PDA

View Full Version : Offseason Issues To Address



Uncle Drew
03-21-2007, 02:20 AM
We all know this season was tough to swallow in a lot of ways for all Duke fans, myself included. Yet having the youngest Duke team since the 1940's in some ways it's amazing we made the NCAA tournament. And despite disappointment about many things, I am proud we were good enough to make the field of 65 this year. (One and done or not.) I think many of us thought, scratch that HOPED the incoming class would be better than advertised. And we fully expected the players with one or more years under their belt to vastly improve in multiple areas of their game. Injuries held a lot of players back at various times in the season, but I do think we saw improvement. Only not at the level we HOPED for. Again as Duke fans we are spoiled. And this team got everyones best shot just for having Duke on their jersey. If Maryland played every game as intensely as they played Duke God only knows how good they could have been this year. But I have noticed a couple deficiencies, that REALLY need addressing in the off season to allow next years Duke team to be the type team we are used to seeing.

1. Every player (with possibly the exception of Nelson) needs to hit the weight room this off season like they are preparing to fight Mike Tyson. I noticed lack of leg strength in many players which resulted in opposing teams being able to move our guys from where they were supposed to or wanted to be. Lack of upper body strength hurt us with other players being able to rip away a rebound or get a steal. Strength hurt us in dribble penetration because defenses could physically steer us away from the basket. This is nothing new really. Think back over the last five years to the type of player that has really hurt us to play against and its rarely a finesse player. Duke struggles against physical teams, we all know it, and I for one think it's time to work on gaining body mass just as much as shooting jumpers. Remember how much Dunleavy improved the summer after hitting the weights? Imagine that much improvement in the returning players and how good they could be. And while they are at it, make sure the football team joins them in the weight room!

2. Communication as stated many times by Coach K was a key problem that led to defensive lapses, bad passes etc. While there is no Shane Battier on this team to call out everyones roles, that doesn't mean each player can't step up in their communication role. I'm not saying send the guys to a team unity workshop in Tibet. But every player from freshman to senior can open his mouth to ask for help on D, alert a team mate to a screen or call for a switch on D. It's easier for some people than others of course, but playing a whole game with good communication will lead to less close games and the need for late second heroics.

3. Attitude and toughness some might say is something you can't teach. But I for one am tired of seeing my team get punked by opposing teams. While the Henderson incident wasn't pretty and contributed to a one and done trip to the ACC tournament. It did tell UNC that at least one player wasn't going to let the opposing center muscle yet another rebound away and put it in for an easy layup. GT has been using a thug and mug tactic against Duke ever since Hewitt became coach. FSU apparently allows their basketball players to practice with the football team, because the Duke vs. FSU basketball games the last few years may as well be played in Doak Campbell Stadium. Throw in games against VCU, LSU, Cincinnati, Temple over the years and it's more than apparent Duke recruits finesse players. Granted the refs should call fouls when a Duke player is getting hacked. But if they aren't blowing the whistle you are supposed to adapt to that style of play. And if you aren't capable or used to playing with that attitude and toughness you will lose 99% of the time. I love that Duke and it's players exude class, intelligence and sportsmanship. But lets face it people Duke players and their fans are the most hated in America. It's become okay to Duke bash on television and in the newspapers. Any player attending Duke needs to know they are getting ready to have their manhood questioned in every game. They need to prepare for it and come to expect it.

4. There are drills and programs to improve a players speed for those who don't know it. And being able to sprint down the court on offense AND defense is as important as it is for a wide receiver. We all know Duke has relied on their defense for years, perhaps never more so than this year. But when I see an opposing player grab a Duke miss in the paint and out run every Duke player to the basket it screams for a need for speed. Yes in situations like that players being out of position contribute to the problem. And God knows our guards allowing dribble penetration the last three years has killed us. But quickness and fast hands can assist in making those guards give up the ball or take a bad shot. It just seems like sometimes Duke is playing at 50mph and the opposing team is running 100mph.


At any rate lets hope for the best. Hope McRoberts stays and Patterson commits to true blue. Hope the players find out from the coaches what they most need to work on and address the deficiencies in the off season. Hope the pick up games bond the players and every practice next year is a four hour battle for playing time. Hope all injuries heal and the academic matters stay positive for all the players. As disappointed as we were about this season, don't lose hope every new season is different. And the up coming one could be a thing of beauty if things work to Dukes favor.

RockyMtDevil
03-21-2007, 02:13 PM
For Duke to have any hope at becoming a national contender again, much less an ACC contender, we need athletes.

It was very apparent that even VCU had better athletes than duke and that is a disgrace. They were quicker, faster, more athletic, stronger and just better with and to the ball than us. Blame it on youth, but I blame it on signing about 7 guys over the last three years that are not athletes and 0r that are not stars.

And, sadly, it appears that this year's incoming class will not address this need, albeit and beside Smith, who appears to be a year or two away from contributing.

Don't expect a huge jump in the rankings next year, we'll be somewhat better but will still struggle just as we have for the last four years, with faster more athletic teams. We simply don't have the personnel any more to play and beat these type teams...It's pathetic that Duke can't sign 2 athletes a year that can run, jump, defend and break you down on offense, much less actually have a chance of stopping dribble penetration to the hoop.

VaDukie
03-21-2007, 02:51 PM
Henderson IMO is a very athletic player who should make a major step up next year. McClure also showed flashes of athletic brilliance (remember the straight up block on Tyler's jumper?), and I'd have a hard time buying Nelson and McRoberts lack athleticism. Where it really hurts us is at the guard spot. I'm hoping an offseason of conditioning can improve Paulus' foot speed, but he certainly has limits athletically.

King and Singler are not great athletes, but at least in the case of Singler he's decevingly athletic.

And to me, we didn't lose to VCU because they physically overwhelmed us - we lost because we missed 12 free throws.

Jumbo
03-21-2007, 02:56 PM
For Duke to have any hope at becoming a national contender again, much less an ACC contender, we need athletes.

It was very apparent that even VCU had better athletes than duke and that is a disgrace. They were quicker, faster, more athletic, stronger and just better with and to the ball than us. Blame it on youth, but I blame it on signing about 7 guys over the last three years that are not athletes and 0r that are not stars.

And, sadly, it appears that this year's incoming class will not address this need, albeit and beside Smith, who appears to be a year or two away from contributing.

Don't expect a huge jump in the rankings next year, we'll be somewhat better but will still struggle just as we have for the last four years, with faster more athletic teams. We simply don't have the personnel any more to play and beat these type teams...It's pathetic that Duke can't sign 2 athletes a year that can run, jump, defend and break you down on offense, much less actually have a chance of stopping dribble penetration to the hoop.

I'd argue that this year's team was SIGNIFICANTLY more "athletic" than last year's. Paulus vs. Paulus (wash). Dockery vs. Nelson -- edge Nelson. Redick vs. Scheyer -- edge Scheyer. McRoberts vs. McRoberts (wash). Shelden vs. McClure (edge -- pretty even, but Shel was obviously much stronger). Melchionni vs. Thomas -- edge Thomas. Last year's injured Nelson vs. Henderson -- edge Henderson. And so forth. I don't think "athleticism" is Duke's problem. I also think Singler and Smith will be more than "athletic" enough to help next year. And I finally think that "athletic" is really just a code word for "black."

Indoor66
03-21-2007, 02:58 PM
Athletic

I agree - a real code word. Thanks for saying so, Jumbo

dockfan
03-21-2007, 03:10 PM
Athletic

I agree - a real code word. Thanks for saying so, Jumbo


Ditto for me. It's about time someone recognized that fact.

I don't mean to spark a debate on this hot-button issue, but there's a related point- notice the curious lack of attention in the national media for how Pitt's guards were "not athletic enough" to defend VCU's Maynor, Walker, Shuler, and Pellot-Rosa.

mgtr
03-21-2007, 03:13 PM
Well, if we cannot out-athlete them, whatever meaning you want to assign to athlete, then we have to outsmart them, as Duke teams have done in the past. This means doing a lot of things that have been mentioned in other posts, including team defense, communication, having the strength to hold position, drawing charges, and making free throws.
All this sounds a lot easier than it will be to do.

mr. synellinden
03-21-2007, 03:14 PM
Yes, Singler is white but he is unquestionably athletic. He can jump and has an array of offensive skills that we haven't seen in a long time. In fact, I'd describe him as a more athletic version of Danny Ferry - and if he stays four years I can see him having a Danny Ferry type career in terms of year by year progression - meaning ACC Player of the year as a JR and SR. Remember how JJ expanded his offensive game as a senior - now think of that offensive player at 6'8" and quicker and a better leaper. That's Singler. He's an athlete. I've never seen King play so I can't comment on his athleticism, but I can say that Nolan Smith is no slouch in the "athlete" department either.

mapei
03-21-2007, 03:35 PM
notice the curious lack of attention in the national media for how Pitt's guards were "not athletic enough" to defend VCU's Maynor, Walker, Shuler, and Pellot-Rosa.

Pitt won. Why is it curious that the post-game media didn't focus on their deficiencies?

RockyMtDevil
03-21-2007, 03:41 PM
Let's look at Duke's upcoming roster:
White Players:
Paulus
Scheyer
Mcbob (um, he's gone)
Zoubek
Pocius
King
Singler

Defining the term athlete is no doubt in question here, but I would define it as someone who can beat you off the dribble, can out jump you, can lock you down on d, who is quicker, faster and can dunk on the break with ease and who can also create his own shot at will, and even someone who with the ball, is quicker than the defender without the ball. That is my definition of an athlete and if any of these players can consistently do that, then whether they are white or blue is irregardless.

I don't think it is a race issue and that is not what I implied. I don't believe Dave McClure and Lance Thomas are great athletes at this stage in their careers...Nor was Shane Battier for that matter, or Chris Carrawell.

It is quite possible that my definition is just waaaaaaaaaaay wrong, but I'd like a couple of those players, even if they are green.

3rdgenDukie
03-21-2007, 04:26 PM
Let's load up on athletes like the ones YouCon has. I mean, they have 10-12 guys who are fast, strong and can jump out of the gym. I don't think anyone can stop them on their way to the NC.

Athletes are great. If they can't play the game of basketball well, they are totally useless. Taking flyers on guys who are athletic but semi-talented players out of HS - Maynor, Pellot-Rossa, etc. - and hoping they develop is fine, but prepare yourself for a lot of Tony Moore, Joe Cook, Orlando Melendez, Ajou Deng, Casey Sanders types.

phaedrus
03-21-2007, 04:47 PM
aside from "athletic" being code word for black, it's also a code word for "likely to jump to the nba early".

which brings us back to our recruiting paradigm, vis-a-vis nba early entry.

Clipsfan
03-21-2007, 05:31 PM
Let's look at Duke's upcoming roster:
White Players:
Paulus
Scheyer
Mcbob (um, he's gone)
Zoubek
Pocius
King
Singler

Defining the term athlete is no doubt in question here, but I would define it as someone who can beat you off the dribble, can out jump you, can lock you down on d, who is quicker, faster and can dunk on the break with ease and who can also create his own shot at will, and even someone who with the ball, is quicker than the defender without the ball. That is my definition of an athlete and if any of these players can consistently do that, then whether they are white or blue is irregardless.

I don't think it is a race issue and that is not what I implied. I don't believe Dave McClure and Lance Thomas are great athletes at this stage in their careers...Nor was Shane Battier for that matter, or Chris Carrawell.

It is quite possible that my definition is just waaaaaaaaaaay wrong, but I'd like a couple of those players, even if they are green.

I think the obvious problem is that you have a different definition of "athletic" than most people. That, and you refuse to look at Duke's players and fairly assess whether they are athletic.

First, your definition of athletic asks for things which almost no college players can do. NBA scouts have been quoted as saying that almost no college players can actually create their own shots, so it would be great if Duke managed to have all of the few on their team. I'm sure that there are tons of guys who can dribble faster than most guys can run (while also knowing how to play the game), unfortunately I can only think of a couple who are close to that speed.

As for our team, we do have the lock down defenders, such as Nelson and McClure. Our guys can dunk with ease (think Marty against VCU). It's been said many times, but Josh, Marty, DeMarcus, David, Gerald, Lance etc are all superb athletes. Greg is even a superior athlete, even if he isn't on the same level as guys like Gerald. I'm willing to bet that Paulus can beat the vast majority of people at most athletic endeavors. I just think that some of our athletes are vastly superior athletes.

I know that some posters want to ignore youth, but it's a definite factor. It takes time for the players' bodies to grow and put on muscle. There is a reason that most 22 year olds are physically much stronger than 18 year olds. Give the guys time.

jma4life
03-21-2007, 05:39 PM
I don't think athlete is a code word for black, certainly not when I use it. I mean, McRoberts and Pocius were two of our most athletic players. And I don't really think this team lacked athletes. McRoberts, Nelson, Pocius, and Henderson are really very good athletes and Scheyer, Thomas, and McClure are solid enough too.

What this team lacked, was a really quick player who could constantly get to the rim and was given the green light to do so.

Demarcus Nelson is probably a better overall athlete than guys like Chris Duhon, D. Ewing and certainly a guy like Bobby Hurley and is pretty similar athletically to J Williams. Same thing can probably be said for Henderson. Yet these guys lacked the ability (or for Henderson, the experience, handles and opportunity) to get to the rim at will and produce unlike the guys I mentioned who were not really any more athletic than these current two. So its not that we need better athletes. I just think this team could use a slashing guard who can break down the defense consistently.

More importantly than that however, is that this team lacked the traditional Duke 4 that I love. If you look at the 91, 92 teams, the 2001 team and even the 2004 team, they all had a versatile 4 that was essentially a 6 ft 8, 3. In 91 and 92, we had G. Hill, 2001 we had Dunleavy and Battier, and in 04, Deng. Next year, Singler should be able to fill the role of the 6 ft 8 versatile power forward who can dribble, shoot, pass, etc. I really think that this kind of a player thrives in the Duke system and really improves the flow of the offense. That is why Singler is so huge in my opinion.

imagepro
03-21-2007, 06:18 PM
with that last line.

I agree with nearly all of your points of comparison. Great analysis Jumbo. I do disagree with the Scheyer vs Redick however. I "think", and I may be wrong, that JJ was far more athletic than some gave him credit for. He had to be, to run around screens all game just to get his shot. He was pretty heavily defended you know. It's not like he was a secret weapon and no one knew about him.

SMO
03-21-2007, 06:18 PM
Jumbo, you laid out very nicely that there really is no lack of athleticism vs. last year. The code word issue is definitely true for some people, hopefully not everyone on this board that uses the term athleticism. If it's not athletes then maybe it's just experience. I'm really looking forward to the next 2 years.


I'd argue that this year's team was SIGNIFICANTLY more "athletic" than last year's. Paulus vs. Paulus (wash). Dockery vs. Nelson -- edge Nelson. Redick vs. Scheyer -- edge Scheyer. McRoberts vs. McRoberts (wash). Shelden vs. McClure (edge -- pretty even, but Shel was obviously much stronger). Melchionni vs. Thomas -- edge Thomas. Last year's injured Nelson vs. Henderson -- edge Henderson. And so forth. I don't think "athleticism" is Duke's problem. I also think Singler and Smith will be more than "athletic" enough to help next year. And I finally think that "athletic" is really just a code word for "black."

Baracus
03-21-2007, 09:33 PM
Maybe I have overlooked some posts or some threads but I haven't seen anything about Zoubek as far as next year. With McRoberts leaving Zoubek is going to have to play a big role for us next year Patterson or not. I for one was very impressed with how Zoubek played during the first part of the season. He played with a lot of intensity and was very aggressive. I thought that his foot work and low post moves were good for a guy trying to make the big transition. During the limited min. he played, he was a monster on the boards and definitely made players who came inside on him alter their shots. I was never able to figure out why Zoubek faded out of the line up as the season drew to a close.


Zoubek's problem came when his playing time was squeezed to almost nothing. If I remember right he went through whole games without hitting the court or if he did it was for 1 min. or 2 and because of this I don't believe he had the confidence that he had at the beginning of the season. During one stretch he had four straight walks when he tried to make a move in the low post. This occured over the course of a few games. Whatever he had was gone. I really believe that it was lack of game experience that effected his playing. Even though he was not able to contribute much as far as scoring while he was in, he was still able to do the aforementioned rebounding and altering shots.


With all this being said Zoubek could make a very big contribution to the team next year. I don't see any way around not playing him. He has to hit the weights before next Nov. because he was pushed around a lot in the low post. If he dedicates himself to the weight room he can be a threat in the low post. There are not many college basketball teams that have an answer for a BIG 7 foot player. I am not expecting our offense to center around Zoubek and I am also not saying he should start next year but a new and improved Zoubek could be the answer for the low post problem.

BELMONTDFAN
03-21-2007, 10:24 PM
RockyMtDevil ,you are on the mark.... I was put in the "penalty box "for saying basically the same thing(maybe a little harsher).Anyway, I am a BIG Duke supporter.We do need to become more athletic somehow. Even today on sports radio WFNZ, Mike Gminski stated the same thing.He said UNC has recruited better athletes the last 3 seasons and been more athletic than Duke. I still believe that Coach K can get it turned around.a After all, he still has won 3 National Titles.
By the way ...I happened to see on FOX SPORTS last night the back-to-back titles against Kansas and Michigan.....what a rush.

Demosthenes
03-21-2007, 11:46 PM
You know who has great athletes? The Raiders. They are going all the way this year. ;)

There used to be a coach in the NFL who said... You can find all of the athletes you want at the Olympics, only half of them are women and the other half don't play football.

Duke isn't missing athletes. They are missing having one of the top PGs in the nation. That's it. Maybe Greg will get there, maybe not, but Duke isn't missing athletes. That is just a misconception perpetuated by the kind of offense we played this year. If this past year's team didn't turn the ball over so much, they would have run more and people would be talking about all of Dukes athletes... whom people have already mentioned. FWIW, how good of a defender is Lawson? Is he locking guys down? He is quick, but not that good of a defender.

As people have mentioned, as a run-jump-strenth athlete, Demarcus is on JWill's level. So is Henderson... they just don't have the handle or shooting ability of JWill. They have his athleticism... they don't have his SKILL. What we don't have right now is guards with the combo of top-level quickness, strength, and skill that we have had in the past. But don't fall into the trap of thinking it is all a lack of athleticism.

mgtr
03-22-2007, 08:25 AM
Maybe we need to analyze our team in order to see what factor may be missing. After hours of careful analysis, I have found that factor: Tattoos. We are definitely short in the tattoo area, a problem easily solved during the offseason. A secondary shortcoming is long hair (bouncy and fluffy for white players, cornrowed and braided for black players). I think with these two additions, we will be all set. We probably won't even need the players who are coming in next year.

imagepro
03-22-2007, 10:02 AM
And you may just be right! Funny post though. thanks---

dockfan
03-22-2007, 11:19 AM
Maybe we need to analyze our team in order to see what factor may be missing. After hours of careful analysis, I have found that factor: Tattoos. We are definitely short in the tattoo area, a problem easily solved during the offseason. A secondary shortcoming is long hair (bouncy and fluffy for white players, cornrowed and braided for black players). I think with these two additions, we will be all set. We probably won't even need the players who are coming in next year.


That leads right into a crucial question for me heading into next season:

Will Kyle Singler have to cut his hair?

KEEP THE MOP, I SAY!

Is there a correlation between Lance getting rid of his cornrows and his point production? What about Marty's ever-decreasing floppy hair? He did seem to play more late in the year with a closer haircut. THESE are the issues to discuss. :)

Saratoga2
03-22-2007, 11:39 AM
As much as I admire Nelson, I don't think it is likely that going from the junior to senior year will greatly improve either his handle or his shooting. He will still be a valued team member but may share some time with Nolan Smith. I was surprised in reading today's feature article that he was listed at 6'3" and 195#. Scout has him listed at 175# so that is a big discrepancy. His coach says he is a combo guard who takes good shots and hits a high percentage of those. He says he is also very solid from the free throw line. His has a reasonable handle and sounds like he values the ball like Scheyer. Sort of a calm player who is hard to rattle. His coach also says he is a good defender and stays in front of his man. Only time will tell, but he sounds like he is equal in size to Nelson and has a lot of areas where he is superior. His defense and rebounding will probably not be as good as Nelson. The 2 looks like his natural position and he may be able to sub for the 1, as Scheyer also did this year. Having an solid option at the 2 will give us a choice when trying to win close games. Nolan may well be the guard we need to push us to the top of the ACC.

As people have mentioned, as a run-jump-strenth athlete, Demarcus is on JWill's level. So is Henderson... they just don't have the handle or shooting ability of JWill. They have his athleticism... they don't have his SKILL. What we don't have right now is guards with the combo of top-level quickness, strength, and skill that we have had in the past. But don't fall into the trap of thinking it is all a lack of athleticism.[/QUOTE]

Saratoga2
03-22-2007, 11:49 AM
You know who has great athletes? The Raiders. They are going all the way this year. ;)

There used to be a coach in the NFL who said... You can find all of the athletes you want at the Olympics, only half of them are women and the other half don't play football.

Duke isn't missing athletes. They are missing having one of the top PGs in the nation. That's it. Maybe Greg will get there, maybe not, but Duke isn't missing athletes. That is just a misconception perpetuated by the kind of offense we played this year. If this past year's team didn't turn the ball over so much, they would have run more and people would be talking about all of Dukes athletes... whom people have already mentioned. FWIW, how good of a defender is Lawson? Is he locking guys down? He is quick, but not that good of a defender.

As people have mentioned, as a run-jump-strenth athlete, Demarcus is on JWill's level. So is Henderson... they just don't have the handle or shooting ability of JWill. They have his athleticism... they don't have his SKILL. What we don't have right now is guards with the combo of top-level quickness, strength, and skill that we have had in the past. But don't fall into the trap of thinking it is all a lack of athleticism.


Nelson is valued member of the team but is unlikely to greatly improve either his handle or his shooting going from his junior to senior seasons. His defense and rebounding are still top attributes, but his weaknesses really show at the end of many games.

The feature article on Nolan Smith lists him at 6'3" and 195#, which makes him the same size as Nelson. His coach says of him that he has an excellent pull up game and hits a high percentage of his shots, but rarely forces them. He also is very solid from the foul line and has a good handle and values the ball, in a similar way to Scheyer. His coach also says he is a good defender and keeps his man in front of him. While he may not be the defender or rebounder that Nelson is he may just have the attributes which we so desperately needed this year to finish during close games. Handle, foul shooting, valuing the ball, pull up jumper. He may well be that player we need to substantially improve next year.