I imagine Booker is drooling thinking about Saturday. I think K needs to do something to shake the boys up. It usually happens once a year, why not try it now.
Here is a thread for the Clemson game.
I have two questions, one of which is rhetorical:
1. Do you think Trevor Booker is licking his chops after seeing what Tracy Smith did to Duke last night?
2. Given K's unhappiness with the effort, will there be a shakeup in the starting lineup?
sagegrouse
'In 2005, after a loss to VT away, Coach said he was "feeling numb" with the lack of effort the team showed. The next game against Wake, he started Patrick Davidson, Patrick Johnson, and Reggie Love (now the keeper of the holy Blackberry) along with JJ and Shelden. To this day, Chris Paul believes that K sent Patrick Davidson out to pick a fight and get him tossed. It wasn't true, but it worked for me! BTW Duke won 102-92.'
I imagine Booker is drooling thinking about Saturday. I think K needs to do something to shake the boys up. It usually happens once a year, why not try it now.
1. Yes. Not just because of what Smith did, but also because of what Duke did against him only weeks ago.
2. Who knows. The Big 3 are locks to start. Maybe there's some shuffling of the bigs, but aside from possibly sending a psychological message, any benefit from that will probably be negligible.
I said it before the NC State game, and it's even more true today. Job one is to win a true road game. Until we do, we haven't, and the longer this goes the bigger the problem gets. Job two is to not look horrible again. All other items are Priority No. 3.
I immediately thought last night that losing at NC State was the best possible scenario in regard to winning at Clemson. This morning I'm not so sure. I've got a feeling we're going down again. But I've been wrong a lot this season.
1. Yes. He's had monster games against Duke at home previously. If they can get him the ball, I can certainly see him repeating that. It goes without saying that limiting his touches is a key, because aside from him Clemson's half-court offense is limited mainly to chucking up 3s.
2. Aside from benching Plumlee, I don't know what he can really do to shake things up. He's not benching any of the big three (nor should he), and Thomas already starts. I also don't know what rotating in a different starting big would do, considering that they rotate so frequently anyway.
It'll be a good test. Clemson is a feast-or-famine team. They feed off the press and score points in bunches. But if they can't turn you over, they tend to struggle in the half court. If we can do a good job against their pressure and if we can do a reasonable job of minimizing Booker again, we should be able to win against them. But no team in the ACC seems to ride so much on their confidence level as Clemson. If they smell blood in the water, they can turn the game ugly quickly.
They play a very different style than State, and hopefully that bodes well. I do feel like some of the problems against State were related to their style (4-out, 1-in, with a really good big man and two guards who penetrated well) as well as some fantastic outside shooting. We won't see that same style from Clemson.
I really hope we can get over the road bugaboo and get rid of that 0 in the road win column. It would be a huge boost for the team's confidence.
The problem with doing something like this is I thought Lance did show a lot of effort against State (whether you thought he played well or not), so if you're locked into the Big Three, the only starting player who might be in jeopardy is Miles, and benching him alone would (a) not be much of a shakeup; and (b) might damage his confidence rather than light a fire under him.
Therefore, if K is going to shake it up, in my opinion he'd have to bench everyone. Or everyone except Jon -- we'd need someone to handle the ball. What would that lineup look like? Well, either we'd be sending walk-ons out there, or it would be Jon, Andre, Ryan, MP1, and Z. Are either of those options a good idea against Clemson's press? I wouldn't think so.
So I guess what I'm saying is, in this particular game with this particular team, I think the option to use that particular motivating device is limited.
uh, we already played Clemson guys. Why is everyone talking about how Booker is going to go nuts?
All the other times are fairly irrelevant, as he'll be playing against the specific players and team that shut him down just a short time ago.
edit: that being said, I'm sure Clemson will make adjustments as will Duke, and he is more likely to perform to his season average than in his last game.
I was simply struck by the comments above about Booker licking his chops/being excited to play Duke...it was as if they didn't realize we already played them.
Last edited by YourLandlord; 01-21-2010 at 12:35 PM.
We only forced State into 9 turnovers last night. That simply must change when we go down to Clemson. The Tigers cannot be allowed to get into their halfcourt offense so easily. If we're not able to disrupt any ball movement like last night, then it's another road L.
It's also especially important we take care of the ball. Even though we held the Tigers to 12 1st half points the first go-round, they equaled that point total in about a 2:00 stretch of the 2nd half due to Duke turnovers. We're going to face the press the entire game on made buckets. There simply has to be better communication than what we saw last night.
with the way we were turning the ball over, this full court press could get REAL ugly for us real quick
I would expect Duke to play with a much higher level of intensity and focus. They have something to prove in this game for a number of reasons (what happened last night, coupled with what happened @Clemson last year). As far as shake-ups in the starting line-up, I would not be surprised at all. The Big 3 are locks to start and play 30+, but I am willing to bet that whoever brings the intensity in practice will be on the floor first on Saturday. I cannot imagine we see the Duke team we saw last night, but even a renewed intensity and effort certainly doesn't mean Duke will handle Clemson like they did in Cameron. This is a good team in a tough gym.
We can argue about how, when and why... but the consensus of the powers that be is that the boys did not show up or perform as had been expected. Usually doesn't happen twice in a row. Doesn't guarantee a win but I don't expect to see a repeat of last night.
Booker will be looking for a big night, as he should.
We will do our damnedest to stop him, and I believe we will.
Color me optimisitic.
I know it has been said by players and coaches that they only focus on the next game and are sure not to overlook opponents. Watching the game last night, I find that hard to believe. We did not show up, and it never looked like we left the bus. Hopefully, for Saturday's sake, this was the one "rare" time that we overlooked an opponent, and we come out firing at littlejohn.
Does anyone know anything new about Stitt? He was hobled at Tech tuesday night... If he's not playing 100% it gives a little more room to focus on Booker, and shut him down like we did a few weeks ago.
The court is the same size. They players are the same. The coaches are the same.
Does the fact that the court is located a few hundred miles south change the defensive strategy or something? Is Duke not allowed to implement the same strategy because the game isn't at home?
Why don't you explain why playing on the road will change the way we defend Booker?
There is a lot of talk about how difficult it is to win on the road in our league and for that matter any division 1 matchup. Saying that, I haven't really heard anyone list the factors which make winning on the road so difficult. I would think the following are true, but there are probably other reasons as well:
1. Hostile environment and crowd take away from the concentration of the visiting players. Also, they may make it difficult to communicate defensive switches and the like.
2. The crowd also infuses the home team with a lot of energy. Everyone wants to do well in front of their friends and family.
3. The perspective of the basketball arena is different and shooting may be bothered by subtle differences.
4. Refs may be swayed by the energy of the crowd without even realizing it. Maybe the visiting team ppicks upextra fouls or are call for traveling more often.
5. Kids have to travel and are away from their normal day to day activities and posibly don't sleep as well.
6. Maybe losing on the road is a self fulfilling prophecy, since the kids might actually believe it is true.
There are many experienced contributors to this web site and I am sure others have lots of other ideas as well. The other question that comes out of this thinking, is if we know the factors, what do we do to counteract them?