Printable View
Jack would not be anywhere near his current efficiency if you tripled his usage to approach RJ. Part of the reason why his efficiency is so high is because he can afford to NOT make something happen when it's not there. RJ and Zion can't. (which is one of the things that makes Zion's efficiency so absurd).Quote:
Originally Posted by Troublemaker
There's a reason KP breaks down efficiency by usage.
Kindly point out where I said “Jack would play RJ’s role”. I certainly never said that. Just because I compared their scoring ability and their turnover potential does not mean I thought Jack should play the same role — either now or in the future — RJ currently plays. I may be dumb but I’m not stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troublemaker
ACC third team? Well the first three teams comprise 15 players; there are 15 teams in the league; with an exception or two, every team has at least one really good player. Grayson Allen was third team ACC last year, wasn't he? Jack would have to be a star at Duke to make any All-ACC team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven43
I don't think you're dumb, and actually, I'm kind of surprised how slightly ornery this forum (including myself) has been, considering the amazing team we're lucky enough to root for this season. So, I will try to do my part to tone it down a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven43
Look, you said that if Jack shot as much as RJ, he'd be more efficient than RJ. I know you're going to argue that's not the same as saying that Jack playing RJ's role would be more efficient than RJ. But, in reality, the difference really is minimal.
RJ takes 19 shots a game. In a vacuum (i.e. non-reality), I would agree that if Jack takes 19 wide-open threes (his signature shot) a game, he'll be more efficient than RJ. But the number of NCAA players who take 19 wide-open threes a game? Zero.
Shots have to be created, and when we're talking about Jack, virtually all his shots are created for him (sometimes by RJ!). Furthermore, Coach K doesn't have Jack running off screens to get open threes, and there's probably a reason for that -- Jack isn't yet good enough to hit threes off movement. Otherwise, I'm sure Coach K would love to get his best 3-pt shooter more open 3s.
To get Jack up to 19 shots, he'll have to do some self-creation. He's going to have to dribble the ball to score, and he'll have to deal with those packed lanes that RJ and Zion are dealing with when they create (especially since Jack is usually the floor spacer). It wouldn't go well for Jack.
Can we agree on some of this?
Sure, we can agree. What you just wrote makes a lot of sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troublemaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by 84Duke
Oh, yes...they still are!!!
Yeah, but the awards favor the better teams, and they also tend to favor older players. I could see White on 3rd team ACC if he continues to improve and then makes another jump over the summer.Quote:
Originally Posted by sagegrouse
Absolutely. Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by UrinalCake
This team is fun to watch because they are really disruptive on D. The half court O is a work in progress- but the transition O is a thing of beauty- maybe the best I have seen on a Duke team. Jack's play has been a nice surprise. Not sure how he does it- but his timing and technique for shot blocking and his ability to bound in traffic is truly impressive. The team gives up too many offensive rebounds at times but so far they have found a way to beat the teams they are supposed to beat by large margins. Recent young Duke teams have not always done this. But all is all- the D is much, much better than expected and that may be enough to make up for some half court and shooting limitations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troublemaker
Many seem to agree with you. My preference was our '92 team's transition O. Bobby ran it beautifully!Quote:
Originally Posted by dukelifer
I had thought it was the best since 92....too early to tell if it will end up better in that regard. I will say this team is more "edge of your seat" while in transition...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey
As an example, you can re-watch the Wake game and find two instances (I think) of Jack being called for a travel when he had the ball and tried to make a move toward the basic instead of shooting. The announcers even mentioned that Tre was probably miffed one time he got Jack the ball and he tried to drive rather than shoot a three. I luuuuuv what Jack is bringing to this team, but he's not replacing RJ right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven43
One question that might be worth debating: if Jack is a starter on next year's team (and Tre's gone), can he learn how to create more looks for himself? That will be some important off-season work. I don't know the games of our incoming freshman very well, but when I look at our current guys who are projected to be around next year, I get worried about where the offense will come from. (Maybe this should be the starting post in a 2019-20 minutes thread? :D )
On one f.b. vs Wake, Tre was out in front in the middle vs 2 defenders, then crossed over to go to the outside of the lane bringing both defenders towards him just a little, which opened space for Zion who was coming down the other side. Tre then threw a lob for an allez-oups dunk to Zion. That was a beautifully run f.b.!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey
Had Tre tried to take it down the middle vs. the 2 defenders, i doubt very much good would have happened...
I assume you mean Cam and not RJ in your final sentence...Quote:
Originally Posted by construe
As for Jack's traveling, I thought the first time it was, but I think the second time was anticipated lazy call from an official on a non travel. Here's the dirty little (not so) secret about officials. They are human. They have sub conscious thoughts about all the players, teams and coaches going into a game - just like everybody else. Something like this could well be a case of officials pegging Jack into spot up shooter only...because those same two moves, by many people, would NEVER be called traveling.
As Duke fans, we saw this with Shavlik Randolph and ridiculous fouls he was called for. He got a reputation as a fouler, so officials felt very comfortable calling fouls on him. After all, it was expected. No official would ever get questioned about a foul on Shav, because we all "know" he fouls....kind of a thing.
Over the years the ACC writers have not especially impressed me with their all ACC selections. I think most take the lazy way out, just going by points, maybe rebounds, success of team.
Few highly valuable glue guys with modest stats but major team importance seem to get traction with them.
I think this is right. Jack is, as K said, our unsung hero. He helps make us a great TEAM. But the honors teams are about individual achievement, and we have a few NBA lottery picks on the team that will get the votes first from a somewhat lazy (and often UNC-centric) selection process.Quote:
Originally Posted by sagegrouse
Having said that, I wouldn't trade Jack for most of the players that will end up on the list. He fills a role we need, and does it exceptionally well.
Maybe I missed it, but I don’t recall anyone suggesting Jack should replace RJ.Quote:
Originally Posted by construe
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldPhiKap
Worse still, such teams are biased towards individual offensive achievement (and stats). If the voters gave proper credit to defense and rebounding, future Jack would have a better shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldPhiKap
Pretty sure he or she meant Barrett, as it was alluding to the brief discussion earlier in this thread. Not that anyone is suggesting White replace Barrett. Just that the comparison was made between White and Barrett and that got brought up.Quote:
Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK