brother is more athletic than he is. Perhaps I am being a little to glass half full (maybe even 3/4 full), I am excited to see what the offseason does for his development. I think that he already has the size (maybe he could add a little more muscle, but who couldn't). He really just needs to learn the college game and more to the point the Duke game. Having someone with his athleticism in the paint really makes our risk/reward, overplaying/shooting the passing lanes style of defense that much better.

Again, maybe my glass is a little too full on MP1, but I am truly excited to see what next year can bring for him. I really think he is a diamond in the rough and may be the best thing to happen for Duke defensively since "The Landlord". I hope he has the work ethic and desire to fully maximize his natural gifts.

houstondukie
03-29-2009, 01:55 PM
if we lose G. Henderson to the NBA and don't get J. Wall, my best guess:

PG N. Smith JR - at the start of this past season, coach k said nolan improved the most during the offseason. a year under his belt and 7 months of improving his pg skills this offseason will mean a new and improved nolan.

SG J. Scheyer SR - will play almost 40 minutes a game next year, starting at SG but playing first backup to nolan at the point.

SF K. Singler JR - many presume elliot williams will start next year, but coach k also moved scheyer to the 6th man role during his sophomore year too. we will have zero backups for nolan and jon if elliot starts.

PF L. Thomas SR - this is lance's most natural position.

C B. Zoubek SR - finally his first healthy offseason.

Sixth man:

SG/SF E. Williams SO - providing a spark off the bench. will play as many minutes as nolan.

Greg_Newton
03-29-2009, 02:53 PM
I know it's unlikely, but just imagine... a team that starts Wall at PG, Scheyer (senior) at SG, Hendo (senior) at SF, Singler (junior) at PF, rotates an improved Zoubek (senior), Thomas (senior), and the Plumlees in the post, and has the enormous luxury of bringing in Nolan Smith (junior) and Elliot Williams off the bench (anything from Ryan Kelly would be an added bonus). That would have to be one of the deepest, most talented, most experienced Duke teams EVER. Like I said, unlikely, but BOY would that be a fun year.

In the more likely G-and-Wall-less scenario, I the like big lineup (with Kyle at the 3, Lance at 4 and Zoub/MP1/MP2 at 5) much better than Nolan/Jon/Elliot/Kyle/Lance. The latter lineup is just asking to be worn out and overpowered, not to mention its reliance on the outside shot... it's just a thinner version of what we had this year. I think K would work with what he's got in this scenario, and make his abundance of big men a significant part of the rotation. Nolan/EW/Jon at playing 1-2, Kyle/Ryan/Lance playing 3-4, Brian/MP1/MP2 playing 4-5. That could at least be a dangerous team by the end of the year, while the small lineup, IMO, could not be.

JDev
03-29-2009, 03:24 PM
This is all dependant on the G/J. Wall/Beldsoe situation and where each ends up. Several people have said Duke will likely go big, with Kyle at the 3, since Duke's depth will mostly exist in big guys. Despite that, I still think Duke goes with a 3 guard starting line-up. Ideally that puts more ball handlers, more shooters, and more guys that break the defense down off the dribble on the floor at the same time (look at the Villanova team that beat Duke and is really playing well). I think Elliot and Nolan will continue to make strides and be improved players when next year begins. If G leaves and Duke doesn't land either recruit, the line-up will be Jon, Nolan, Elliot, Kyle, and a mixture of Z, Lance, MP1 and MP2.
If Duke does land Wall things get interesting. I think in that case K will have Elliot come of the bench and be the sixth man spark, much like Jon his sophomore year. Elliot could fill that roll just as well as Jon did, being able to sub for any guard and provide instant energy and offense.

geraldsneighbor
03-29-2009, 03:34 PM
The way I see it G comes back. We land Wall or Bledsoe. Here is how stuff shakes out:

PG: John Wall 6'4'' Freshmen Raleigh, NC
SG: Jon Scheyer 6'5'' Senior Northbrook, IL
SF: Gerald Henderson 6'4'' Senior Blue Bell, PA
PF: Kyle Singler 6'8'' Junior Medford, OR
C: Brian Zoubek 7'1'' Senior Haddonfield, NJ

Z will improve having really his first healthy summer to improve and get a post move. Footwork is the biggest key with him. This line-up looks awfully beast when you remember the bench consists of Smith/Williams/Kelly/Plumlee/Thomas. This could be a team that can go 10-11 deep even with minutes going to be battled for. Exciting stuff in a depressing time of year.

KrazyKfan
03-29-2009, 03:38 PM
I think we'll have a guard lineup and a big lineup

Guard Lineup

PG Wall/Smith
SG Williams
SF Scheyer
PF Henderson
C Singler

Big

PG Wall/Scheyer/Smith
SG Scheyer/Henderson/Williams
SF Henderson/Singler
PF Singler/Thomas/Plumlee
C Plumlee/Zoubek

Next year's roster pending any transfers or Henderson going pro


Nolan Smith
John Scheyer
Gerald Henderson
Elliot Williams
Kyle Singler
Bryan Zoubek
Lance Thomas
Miles Plumlee
Mason Plumlee
Ryan Kelly
Olek Czyz


Missing a few subs

And then maybe Wall and Bledsoe.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
03-29-2009, 04:23 PM
PG - John Wall
SG - John Scheyer
SF - Gerald Henderson
PF - Kyle Singler
PF - Mason Plum man

FireOgilvie
03-29-2009, 05:46 PM
if we lose G. Henderson to the NBA and don't get J. Wall, my best guess:

PG N. Smith JR - at the start of this past season, coach k said nolan improved the most during the offseason. a year under his belt and 7 months of improving his pg skills this offseason will mean a new and improved nolan.

SG J. Scheyer SR - will play almost 40 minutes a game next year, starting at SG but playing first backup to nolan at the point.

SF K. Singler JR - many presume elliot williams will start next year, but coach k also moved scheyer to the 6th man role during his sophomore year too. we will have zero backups for nolan and jon if elliot starts.

PF L. Thomas SR - this is lance's most natural position.

C B. Zoubek SR - finally his first healthy offseason.

Sixth man:

SG/SF E. Williams SO - providing a spark off the bench. will play as many minutes as nolan.


Assuming we don't get a PG and Henderson leaves, I really hope to never see that starting lineup... I don't think K would ever use it either. If we do see a big lineup, I would expect that Mason/Miles Plumlee would be in there. Lance and Z aren't good enough at handling the ball, passing, or scoring to be effective on the court at the same time... there are also way too many defensive problems with that lineup (way too slow for switching man-to-man). Also, as much as I like Singler as a 3 in the NBA, I like him better as a PF in college. I think Ryan Kelly will come in and immediately be our 2nd best scoring big man (behind Singler). A lineup with Singler and Kelly in there would be fun to watch.

gumbomoop
03-29-2009, 10:57 PM
I've no idea whether G stays or departs, whether Wall or Bledsoe arrives. If either of those first 2 are here next year, I gotta say, we're preseason national top 3. If neither of those 2 are here, we're still top 7-10.

I hesitate to exult overly about depth of team next year, for that didn't totally pan out this year. Still, the 2 new fellows, whose talent level we'll at least get a glimpse of this Wed night in McD All-Am game, will surely get some playing time.

Here are some improvements I'm sure hoping, and in some cases expecting, to see:

Nolan - ball handling drills over and over; keep hands off when defending, over and over. He can break out, but his handle must be better, and fierceness, too. Remember when last year, K and coaches were reported to have taken Scheyer aside to tell him he was deferring too often, that he needed to be a star? Nolan needs to be told same thing.

EWill - ditto on ball handling. I don't think he'll ever be our PG, but he needs to have much more confidence in his handle, and that confidence must be merited. With a really good handle, EWill is a killer.

Scheyer and Singler - hope Scheyer merits mention in same sentence as Battier re court-awareness-brilliance. He's getting there. Hope Singler merits mention in same sentence as Laettner re clutch-toughness. He's getting there, and indeed is more advanced - isn't he? - than was Laettner at end of L's soph yr. Yes? Am I halucinating on this point?

Z - This ain't gonna happen, but I believe it's in Z's and team's best intermediate-term interest for Z to redshirt. I do not deny that Z was improved this year, but if one goes back to preseason hopes, many posters had very high hopes for Z - e.g., 20-22 mpg, 12/8. Didn't happen, unlikely to happen next year. After 3 years, he's still a project, an intriguing one, to be sure, but not a dependable player at either end of the court. With lots more depth at the "4 1/2" spot, the team will not be substantially better with Z, unless he's substantially improved. I'm skeptical. I think he'd be a much, much better player in '10-11, after relentless skills drills: footwork, holding position on screens, high post passing without the nervous hands, 1-2 dependable moves down low, perhaps jump-hook, [but not the arm-around move, which sometimes he gets away with, sometimes not], etc.

LT - a bit more improvement than Z this year, but still maddeningly inconsistent. Must, must, must harness his wild energy; the energy is a strength, the wildness a weakness. Finishes "easy" baskets infrequently. If MP2 and Kelly are offensively skilled, and if defensively either is a shot-blocker, I suppose LT becomes the '09-10 DMc re situation minutes.

MP1 - I worry a bit that his first 2 years will be sort of "lost" as we await LT's and Z's improvement. I realize more than a few posters hoped for more minutes for MP1 this year, and I now fear he's still trapped behind LT and Z, which is both understandable and frustrating, for it's not as if he's trapped behind 2 highly productive players. I have seen the reference that Singler has taken MP1 under his wing to encourage him, so I hope he gets real minutes next year.

Czyz - I'm guessing he'll either redshirt or transfer. He's definitely trapped behind others, and needs fundamentals-work. Sure hope he stays, for he'll delight in future, but unlikely next season.

G - If, very big if, he returns, must work on handle, which is not adequate in crunch time. Messes up too often on cross-over, ball off own knee occasionally. He's a beautiful player rising for Kobe-jumper, and even if his handle is not one whit better, we'd all be thrilled if he returns, for he's a near-star. Whether for NBA or for Duke, he's gotta have a better handle.

Matches
03-30-2009, 10:08 AM
If we land another PG, and Henderson returns:

PG
Scheyer
Henderson
Singler
whoever wins out for the 5 spot

If Henderson leaves I think E-Will starts at the "3". I think he has the potential to be our defensive "stopper" next year, and I think he's better off starting than coming off the bench. Then you use Nolan as a sub at positions 1-3 - he would still play a ton of minutes and basically be a 6th starter.

If Henderson leaves AND we do not get a PG, then Nolan and E-Will both probably start, with Singler playing a lot at the "3".

edit: And that rests on the assumption that the PG we land, if we land one, would start right away. I've not seen any of the PG prospects play, so that could be totally off.

jv001
03-30-2009, 10:34 AM
if we lose G. Henderson to the NBA and don't get J. Wall, my best guess:

PG N. Smith JR - at the start of this past season, coach k said nolan improved the most during the offseason. a year under his belt and 7 months of improving his pg skills this offseason will mean a new and improved nolan.

SG J. Scheyer SR - will play almost 40 minutes a game next year, starting at SG but playing first backup to nolan at the point.

SF K. Singler JR - many presume elliot williams will start next year, but coach k also moved scheyer to the 6th man role during his sophomore year too. we will have zero backups for nolan and jon if elliot starts.

PF L. Thomas SR - this is lance's most natural position.

C B. Zoubek SR - finally his first healthy offseason.

Sixth man:

SG/SF E. Williams SO - providing a spark off the bench. will play as many minutes as nolan.

I just don't see this lineup starting next year. With Zoubs and Lance in at the same time, our offense will not have much scoring punch. Not even if we run a different offense. Lance is a role player that has much hustle, but has no defining shot and makes silly fouls. And at times really has a hard time holding onto rebounds. I say Hendo is gone. Good luck Gerald in the NBA. Starters:
Nolan Smith..Point guard...Freshman backup
Jon Scheyer..2 guard...Williams and Smith backups
Kyle Singler..Forward...Ryan Kelly backup
Elliot Williams..Forward...Mason Plumlee backup
Brian Zoubek..Center..Miles Plumlee backup
As always starting positions will be determined by how players improve over the summer and in Coach K's relentless practices.
If Zoubs does not improve over the summer, I see Miles taking his spot. And it would not be a leap to see Kelly or Mason take some of Elliots mins if he does not improve his ball handling (right hand and his shooting). Can't wait till November. Go Duke!

jimsumner
03-30-2009, 10:39 AM
"Nolan Smith..Point guard...Freshman backup
Jon Scheyer..2 guard...Williams and Smith backups
Kyle Singler..Forward...Ryan Kelly backup
Elliot Williams..Forward...Mason Plumlee backup
Brian Zoubek..Center..Miles Plumlee backup"

Do you mean Lance Thomas at forward?

jv001
03-30-2009, 10:55 AM
"Nolan Smith..Point guard...Freshman backup
Jon Scheyer..2 guard...Williams and Smith backups
Kyle Singler..Forward...Ryan Kelly backup
Elliot Williams..Forward...Mason Plumlee backup
Brian Zoubek..Center..Miles Plumlee backup"

Do you mean Lance Thomas at forward?

Jim I don't think Lance played so poorly that he does not get into the rotation. Sorry bout that. I look for Lance to get mins at PF and Center, but not start. Lance brings some positive things to the team..hustle, good defense when he's not making silly fouls but his offensive short comings hurt our offense. All of this is speculation anyway. We have no idea what will transire by tipoff next year. I do look for improvement from several players over the offseason. Go Duke!

RainingThrees
03-30-2009, 11:00 AM
Jim I don't think Lance played so poorly that he does not get into the rotation. Sorry bout that. I look for Lance to get mins at PF and Center, but not start. Lance brings some positive things to the team..hustle, good defense when he's not making silly fouls but his offensive short comings hurt our offense. All of this is speculation anyway. We have no idea what will transire by tipoff next year. I do look for improvement from several players over the offseason. Go Duke!

And Zoubs and Miles don't make silly mistakes and pick up bad fouls? Also when did Miles or Zoubs become offensive threats?

Oriole Way
03-30-2009, 11:12 AM
if we lose G. Henderson to the NBA and don't get J. Wall, my best guess:

PG N. Smith JR - at the start of this past season, coach k said nolan improved the most during the offseason. a year under his belt and 7 months of improving his pg skills this offseason will mean a new and improved nolan.

SG J. Scheyer SR - will play almost 40 minutes a game next year, starting at SG but playing first backup to nolan at the point.

SF K. Singler JR - many presume elliot williams will start next year, but coach k also moved scheyer to the 6th man role during his sophomore year too. we will have zero backups for nolan and jon if elliot starts.

PF L. Thomas SR - this is lance's most natural position.

C B. Zoubek SR - finally his first healthy offseason.

Sixth man:

SG/SF E. Williams SO - providing a spark off the bench. will play as many minutes as nolan.

I'm not a fan of starting both Thomas and Zoubek. Although I expect both players to improve over the summer, I don't think they are offensively skilled enough to be on the court at the same time - in the sense that it would hurt our offense.

They both shoot a great percentage from the field, but they need to be set up in order to shoot. Since we don't have a classic penetrating PG in that lineup (unless Nolan drastically improves his passing and starts getting into the lane like crazy, which I'm not expecting) to get those two easy shot opportunities, it doesn't make sense to me to have both Lance and Brian on the floor at the same time. In many ways, our lack of a pure point guard has hurt Thomas and Zoubek in particular. Imagine if we had Ty Lawson driving into the lane, drawing multiple defenders, and dropping off passes to our big men.

Just my opinion.

ChicagoCrazy84
03-30-2009, 11:19 AM
The way I see it at this point is we will not have a roster with only 3 guards. Everyone's worst case scenario is G leaving and we do not land Wall so we are left with Scheyer, EWill, and Nolan. I don't think this is an option to Coach K. The way I see it is Coach K will want to get an answer from Gerald ASAP so he can go from there. If he decides to go, then we are going to go hard after Wall, Bledsoe, and potentially Darius Smith as well. If he decides to stay, maybe he'll roll the dice with Nolan and Jon again next year. I can't see this team without the services of some sort of backup for Jon, Nolan, and Elliot.

COYS
03-30-2009, 11:22 AM
The way I see it at this point is we will not have a roster with only 3 guards. Everyone's worst case scenario is G leaving and we do not land Wall so we are left with Scheyer, EWill, and Nolan. I don't think this is an option to Coach K. The way I see it is Coach K will want to get an answer from Gerald ASAP so he can go from there. If he decides to go, then we are going to go hard after Wall, Bledsoe, and potentially Darius Smith as well. If he decides to stay, maybe he'll roll the dice with Nolan and Jon again next year. I can't see this team without the services of some sort of backup for Jon, Nolan, and Elliot.

I think that whether or not G stays or goes, we're going hard after Wall. That appears obvious after the meeting Wall and K had yesterday.

NSDukeFan
03-30-2009, 03:42 PM
I realize it is hard to have more than an 8 or 9 man rotation, but I think the second squad will have a lot of talent next year.
In a worst case scenario at this point, I would agree with
Smith
Scheyer
Singler
Thomas
Zoubek
as the starting line-up with Williams as sixth man. It would be nice to see Mason, Miles or Kelly able to provide some scoring punch and make the starting line-up, but I don't see them replacing seniors Zoubek and Thomas at the beginning of the year. I also look for Z and Thomas to keep improving over the summer and maybe provide a bit of scoring for us next year.

In this scenario, our starters are going up against Williams, Curry (that feels good to type), MP1, MP2 and Kelly in practise with an improved Czyz as well.
I don't think any other PG we might get next year except for Wall starts for us ahead of Smith and Williams. I think Bledsoe would be a great contributor for us though. In this scenario, we would not have much depth in the backcourt, which may increase the likelihood of E-will coming off the bench.

To me, the above squad is a solid top ten team with a real chance at the final four, but...

Add Wall and/or G (especially G) to the above scenario and I agree we are a preseason top 3 and final four favorite with great backcourt depth as well. Then, only one of Z and Thomas starts with the other providing great minutes off the bench. If both G and Wall come, I like the chances of our second unit (Smith/Wall, Williams, Z, MP1, MP3, Kelly) making the tournament. :)

umdukie
03-30-2009, 10:33 PM
2001
Jason Williams
Shane Battier
Carlos Boozer
Mike Dunleavy
Chris Duhon

vs.

2009
John Wall
Jon Scheyer
Gerald Henderson
Kyle Singler
Mason Plumlee

Next year has the potential to be something special if Wall comes and G stays.

RainingThrees
03-30-2009, 10:40 PM
Mason hasn't proven that he will be better than Miles, Zoubs, or Lance yet. I would rather have low expectations and be surprised that have high ones and be disappointed.

Cameron
03-30-2009, 10:52 PM
My favorite hypothetical is 1999-2000:

William Avery
Jason Williams
Mike Dunleavy
Shane Battier
Elton Brand

Bench:

Chris Duhon
Chris Carrawell
Nate James
Corey Maggette
Casey Sanders

Duvall
03-30-2009, 11:12 PM
My favorite hypothetical is 1999-2000:

William Avery
Jason Williams
Mike Dunleavy
Shane Battier
Elton Brand

Bench:

Chris Duhon
Chris Carrawell
Nate James
Corey Maggette
Casey Sanders

Note that Dunleavy didn't start over Carrawell in the real 1999-2000 season. Also, Duhon was in high school.

That team would have killed people. Literally, I literally think Pete Gillen would have up and died before taking his team into Cameron to face that squad.

JDev
03-30-2009, 11:26 PM
Note that Dunleavy didn't start over Carrawell in the real 1999-2000 season. Also, Duhon was in high school.

That team would have killed people. Literally, I literally think Pete Gillen would have up and died before taking his team into Cameron to face that squad.

Gillen would have burned all of his timeouts while the teams were still in lay-up lines.

Cameron
03-30-2009, 11:34 PM
Yeah, I meant 2000-01. My bad. So take Carrawell out.

Really, just forget I posted that.

VaDukie
03-30-2009, 11:34 PM
Gillen would have burned all of his timeouts while the teams were still in lay-up lines.

Not to get off-topic, but I miss the Pete Gillen days. We can only hope Bennett matches is unintentional comedy level.

pfrduke
03-30-2009, 11:34 PM
My favorite hypothetical is 1999-2000:

William Avery
Jason Williams
Mike Dunleavy
Shane Battier
Elton Brand

Bench:

Chris Duhon
Chris Carrawell
Nate James
Corey Maggette
Casey Sanders

Do you not want to throw Boozer on that bench? Or in your hypothetical world does he not come to Duke since Brand stayed?

Cameron
03-30-2009, 11:37 PM
Think about the 2002-03 team possibilities...

Just the starters:

Jason Williams
JJ Redick
Mike Dunleavy
Carlos Boozer
Shelden Williams

My God.

Cameron
03-30-2009, 11:39 PM
Do you not want to throw Boozer on that bench? Or in your hypothetical world does he not come to Duke since Brand stayed?

In my real world, I'm just tired:)

That original post was so full of errors I pry should stop posting for the night.

But, look at the 2003 starting lineup hypothetical from above. Damn. It kind of hurts thinking about how dominant we could have been. We would have had the greatest college teams of all-time back to back to back to back (had we hypothetically won the national title in '99).

:D

Cameron
03-30-2009, 11:40 PM
And then you have Jones and Duhon and Ewing, who would have started anywhere else in the nation.

speedevil2001
03-30-2009, 11:52 PM
We got a new starting line up boys..


Smith...watch out if wall signs with duke.
Scheyer
Williams
Singler
Mason Plumlee..just saw him dunk in the mickey d game. he is a lot better than zoubek and his brother.

jimsumner
03-30-2009, 11:58 PM
Let's try another hypothetical

2005

Shelden Williams
Luol Deng
J.J. Redick
Shaun Livingston
Kris Humphries or Dan Ewing

Bench

Humphries or Ewing
Shavlik Randolph
Sean Dockery
DeMarcus Nelson
Michael Thompson
Lee Melchionni
David McClure

FireOgilvie
03-31-2009, 12:01 AM
We got a new starting line up boys..


Smith...watch out if wall signs with duke.
Scheyer
Williams
Singler
Mason Plumlee..just saw him dunk in the mickey d game. he is a lot better than zoubek and his brother.

I totally agree about Mason. I was hoping he would anyway... but, then according to Jason Williams, Coach K said "Mason Plumlee" and "Laettner" in the same sentence. I think he is definitely the pre-season favorite. Combine 6'11" height with, quite frankly, amazing athleticism, and you have a potential star.

dukeballer2294
03-31-2009, 12:22 AM
I totally agree about Mason. I was hoping he would anyway... but, then according to Jason Williams, Coach K said "Mason Plumlee" and "Laettner" in the same sentence. I think he is definitely the pre-season favorite. Combine 6'11" height with, quite frankly, amazing athleticism, and you have a potential star.

I agree Mason is the best out of that bunch but I think it is Lance's job to lose and I dont think he will lose it 2 staright years. That guy has to much fire under him, I hope he is named captain.(But thats another topic)

pfrduke
03-31-2009, 12:59 AM
I agree Mason is the best out of that bunch but I think it is Lance's job to lose and I dont think he will lose it 2 staright years. That guy has to much fire under him, I hope he is named captain.(But thats another topic)

I think Lance would be a great captain, but if he's still this team's best option at the 5 next season, no one should be happy.

Cameron
03-31-2009, 01:44 AM
2005

Shelden Williams
Luol Deng
J.J. Redick
Shaun Livingston
Kris Humphries or Dan Ewing

Bench

Humphries or Ewing
Shavlik Randolph
Sean Dockery
DeMarcus Nelson
Michael Thompson
Lee Melchionni
David McClure

That's straight sick. Look at that depth, folks. I know you could say this about a lot of schools, but, honestly, had Duke kept all its players like it did in the '80s and most of the '90s for the full four years, we would have had arguably the greatest teams to ever grace college basketball every year from 1999 to 2006 or so. We might never have lost a national title game.

That's wicked.

jv001
03-31-2009, 10:27 AM
That's straight sick. Look at that depth, folks. I know you could say this about a lot of schools, but, honestly, had Duke kept all its players like it did in the '80s and most of the '90s for the full four years, we would have had arguably the greatest teams to ever grace college basketball every year from 1999 to 2006 or so. We might never have lost a national title game.

That's wicked.

that I don't like the NBA. Just call me old fashion. Stay 4 years, get a degree and then go pro. Go Duke!

Matches
03-31-2009, 10:38 AM
That's straight sick. Look at that depth, folks. I know you could say this about a lot of schools, but, honestly, had Duke kept all its players like it did in the '80s and most of the '90s for the full four years, we would have had arguably the greatest teams to ever grace college basketball every year from 1999 to 2006 or so. We might never have lost a national title game.

That's wicked.

It's a fun game to play, but what if everyone else kept their stars too? 2006 UNC with Felton, May, McCants, Marvin Williams, and Hanstravel? With Frazor, Green, and Ginyard off the bench?

Or '99 UNC with Cota, Carter, Jamison, Haywood, plus Okulaja, Jason Capel, and Klang off the bench? Their hypothetical 99 team and our actual 99 team would've had some amazing games.

Matches
03-31-2009, 10:45 AM
My favorite hypothetical is 1999-2000:

William Avery
Jason Williams
Mike Dunleavy
Shane Battier
Elton Brand

Bench:

Chris Duhon
Chris Carrawell
Nate James
Corey Maggette
Casey Sanders

I'd guess it would've been more like:

Starters:

Avery
J Williams
Maggette
Battier
Brand

Bench:

Carrawell
Dunleavy
Boozer
Burgess
James

Geez that team is ridiculous. Even if Boozer didn't matriculate - just sick.

DukieBoy
03-31-2009, 06:11 PM
Let's try another hypothetical

2005

Shelden Williams
Luol Deng
J.J. Redick
Shaun Livingston
Kris Humphries or Dan Ewing

Bench

Humphries or Ewing
Shavlik Randolph
Sean Dockery
DeMarcus Nelson
Michael Thompson
Lee Melchionni
David McClure

Add LeBron James :D

Duvall
03-31-2009, 06:13 PM
Add LeBron James :D

Still not as good as the 1999-2000 team with the senior captain from Lower Merion, PA.

DukieBoy
03-31-2009, 06:15 PM
Still not as good as the 1999-2000 team with the senior captain from Lower Merion, PA.

Senior LeBron v. Senior Kobe???? There's a debate for ya

Newton_14
03-31-2009, 09:44 PM
My favorite "could have been" roster would have been in 2001 even though we won the title anyway. The "could have been" team would have been the first team since 1976 to run the table and would have destroyed every opponent in my "could have been" world. Of course in this land of make believe they would be coming off a title in 2000 and likely going for back to back titles and back to back undefeated seasons.

So here we go:

Starters:
PG- Will Avery - Sr
SG- Jason Williams - Soph
SM-Corey Maggette- Jr
PF- Shane Battier- Sr
C- Elton Brand- Sr

Bench:
Mike Dunleavy- Soph
Carlos Boozer- Soph
Nate James- Sr
Chris Duhon- Fr
Casey Sanders-Soph
Nick Horvath- Soph

Dukebasketball32
03-31-2009, 10:09 PM
Wow i think we have the potential to be a VERY good team next year. Personally, i think G is gone and i don't see us landing a point guard. But even with both of those things, i think we will look good with this lineup:

PG- Nolan Smith: He frustrated the heck out of me at times this year but man is he athletic. I think he will be the most improved player going into next season and will really turn some heads.
SG- Jon Sheyer: Not a whole lot to say here. Hes a stud and has an incredible will to win. Locked in the spot all year long no matter who we sign.
SF- Elliot Williams: I saw the kid play in high school and i think he is gonna be an absolute monster eventually. He is an excellent driver and needs to look to score more. He can also shut down anybody.
PF- Kyle Singler: Best player on the team in my opinion. SO happy that he is staying. My favorite player at duke since Dunleavy.
C- Mason Plumlee: He is looking real good. I think it may be a stretch, but he is good and deserves a chance to develop and start.
Bench:
Ryan Kelly: going to be a VERY good player. I think he is the top scoring frosh next year. May even find himself starting at C if we go small.
Lance Thomas- Great hustle. Should be a captain next year
Zoubek- Needs improvement
Miles Plumlee- Solid. Will pass up zoubek and split time with Mason at the 5 after thomas graduates.

slower
03-31-2009, 10:38 PM
Mason hasn't proven that he will be better than Miles, Zoubs, or Lance yet.

don't you just have the feeling that he WILL?

Boston Dukie
03-31-2009, 11:18 PM
Does anyone think that G staying can be influenced by Wall coming (and vice versa)? If G were to say "I am definitely staying" then that would have to help Wall's desire to come to Duke, and if Wall said "I am headed to Duke" don't you think that G would be more likely to stay?

I think Duke got screwed on this once before actually. If Luol Deng had decided to stay (which is what he was saying all along), then I think it might have helped Shawn Livingston come to Duke.

Just speculation, but putting myself in the shoes of any of the 4 guys above, that is how I would have thought of things (one of the factors I would think about).

Also, Mason (or Kelly) will be much better than Zoubek, and better start otherwise it probably means they are not very good. People keep saying that with his first healthy year Zoubek will be light years better. But it just doesn't work that way. Junior to senior year dramatic improvements don't happen for 7-1 guys who literally have not dunked the ball after 3 years in college. It speaks to a severe uphill battle Zoubek has due to a lack of athleticism.

Williams will improve a ton as fresh to soph is usually the big improvement year for players (so throw Miles in the big improvement bucket as well). Thomas improved a bunch last year and it would be great if he continues to progress.

I will go out on a limb and say that Zoubek plays less than 5 mins a game. Mason, Miles and Kelly will all be much better and Lance brings some very strong things to the table in certain situations.

whereinthehellami
04-01-2009, 08:52 AM
My favorite "could have been" roster would have been in 2001 even though we won the title anyway. The "could have been" team would have been the first team since 1976 to run the table and would have destroyed every opponent in my "could have been" world. Of course in this land of make believe they would be coming off a title in 2000 and likely going for back to back titles and back to back undefeated seasons.

So here we go:

Starters:
PG- Will Avery - Sr
SG- Jason Williams - Soph
SM-Corey Maggette- Jr
PF- Shane Battier- Sr
C- Elton Brand- Sr

Bench:
Mike Dunleavy- Soph
Carlos Boozer- Soph
Nate James- Sr
Chris Duhon- Fr
Casey Sanders-Soph
Nick Horvath- Soph

I don't think Horvath or Sanders see much playing time with that roster!

dgoore97
04-11-2009, 09:22 PM
another article i can't read might be interesting tho..

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/news/story?id=4055707&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fncb %2finsider%2fnews%2fstory%3fid%3d4055707

Hancock 4 Duke
04-12-2009, 12:04 PM
Wow i think we have the potential to be a VERY good team next year. Personally, i think G is gone and i don't see us landing a point guard. But even with both of those things, i think we will look good with this lineup:

PG- Nolan Smith: He frustrated the heck out of me at times this year but man is he athletic. I think he will be the most improved player going into next season and will really turn some heads.
SG- Jon Sheyer: Not a whole lot to say here. Hes a stud and has an incredible will to win. Locked in the spot all year long no matter who we sign.
SF- Elliot Williams: I saw the kid play in high school and i think he is gonna be an absolute monster eventually. He is an excellent driver and needs to look to score more. He can also shut down anybody.
PF- Kyle Singler: Best player on the team in my opinion. SO happy that he is staying. My favorite player at duke since Dunleavy.
C- Mason Plumlee: He is looking real good. I think it may be a stretch, but he is good and deserves a chance to develop and start.
Bench:
Ryan Kelly: going to be a VERY good player. I think he is the top scoring frosh next year. May even find himself starting at C if we go small.
Lance Thomas- Great hustle. Should be a captain next year
Zoubek- Needs improvement
Miles Plumlee- Solid. Will pass up zoubek and split time with Mason at the 5 after thomas graduates.

I'm sorry, but EWill as SF? I think he should be a guard. Here is my starting line:
PG-Nolan Smith
SG-Jon Scheyer
SG-Elliot Williams
PF-Singler
PF-Henderson (Yes Henderson)
OFF THE BENCH/Subs
PG-Jon Scheyer (sub)
SG-Singler (SUB)
SG-Hendo (sub)
PF-Kelly
PF-Zoubek, Thomas, both Plumlee's
Whole Team
PG-Smith, Scheyer, Williams, Jordan Davidson
SG-Scheyer, Williams, Singler, Henderson
F-Kelly, Plumlee, Plumlee, Zoubek, Johnson, Thomas
We won't be a very deep team next year. Hopefully we will get Wall to strengthen our PG status.

CDu
04-12-2009, 12:25 PM
I'm sorry, but EWill as SF? I think he should be a guard. Here is my starting line:
PG-Nolan Smith
SG-Jon Scheyer
SG-Elliot Williams
PF-Singler
PF-Henderson (Yes Henderson)


There's really no difference between a SG and a SF in college for most teams, especially Duke. Most teams have PG, wings, and posts. Many teams play with a PG, three wings, and a post. That's generally been the Duke model, with the last two years being exceptions. Last year and the year before, we typically played with four wing players (Singler is a big wing and we didn't have a PG) and a post player (unless McClure was in the game - then we had five wing players).

So Williams and Scheyer would be classified as wings. Unless he substantially improves his PG skills, you'd say the same thing about Smith. With your starting lineup, I'd just call it:

PG/W: Smith
PG/W: Scheyer
W: Williams
W/Post: Henderson
W/Post: Singler

That said, IF Henderson stays, I'll be surprised if we use this lineup. It leaves us with no backcourt reserves, and means we'll be undersized again. I'd expect one of Zoubek, Thomas, or the Plumlees to start and one of Smith and Williams to come off the bench (but play major minutes).

And that's of course ignoring the possibility that Henderson may go pro and the possibility that we may yet get a PG for next year's team (which could affect the starting lineup OR the bench).

Devilsfan
04-12-2009, 04:56 PM
My post season thoughts:
It was great seeing G improve so much (too much?) this year
We need a FAST point guard.
We need PF's that have already been introduced to the weight room.
We're extremely close (closer than most think) to greatness again.

BlueintheFace
04-20-2009, 02:13 PM
Reports are starting to trickle down that G's declaration to enter the draft is just a formality... which means that this thread might be looking a bit more relevant now than it was before.

Here's my mindless speculation about who will be in the rotation if we don't get Wall, but get Bledsoe-

1) Nolan/ Bledsoe??
2) Scheyer
3) Williams/ Kelly
4) Singler/ LT
5) Plumlee2/ Zoubek and Plumlee1

or if K decides to pull another rabbit out of his hat and go large all-season to match our numbers at the forward positions (assuming we don't get either Wall or Bledsoe):

1) Nolan or Williams
2) Scheyer/ Nolan or Williams
3) Singler/ Kelly
4) Plumlee2/ LT or Plumlee
5) Zoubek/ LT or Plumlee

... interestingly enough, this wouldn't shock me when I look at our roster without a true PG.

Duke #33
04-20-2009, 09:12 PM
Reports are starting to trickle down that G's declaration to enter the draft is just a formality
Does that mean that he will enter, but just needs to announce, or he is still deciding what to do?

ice-9
04-21-2009, 05:18 AM
It's hard to see how a lineup with Singler at the "3" could guard anyone, especially given the way this year's team struggled defensively down the stretch.


Duke can be a good defensive team with Singler at the 3...if we play zone.

A lineup of Scheyer, Smith/Williams, Singler/Kelly, Kelly/MP2/Thomas and Zoubek/MP1 can be devastating on the zone. With the exception of Zoubek, everyone is quick. Further, everyone will have above average length and height at their respective positions -- it'll be tough for opponents to shoot over us and/or drive against us.

If we don't get Wall/Bledsoe, it'll be interesting to see what Coach K does.

sagegrouse
04-21-2009, 09:17 AM
Duke can be a good defensive team with Singler at the 3...if we play zone.

A lineup of Scheyer, Smith/Williams, Singler/Kelly, Kelly/MP2/Thomas and Zoubek/MP1 can be devastating on the zone. With the exception of Zoubek, everyone is quick. Further, everyone will have above average length and height at their respective positions -- it'll be tough for opponents to shoot over us and/or drive against us.

If we don't get Wall/Bledsoe, it'll be interesting to see what Coach K does.

I am having trouble with the Z word in your post, and not the one with the first name of Brian.

Zone. Zone? ZONE? Z-O-N-E? At Duke? My last memory of a zone defense at Duke was Jack Givens of UK shredding it for 42 points in the NCAA championship game. (I mean, couldn't someone have just taken his head off on one of his drives?) Although there is a hazy reverie from last season against BC, where a half-court zone trap led to a whole bunch of TOs.

Zone? Never gonna happen at Duke.

Also, K is not a fan of the twin towers (or triple towers) approach to hoops. I mean, he had the pick of the entire NBA and took just one true center for the Olympic team. Surely everyone agrees that K's ideal team consists of five long, fast, and skilled players between 6-4 and 6-8, who are pretty interchangeable on both offense and defense. Last year's version is what Coach Knight referred to as "Mike's all-forward team."

WRT your other comments ("With the exception of Zoubek, everyone is quick"), I don't have time to rebut except to say that MP1 was a fouling and TO machine in his first year and that MP2 and Kelly are big men freshmen, and it would be better to avoid definitive statements until we see them on the court. Even Christian and Danny were not true stars as freshmen, and Shelden, who contributed his first year, had real trouble with fouls.

My memory is failing a bit, but how long has it been since someone declared, "Czyz is Polish for Jesus, and Olek is definitely the second coming." Actually, I think that was me in jest, but surely the point is obvious. And BTW why wouldn't Olek, whom you omitted, be more likely to have help the team than either of the freshmen.

sagegrouse

sagegrouse

MChambers
04-21-2009, 10:16 AM
Zone. Zone? ZONE? Z-O-N-E? At Duke? My last memory of a zone defense at Duke was Jack Givens of UK shredding it for 42 points in the NCAA championship game. (I mean, couldn't someone have just taken his head off on one of his drives?)

I just remember an endless parade of foul line jumpers. Did he ever drive?

I agree with you on the zone. Duke will play man-to-man, but if we don't get Wall or Bledsoe, it will have to be a far less aggressive man-to-man than usual.

jimsumner
04-21-2009, 10:36 PM
Inasmuch as Bill Foster was Duke's coach when Givens shredded the Duke zone in the '78 title game, I'm not sure it has much relevance to the current discussion. Foster actually used lots of zone and Duke was pretty good at it.

But the guy who replaced Foster doesn't use a lot of zone. Some, here and there, a minute or so at a time, for a variety of sound tactical and strategic reasons.

But limited. So, the idea that K is suddenly going to go all Boeheim on us and use zones for a large part of a game doesn't seem very likely.

BlueintheFace
04-25-2009, 04:52 PM
We seem to be a step closer towards solidifying our roster for next year.

- G has declared.
- Bledsoe has been offered by KY and we have not offered him yet.
- Wall is still an unknown quantity.

All of this means (to me) that it is more likely than not that we have just three guards next year. If you think we are running a three guard scheme with just three guards on the roster (not counting davidson... yet) then I have some real estate I would like to sell you.

This rotation is looking more and more likely:

1) Nolan or Williams
2) Scheyer/ Nolan or Williams
3) Singler/ Kelly
4) Plumlee2/ LT or Plumlee1
5) Zoubek/ LT or Plumlee1

NOTE: Jordan Davidson could be really seeing some playing time. I hope he has been working on that three. We might need people to respect his ability to hit that shot in order to keep good spacing when he is in the game

NOTE: LT could be in the starting lineup just as easily as Plumlee2 or even Plumlee1. The truth is, there will be some serious competition down low this off-season and in the pre-season. However, I am almost positive that, should we have just three guards, we will be FORCED to push Singler and Kelly to the G/F position.

Next year's pre-season could be really really entertaining and full of intrigue.

hedgehog
04-25-2009, 05:02 PM
1) Nolan or Williams
2) Scheyer/ Nolan or Williams
3) Singler/ Kelly
4) Plumlee2/ LT or Plumlee1
5) Zoubek/ LT or Plumlee1


How about:
1) Jon/Nolan
2) Nolan/Jon/Williams
3) Williams/Singler/Kelly
4) Singler/LT/Kelly/Czyz
5) Mason/Zoubek/Miles

As in the starting lineup i think we see most often is Jon, Nolan, Williams, Singler, and one big man. Also, I think Jon is much more likely to get time at PG than Williams, considering he has played it off and on for three years at Duke and Williams hasn't played point in HS or college. Obviously, the depth is a bit short at guard.

CDu
04-25-2009, 05:30 PM
How about:
1) Jon/Nolan
2) Nolan/Jon/Williams
3) Williams/Singler/Kelly
4) Singler/LT/Kelly/Czyz
5) Mason/Zoubek/Miles

As in the starting lineup i think we see most often is Jon, Nolan, Williams, Singler, and one big man. Also, I think Jon is much more likely to get time at PG than Williams, considering he has played it off and on for three years at Duke and Williams hasn't played point in HS or college. Obviously, the depth is a bit short at guard.

It's going to be interesting next year. With only 3 guards and 6 bigs (7 if Czyz makes improvements), we're going to play a lot of big lineups this year. Given that, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see one of the three guards coming off the bench.

But I do agree that Williams won't see time at PG. Smith and Scheyer are going to be the ones manning the position, unless we somehow wind up with Bledsoe or Wall (and I'm not optimistic on that front).

I'm honestly not sure how it's going to play out. I'm guessing that Singler and Kelly will see a lot of time at the 3. The question will be whether Coach K decides to go big to start the game (with Singler at the 3) or whether he goes big off the bench (with Singler at the 4).

Assuming no additional changes to the roster, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see this lineup:

Scheyer/Smith
Smith/Scheyer
Singler
Thomas
Plumlee/Zoubek

With a bench of:
Williams
Zoubek/Plumlee
Plumlee
Kelly

We're going to be VERY thin in the backcourt next year if this is the lineup. As such, we're going to need huge improvements from the returning players and/or the freshmen for us to be as good next year. Here's hoping to big progress this summer.

BlueintheFace
04-25-2009, 06:26 PM
As in the starting lineup i think we see most often is Jon, Nolan, Williams, Singler, and one big man.

And who comes off the bench for those three guards?

Bob Green
04-25-2009, 06:31 PM
And who comes off the bench for those three guards?

At substitution time, Coach K inserts another big man and Singler moves to small forward/third guard.

BlueintheFace
04-25-2009, 07:00 PM
At substitution time, Coach K inserts another big man and Singler moves to small forward/third guard.

This doesn't seem very smart. You have to adapt to the personnel you have. K has always been great at this. Next season Duke will have 3 guards and 5 forwards/centers likely to be in the rotation. Something tells me that K will not run a three guard set, and if he doesn't run a three guard set, I doubt he will start three guards.

NOTE: I took Kelly, Czyz, and Davidson out of the rotation. This is just speculation and if one of them was in the rotation then my analysis would change, but I think their exclusion makes the most sense.

hedgehog
04-25-2009, 07:17 PM
This doesn't seem very smart. You have to adapt to the personnel you have. K has always been great at this. Next season Duke will have 3 guards and 5 forwards/centers likely to be in the rotation. Something tells me that K will not run a three guard set, and if he doesn't run a three guard set, I doubt he will start three guards.

I think that K has shown that he is likely to put the best players out on the floor for the most minutes and also have them start, somewhat regardless of positions. Certainly we have heard the refrain that "Duke recruits players (or athletes), not positions." While that is only true to a certain degree, I think that Nolan, Jon, Elliot, and Kyle represent our four strongest players as things currently stand. Thus, I expect them all to start and each to get a majority of the 40 minutes in non-OT games.

FireOgilvie
04-25-2009, 08:19 PM
I think that K has shown that he is likely to put the best players out on the floor for the most minutes and also have them start, somewhat regardless of positions. Certainly we have heard the refrain that "Duke recruits players (or athletes), not positions." While that is only true to a certain degree, I think that Nolan, Jon, Elliot, and Kyle represent our four strongest players as things currently stand. Thus, I expect them all to start and each to get a majority of the 40 minutes in non-OT games.

Right. I don't think it matters which lineup starts. No matter what, we're going to see a lot of all three guards at the same time and probably a lot of "2 guards, Singler, plus two more bigs." Those are going to take up the majority of the minutes. It will be important to have all 3 guards against smaller/quicker teams.

natedog4ever
04-25-2009, 11:18 PM
I'll go ahead and lay it out there - the five that will start and finish games will be Smith, Scheyer, Williams, Singler, Thomas. And by "finish", I mean when the game is close in the second half - like, as in, every game for the last 3 seasons.

There will be no magical switch to some "super big" scheme. Singler will have to move down to wing at times. Unfortunately, he hurts us as much as helps when he stays there (IMHO). Also, we'll go about seven deep, that's it. I just hope that Mason can manage to be one of those.

There is a lot of "delusion" going on around here.

Bob Green
04-26-2009, 12:09 AM
I'll go ahead and lay it out there - the five that will start and finish games will be Smith, Scheyer, Williams, Singler, Thomas. And by "finish", I mean when the game is close in the second half - like, as in, every game for the last 3 seasons.

There will be no magical switch to some "super big" scheme. Singler will have to move down to wing at times. Unfortunately, he hurts us as much as helps when he stays there (IMHO). Also, we'll go about seven deep, that's it. I just hope that Mason can manage to be one of those.

There is a lot of "delusion" going on around here.

I agree with you in principle but I think we will be more than seven deep. This past season we had nine players average double digit minutes and six of them are back: Scheyer, Singler, Smith, Williams, Thomas, and Zoubek. There are four more recruited scholarship players on the roster: Miles Plumlee, Czyz, Mason Plumlee, and Kelly. I expect three of those will see significant minutes, plus Coach K will most likely bring in another guard in the 2009 class. I expect we will be eight or nine deep next season.

COYS
04-26-2009, 01:18 AM
There will be no magical switch to some "super big" scheme. Singler will have to move down to wing at times. Unfortunately, he hurts us as much as helps when he stays there (IMHO). Also, we'll go about seven deep, that's it. I just hope that Mason can manage to be one of those.

There is a lot of "delusion" going on around here.

I don't think that Kyle will hurt us on defense (which is what I presume you mean when you say Kyle will hurt us there) against certain teams or when paired with Lance, almost like the lineups this past year with Thomas/Zoub, Kyle, and McClure. Thomas can pick up an agile wing if necessary. That being said, Kyle is a savvy player who held his own, for the most part, when defending a variety of players. I'm not so sure why you would be so worried about having him in the game with two other bigs.

FireOgilvie
04-26-2009, 02:01 AM
I don't think that Kyle will hurt us on defense (which is what I presume you mean when you say Kyle will hurt us there) against certain teams or when paired with Lance, almost like the lineups this past year with Thomas/Zoub, Kyle, and McClure. Thomas can pick up an agile wing if necessary. That being said, Kyle is a savvy player who held his own, for the most part, when defending a variety of players. I'm not so sure why you would be so worried about having him in the game with two other bigs.

I think Singler is great, but he is not even close to being as good of an on-the-ball defender as Elliot or Nolan. They can stay in front of almost anyone, while Singler was burned a lot last year on switches (but no more than Lance). I would almost guarantee that they (the guards) play at the end of games in situations involving free throws or in case we need a big defensive stop. If we go big and attempt a straight up switching man-to-man, we are going to run into a lot of trouble... the other team will have their pick on who they want to beat off the dribble. I would love to see some kind of zone thrown in intermittently to mix things up. Last year, our defense was too predictable, and not good enough to make up for that, IMO.

I really hope to see the Plumlees and Zoubek used as much as possible while basically chained to the basket on defense. They're all very good at altering/blocking shots, which is key when someone drives on us, which was basically our opponents' game plan last year. When our bigs leave the paint, especially Zoubek, only bad things happen.

I think next year will be very interesting from a strategic standpoint. Will we finally use a true center for the majority of the game? How will we adjust to having only 3 guards? We lose Paulus, Henderson, Pocius, and McClure... 4 players that play 1-3, and we bring in two 4/5s. Will Kelly get time at the 3? How much will Czyz improve? It would be nice to have another backup at the 3 in case 1 of our guards gets injured. There is a lot to think about!

whereinthehellami
04-26-2009, 08:53 AM
I wish Duke had Singler with a better supporting cast. Not there isn't talent but he has not had the right amount of experience and athletiscm in the lineup for him to really take advatange of his game. Singler with a solid post that can score and has good hands would be a sight to behold. I don't think Singler focuses as much on his passing, which is excellent, because the current frontcourt payers don't have soft hands and the ability to finish. While Plumlee might have a bright future, I don't see him helping in this regard next year. Singler type players don't come around that often and it has been and will be bad timing for him. At least we have him for one more year.

natedog4ever
04-26-2009, 10:35 AM
I agree with you in principle but I think we will be more than seven deep. This past season we had nine players average double digit minutes and six of them are back: Scheyer, Singler, Smith, Williams, Thomas, and Zoubek. There are four more recruited scholarship players on the roster: Miles Plumlee, Czyz, Mason Plumlee, and Kelly. I expect three of those will see significant minutes, plus Coach K will most likely bring in another guard in the 2009 class. I expect we will be eight or nine deep next season.

Granted, I am not considering that we will get any more guards, but we can hope.

That being said, just because 6 are back does not make 2 or 3 of the others automatic big-minute contributors. It has nothing to do with what we did last year either. And, with all due respect, here is perhaps the biggest problem that I see with your slant - if you are going to include Zoubek in the 6 automatic contributors, you definitely will not see 2 or 3 of the other 4 playing. We just aren't going to bring 3 centers/bigs off the bench. Just my prediction after watching for too many years.

natedog4ever
04-26-2009, 10:46 AM
I don't think that Kyle will hurt us on defense (which is what I presume you mean when you say Kyle will hurt us there) against certain teams or when paired with Lance, almost like the lineups this past year with Thomas/Zoub, Kyle, and McClure. Thomas can pick up an agile wing if necessary. That being said, Kyle is a savvy player who held his own, for the most part, when defending a variety of players. I'm not so sure why you would be so worried about having him in the game with two other bigs.

Disclaimer: I will take Kyle at any position any day of the week.

However, I actually meant offensively. I don't think we've seen him defend the typical college "3" enough to say how he would perform. I agree that Lance can cover that and I think coach K loves that about Lance. Lance can even switch at the top to a point guard and still defend well.

As for Singler, I just think he is much less potent when he gets hung up on the perimeter. Duke just needs to ensure that space is made for him to operate and that he understands he should still do that, even when he is a "perimeter" player.

COYS
04-26-2009, 12:13 PM
Disclaimer: I will take Kyle at any position any day of the week.

However, I actually meant offensively. I don't think we've seen him defend the typical college "3" enough to say how he would perform. I agree that Lance can cover that and I think coach K loves that about Lance. Lance can even switch at the top to a point guard and still defend well.

As for Singler, I just think he is much less potent when he gets hung up on the perimeter. Duke just needs to ensure that space is made for him to operate and that he understands he should still do that, even when he is a "perimeter" player.

I agree that the team as a whole seamed to forget how effective Kyle can be operating from the post as well as from the perimeter. However, I would imagine we'd actually see more of Kyle posting up if we are playing a lineup with Kyle at the three since whoever is guarding Kyle is likely to be at a significant size disadvantage. This is particularly true if the other forwards in the game with Kyle are some combination of Kelly, Mason, or Thomas since all three can draw their defenders out of the paint area and give Kyle room to operate.

natedog4ever
04-26-2009, 01:42 PM
I agree that the team as a whole seamed to forget how effective Kyle can be operating from the post as well as from the perimeter. However, I would imagine we'd actually see more of Kyle posting up if we are playing a lineup with Kyle at the three since whoever is guarding Kyle is likely to be at a significant size disadvantage. This is particularly true if the other forwards in the game with Kyle are some combination of Kelly, Mason, or Thomas since all three can draw their defenders out of the paint area and give Kyle room to operate.

I hope so. The same advantage existed for G this year and we sure didn't see much posting up. Kyle's inside points thus far have come exclusively from driving larger guys to the basket, so I look forward to seeing what else he has in the bag.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
04-26-2009, 02:49 PM
On paper at least without Wall or Bledsoe I sort of fear that Duke will be a pretty boring team to watch next year. However, with expectations low in the entertainment field, it might be a little easier to be pleasantly surprised.

Saratoga2
04-26-2009, 07:11 PM
Going in to the season with 3 guards, assuming we can't sign another before the season starts, will put a lot of pressure on the team. Issues with injuries, illness and/or fouls could have a drastic impact on the team as well. I suspect in the condition of three ACC level guards, coach K will be reluctant to put all three on the floor together. If that is true, he may have to rotate one in to keep the others fresh.

The mythical 3 position will have to be filled by Singler, Kelly, Thomas or Czyz. Fortunately we have the two Plumlees and Zoubek for inside duty and the smaller more agile forwards can be moved out.

Our best hope though is still to add another guard. Wall would be the best possible but perhaps there are backup plans. It would be great if this phase of recruiting will be over soon and the team can form.

gotham devil
04-27-2009, 01:57 AM
Wow i think we have the potential to be a VERY good team next year. Personally, i think G is gone and i don't see us landing a point guard. But even with both of those things, i think we will look good with this lineup:

PG- Nolan Smith: He frustrated the heck out of me at times this year but man is he athletic. I think he will be the most improved player going into next season and will really turn some heads.
SG- Jon Sheyer: Not a whole lot to say here. Hes a stud and has an incredible will to win. Locked in the spot all year long no matter who we sign.
SF- Elliot Williams: I saw the kid play in high school and i think he is gonna be an absolute monster eventually. He is an excellent driver and needs to look to score more. He can also shut down anybody.
PF- Kyle Singler: Best player on the team in my opinion. SO happy that he is staying. My favorite player at duke since Dunleavy.
C- Mason Plumlee: He is looking real good. I think it may be a stretch, but he is good and deserves a chance to develop and start.
Bench:
Ryan Kelly: going to be a VERY good player. I think he is the top scoring frosh next year. May even find himself starting at C if we go small.
Lance Thomas- Great hustle. Should be a captain next year
Zoubek- Needs improvement
Miles Plumlee- Solid. Will pass up zoubek and split time with Mason at the 5 after thomas graduates.
That is a very optimistic scenario. College basketball and the ACC in particular should be fairly weak next year. Without Wall, I expect Duke to win the ACC and have a legitimate chance at another Sweet 16 appearance.
Nolan Smith: pro potential, but only showed flashes of that throughout his two seasons. He may have a breakout season.
Scheyer: skilled four-year college two guard, who is perhaps undervalued nationally, but overvalued by Duke fans
Elliot Williams: also displayed flashes of potential when given playing time towards the end of the season, but needs substantial work on his ballhandling and perimeter shooting
Kyle Singler: easily the best player on the current roster and will continue to bear an enormous burden for the program
Mason Plumlee: an athletic high-post 4, who will likely be used as low-post 5, high ceiling
Ryan Kelly: a very skilled offensive 4, with strength and defensive weaknesses
Lance Thomas: a versatile defender, who has demonstrated little offensive development over his prior three seasons
Zoubek: provides length against opposing slow big men and five fouls
Miles Plumlee: seemed overwhelmed on both sides of the ball in the very limited time he received as a freshman

DevilDan
04-27-2009, 02:32 AM
With the now almost certain exit of Henderson, I think we're looking at another season much like '08-'09: 24-28 wins, a finish in the ACC top three, a 2-3 seed in the tourney, and an exit in the S16 or the E8.

NCAA hoops just isn't what it used to be... across the country, it's a 2-year stay for the best players, then a reload for next season. For the '09-'10 team to excel, we need a POINT GUARD and some SCORING from EWill and a consistent contribution from SOMEONE at the 5 position.

As much as I like Jon Scheyer, at "1" we get a functional player who won't hurt us, but he won't beat quicker defenders (and from there he gets less shots). I'd like to see Elliot improve to 12-14 each game, and fill the gap left by GH. Mason Plumlee shows some great hops, a nose for the rim in the all-star games, and plays with the recklessness of a basketball jones -- it would be exciting to have him in the lineup, see his stuff, and watch him improve rapidly. The toughest thought is that Olek may be the forgotten man -- why did he always look so LOST out there ?

Kyle will be our rock, and I can't wait for the season to start. I'm not my usual super positive boy-cheerleader best at this point, because I still have Villanova on the brain. Somebody help perk me up ... GO DUKE !

miramar
04-27-2009, 09:20 AM
As noted in the N&O, at the present time (i.e., w/o Wall) it looks as though Duke will switch between a big team and a small team, basically depending on whether Kyle is playing the 3 or the 4.

While there have been concerns about how Singler would fare defensively, we should remember that Mike Dunleavy played the 3 consistently, and I don't remember any particular defensive problems. I would say that Singler is at least as athletic as Dunleavy was at Duke, perhaps more so considering that Mike was adjusting to his growth spurt, and their size is similar (Singler 6-8 220 and Dunleavy 6-9 210). If Duke encounters somebody like Henderson at the 3 then that would be a problem, but that shouldn't happen too often.

Even with all the questions about PG and the post, Duke returns four starters from an ACC championship team that won 30 games. I think the PG situation will improve one way or another, so the key will be whether the big men can develop as expected. I keep hoping for someone to step up with at least 10 points and 7 boards, which doesn't seem like too much to ask. The last two years the leading scorer for the #5 position has been 4.3 and 5.3 with about four boards, but that's an aberration. Right?

CDu
04-27-2009, 10:31 AM
As noted in the N&O, at the present time (i.e., w/o Wall) it looks as though Duke will switch between a big team and a small team, basically depending on whether Kyle is playing the 3 or the 4.

Unless we get Wall or Bledsoe (or someone else) or Davidson earns some regular minutes, I think it's a given that we'll have three big men on the court for most of the game. There's just no way around it.

Looking at it logically, here's an (I think) reasonable guesstimate of minutes allocation for our guards:

Scheyer (~34mpg)
Smith (~30mpg)
Williams (~30mpg)

That would leave about 26 minutes per game that would have to be made up for by other players. So unless Davidson is playing 10+ minutes per game, we're looking at a LOT of big lineups.

Coach K may or may not want to start or finish the game with 3 guards, but he's almost certainly going to spend at least half of the game with 3 big guys on the floor. Even if we see 35 minutes per game from each of our guards (and I'd be pretty surprised by that), that's still 15 minutes per game in which we'd have to either go with three big guys or use Davidson.

Matches
04-27-2009, 10:39 AM
Coach K may or may not want to start or finish the game with 3 guards, but he's almost certainly going to spend at least half of the game with 3 big guys on the floor. Even if we see 35 minutes per game from each of our guards (and I'd be pretty surprised by that), that's still 15 minutes per game in which we'd have to either go with three big guys or use Davidson.

And that's not even accounting for foul trouble (to which Nolan was prone this past year) or injuries. We are awfully thin in the backcourt.

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 10:42 AM
Right, which backs up my earlier contention that the red-shirting of Davidson was not just for practice purposes or because he was just having so much fun being part of the program.

We aren't going to see a radical change in philosophy in order to play 3 bigs for half the game.

Ah, harkens back to the days of Stan Brunson, Jay Heaps and Reggie Love. These are the good old days.

Oriole Way
04-27-2009, 10:44 AM
And that's not even accounting for foul trouble (to which Nolan was prone this past year) or injuries. We are awfully thin in the backcourt.

Too thin.

We absolutely need to add another talented guard in order to deal with injuries. It would be unwise and reckless to enter next season with only 3 guards, one of whom - Nolan Smith - is very injury prone. Jordan Davidson is nothing more than an option in case of dire emergency. If he sees playing time in anything but garbage time, we are in serious trouble.

CDu
04-27-2009, 11:12 AM
Right, which backs up my earlier contention that the red-shirting of Davidson was not just for practice purposes or because he was just having so much fun being part of the program.

We aren't going to see a radical change in philosophy in order to play 3 bigs for half the game.

Ah, harkens back to the days of Stan Brunson, Jay Heaps and Reggie Love. These are the good old days.

I will be very surprised to see Davidson play more than end-of-game minutes instead of Coach K going with a highly-recruited big man. I think we'll absolutely see three bigs for extended minutes next year unless Duke gets Bledsoe or Wall (or somebody else, though I have no idea who that someone will be).

There are three or four (non-guard) players who are remotely capable of playing the wing for us next year, and that's Singler, Kelly, Thomas, and Czyz. And the last two may be a reach. But I'll be really surprised if Coach K gives extended minutes to Davidson as opposed to going with a more talented big man.

JDev
04-27-2009, 11:20 AM
Players tend to make their biggest or most drastic jumps in ability between their freshmen and sophomore years. That holding true at Duke next year will be the biggest predictor of success. If Elliot and Miles make the possible improvements, Duke's ceiling rises. I also see Nolan taking another step, just as he did in the tranisition to last year. Those things are the most important developments for Duke in 2010, despite any potential aquisitions that are still being explored. I do tend to be optimistic about each of those things. In the preseason last year Miles spent a lot of time looking like the first team center, so the potential is there. Elliot obviously made huge strides over the course of the season, and I think this offseason will be big for him. He showed in the last month of the season what he can be. Nolan's career seems to be like G's in a sense, in that he is clearly improving with each passing season (I don't mean that he will be 1st team All-ACC, but I do mean he will be obviously better). He hit a rut last year, but in the first few months of the season he was a double figure scorer, playing solid defense, and learning to run a team. He started to find that again around the ACC tournament, and I think he is ready to pick up there. I am not ready to say this team is Final Four good with only three guards on the roster, but I am not ready to rule it out either.

gumbomoop
04-27-2009, 12:13 PM
That is a very optimistic scenario. College basketball and the ACC in particular should be fairly weak next year. Without Wall, I expect Duke to win the ACC and have a legitimate chance at another Sweet 16 appearance.
Nolan Smith: pro potential, but only showed flashes of that throughout his two seasons. He may have a breakout season.
Scheyer: skilled four-year college two guard, who is perhaps undervalued nationally, but overvalued by Duke fans
Elliot Williams: also displayed flashes of potential when given playing time towards the end of the season, but needs substantial work on his ballhandling and perimeter shooting
Kyle Singler: easily the best player on the current roster and will continue to bear an enormous burden for the program
Mason Plumlee: an athletic high-post 4, who will likely be used as low-post 5, high ceiling
Ryan Kelly: a very skilled offensive 4, with strength and defensive weaknesses
Lance Thomas: a versatile defender, who has demonstrated little offensive development over his prior three seasons
Zoubek: provides length against opposing slow big men and five fouls
Miles Plumlee: seemed overwhelmed on both sides of the ball in the very limited time he received as a freshman

I've absented myself from the boards for a couple of weeks, waiting on G's decision, and Wall's. We seem to have a near-certain G decision to leave, and a near-hilarious no-decision-in-sight re Wall, so I venture back in, and into the debate about next year. The view here expressed by Gotham Devil was in response to the optimistic view of Dulebasketball32 at post #118.

I side with Dukebball32, freely admitting the accuracy of Gotham Duke's judgment that Dukebball32 -and I- are optimistic, by which, I infer, Gotham Duke thinks we '09-'10 optimists are foolishly so. This is hardly a crazy charge, as I'm optimistic even assuming no G/Wall/Bledsoe!

I've posted a few weeks back, more than once and here repeat, that I see clear, even dramatic, improvement by Nolan and EWill as key to next season. We do absolutely need a breakout season from Nolan. I freely admit that if both these guys play passively, any optimism is quite misplaced. If either fails to display an improved handle, big problem, because (a) Nolan will surely play some point, and (b) EWill's signal strength is getting to the basket on his own. If either fails to display steady confidence, also big problem. If these 2 defer, game after game, to KS and JS, big problem.

Thus having identified Nolan and EWill as keys, and then listing several damning problems, it does take an optimist to trust that they will rise to the challenge. I trust K to give it to 'em straight, and for them to respond. But if K doesn't - hard to imagine - and they don't - possible - then optimism is unwarranted.

I'm intrigued by Gotham Devil's comment about JS, and plead guilty to valuing JS very, very highly. I'd welcome further comment by Gotham Devil, or anyone else, re ways in which we may be overvaluing JS. I need some specifics, to test my own assessment of JS.

Agreeing with Gotham Devil's assessment of LT and Z [the latter of whom I have previously, brilliantly, and uselessly nominated for a redshirt year], my optimism focuses more on the MPs. I'm with those who plumped for more time for MP1 this season, and with those who see real talent in MP2. As for LT, he's likely to become a DMc-type situational contributor: his court sense and block-out skills are less than DMc's, but he's longer and will cause problems for some opponents. As for Z, I'm resigned to hoping the Z-project will blossom. I see him, however, as a situational player, too. I just don't see 18 mpg, 8 pts, 6 rbds from him, but maybe a bit less. I do worry that, while waiting [!!] for Z to break out, the more athletic MPs don't develop enough to play confidently in Feb-March.

I think Czyz redshirts. He's a fascinating project, too, and I look forward to his years with Curry, Dawkins et al.

Finally, part of my optimism relates to the fact that I don't see any teams that, on paper, look as impressive [talent and experience] at beginning of '09-'10 as UNC, UConn, and Pitt did 6 months ago. I think Kansas, Mich St,Texas, UK-if-Wall, and 'Nova, along with Duke and UNC will be preseason top 7. Btw, Texas recruit Avery Bradley may be better all-around than Wall.

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 12:53 PM
I will be very surprised to see Davidson play more than end-of-game minutes instead of Coach K going with a highly-recruited big man. I think we'll absolutely see three bigs for extended minutes next year unless Duke gets Bledsoe or Wall (or somebody else, though I have no idea who that someone will be).

There are three or four (non-guard) players who are remotely capable of playing the wing for us next year, and that's Singler, Kelly, Thomas, and Czyz. And the last two may be a reach. But I'll be really surprised if Coach K gives extended minutes to Davidson as opposed to going with a more talented big man.

Likewise, I'll very surpirsed if Kelly or Czyz play extended minutes next year. But we can hope. Put it this way - I think the biggest line-up we'll see will have Singler, Thomas, and one of the centers. And this will be for less than 15 a game. And I am confident enough to bet on it, although I think others are more or less talking about what they wish could happen.

InSpades
04-27-2009, 01:47 PM
Likewise, I'll very surpirsed if Kelly or Czyz play extended minutes next year. But we can hope. Put it this way - I think the biggest line-up we'll see will have Singler, Thomas, and one of the centers. And this will be for less than 15 a game. And I am confident enough to bet on it, although I think others are more or less talking about what they wish could happen.

This means you think Scheyer, Smith and Williams will average 35 minutes per game each (or Davidson will play to make up for 1 of them). Right? In an ideal world that would be the case as they are clearly 3 of Duke's 4 best players but Nolan and Elliot have been prone to picking up fouls with the way they play defense. To keep them on the court that much they will have to change how they play on the defensive end. This is why I think Duke could really use another guard for next year. It doesn't have to be John Wall, just someone to let Duke play their high-pressure defense and not worry about only having 3 guards. It will be interesting to see how K works the 3 guards vs. 3 bigs lineup differences. Hopefully Duke has a 4th guard and it's not as big of an issue, but I'm sure we'll see 3 bigs a lot more next year regardless.

That being said I'm very excited for next year's team. Duke will have a very talented team and I see no reason why they won't be competing for an ACC Championship and poised for a decent NCAA tourney run even without adding another piece to the puzzle. We may even get a chance to even the score up a little with our neighbors down the road!

whereinthehellami
04-27-2009, 01:51 PM
Coach K always says that the best 5 will play. But Duke's backcourt is going to be seriously thin next year. Can he afford to start Smith, Scheyer, and Williams? Without Smith and Williams in there Duke is slow. This team seems to be built for a zone. One in which the senior Zooobs can camp out in front of the basket.

I'd like to see Duke try a starting lineup of;

Scheyer 6-5 SR
Williams 6-4 SO
Singler 6-8 JR
Thomas 6-8 SR
Zoubek 7-0 SR

Smith (6-2, JR) and Plumlee (6-11, FR) woud be the first subs in. Kelly getting a random sprinkling of minutes after that. But I think Duke is a 7-8 man team next year.

CDu
04-27-2009, 01:55 PM
Likewise, I'll very surpirsed if Kelly or Czyz play extended minutes next year. But we can hope. Put it this way - I think the biggest line-up we'll see will have Singler, Thomas, and one of the centers. And this will be for less than 15 a game. And I am confident enough to bet on it, although I think others are more or less talking about what they wish could happen.

Your scenario can only happen if:

1) Scheyer, Smith, and Williams all play 35 minutes per game or more; or
2) Davidson gets extended minutes.

Mathematically speaking: 120 - (Scheyer minutes + Smith minutes + Williams minutes + Davidson minutes) = minutes with 3 big men on the floor. So unless our three guards play A LOT of minutes, we're going to see extended time with three big men on the floor.

This is, of course, contingent upon us not getting another PG. If Wall or Bledsoe joins the team, then I think we'll see very little time with 3 "bigs" on the floor.

FireOgilvie
04-27-2009, 02:03 PM
Your scenario can only happen if:

1) Scheyer, Smith, and Williams all play 35 minutes per game or more; or
2) Davidson gets extended minutes.

Mathematically speaking: 120 - (Scheyer minutes + Smith minutes + Williams minutes + Davidson minutes) = minutes with 3 big men on the floor. So unless our three guards play A LOT of minutes, we're going to see extended time with three big men on the floor.

This is, of course, contingent upon us not getting another PG. If Wall or Bledsoe joins the team, then I think we'll see very little time with 3 "bigs" on the floor.

Hypothetically, it could also happen if all 3 players play at the same time for 25+ minutes, and then we go ALL BIGS or 1 guard plus two bigs, etc. I could see a lineup of Singler, Plumlee, Plumlee, Thomas, and Zoubek... just hold the ball up really high in the air and we keep possession. :cool:

CDu
04-27-2009, 02:24 PM
Hypothetically, it could also happen if all 3 players play at the same time for 25+ minutes, and then we go ALL BIGS or 1 guard plus two bigs, etc. I could see a lineup of Singler, Plumlee, Plumlee, Thomas, and Zoubek... just hold the ball up really high in the air and we keep possession. :cool:

Technically, going with all bigs would still qualify as having at least 3 bigs - it would just mean we had 3 bigs plus 2 bigs. But yeah, it's certainly possible that we'd see some lineups with more than 3 bigs - if foul trouble and/or injury becomes an issue in the backcourt. That's not a scenario I want to see play out, and hopefully it won't happen.

At the very least, we're likely to see a LOT of minutes of action each game with at least 3 big men on the floor. It's almost definite to be 20+ minutes per game, unless we get a freshmen guard or Davidson sees a lot of time on the court.

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 02:58 PM
This means you think Scheyer, Smith and Williams will average 35 minutes per game each (or Davidson will play to make up for 1 of them). Right? In an ideal world that would be the case as they are clearly 3 of Duke's 4 best players but Nolan and Elliot have been prone to picking up fouls with the way they play defense. To keep them on the court that much they will have to change how they play on the defensive end. This is why I think Duke could really use another guard for next year. It doesn't have to be John Wall, just someone to let Duke play their high-pressure defense and not worry about only having 3 guards.

Bingo.

And I do predict game-time minutes for Davidson (please let it be very few). We've seen this before when Duke has been undermanned.

BlueintheFace
04-27-2009, 02:58 PM
I will be shocked if we run Williams, Smith, and Scheyer over 35 minutes each. Really SHOCKED. And very concerned...

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 03:03 PM
Your scenario can only happen if:

1) Scheyer, Smith, and Williams all play 35 minutes per game or more; or
2) Davidson gets extended minutes.

Mathematically speaking: 120 - (Scheyer minutes + Smith minutes + Williams minutes + Davidson minutes) = minutes with 3 big men on the floor. So unless our three guards play A LOT of minutes, we're going to see extended time with three big men on the floor.



Remind me - what makes you think Duke won't play guards 35 minutes a game in a situation like this? Remember, I am not talking about what we would do as coach, what we wish would happen, etc., but what is likely going to happen. Taking historical knowledge of the program into account.

CDu
04-27-2009, 03:04 PM
Bingo.

And I do predict game-time minutes for Davidson (please let it be very few). We've seen this before when Duke has been undermanned.

I'll be SHOCKED if Smith and Williams average 35 minutes per game. Foul trouble (those guys like to commit fouls) will prevent it. Scheyer might be able to manage it (though he's never done it before), but I don't think the other two will be able to do it. I think you're underestimating how difficult it is for a player to be ABLE to play 35 minutes per game.

I'll also be shocked if Davidson gets more than 5 minutes per game next year.

CDu
04-27-2009, 03:06 PM
Remind me - what makes you think Duke won't play guards 35 minutes a game in a situation like this? Remember, I am not talking about what we would do as coach, what we wish would happen, etc., but what is likely going to happen. Taking historical knowledge of the program into account.

Foul trouble for Smith and Williams will prevent it from happening. I think you're underestimating how difficult it is to be able to play 35 minutes per game. Smith and Williams are aggressive players and thus will tend to pick up fouls. That's going to result in minutes lost.

I think Scheyer will get about 35 minutes per game, but I don't think Smith or Williams will be able to do it. I think about 30 minutes per game would be a more reasonable (though still potentially optimistic) guess for them. And I don't think we'll see more than 2-3 minutes per game from Davidson.

BlueintheFace
04-27-2009, 03:29 PM
Foul trouble for Smith and Williams will prevent it from happening. I think you're underestimating how difficult it is to be able to play 35 minutes per game. Smith and Williams are aggressive players and thus will tend to pick up fouls. That's going to result in minutes lost.

I think Scheyer will get about 35 minutes per game, but I don't think Smith or Williams will be able to do it. I think about 30 minutes per game would be a more reasonable (though still potentially optimistic) guess for them. And I don't think we'll see more than 2-3 minutes per game from Davidson.

In addition, our FRONTCOURT has so much depth, it is hard to believe that we will try and run a scheme most of the time that leaves us with with ZERO subs with any experience or game time at 3 positions and THREE/FOUR legitimate subs at the other two positions. Doesn't seem like smart game management to me.

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 03:47 PM
I'll be SHOCKED if Smith and Williams average 35 minutes per game. Foul trouble (those guys like to commit fouls) will prevent it. Scheyer might be able to manage it (though he's never done it before), but I don't think the other two will be able to do it. I think you're underestimating how difficult it is for a player to be ABLE to play 35 minutes per game.

I'll also be shocked if Davidson gets more than 5 minutes per game next year.

Just for kicks, let's take a trip into the days of wayback . . .

Including some past eras when we were slightly undermanned . . .

'93-94 - Grant Hill - 36 min/gm
'95-96 Jeff Capel - 35 min/gm
'95-96 Chris Collins - 35 min/gm
'95-96 Ricky Price - 32 min/gm
'96-79 Wojo - 31 min/gm (played some defense, didn't he?)
'99-00 Chris Carrawell - 36 min/gm
'99-00 Shane Battier - 36 min/gm
'00-01 Shane Battier - 36 min/gm
'01-04 Chris Duhon - his last 3 years floated 35-36 min/gm
'04-05 Dan Ewing - 35 min/gm
'04-05 JJ Redick - 37 min/gm:eek:
'05-06 JJ Redick - 37 min/gm:eek:

Hurley floated between 33 and 36.

JWill floated between 32 and 34.

Meanwhile, guys like Brunson and Love gave 10 min/gm in seasons in which they were needed.

Just a little historical perspective. Definitely all good points regarding whether the current crop can stay in the game. I will tell you that they will be out there until they foul out.

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 04:02 PM
In addition, our FRONTCOURT has so much depth, it is hard to believe that we will try and run a scheme most of the time that leaves us with with ZERO subs with any experience or game time at 3 positions and THREE/FOUR legitimate subs at the other two positions. Doesn't seem like smart game management to me.

Sorry, but I must disagree with you (seems like we keep running into each other, no?)

We actually have very little proven frontcourt depth outside of Singler and Thomas. I hold out hope for Mason after seeing him in some of the all-star games. After that it's basically Zoubek. I don't know if you have noticed, but the coaches go away from him at some strange times in games. I have some ideas why, but that's for another post.

I think Olek and Kelly have some big leaps to make before contributing next year and I think the same is true of Miles, but he is closest.

CDu
04-27-2009, 04:02 PM
Just for kicks, let's take a trip into the days of wayback . . .

Including some past eras when we were slightly undermanned . . .

'93-94 - Grant Hill - 36 min/gm
'95-96 Jeff Capel - 35 min/gm
'95-96 Chris Collins - 35 min/gm
'95-96 Ricky Price - 32 min/gm
'96-79 Wojo - 31 min/gm (played some defense, didn't he?)
'99-00 Chris Carrawell - 36 min/gm
'99-00 Shane Battier - 36 min/gm
'00-01 Shane Battier - 36 min/gm
'01-04 Chris Duhon - his last 3 years floated 35-36 min/gm
'04-05 Dan Ewing - 35 min/gm
'04-05 JJ Redick - 37 min/gm:eek:
'05-06 JJ Redick - 37 min/gm:eek:

Hurley floated between 33 and 36.

JWill floated between 32 and 34.

Meanwhile, guys like Brunson and Love gave 10 min/gm in seasons in which they were needed.

Just a little historical perspective. Definitely all good points regarding whether the current crop can stay in the game. I will tell you that they will be out there until they foul out.

I agree that we have had guys that have played 35 minutes per game. Would never argue otherwise. I also agree that our three guards will play as much as they can. But given Smith's and Williams's defensive tendencies, I do not see them playing 35 minutes per game (even though I think Coach K would prefer it). As I said before, I think you're underestimating how difficult it is to be able to stay on the floor for 35+ minutes per game. I think they'll get about 30 minutes per game along with Scheyer's 35ish, which leaves 25 minutes per game for either Davidson or the bigs.

From there, I do not see Davidson playing extended minutes. Brunson and Love got minutes because Duke was so thin that those guys were the 7th/8th best players available. Davidson will be the 11th or 12th best player available. I can all but guarantee you that Coach K will go with three big(ger) men on the court with Kelly before he plays Davidson. He'll adjust the strategy before he puts weaker players on the floor.

JDev
04-27-2009, 04:03 PM
As someone stated, Coach K will play the best five players, and that means that, barring any other additions, Scheyer, Smith, and Williams will all start. After Singler, they are likely to be Duke's next best three players. I don't think they all average 35+ minutes a game, but I think they all will be around 30, with Scheyer a little higher (again, barring any late additions). Duke at times will utilize a big lineup, with Singler at the 3, out of necessity if nothing else. Duke's best line-up, and the one they are likely to use at crunch time if fouls aren't an issue, still features all four of those guys, with Kyle at the 4, and the big guy who is playing the best or matches up the best in the current game. The 5 spot battle is intriguing because there are minutes there if someone elevates their game.

JDev
04-27-2009, 04:06 PM
As far as Davidson goes, I just don't see him getting any significant time, despite the thin backcourt. I could be wrong. I would guess that if one of the existing guards is in foul trouble, Duke goes big virtually every time.

Matches
04-27-2009, 04:10 PM
From there, I do not see Davidson playing extended minutes. Brunson and Love got minutes because Duke was so thin that those guys were the 7th/8th best players available. Davidson will be the 11th or 12th best player available. I can all but guarantee you that Coach K will go with three big(ger) men on the court with Kelly before he plays Davidson. He'll adjust the strategy before he puts weaker players on the floor.

I agree with this. The only way Davidson sees more than spot duty is if there is an injury to one of the backcourt players. I remember Jay Heaps getting minutes at the end of the '96 season, but that was a sign that we were mortally wounded.

SMO
04-27-2009, 04:19 PM
Just for kicks, let's take a trip into the days of wayback . . .

Including some past eras when we were slightly undermanned . . .

'93-94 - Grant Hill - 36 min/gm
'95-96 Jeff Capel - 35 min/gm
'95-96 Chris Collins - 35 min/gm
'95-96 Ricky Price - 32 min/gm
'96-79 Wojo - 31 min/gm (played some defense, didn't he?)
'99-00 Chris Carrawell - 36 min/gm
'99-00 Shane Battier - 36 min/gm
'00-01 Shane Battier - 36 min/gm
'01-04 Chris Duhon - his last 3 years floated 35-36 min/gm
'04-05 Dan Ewing - 35 min/gm
'04-05 JJ Redick - 37 min/gm:eek:
'05-06 JJ Redick - 37 min/gm:eek:

Hurley floated between 33 and 36.

JWill floated between 32 and 34.

Meanwhile, guys like Brunson and Love gave 10 min/gm in seasons in which they were needed.

Just a little historical perspective. Definitely all good points regarding whether the current crop can stay in the game. I will tell you that they will be out there until they foul out.

And none of these guys turned into a pile of mush after playing so many minutes? :D

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 04:19 PM
I agree that we have had guys that have played 35 minutes per game. Would never argue otherwise. I also agree that our three guards will play as much as they can. But given Smith's and Williams's defensive tendencies, I do not see them playing 35 minutes per game (even though I think Coach K would prefer it). As I said before, I think you're underestimating how difficult it is to be able to stay on the floor for 35+ minutes per game. I think they'll get about 30 minutes per game along with Scheyer's 35ish, which leaves 25 minutes per game for either Davidson or the bigs.

From there, I do not see Davidson playing extended minutes. Brunson and Love got minutes because Duke was so thin that those guys were the 7th/8th best players available. Davidson will be the 11th or 12th best player available. I can all but guarantee you that Coach K will go with three big(ger) men on the court with Kelly before he plays Davidson. He'll adjust the strategy before he puts weaker players on the floor.

I would love it if it worked out that way (successfully).

livehead16
04-27-2009, 04:27 PM
Please forgive me for jumping into the middle, but I just don't have time to read all the way back. Is it Jordan Davidson to whom all of you are referring? (I'm assuming it is, since I haven't heard of any new Davidsons coming along.) If so, he is leaving - he's decided to forgo his last year of eligibility. He was treated as a senior at the banquet on Friday night.

Again, please forgive me if this is old news - I had assumed everyone around these parts would have already heard about that, but maybe not.

K-Duke
04-27-2009, 04:59 PM
Please forgive me for jumping into the middle, but I just don't have time to read all the way back. Is it Jordan Davidson to whom all of you are referring? (I'm assuming it is, since I haven't heard of any new Davidsons coming along.) If so, he is leaving - he's decided to forgo his last year of eligibility. He was treated as a senior at the banquet on Friday night.

Again, please forgive me if this is old news - I had assumed everyone around these parts would have already heard about that, but maybe not.

I said this in another threat you posted in, but I think you're mixing up Jordan and Marty.

livehead16
04-27-2009, 05:05 PM
And I just replied to you in that thread, but I promise you, I'm not mixing up anything. Four seniors honored on Friday - Greg, Dave, Marty and Jordan.

(And if I couldn't keep Marty and Jordan straight, I wouldn't dare post on this board. LOL.)

K-Duke
04-27-2009, 05:08 PM
And I just replied to you in that thread, but I promise you, I'm not mixing up anything. Four seniors honored on Friday - Greg, Dave, Marty and Jordan.

(And if I couldn't keep Marty and Jordan straight, I wouldn't dare post on this board. LOL.)

fair enough... so, anybody know anything about the Jordan Davidson situation then?

BlueintheFace
04-27-2009, 05:28 PM
Sorry, but I must disagree with you (seems like we keep running into each other, no?)

We actually have very little proven frontcourt depth outside of Singler and Thomas. I hold out hope for Mason after seeing him in some of the all-star games. After that it's basically Zoubek. I don't know if you have noticed, but the coaches go away from him at some strange times in games. I have some ideas why, but that's for another post.

I think Olek and Kelly have some big leaps to make before contributing next year and I think the same is true of Miles, but he is closest.

Miles was Duke Basketball's starting big man at the beginning of last year. We found out within a few games that other options might be better, but I think he will see the floor a fair amount more than last year. I agree on Czyz and likely Kelly (from what I can tell now... which is not much)

Still, from what you have said in this thread. You have Duke running a 7 man rotation with 3 guards playing 35+ minutes with no real subs at those three positions, 2 big men who will see the floor a great deal, one big man who won't be ever be on the floor more than 15-20 minutes if history tells us anything, and our seventh man, the unknown quantity freshman.

It seems like you see Singler, Williams, Smith, and Scheyer all playing ~35 minutes (and sometimes more) with the remaining minutes split up among three big men. Is this a fair characterization?

CDu
04-27-2009, 05:29 PM
And I just replied to you in that thread, but I promise you, I'm not mixing up anything. Four seniors honored on Friday - Greg, Dave, Marty and Jordan.

(And if I couldn't keep Marty and Jordan straight, I wouldn't dare post on this board. LOL.)

Jordan is the Davidson to whom we've been referring. He redshirted this season, which led many including me to assume he'd be playing next year as a grad student. If what you say is true, I find it very interesting but surprising, given that he didn't participate in senior day. Perhaps he changed his mind post season?

I was under the impression that a large part of the reason he was coming back was to provide SOME sort of practice players at the guard position. Without him, we were at one point looking at only three guards of any value on the team. The addition of Curry (he will sit out the year but will practice with the team) alleviates some of that problem. Perhaps that's why Davidson has moved on?

Can anyone else provide more insight into why Davidson would be honored at the banquet but not on senior day? More importantly, can anyone provide insight into whether Davidson will actually be on the team next year?

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 06:04 PM
If you go back and read the post by DukeDevilDeb in the original Jordan Davidson thread, she says that the decision to redshirt had been made, but that Jordan would decide whether to return after the season.

CDu
04-27-2009, 06:35 PM
If you go back and read the post by DukeDevilDeb in the original Jordan Davidson thread, she says that the decision to redshirt had been made, but that Jordan would decide whether to return after the season.

That addresses the first question I guess, but not the second one. The banquet information (his being honored with the seniors) suggests that Davidson might not be coming back next year after all. It would be nice to know more about that.

I don't think it makes much difference in terms of playing time on the court (I really don't think Davidson was going to get much run), but it might have impact on practices next year.

natedog4ever
04-27-2009, 07:22 PM
That addresses the first question I guess, but not the second one. The banquet information (his being honored with the seniors) suggests that Davidson might not be coming back next year after all. It would be nice to know more about that.

I don't think it makes much difference in terms of playing time on the court (I really don't think Davidson was going to get much run), but it might have impact on practices next year.

I think it sounds as if he decided not to return between the end of the season and the banquet. I didn't think he was going to play much either, but maybe as you pointed out, the practice problem can be alleviated with Curry.

When are those open tryouts again?

Sobriquet
04-28-2009, 12:01 PM
There is a chance that Duke could "go big" for extended periods of time this year, allowing Singler or Kelly to play at the 3 while two other bigs are also in the game.

On the surface, this potentially creates mismatches for our threes who would be guarding quicker, perimeter oriented players.

Unless:

One of the Plumlees develops into a shotblocker. A MOBILE shotblocker. One of our biggest problems last year was penetrating players. Duke's aggressive, risk taking, switching D has one glaring flaw. It is vulnerable to pentrating guards who can finish at the rim. I am not advocating changing this, going to man, or anything else. No def scheme is perfect, and our Man D has served us well.

But penetration is a problem. This is alleviated with laser quick guards who can stay in front of their guy, but switches always leave a sliver of daylight for going to the hole. The answer for this is a shotblocking eraser.

Thinking back, it would have been hard for JJ to get huge numbers of minutes without a guy like Shel backing him up. JJ was a capable Defender, but he was a little footslow. He made up for it by gambling on passing lanes and generally overplaying. He could do this secure in the fact that if (when) his defender went arround him Shel was waiting to make the penetrator eat the ball. By their Jr and Sr years, opponents were very hesitant to go into the paint because the Landlord was waiting, and JJ had adjusted his Defensive style accordingly, becoming a capable defender to go along with his stellare offensive abilities.

Same thing next year (hopefully). We can move Kyle to the 3 for long stretches while knowing we have created a situation where quicker wings will isolate and penetrate. If there is a mobile shotblocker waiting, that threat is lessened, while allowing Kyle to create his own mismatches on O.

But it takes a MOBILE shotblocker to do this, lest any of you think Zoubs is the answer. Z is a great shot alterer, but he is stationary. Penetrators can drive and dish when Z commits, or they can pull up for a mid range J, knowing Z can't get there. A mobile shotblocker will discourage a drive, while at the same time a penetrator will know that the Shot Blocker can still recover for a dished pass or get out on a mid range J.

If either Plum can do this, much of our defensive problems would be solved. A shotblocker, even if he did very little else besides rebound, would have DRASTICALLY altered the Villanova game last year. Duke could have overplayed at will on the perimeter, which was our only chance against the quicker guards, knowing that they had a safety net behind them.

I hope that one or both of the Plums will be that mobile shotblocker. I haven't seen enough of Miles to know, but Mason has been aggressively going after shots each time I have seen him play, and he has the mobility and hops to get the job done. More bulk is needed long term for Offense, defensive positioning, and rebounding, but what we really need is shotblocking next year.

I don't know that one of the Plums can be that mobile shot blocker, but I am hopeful.

I also hope we get Wall or Bledsoe, which would negate (to a significant extent) our need for that Shot Blocking force.

ncexnyc
04-28-2009, 01:06 PM
Many of us, myself included tend to forget that not every player who dons a Duke uniform is going to be a very good player, let alone a superstar. We forget that for the most part these are young kids who've shown potential in High School and that their game is a work in progress.

Yes, some do develop faster than others, but we shouldn't get down on the kids who come along slower and who don't reach what we project for them as players, it just isn't fair to them.

Barring a major injury, I expect another solid season from our kids. Yes, we currently have a depth issue at the guard position, but I have faith that Coach K and his staff will have that all straightened out come November. We still have Kyle and Jon and that is a fantastic pair of kids to build a squad around. Nolan and Elliot are very capable players and both have a very high ceiling, so that's a major plus in looking for a someone to pick up the slack for our loss of G. We've also got a nice stable of bigs, which over the past few seasons has been lacking. Yes, I know Lance and Brian aren't world beaters, but each of them has developed over the course of their stay at Duke, albeit slowly. Lance has the physical tools and last year showed flashes of what he can do. As a senior I believe he will finally become the player we projected he would be when he signed at Duke. Brian has had an injury plagued career, however last year he stayed healthy and this is the first summer he's been completely sound. I believe this will enable him to work on the finer points of post play and he too will be a surprise to all of us come November. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not predicting any All-ACC accolades from either player, but I do believe they will both provide us with the pressence we've all been clamouring for these past two seasons.

We've got several other bigs with loads of potential, but lots of question marks. Does the game finally slow down for Miles, who has all the tools. Is the Mason we've seen in exhibition games, the Mason we're going to get come November? Can Ryan's smooth stroke provide us with some production during the season? Can Olek actually get on the court? If any of these kids can provide us with some quality time, we really won't have anything to worry about next season.

BlueintheFace
04-28-2009, 03:36 PM
There is a chance that Duke could "go big" for extended periods of time this year, allowing Singler or Kelly to play at the 3 while two other bigs are also in the game.

This remains my theory for now, but most on this thread seem to strongly disagree. I think Singler can defend the three just fine and did so many times last season.

Sobriquet
04-28-2009, 03:50 PM
This remains my theory for now, but most on this thread seem to strongly disagree. I think Singler can defend the three just fine and did so many times last season.

No, no. I think we will go big some. Barring getting another guard, we will have to do so. But Kyle will be vulnerable to some threes. Especially those WGs masquerading as SFs, a la Villanova, or Duke (6-4ish GH). Kyle will have a hard time staying in front of those guys. With a shot blocker behind him, a MOBILE shot blocker, this threat is lessened because the opposing "3" will not be able to do as much damage when they get arround Kyle. And they will get arround him.

KS will play good D within our system, but putting him on a shorter, quicker guard is not exactly a recipe for unbridled defensive success for KS.

NSDukeFan
04-28-2009, 04:12 PM
No, no. I think we will go big some. Barring getting another guard, we will have to do so. But Kyle will be vulnerable to some threes. Especially those WGs masquerading as SFs, a la Villanova, or Duke (6-4ish GH). Kyle will have a hard time staying in front of those guys. With a shot blocker behind him, a MOBILE shot blocker, this threat is lessened because the opposing "3" will not be able to do as much damage when they get arround Kyle. And they will get arround him.

KS will play good D within our system, but putting him on a shorter, quicker guard is not exactly a recipe for unbridled defensive success for KS.

I agree with both you and BlueintheFace. Kyle can defend the three pretty well, though he is susceptible to All-American 3s (who isn't) or some of the three guard offenses that have very quick 3s (e.g. Nova, but apparently we were susceptible to them last year as well for one game, anyway). But I think he provides at least as much (though I would argue much more) of a challenge for a guard trying to match up with him. Good luck and, if we miss, thanks for the rebound.

Having a shot-blocking, or deterring, presence inside certainly helps, which may partly explain Zoubek's great +/- this year (though the situations he was specifically deployed in is more of an explanation). I hope that we will get more from the 5 position this year and expect that we will.

I am one of those 'wildly?' optimistic people that expects to see improvement from all our guys after a summer's work. I am looking forward to Lance making a solid contribution at the 4 and 5, and maybe even the 3 especially defensively and being an emotional leader on the team. I expect to get more nice bursts of solid play from Z and hopefully for longer periods. I hope to see Miles and Mason providing some shot-blocking and altering and hopefully some of the offensive potential they both show. It would be nice to see them playing together sometimes for an athletic, shot-blocking frontcourt.

I have a lot more confidence in Kelly than some posters who expect nothing from him next year. I agree he is not a muscle man at this point, but he has some great skills for a guy that size from the limited amount I have seen.

I am really excited about the monster year I expect Kyle to have next year.

If we don't get Wall, Bledsoe, or someone else K can pull out of his hat, we will not have a lot of depth in the backcourt, but I am not scared to have Kyle, Lance, Kelly (and maybe even Olek?) at a wing position for significant minutes. Maybe we will be like Brandon Knight's great uncle Bobby;) says and have 5 forwards (literally?)

Whatever happens, should be a lot of fun and even more so than this year, we should have a reasonable chance against anyone, including Kansas.

roywhite
04-28-2009, 04:31 PM
I'm not as concerned with the starters, or even the rotation, as the lack of depth in the backcourt should an injury or illness occur. That would be a problem.

Sobriquet
04-28-2009, 04:48 PM
I agree with both you and BlueintheFace.

I am really excited about the monster year I expect Kyle to have next year.



Nothing happens in a vacum on the basketball court. I fully expect Kyle to hone his body and his skills over the summer. That does not a monster year make.

For him to have this monster year, it is dependant on some other things comming to pass.

He needs PG help. He needs someone, Wall, Nolan, EWill, Bledsoe, Jon, SOMEBODY to play solid at the PG. And solid means attacking, penetrating, dishing, running the O at a level beyond anything we saw out of Duke last year. Not All ACC good, but much better than what we got last year.

Secondly, Kyle needs low post help, specifically someone to keep low post defenders honest. Last year he got attention from both opposing bigs, and occasionally from one of the guards as well.

See, there is a HUGE change from last season to next season.

No more Gerald Henderson. By Feb, opponents keyed on Gerald every game. That opened up opportunities for other players. Next year, barring roster changes or extreme player development, opponents will key on Kyle as Duke's most dangerous player.

And I love Kyle. I do. But creating his own shot while being the focus of the opponents D is not one of his strengths. If he can get his three falling, he can dribble drive for some baskets, but that gets difficult if you are the focus of the other guys's D scheme, facing a steady stream of help defenders.

Certainly, Kyle could have a monster year, with a little help. But the help is crucial. G raised his game, and everybody else was brought along because of G's one-on-one, ability to create drew defenders and left others on an island facing a sole defender. Kyle lacks that, but has other strengths that G lacked. If the team raises its overall play (from just a few players) then Kyle could explode.

But if next year is a two man show with him and Jon we might be in some trouble. Kyle will still be very good. But not POY worthy, by a long shot.

gumbomoop
04-28-2009, 05:45 PM
Certainly, Kyle could have a monster year, with a little help. But the help is crucial. G raised his game, and everybody else was brought along because of G's one-on-one, ability to create drew defenders and left others on an island facing a sole defender. Kyle lacks that, but has other strengths that G lacked. If the team raises its overall play (from just a few players) then Kyle could explode.

But if next year is a two man show with him and Jon we might be in some trouble. Kyle will still be very good. But not POY worthy, by a long shot.

Amen. I'm one of the optimists, but I agree with every word here. It's gotta be Nolan and EWill, for they are the two who can improve dramatically. [Well, others, too, but the probabilities are with NS and EW.]

They must both improve handle, mental toughness, relentlessness, not-always-deferring-to-Kyle/Jon-ness. EW must significantly improve free throw shooting; and NS must get to the line regularly, so he can get points while challenging JS for team leader at 88-90% from line. No passivity from either guy, none.

And 2 of our 5s must score a little, rebound a lot, block a few, and not look lost.

Kishiznit
04-28-2009, 11:31 PM
No reason to call anyone out as we all have our own opinions and no questions will be answered until April of 2010.

Make no mistake, I am a huge Singler fan and I am much appreciative of the fact that he was an early commit to stay in Durham. Kyle is a 4. No matter how much we want to see him floating around the perimeter and putting his 6-9 frame on a 6-5 wing player, he is best suited to hang out around the basket because of his speed. #12 is best offensively, when a 4 or 5 is guarding him - shoot the 3 in their eye or drive to the basket. He cannot get to the basket with a smaller 3 guarding him. KS explodes defensive opportunities when he is guarding the post guys, not on the perimeter. He is long and can cover anyone when they back down to the basket and with great hands can grab many boards without leaving his feet. When he guards a 3 on the perimeter he is like a rookie O lineman throwing a lookout block against Demarcus Ware.

Nolan has got to play the point. EWil must play the 2 with some point back-up. My bet is that EWil will shoot >35% from 3 pt line next year which would be big for us as we know he can get to the rim. Our backcourt will not be bad.

#30 will spend a lot of time in the backcourt but should move to 3. He will average more minutes than any player next year, including KS. JS will have a huge senior campaign.

Frontcourt with Singer will be Zoubek, Mason, and Lance....period.

It's all about matchups and if a team is large, they get Z and Mason. If the team is small, they get Mason and Lance.

I would love to see Olek get mins next year but will have to settle 9 or 10 in the rotation next year.

GO DUKE.

JDev
04-29-2009, 12:04 AM
Kyle will play some 3 next year, but it is likely to be just out of necessity due to the thin backcourt. As Kish said, Kyle is generally more effective at the 4, and he is a quintessential Duke 4, much like Dunleavy and Deng to name a few. He is big enough to defend the other team's second big, and versatile enough to give that same big fits on the other end of the floor by moving to the outside and/or putting the ball on the floor. Duke will better with him at the 4, because of the things I mentioned, but also because it gives Duke the ability to put what are likely to be their best five players on the floor: Smith/Williams/Scheyer/Singler/5 to be decided. The less Kyle plays the 3, the more Duke's likely best five will be on the floor.

BlueintheFace
04-29-2009, 12:14 AM
No reason to call anyone out as we all have our own opinions and no questions will be answered until April of 2010.

Make no mistake, I am a huge Singler fan and I am much appreciative of the fact that he was an early commit to stay in Durham. Kyle is a 4. No matter how much we want to see him floating around the perimeter and putting his 6-9 frame on a 6-5 wing player, he is best suited to hang out around the basket because of his speed. #12 is best offensively, when a 4 or 5 is guarding him - shoot the 3 in their eye or drive to the basket. He cannot get to the basket with a smaller 3 guarding him. KS explodes defensive opportunities when he is guarding the post guys, not on the perimeter. He is long and can cover anyone when they back down to the basket and with great hands can grab many boards without leaving his feet. When he guards a 3 on the perimeter he is like a rookie O lineman throwing a lookout block against Demarcus Ware.

Nolan has got to play the point. EWil must play the 2 with some point back-up. My bet is that EWil will shoot >35% from 3 pt line next year which would be big for us as we know he can get to the rim. Our backcourt will not be bad.

#30 will spend a lot of time in the backcourt but should move to 3. He will average more minutes than any player next year, including KS. JS will have a huge senior campaign.

Frontcourt with Singer will be Zoubek, Mason, and Lance....period.

It's all about matchups and if a team is large, they get Z and Mason. If the team is small, they get Mason and Lance.

I would love to see Olek get mins next year but will have to settle 9 or 10 in the rotation next year.

GO DUKE.

No Singler at the three?

You have Duke playing a 7 man rotation, not a 9 or 10 man rotation, unless I am missing something. Do you have Kelly as the one man off the bench in the backcourt to make an 8 man rotation? If not, then you have a 7 man rotation there with all of our guards playing 40 minutes/game.

Additionally, Singler guarded wings a lot last season and did not get burned.

Kedsy
04-29-2009, 12:22 AM
This remains my theory for now, but most on this thread seem to strongly disagree. I think Singler can defend the three just fine and did so many times last season.

Well, I strongly agree. I understand the defensive issues, but with Singler or Kelly playing the 3 we'll have one of the biggest teams in the nation. Because not only can we field a frontline of 7'1", 6'10", 6'9", but our guards are much bigger than most teams will have -- Nolan will be our only player shorter than 6'4" but with his wingspan he plays at least 6'4". It will be like this year's Florida State (or maybe Wake Forest) but with a lot more skill.

As anyone who has played can attest, guarding a bigger player takes a lot out of you, much more than merely having to run up and down against a fast break team. If we play a big lineup consistently, we will tire out a lot of teams, which will reduce the quickness advantage they may seem to have at the 3. Going big is not something we're used to seeing here at Duke, but it should be plenty interesting.

BlueintheFace
04-29-2009, 01:03 AM
I'd just like to explain something to all of those (and there seem to be a lot) who think that Duke will not run bigger next year if the team remains as it is currently composed.

Either Singler or Kelly plays SIGNIFICANT time on the wing (the 3 spot, whatever you want to call it) or Scheyer, Williams, and Smith will all have to play 40 min/game which is impossible. If Nolan and E-will both play 32 min/game (a reasonable proposition considering propensity to foul) and Scheyer plays 36 min/game (sound about right?), then you have 20 min/game on the wing coming for Singler or Kelly.

I hope that you all can understand that. Singler WILL play on the wing unless Kelly turns out to be a godsend. Okay? It's not a debatable topic. The minutes simply do not workout otherwise... unless you believe Jordan Davidson will be (a) playing and (b) logging significant minutes.

Sobriquet
04-29-2009, 01:23 AM
I'd just like to explain something to all of those (and there seem to be a lot) who think that Duke will not run bigger next year if the team remains as it is currently composed.

Either Singler or Kelly plays SIGNIFICANT time on the wing (the 3 spot, whatever you want to call it) or Scheyer, Williams, and Smith will all have to play 40 min/game which is impossible. If Nolan and E-will both play 32 min/game (a reasonable proposition considering propensity to foul) and Scheyer plays 36 min/game (sound about right?), then you have 20 min/game on the wing coming for Singler or Kelly.

I hope that you all can understand that. Singler WILL play on the wing unless Kelly turns out to be a godsend. Okay? It's not a debatable topic. The minutes simply do not workout otherwise... unless you believe Jordan Davidson will be (a) playing and (b) logging significant minutes.

Agree. Totally. Unless we get Wall or Bledsoe. The addition of another guard would alleviate our depth concern on the wing and in the backcourt, because then we have 4 players for 3 positions.

Even if that miracle were to come to pass, Singler and or Kelly will still log minutes at the three. Maybe not a ton of minutes, but engouh to be noticable. We lost 3 wings/guards off last year's rotation and didn't add any one at their positions.

As it stands now, we have to play big. It won't be a matter of wanting to do it. It is a necessity. It will happen whether K is in love with the idea or not. Injuries or foul trouble will push Kyle to the three, and possibly the two.

It could happen.

CDu
04-29-2009, 09:19 AM
Agree. Totally. Unless we get Wall or Bledsoe. The addition of another guard would alleviate our depth concern on the wing and in the backcourt, because then we have 4 players for 3 positions.

Even if that miracle were to come to pass, Singler and or Kelly will still log minutes at the three. Maybe not a ton of minutes, but engouh to be noticable. We lost 3 wings/guards off last year's rotation and didn't add any one at their positions.

As it stands now, we have to play big. It won't be a matter of wanting to do it. It is a necessity. It will happen whether K is in love with the idea or not. Injuries or foul trouble will push Kyle to the three, and possibly the two.

It could happen.

Agreed. Count me in the camp that isn't overly excited about the idea of having to go big. I think Singler is more suited to play the "4" in college - pulling bigger guys away from the basket and taking advantage of their lack of comfort and quickness out there. I think he'd have a bit more trouble off the dribble against quicker wings. But we'll see. Hopefully I'm wrong, or at least hopefully Duke can make it work.

As you said, getting Wall or Bledsoe would be huge if for no other reason than it would allow us to have depth in the backcourt. That would allow us to not be forced to play big for so many minutes. Having a true PG would be an added bonus.

In any case, we're going to need big improvements from Smith, Williams, and a couple of the big guys.

ice-9
04-29-2009, 11:03 AM
I've always enjoyed the speculation part of the off-season. Baseless speculations? Sure but why not. March madness has taken a hit for me and speculating on Duke's lineup for next year fixes my jones.

So without further adieu, I gots:


Scheyer 6-5 SR
Williams 6-4 SO
Singler 6-8 JR
Thomas 6-8 SR
Zoubek 7-0 SR (Plumlee 6-10 FR)



Smith 6-3 JR
Kelly 6-9 FR


I don't see Duke getting any more PGs (that are capable of getting into the top 8). I think Smith or one of the backcourt players will come off the bench at least to start the game. Although that will probably depend more on match-ups. This team has some definate holes, quickness and athletiscm being chief among them.

On the other hand next year's team will have some size and experience. The above starting five 5 has 3 SRs and 1 JR. Granted Thomas and Zoubek need to really take their games up a level in the off-season for Duke to be a team that could get past the Sweet 16 next year. And I think either Kelly or Plumlee has to become a double figure scorer or leader in rebounding for Duke to be a top 10 team next year. That is alot to ask of freshmen but Duke needs one of them to be special.

Coach K talks alot about adapting his style to his team. Well we will see for sure next year. In the past this usually involves Duke playing 3-5 guards/forwards. Well this time he has to go out of the box and come up with a style that fits a team with 5 out of the top 8 that are 6-8 or taller. This will be a challenge on both sides of the ball. If Duke had a bluechip PG, than on offense you could see some real fireworks with all the talented frontcourt players who could be fed for mid-range and low post points. Unfortunately Duke doesn't have a PG that can exploit that. And on defense this team will have alot of problems playing an agressive overplaying man-to-man. Foul trouble will be a buzz-word for our games next year.

Well my coffee is gone and my buzz has run its course.


Assuming we don't get Wall or Bledsoe, I think Nolan will start over Williams. Several reasons:

- With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Thomas and Zoubek, we'll likely play a slower, half court game. Nolan's better 3-pt shot will come in handy in that case.

- While the change to insert Williams last season into the starting five sparked our team, if you look at the numbers and the way the team played it was really a temporary lift. Nolan played better down the stretch than Williams did, and I expect Coach K to put Nolan back into the starting lineup next season.

I can see MP2 and Kelly taking big minutes away from Thomas and Zoubek. With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Kelly and MP2 we'd have FIVE offensive threats. After this season, where often we only had three, this will be a welcomed change.

Saratoga2
04-29-2009, 11:43 AM
Assuming we don't get Wall or Bledsoe, I think Nolan will start over Williams. Several reasons:

- With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Thomas and Zoubek, we'll likely play a slower, half court game. Nolan's better 3-pt shot will come in handy in that case.

- While the change to insert Williams last season into the starting five sparked our team, if you look at the numbers and the way the team played it was really a temporary lift. Nolan played better down the stretch than Williams did, and I expect Coach K to put Nolan back into the starting lineup next season.

I can see MP2 and Kelly taking big minutes away from Thomas and Zoubek. With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Kelly and MP2 we'd have FIVE offensive threats. After this season, where often we only had three, this will be a welcomed change.

A lot will depend on improvements current players make to their games. Williams has a lot of potential for improvements too his shot and his free throw shooting. If he does that, it would be hard to keep him from starting, as he has the size, athletic ability and proven defensive excellence. I don't expect either Thomas or Zoubek to make major improvements but what they can give is still good.

MP2 does have a chance to become a starter as the season moves along. Where MP1 is good sized, agile and will have a year's experience. Kelly looks like a 4, perhaps as a substitute for Singler or if Singler has to move to the 3.

Plenty of time to see how the team shakes out and whether we get another guard.

BlueintheFace
04-29-2009, 11:49 AM
Kelly looks like a 4, perhaps as a substitute for Singler or if Singler has to move to the 3.

I am pretty sure Kelly fits in best at the three. His go-to shot is a Paul Pierce-type elbow jumper. He works best using a variety of moves taking his man from the outside-in before pulling up for the fading mid-range jumper or finishing the drive. He also has a great three point shot.

Sobriquet
04-29-2009, 11:55 AM
Assuming we don't get Wall or Bledsoe, I think Nolan will start over Williams. Several reasons:

- With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Thomas and Zoubek, we'll likely play a slower, half court game. Nolan's better 3-pt shot will come in handy in that case.

- While the change to insert Williams last season into the starting five sparked our team, if you look at the numbers and the way the team played it was really a temporary lift. Nolan played better down the stretch than Williams did, and I expect Coach K to put Nolan back into the starting lineup next season.

I can see MP2 and Kelly taking big minutes away from Thomas and Zoubek. With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Kelly and MP2 we'd have FIVE offensive threats. After this season, where often we only had three, this will be a welcomed change.

I'm not so sure about parts of your lineup.

First, I think the three guards start alongside Kyle and a 5 to be named later.

Personally, I would love it if some of the bigs improved enough to merit starting roles alongide Kyle and two guards, but I am not sure it will happen.

Should that come to pass, then I agree that Nolan starts over E-will. He was playing better last year, and another summer of improvement may underline that.

Of course, in fairness to E-Will, at the end of the season Nolan had the benefit of an extended break from both game and practice time, allowing his body to rest. Nolan did out play E-Will down the stretch, but I wonder how much of that is due to Nolan being well rested for the stretch run?

E-Will could greatly improve this offseason, but Nolan's ability at the PG may offset any such improvement. Conversely, the addition of a top flight PG recruit may move Nolan to the bench in favor of E-Will's ability on the wing.

Lotsa what ifs on the perimeter.

One big misconception I think you have is regarding Kelly and MP2. I don't think either will be big offensive threats.

MP2 is a dunking machine who can hit some outside Jumpers. But he does not have refined post moves, and his ball handling is OK. And that is Big Man OK, not guard OK, which is a completely different standard. I think he will get minutes, but he won't be a target on O. While he does have great athleticism, he is also really skinny right now. He may have trouble consistently getting good position in the post. That will affect his consistency on offense.

As for Kelly, he does have pretty good O skills. I am not sure if he has the athleticism or body, YET, to fully utilize those skills. There is a baseline level of athleticism/body development necessary to play this game. A player can be a great shooter, dribbler, passer, etc, but it all means nothing if he is not athletic enough to get his own shot. I also have grave concerns regarding Kelly's defensive aptitude. If he cannot keep up on that end, and right now I am not sure that he can, then he won't get big minutes.

One of my big beefs with recruiting is the variance on measurables. It may not seem like much, but there is a huge difference between being 6-10 210 and 6-11 220. Or 6-9 and 210 vs 6-10 and 215. It really affects what they can do now and where their bodies will go as they mature. Without having a definitive set of measurements, these things can be hard to project.

The above projection by me is of course subject to revision. The addition of Wall or Bledsoe may change that. A fast penetrating PG might turn Kelly or the Plumlees into capable offensive weapons because such a guard would need targets when he penetrates and draws attention, making life good for dunkers or spot up shooters.

Without a new PG, we are still likely to be a Big 3 on offense most of the time again next year. If Nolan and or E-will really improve, it could be big 4. But, I still think last year's big 3 will be better than next year's big 3, but the top 4 and beyond will be better than last year's top 4 and beyond.

Really, the drop off after the big 3 last year was precipitous. Any one of a couple of guys was capable of doing something, but there was no consistency and any such contribution was a pleasant surprise.

Sobriquet
04-29-2009, 12:10 PM
Well, I strongly agree. I understand the defensive issues, but with Singler or Kelly playing the 3 we'll have one of the biggest teams in the nation. Because not only can we field a frontline of 7'1", 6'10", 6'9", but our guards are much bigger than most teams will have -- Nolan will be our only player shorter than 6'4" but with his wingspan he plays at least 6'4". It will be like this year's Florida State (or maybe Wake Forest) but with a lot more skill.

As anyone who has played can attest, guarding a bigger player takes a lot out of you, much more than merely having to run up and down against a fast break team. If we play a big lineup consistently, we will tire out a lot of teams, which will reduce the quickness advantage they may seem to have at the 3. Going big is not something we're used to seeing here at Duke, but it should be plenty interesting.

Hardly the biggest.

We wouldn't even be the biggest teams on tobacco road. We wouldn't be in the top 2.

Wake can go 6-9, 6-10, 7-0, and 7-1.
UNC can go 6-8, 6-10, 7-0, 6-9, 6-9, and 6-9.

And both of those include 6-9 guys who are legitimate college 3's and not college 4's playing out of position (Singler and Kelly).

Aminu and Henson are going to be absolute nightmare matchups for Duke next year. Long, athletic, and skilled. Unless MP2 is even more mobile and athletic than I think, AND he picks up the D at lightspeed, we don't really have a good cover for those position.

Kyle can do it, but we risk putting our most important player in a position where foul trouble is likely.

Guarding big players is tiring. But we don't have many BIG players. We have tall players, sure, but few of them are that BIG.

Slamming into a 6-9 245 lb guy is draining. Slamming into a 6-9 210 lb guy is not picnic, but it isn't that hard either.

Look, you may be right that other teams will have trouble with our length. But there are plenty of other tall teams right here in NC. GT could have a nasty front line, Miami has some beef, and FSU could be terrifying depending on how Alabi progresses. And Big 12, Big 10, and Pac 10 teams are always full of Big Beefy Guys (whose skill can be iffy).

Our height (not size) is nice. But it is either young, or it hasn't really shown anything to date. I don't look at our bigs and think they are terrifying. There is potential there, but nothing has been shown on the court, especially compared to WFU or UNC's bigs.

whereinthehellami
04-29-2009, 01:38 PM
Assuming we don't get Wall or Bledsoe, I think Nolan will start over Williams. Several reasons:

- With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Thomas and Zoubek, we'll likely play a slower, half court game. Nolan's better 3-pt shot will come in handy in that case.

- While the change to insert Williams last season into the starting five sparked our team, if you look at the numbers and the way the team played it was really a temporary lift. Nolan played better down the stretch than Williams did, and I expect Coach K to put Nolan back into the starting lineup next season.

I can see MP2 and Kelly taking big minutes away from Thomas and Zoubek. With a lineup of Nolan, Scheyer, Singler, Kelly and MP2 we'd have FIVE offensive threats. After this season, where often we only had three, this will be a welcomed change.

I would prefer to see one of the backcourt players come off the bench and I like Smith to do that because he can play as the primary ball handler or off the ball. As far as 3-point shooting goes, Duke returns their top two 3-pt shooters and neither of them are Williams or Smith. Smith and Williams have some mechanics that need to be worked out for them to be considered consistent 3-pt shooters.

I could see MP2 starting at some point next year but I've noticed that while he has decent straight ahead speed for a big man, his lateral speed is limited. I see Mason picking up alot of cheap fouls rather quickly next year as he adjusts to the speed of the ACC.

I think Kelly is going to have a tough time getting on the court this year. His lack of strength and speed are hurdles he is going to have to overcome. I think MP2 has better strength, straight ahead speed, and length.

It is hard for big men to come into the ACC and do well as freshman. Unless they are special, like Brand and Deng. I don't think Duke has any of those unquestionable talents coming next year. While Thomas and Zoubek aren't sexy and need to keep improving in the off-season, I expect them be ahead of the other frontcourt players next year.

BlueintheFace
04-29-2009, 01:43 PM
While Thomas and Zoubek aren't sexy ...

There are some ladies out there that would certainly disagree...

JDev
04-29-2009, 02:39 PM
I am pretty sure Kelly fits in best at the three. His go-to shot is a Paul Pierce-type elbow jumper. He works best using a variety of moves taking his man from the outside-in before pulling up for the fading mid-range jumper or finishing the drive. He also has a great three point shot.

You might be right, but I tend to think he fits best at the 4 position at Duke. Duke has an illustrious history of utilizing guys at the 4 who have versatility, and who will eventually become NBA 3s, in the mold of guys like Grant Hill, Battier, Dunleavy, and Deng. Singler fits perfectly into that mold, due to the combination of his size and the skills you mentioned in your post.
Singler will undoubtably play some 3 this year due to the overall make-up of Duke's lineup, but I think, at Duke anyway, he is better at the 4. Being at the 4 doesn't require you to play exclusively in the paint, as Singler and his predecessors have shown, so he can still do the things you mentioned. Those things might be even more effective because he is being defended by the other team's second big, who is not always comfortable with perimeter defense.

Kedsy
04-29-2009, 03:47 PM
Hardly the biggest.

We wouldn't even be the biggest teams on tobacco road. We wouldn't be in the top 2.

Wake can go 6-9, 6-10, 7-0, and 7-1.
UNC can go 6-8, 6-10, 7-0, 6-9, 6-9, and 6-9.

And both of those include 6-9 guys who are legitimate college 3's and not college 4's playing out of position (Singler and Kelly).

Aminu and Henson are going to be absolute nightmare matchups for Duke next year. Long, athletic, and skilled. Unless MP2 is even more mobile and athletic than I think, AND he picks up the D at lightspeed, we don't really have a good cover for those position.

Kyle can do it, but we risk putting our most important player in a position where foul trouble is likely.

Guarding big players is tiring. But we don't have many BIG players. We have tall players, sure, but few of them are that BIG.

Slamming into a 6-9 245 lb guy is draining. Slamming into a 6-9 210 lb guy is not picnic, but it isn't that hard either.

Look, you may be right that other teams will have trouble with our length. But there are plenty of other tall teams right here in NC. GT could have a nasty front line, Miami has some beef, and FSU could be terrifying depending on how Alabi progresses. And Big 12, Big 10, and Pac 10 teams are always full of Big Beefy Guys (whose skill can be iffy).

Our height (not size) is nice. But it is either young, or it hasn't really shown anything to date. I don't look at our bigs and think they are terrifying. There is potential there, but nothing has been shown on the court, especially compared to WFU or UNC's bigs.


Well, I don't necessarily agree with you. First of all, there's absolutely no way Wake plays all four big guys at the same time, and I'm not sure how often they'll even play three. Same for UNC (who certainly can't "go" with 6 players and no guards).

Second, in this year's Duke/Wake games, Singler mostly guarded Aminu, and I don't recall him getting into serious foul trouble (I could be wrong on that point, though, I really don't remember). I also doubt he'll have that much of a problem guarding Henson who is only a freshman and weighs about 80 pounds. Singler's potential defensive issue when playing the 3 is against smaller, quicker players, not big ones (even if they're big and mobile).

Finally, I think you're missing my point. What will make Duke one of the biggest teams in the country next year is not entirely their front line. It's the fact that we can field a big/tall frontline as well as tall guards. Drew is only 6'1", Ish Smith and Teague are 6'0" and 6'2" (and that's being generous). Most teams field one or two players who will be 3 or 4 inches shorter than Duke's shortest player. I still say if you talk about average lineup height (five players on the court, not five tallest players), and you have Singler or Kelly playing the 3, then Duke will be one of the tallest teams in the country. Do the math.

CDu
04-29-2009, 07:50 PM
Finally, I think you're missing my point. What will make Duke one of the biggest teams in the country next year is not entirely their front line. It's the fact that we can field a big/tall frontline as well as tall guards. Drew is only 6'1", Ish Smith and Teague are 6'0" and 6'2" (and that's being generous). Most teams field one or two players who will be 3 or 4 inches shorter than Duke's shortest player. I still say if you talk about average lineup height (five players on the court, not five tallest players), and you have Singler or Kelly playing the 3, then Duke will be one of the tallest teams in the country. Do the math.

All that height won't mean a whole lot if we can't stay in front of those smaller opponents. Whomever was guarding Lawson had at least a 5 inch height advantage (and sometimes as much as a 7-8 inch advantage), and we couldn't stop him. Villanova was shorter than us, and they had no problems getting into the lane (and keeping us out of the lane). Height can be helpful for sure, but it certainly isn't everything.

That's the concern with playing Kelly and (potentially even) Singler at the 3 spot. Singler can exploit most 4/5s with his perimeter game and yet can defend those guys well. Put him against smaller, quicker, 6'3"-6'5" types and he might have problems (he might also be fine - it's just a reasonable concern).

Newton_14
04-29-2009, 09:58 PM
.

That's the concern with playing Kelly and (potentially even) Singler at the 3 spot. Singler can exploit most 4/5s with his perimeter game and yet can defend those guys well. Put him against smaller, quicker, 6'3"-6'5" types and he might have problems (he might also be fine - it's just a reasonable concern).

I believe Kyle can guard most college 3's good enough, but one thing we should consider is if Kyle is on the floor as the 3 and Lance is playing the 4, then Lance could/would guard the 3 with Kyle guarding the 4. That would work.

I will also be interested to see if Lance plays the 3 at times. Would not be a 3 point threat but could provide spot minutes on the wing if needed.

Bob Green
04-29-2009, 11:11 PM
Instead of discussing the different positions such as 3 or 4, I believe it is more productive to discuss how a line-up effects our offense and defense seeing as we all know Coach K doesn't pigeon hole players into set roles. Duke in the K era has run either a 4 out 1 in, or 3 out 2 in motion offense, along with man-to-man defense. Over the last several years, we have run a 4 out 1 in out of necessity. With the team make-up next season, I expect to see more 3 out 2 in sets.

Kishiznit
04-29-2009, 11:42 PM
By losing Marty, McClure, and most likely G - does anyone honestly expect Coach's style to go BIG? There will be no change. We will go 7 or 8 deep depending on the match-up. Singler will play most of his minutest at the 4.

My bet is we get Wall or Bledsoe and we give them the ball immediately at the point. Between Wall/Bledsoe, EWil, Smith, and Scheyer - that is solid minutes for 4 players for positions 1-3.

Back to my point of Singler playing 4...the other interior minutes will be by committe for the upcoming year. I have an opinion on the following year but do not want to lose the '09-'10 campaign...GO DUKE

BlueintheFace
04-30-2009, 12:02 AM
By losing Marty, McClure, and most likely G - does anyone honestly expect Coach's style to go BIG? There will be no change. We will go 7 or 8 deep depending on the match-up. Singler will play most of his minutest at the 4.

My bet is we get Wall or Bledsoe and we give them the ball immediately at the point. Between Wall/Bledsoe, EWil, Smith, and Scheyer - that is solid minutes for 4 players for positions 1-3.

Back to my point of Singler playing 4...the other interior minutes will be by committe for the upcoming year. I have an opinion on the following year but do not want to lose the '09-'10 campaign...GO DUKE

How many minutes do you foresee Singler playing at the three next year? Just Ballpark figure?

CDu
04-30-2009, 08:16 AM
By losing Marty, McClure, and most likely G - does anyone honestly expect Coach's style to go BIG? There will be no change. We will go 7 or 8 deep depending on the match-up. Singler will play most of his minutest at the 4.

I think you're missing the point. This whole discussion has revolved around what happens if we DON'T get Wall or Bledsoe. If we don't get someone, then we have only 3 guards on the roster. That means that Coach K will HAVE to go big for extended minutes (probably 20-30 minutes per game).


My bet is we get Wall or Bledsoe and we give them the ball immediately at the point. Between Wall/Bledsoe, EWil, Smith, and Scheyer - that is solid minutes for 4 players for positions 1-3.

If we get Wall, I think we'll see a three-guard lineup most of the time. We may see a few minutes per game with a 3-big lineup, but 4 solid guards would allow a three guard lineup most of the time. With Bledsoe, it would depend on how ready he is to play college ball, but we'd still likely see few minutes with a big lineup. But as discussed above, this discussion has been centered on what happens if we DON'T get Wall or Bledsoe.


Back to my point of Singler playing 4...the other interior minutes will be by committe for the upcoming year. I have an opinion on the following year but do not want to lose the '09-'10 campaign...GO DUKE

If we get Wall or Bledsoe, then Singler will play most of his minutes at the 4. But it is most certainly possible (perhaps even probable) that we won't get Wall or Bledsoe. Who do you think will play the extra 20-25 minutes per game at the 3 if we don't get either of those guards?

Newton_14
04-30-2009, 07:58 PM
If we don't add another guard before the coming season, there is no way around having to play big for extended minutes. Or playing "tall" as some feel we are not big but rather we are "tall".

Unless Jon, Nolan, and E-Will are going to play 38 to 40 minutes every game, someone has to come in for them. That will mean at least 3 of the "tall" guys will have to play together, if not 4. What happens if Nolan and E-Will both pick up 2 early fouls?

I feel good about our chances with Wall, and if that happens then it kills the debate, but until he is signed we have to assume it's possible that next year's roster is already set and we have a grand total of 3 guards.

ACCBBallFan
05-01-2009, 05:22 PM
If Duke does not add another guard, it's a good thing Duke has Seth Curry to at least partake in practice or in a 5 vs 5 scrimmage or one team would have had to play one guard and 4 mids to bigs.

Jon-E Will-Kyle-MP2-Z or Nolan-Jon-Kelly-Kyle-Z

vs.

Nolan- Seth-Kelly-Lance-MP1 and Olek filling in, or
E Will-Seth-Olek-Lance -MP1/MP2

is at least enough talent to give the guards a workout while interchanging E Will and Nolan some.

It also allows Kelly and MP2 to develop by practicing against Kyle at the 3 or 4.

If PT is earned in practice, hard to imagine Nolan not being a beter PG than the SGs Jon or E Will and even Seth is more of a SG than a PG.

Without G or Wall, Duke is going to have to alter its half court tactics to get more offensive production out of its 7 footer. To have room to operate Lance cannot be in that lineup as he is not an outside threat.

When Z sits, Lance can be a defensive wing stopper while one of the MPs plays the post defender and Kyle plays the 3 slot on Offense and 4 spot on Defense.

Hard to project what contribution Olek may be able to make next year but the athleticism is certainly there if he can garner some court awareness.

Czyz might be able to make a contribution for a few minutes in a full court pressing situation with other athletes like Nolan, E Will, Lance and Jon/Kyle while other rests.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 09:13 AM
Wall will end up @ UK with Bledsoe, IMO. I love watching Duke play and compete, but we need to make sure we do not raise our expectations for next years team. We will have talent, yes, but no true PG and 3 guards, wow. I know I know, go ahead and say how "negative" I am being. I call it realism.

I concur. With no real point guard, suspect options at the 3 without Henderson, and still no true post player (Plumlee may eventully develop into one, but it won't be next year), next season could be a tough go. Not that we won't make the Tourney, but I can see a 3rd or 4th place finish in the ACC, and a 4-5 seed come March.

bluebear
05-06-2009, 09:25 AM
I concur. With no real point guard, suspect options at the 3 without Henderson, and still no true post player (Plumlee may eventully develop into one, but it won't be next year), next season could be a tough go. Not that we won't make the Tourney, but I can see a 3rd or 4th place finish in the ACC, and a 4-5 seed come March.

3rd or 4th place finish? Who will be clearly ahead of us? I am not an overly optimistic fan in general but I think this is selling the team a little short given all the talent on the team. Duke will be in the mix to the win the ACC with a likely 2 or 3 seed in the tourney..8-12 ranking nationally..

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 09:27 AM
3rd or 4th place finish? Who will be clearly ahead of us? I am not an overly optimistic fan in general but I think this is selling the team a little short given all the talent on the team. Duke will be in the mix to the win the ACC with a likely 2 or 3 seed in the tourney..8-12 ranking nationally..

carolina and wake for starters (especially, if teague returns)

bluebear
05-06-2009, 09:34 AM
carolina and wake for starters (especially, if teague returns)

I don't consider either to be clearly better than Duke going into next year..both could end up with better records but neither will be dominant. Duke will have holes but a lot of talent... Again, I'm not predicting a final four but it will be a down year for many teams with no clear favorite in the ACC...Duke's talent puts them in the mix to win the league..A 1-2 finish in the ACC will translate to a 2-3 seed in the tournament..

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 09:40 AM
I don't consider either to be clearly better than Duke going into next year..both could end up with better records but neither will be dominant. Duke will have holes but a lot of talent... Again, I'm not predicting a final four but it will be a down year for many teams with no clear favorite in the ACC...Duke's talent puts them in the mix to win the league..A 1-2 finish in the ACC will translate to a 2-3 seed in the tournament..

i agree that no team is clearly better, but i'd personally place duke 3rd behind those two

Sobriquet
05-06-2009, 09:41 AM
carolina and wake for starters (especially, if teague returns)

Yeah, both COULD be better than Duke. And FSU and or GT could be dangerous next year.

But all have holes in their roster.

UNC has Drew at the PG, and he scares nobody. But the rest of their squad is nasty.

Wake has a good team, even without Teague as Ish Smith is a guality PG. But with Teague they look fantastic.

FSU got a frosh SG that will do a lot of damage, and Alabi is a game changing post. Thabeet on D, but much more aggressive and competant on O.

GT has a talented roster, if their early entry player comes back to school. Lots of talented parts, but the best ones are young and they are all highly inexperienced when it comes to winning big games.

Yeah, Duke's current roster could win the league, but it could also end up 4 or 5. Real poo shoot next year.

Unless Duke gets Wall. Then Duke is the unquestioned No. 1 pre season ACC sguad, and a top 5 or better preseason. Only Kansas would definitely be better on Paper.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 09:43 AM
Yeah, both COULD be better than Duke. And FSU and or GT could be dangerous next year.

But all have holes in their roster.

UNC has Drew at the PG, and he scares nobody. But the rest of their squad is nasty.

Wake has a good team, even without Teague as Ish Smith is a guality PG. But with Teague they look fantastic.

FSU got a frosh SG that will do a lot of damage, and Alabi is a game changing post. Thabeet on D, but much more aggressive and competant on O.

GT has a talented roster, if their early entry player comes back to school. Lots of talented parts, but the best ones are young and they are all highly inexperienced when it comes to winning big games.

Yeah, Duke's current roster could win the league, but it could also end up 4 or 5. Real poo shoot next year.

Unless Duke gets Wall. Then Duke is the unquestioned No. 1 pre season ACC sguad, and a top 5 or better preseason. Only Kansas would definitely be better on Paper.

agree that with wall, we're preseason 1 in the conference. but i'd say about 10 nationally. he IS only a freshman you know :-)

yancem
05-06-2009, 09:54 AM
carolina and wake for starters (especially, if teague returns)

You do realize that unc will have the same backcourt issues Duke has next year. They only have 4 guards on its roster next year and one of them is Justin Watts who only averaged 3 minutes a game last year. I also don't see Larry Drew II being any better of an option at the pg spot than either Smith or Scheyer. As for Wake, they almost certainly will loose Johnson and if Teague leaves as well, their backcourt isn't looking overly impressive.

The acc is going to be down next year. It is loosing a lot of talent and is not bringing in nearly as much as its loosing. With or without Henderson or Wall Duke should be top 1-3 in the acc next year. Unfortunately that probably won't mean a whole lot.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 10:02 AM
You do realize that unc will have the same backcourt issues Duke has next year. They only have 4 guards on its roster next year and one of them is Justin Watts who only averaged 3 minutes a game last year. I also don't see Larry Drew II being any better of an option at the pg spot than either Smith or Scheyer. As for Wake, they almost certainly will loose Johnson and if Teague leaves as well, their backcourt isn't looking overly impressive.

The acc is going to be down next year. It is loosing a lot of talent and is not bringing in nearly as much as its loosing. With or without Henderson or Wall Duke should be top 1-3 in the acc next year. Unfortunately that probably won't mean a whole lot.

yeah, but they have ed davis and we don't

Sobriquet
05-06-2009, 10:08 AM
agree that with wall, we're preseason 1 in the conference. but i'd say about 10 nationally. he IS only a freshman you know :-)

I say top 5. Kansas is No 1. With a bullet. But after that, the drop off is huge. Not unlike this year when UNC was no 1 and then every body else was a pick-em type scenario. After KU, there is no one else who is defintely better than a Wall lead Duke team. There are solid arguments for various teams, sure. But Duke will be an experienced team with Talls whose abilities will be maximized by a player like Wall. We are in the 8-12 range, RIGHT NOW, without a stud PG. Wall might be one of the best PGs in college next year. What would that mean to Duke?


You do realize that unc will have the same backcourt issues Duke has next year. They only have 4 guards on its roster next year and one of them is Justin Watts who only averaged 3 minutes a game last year. I also don't see Larry Drew II being any better of an option at the pg spot than either Smith or Scheyer. As for Wake, they almost certainly will loose Johnson and if Teague leaves as well, their backcourt isn't looking overly impressive.

The acc is going to be down next year. It is loosing a lot of talent and is not bringing in nearly as much as its loosing. With or without Henderson or Wall Duke should be top 1-3 in the acc next year. Unfortunately that probably won't mean a whole lot.

Um, not so much. I would say that UNC only has three guards, not counting Watts. Three guards, just like Duke. Only those three guards at UNC will only be sharing 2 positions. UNC has two legitimate WF's in Ginyard and probably Henson.

Heck, if Henson is as good as advertised, UNC may start him at the 3 and move Ginyard to the SG position. UNC has FOUR options at the PG-SG, with 3 of them at least capable of spot duty at the pg slot. Henson and Ginyard can man the three, with Ginyard going from SG to PF (not that they need him there) and Henson swinging between the SF and PF.

While Drew doesn't scare me, AT ALL, UNC does not currently have the same issues at the guard that we do. Drew only has to be capable. UNC has three great options in the low post, at a minimum. Maybe 5 options. They have great WFs. And SG is the easiest position in college ball. UNC has legitimate WFs, whereas we have WGs and some PFs both of whom can shift to WF.

Wall to Duke means putting a player on the court who can lock down their PG while their PG can't guard Wall. Marshall is athletic enough, but he can only play spot min at PG. Ginyard could guard Wall, but that means Scheyer or E-Will being guarded by someone either shorter or less athletic, or both.

Choose Duke.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 10:10 AM
"We are in the 8-12 range, RIGHT NOW, without a stud PG."

see, i see us as more in the 15-18 range right now

roywhite
05-06-2009, 10:11 AM
yeah, but they have ed davis and we don't

Nor do they have Kyle Singler or Jon Scheyer. And they've lost Hansbrough, Green, Ellington, and Lawson... No way they are as good next season as they have been the past 2 seasons. No need to stress out about our prospects next year, with or without Henderson and Wall.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 10:13 AM
Nor do they have Kyle Singler or Jon Scheyer. And they've lost Hansbrough, Green, Ellington, and Lawson... No way they are as good next season as they have been the past 2 seasons. No need to stress out about our prospects next year, with or without Henderson and Wall.

oh, i absolutely agree that they are nowhere near as good. but i still think they're better than us unfortunately

johaad
05-06-2009, 10:13 AM
But the one thing that no one is taking into consideration for our chances next year is player improvement. Obviously there is little to no way to predict it but we need to remember that many of our guys have improved significantly over the summer. I still think we have a good shot at Wall, and I hope we get him. But even if we don't, lets send some good vibes to the team to improve over the summer. I have a gut feeling that we could be something very good next year in the ACC and nationaly.

Sobriquet
05-06-2009, 10:18 AM
"We are in the 8-12 range, RIGHT NOW, without a stud PG."

see, i see us as more in the 15-18 range right now

Personally, I agree with your statement. But the polls currently project us from 8-12.

In a vacum, next year's Duke team in 15-18 from a talent perspective. But most of the nation takes a step back. The Big East was decimated by early entry and graduation, as was the ACC. The SEC wasn't very good last year, and they will be some better, but not definitively so. The Big 12 is pretty static. Tx and OK will probably be the same or better, and KU is as discussed.

The Big Ten is MSU, Purdue, Michigan (in that order) and then a bunch of Walkovers.

As for the Pac 10, UCLA could be good if Jrue Holliday comes back, but iffy if he doesn't. No one else out there scares me.

With Wall, Duke has top 5 potential. At least, there is a valid argument for such a ranking.

Last year was really good in college hoops. Next year the overall level of play takes a step back.

I, like you Roto, tend to evaluate Duke in a vacum or in a historical sense. ie, how good would this roster usually be? But you really have to compare them to the other teams. Of which there aren't many good ones next year.

Sobriquet
05-06-2009, 10:23 AM
But the one thing that no one is taking into consideration for our chances next year is player improvement. Obviously there is little to no way to predict it but we need to remember that many of our guys have improved significantly over the summer. I still think we have a good shot at Wall, and I hope we get him. But even if we don't, lets send some good vibes to the team to improve over the summer. I have a gut feeling that we could be something very good next year in the ACC and nationaly.

Larry Drew could improve. So could Ed Davis. So could Zeller. Ginyard could improve his perimeter Jumper.

I always take into account player improvement by Duke players. But other posters here tend to dismiss or discount similiar improvement by opposing players.

Last summer, everyone downplayed Lawson because he couldn't shoot, and wouldn't learn to do so over the summer. Well, he really improved that over the summer. Thompson improved over the summer. Green got more consistent from the perimeter.

Duke players are not the only ones who improve. And, quite frankly, most of the the UNC players either have higher ceilings than Duke's players (Lance, Z, Jon, and Kyle), or are closer to achieving their ceilings than Duke's players (Plums, Olek, Kelly)

Heck, the player that really scares me is John Henson, who needs more muscle. Hans put on 15-20 lbs of muscle his frosh summer. If Henson can have a similiar summer, his body would be good to go day 1.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 10:23 AM
Personally, I agree with your statement. But the polls currently project us from 8-12.

In a vacum, next year's Duke team in 15-18 from a talent perspective. But most of the nation takes a step back. The Big East was decimated by early entry and graduation, as was the ACC. The SEC wasn't very good last year, and they will be some better, but not definitively so. The Big 12 is pretty static. Tx and OK will probably be the same or better, and KU is as discussed.

The Big Ten is MSU, Purdue, Michigan (in that order) and then a bunch of Walkovers.

As for the Pac 10, UCLA could be good if Jrue Holliday comes back, but iffy if he doesn't. No one else out there scares me.

With Wall, Duke has top 5 potential. At least, there is a valid argument for such a ranking.

Last year was really good in college hoops. Next year the overall level of play takes a step back.

I, like you Roto, tend to evaluate Duke in a vacum or in a historical sense. ie, how good would this roster usually be? But you really have to compare them to the other teams. Of which there aren't many good ones next year.

interesting take and i'm sure you know teams outside the ACC better than I do. but i'm a bit surprised when you say that play will take a step back. i'm coming from the perspective that this year's NBA draft is considered to be one of the worst in recent memory as many projected top 10 picks are returning to school (davis, monroe, warren). i'd think that would make for more good teams.

Kedsy
05-06-2009, 10:38 AM
The Big 12 is pretty static. Tx and OK will probably be the same or better, and KU is as discussed.


Oklahoma just lost the national player of the year. How do you figure they'll be as good or better?

johaad
05-06-2009, 10:38 AM
Larry Drew could improve. So could Ed Davis. So could Zeller. Ginyard could improve his perimeter Jumper.

I always take into account player improvement by Duke players. But other posters here tend to dismiss or discount similiar improvement by opposing players.

Last summer, everyone downplayed Lawson because he couldn't shoot, and wouldn't learn to do so over the summer. Well, he really improved that over the summer. Thompson improved over the summer. Green got more consistent from the perimeter.

Duke players are not the only ones who improve. And, quite frankly, most of the the UNC players either have higher ceilings than Duke's players (Lance, Z, Jon, and Kyle), or are closer to achieving their ceilings than Duke's players (Plums, Olek, Kelly)

Heck, the player that really scares me is John Henson, who needs more muscle. Hans put on 15-20 lbs of muscle his frosh summer. If Henson can have a similiar summer, his body would be good to go day 1.

I absolutely agree that other players improve. And in my post I in no way stated that Duke players improve while the others stay the same. All I am saying is that it's not all doom and gloom. I do disagree that MOST UNC players have a higher ceiling than Duke. Duke should have a good season next year.

Kedsy
05-06-2009, 10:43 AM
Heck, the player that really scares me is John Henson, who needs more muscle. Hans put on 15-20 lbs of muscle his frosh summer. If Henson can have a similiar summer, his body would be good to go day 1.

I think you're right that we tend to think our players will improve and forget that other teams' players will improve as well.

On the other hand, it's iffy to suggest that an incoming freshman will improve drastically over the summer. Henson could add 20 pounds of muscle? Then so could MP2. And if he adds that kind of bulk, look out, right? It's all wild speculation as far as I can see.

InSpades
05-06-2009, 10:47 AM
I think everyone is going a little overboard with the negativity. UNC was a team last year that lost to Florida State in the ACC tournament because they were missing Lawson. I'm pretty sure Lawson won't be back next year... also not coming back are their next 3 best players. If Duke lost it's 4 best players then I think the sky would fall and the hellmouth would open and swallow DBR whole. Duke returns 4 starters from last year, UNC loses 4 starters from last year. Duke returns the pre-season favorite for ACC PotY. I realize Duke last year was not UNC last year. I also realize that UNC's freshmen may be a bit better than our freshmen. Henson in particular looks like a handful, but they still are freshmen, no? The biggest problem is obviously that Duke is losing depth in the backcourt and that has to concern everyone. It's certainly not the end of the world though. I'm excited for next year, with or without John Wall.

johaad
05-06-2009, 10:50 AM
On the other hand, it's iffy to suggest that an incoming freshman will improve drastically over the summer. Henson could add 20 pounds of muscle? Then so could MP2. And if he adds that kind of bulk, look out, right? It's all wild speculation as far as I can see.

Exactly. There is no way to judge improvement of players short of watching them practice day in and day out. I think player improvement speculation is the most difficult type of speculation.

By the way, Inspades, great post. I agree wholeheartedly.

Sobriquet
05-06-2009, 11:15 AM
Oklahoma just lost the national player of the year. How do you figure they'll be as good or better?

Keith Tiny Gallon, Tommie Mason-Griffen, Kyle Hardrick, Andrew Fitzgerald
and others.

Willie Warren improves. A true, pass first PG in TMG, and a huge low post in Gallon that will put up big numbers. OK lost the griffens, but they easily replaced the younger bro, get better at PG, and have one of the better SG's in the nation. And a low post banger with skills who is eerily reminiscent of one Elton Brand. Not saying Tiny is that good, but he looked beastly at McD's.

And I said static or better. OK came in second to KS in the big 12, which I expect to repeat itself. OK is no worse than third in the big 12, dep on Texas's attrition.

Sobriquet
05-06-2009, 11:54 AM
I think you're right that we tend to think our players will improve and forget that other teams' players will improve as well.

On the other hand, it's iffy to suggest that an incoming freshman will improve drastically over the summer. Henson could add 20 pounds of muscle? Then so could MP2. And if he adds that kind of bulk, look out, right? It's all wild speculation as far as I can see.


Agreed. If MP1 OR MP2 really hit the weight room, Duke's outlook really improves. I mean dramatically. The uncertainty about Duke's post options is a real anchor on this team's outlook. There is a rosy outlook that all of Duke's posts will improve noticably, and the post will be an area of strength. Similiarly, the rosy outlook is that Nolan and E-Will will shore up their games giving Duke great play, if little depth, at the guard.

A pessimistic view would be that Lance and Z have shown little improvement to date and the odds of them becoming legitimate low post options are slim. Also, the Plums need lots of work and won't be ready next year, ditto Kelly. As for the guards, they WILL improve, no doubt, but whether that improvement rises to the level we need is doubtful.

I tend toward the pessimistic view in general (if not this particular case). But the reality is that our player improvement will fall somewhere in the middle. Some of our players will really improve, and some won't. I have my opinions as to who that will be, but it is a baseless opinion with no facts to support it. Will we improve? Sure. I just doubt that we will improve to the level that some expect.

As a personal note, I don't think Henson adds that much weight. For the last 2 years, every prognosticator has been raving about where Henson will be once he adds weight. Only he hasn't. Some players are hard-gainers when it comes to weight. Think Casey Saunders, who just couldn't add weight until his Jr year, and still never got anywhere near an ideal playing weight for his size. If Henson is still a 6-9 ish, 195 (lb) (yeah right) stick, his effectiveness is considerably lessened.


I think everyone is going a little overboard with the negativity. UNC was a team last year that lost to Florida State in the ACC tournament because they were missing Lawson. I'm pretty sure Lawson won't be back next year... also not coming back are their next 3 best players. If Duke lost it's 4 best players then I think the sky would fall and the hellmouth would open and swallow DBR whole. Duke returns 4 starters from last year, UNC loses 4 starters from last year. Duke returns the pre-season favorite for ACC PotY. I realize Duke last year was not UNC last year. I also realize that UNC's freshmen may be a bit better than our freshmen. Henson in particular looks like a handful, but they still are freshmen, no? The biggest problem is obviously that Duke is losing depth in the backcourt and that has to concern everyone. It's certainly not the end of the world though. I'm excited for next year, with or without John Wall.


Yeah, but UNC returns a lot and has a high level recruiting class comming in. It is not a top flight class, as was previously thought. Strickland is unprepared to take over the PG, as Roy thought/hoped last year. The Wear Twins look like capable role players.

But Henson looks like a stud who can fill up the basket.

UNC did lose a lot, but their roster was so much more talented than anyone else in the nation that their cupboard is still relatively full.

And UNC is not iffy in the post (like Duke). Right now, they have one of the best front lines in the nation. Sure, they lost Hans. But, while he scored and rebounded well, he was allergic to defense and was a black hole as a passer. Thompson blossomed last year, and I personally think (and it is an opinion that is not unpopular in the media) that Thompson will put up Hans esque numbers next year as a lead option in the post. And he plays solid D. At the C position will be Ed Davis, who looks beastly. Solid on O, and a terror on D. A shot blocker who will discourage drives, making it easier for inexperienced perimeter defenders to stay on thier guy. Next year's Ed Davis will be a better player than last year's Danny Green, and maybe better than Wayne Ellingtion. Maybe a LOT better.

Without Wall, one of our best offensive guys, Jon, will be D'd up by Ginyard, one of the best defensive players in the nation, who happens to be a great matchup for Jon (from UNC's pov). That leaves Strickland or Henson, or MacDonald (who is real familiar with E-Will's game) on E-Will and Drew or Strick on Nolan. Given that Ed Davis can cause problems for Kyle, and Thompson/Zeller looks good against our C options, UNC has to like that scenario.

Ginyard/Green is a wash.
Thompson is back, and with Ed Davis, the addition of Zeller who will spend the summer improving, and the Wear twins for backup/practice opponents, UNC's post is not noticably worse than last year's, most of which was spent without Zeller. With solif player improvement, from top to bottom UNC could be better in the post overall this year. Their post D took a giant step forward the instant Han's eligibility expired.

Their Guard rotation is IFFY. But if Henson can handle the 3, and Ginyard slides to SG, they should be OK. All Drew has to do is not lose games.

Wall introduces an element to Duke's O that UNC doesn't have a great counter for. Given both of their sizes, Ginyard could guard Wall, or maybe Strickland who is a good athlete. But I still like Wall to win either matchup, albeit less than if Roy were dumb enough to put Mac or Drew on Wall. If a good defender is tied up with Wall, that leaves an overwhelmed, undersized, underclassman guarding the crafty Scheyer, and similiar with whatever other wing is in the game. Further, Ed Davis and the other posts will have to keep an eye on Wall to help out on penetration, meaning that Kyle will have more room to operate, as will whatever other tall is in the game.

Frankly, this is WHY this thread has grown to this level and why Wall is such a key recruit. He is only one player, but he dramatically alters our team's makeup and what we can do. I mean hugely alters. Suddenly we have 4 good to great options for 3 G positions. And a run-n-gun PG prevents our thinish, but mobile, bigs from having to really beat and bang against low post widebodies. Instead they can attack the basket following Wall's drives or get Dishes, or run in transition.

Yes, UNC lost a lot. But they return a terrific front line, a very good Wing, and a decent PG. Added to that are recruits that add depth to the backcourt and a WF/PF with as much potential as any recruit in the class.

As things currently stand, I cannot say that Duke is better than UNC. Nor can I say UNC is better. But UNC has depth, skill, experience and size in the front court. And that is more than I can say for Duke.

gumbomoop
05-06-2009, 12:55 PM
Nor do they have Kyle Singler or Jon Scheyer. And they've lost Hansbrough, Green, Ellington, and Lawson... No way they are as good next season as they have been the past 2 seasons. No need to stress out about our prospects next year, with or without Henderson and Wall.

Correct, in all particulars. As K stated one week ago [Tavis Smiley show, 4/29, I think], he thinks we're preseason top 10. Posters who have us at 12-18 may or may not be correct that that's where we [I]should be placed next Oct., but in most of the dozen or so pre-season lists, we will be top 10.

As I and others have noted, next year there's no team with the pre-season on-paper look [talent and experience] of Oct. '08's UNC, nor UConn, nor even, probably, Pitt. Kansas is sure to be #1 in most pre-season lists. Even w/o G/Wall, I think we're top 7 [Kansas, Mich St, Texas, UK-depending, 'Nova, Duke, UNC]. With either G or Wall, we're #2 or 3.

UNC is clearly better than Duke in frontcourt, and Ed Davis is superb, but they got no Singler [clear pre-season conf POY pick over Teague, Booker, Davis], nor Scheyer. Someone once posted that some of us overvalue JS, and I asked for details so I could consider them, but none have thus far appeared.

Clemson, Wake, FSU, maybe Ga Tech will challenge for top spots in ACC, and certainly in the several prognostications that will appear, I could see Wake and Clemson getting some 1st/2d place votes; but overall Duke will be slim pick for conf #1.

I hope, but cannot realistically expect, a breakout year from Z, so my hope at 5 is in development of both MPs, and a few points and lots of rebounds from 5-by-committee. Any offensive talent in the post would benefit measurably from Singler passes. Will he have someone to pass to, someone with good footwork?

Overall, our fortunes rest, imo, on clear improvement [ball handling, relentless intensity and confidence] from Nolan and EWill. If - yep, big if - that happens, deep tourney run. If not, disppointment.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 01:01 PM
"As K stated one week ago [Tavis Smiley show, 4/29, I think], he thinks we're preseason top 10. Posters who have us at 12-18 may or may not [I think not] be correct that that's where we should be placed next Oct., but in most of the dozen or so pre-season lists, we will be top 10."

as a point of reference, over at ESPN, katz has us at 10 and gottlieb has us at 12

InSpades
05-06-2009, 01:10 PM
On the topic of "all Drew has to do is not lose games". If you replace Lawson with Drew last year and Drew does the "not lose games" thing. How good do you think they are? Will the supporting cast next year be better or worse than it was last year?

As far as depth goes.... UNC basically played 7 guys in the NCAA tournament last year. 5 of them aren't going to be there next year. When Lawson was hurt, Frasor played more point than Drew did. If UNC had all this talent, then it wasn't really being used at all.

Agreed that Thompson and Davis could be amazing, but don't you think maybe they benefitted from being surrounded by a great PG and the all-time leading ACC scorer in the middle? They also had 3 guys on the perimeter capable of hitting 3s (all of whom are gone).

UNC has more questions than Duke going into next year. They may also have more answers but that is yet to be seen.

CDu
05-06-2009, 01:21 PM
UNC has more questions than Duke going into next year. They may also have more answers but that is yet to be seen.

Agreed. I think that Davis will be a revelation next year (I think UNC underutilized him last year), and he and Thompson make a nice pairing with Thompson being more of a finesse player and Davis providing the intimidation in the paint. And I think Henson adds a nice dimension to that team.

But despite that, they do have a lot of question marks. Their backcourt is either of questionable skill level (Drew) or completely unproven (Strickland and McDonald). They have two post guys with a strong shot at All-ACC honors this year, but other than that literally everyone is an unknown.

I'd say that, right now, Duke would have the higher expected results, but UNC has the higher ceiling for results for next year. UNC just has a lot more variability in potential results. Things could work out really well or really badly for them next year.

And of course, the equation would change substantially if either team gets John Wall.

rotogod00
05-06-2009, 01:24 PM
for comparison purposes, katz has carolina at 4 and gottlieb has them at 9