MBB Duke 87 Bellarmine 62 Post Game Thread

[CDu]

1. Hairston can actually guard mobile undersized big men. Duke will definitely hit some during the NCAA tourney.
2. More fouls to give.
3. More defined roles. The three big rotation means each big is playing both the four and the five.

1. Except that there's no evidence that Hairston is more capable of defending mobile, undersized big men. He's never shown that skillset before. Lance Thomas showed that skillset. Hairston is a different player than Lance Thomas.
2. No difference in fouls to give. We'll still have 20 fouls to give amongst those four players, regardless of how the minutes play out.
3. Actually, no that's not true. It means that one of the three big men is playing both positions. If you assume that Kelly is a 4 and Miles a 5, then Mason is a 4/5.

My counterpoints:
1. I don't think the benefit gained here (which is very small, if anything) is worth the loss of minutes of one of the better players in favor of more minutes for one of the weaker players.
2. What happens when you get a guy or two in foul trouble? Then you'll have to split up the teams anyway. Might as well have the three key guys comfortable with playing with each other first.

The "two lines" approach worked because seniors Zoubek and Thomas were so far advanced compared to the Plumlees that it made sense to play them together. So they did, for like 75% of the playing time down the stretch. The Plumlees played fill-in minutes. In this year's team, you have 3 players far ahead of the other options. Splitting them into groups of two would either limit all three's minutes too much (if the lines were split equally) or limit one of those player's way too much (if the lines were split 25/15 or more).

[CDu]

Based on the box score, it's interesting that the two guys whose lines were most disappointing were Andre (15 minutes, 1 made shot) and Ryan (1 rebound), who were also the two guys I expected to start who ended up on the bench. Cause, or effect?

I wouldn't say that Kelly's rebound totals were disappointing. The Plumlees got 17 boards while Kelly frequently played the high post and often had to defend on the perimeter (Bellarmine spread it out).

Between all the long rebounds (Bellarmine shot a lot of 3s) and the fact that the Plumlees were pounding the glass together, I wouldn't read too much into Kelly's 1 rebound. I thought he played just fine.

Dawkins, on the other hand...

[gumbomoop]

I didn't follow the game at all, except to look at stats and read EK. But K followed it, and his postgame comments focus on Tyler Thornton. [See link in Bellarmine story to Quotes.] To wit:

- "[Tyler] Thornton really gave us a big boost. When he's in the ball game, we just play better. He doesn't have to hit a shot - we just play better when Tyler's in the basketball game."

- "Tyler's communication was so good."

- "Tyler played more in the second half, and that helps. Not everybody needs to shoot the ball."

Tyler is hardly an impressive athlete. Gottlieb, bless him, would find Tyler alarmingly unathletic.. Tyler's handle, for an elite PG, is not elite. He's not a flashy passer, and doesn't blow by defenders to get into the lane. Not a great shooter.

But, K seems to think that winning basketball requires good defense, based in part on effective communication from leaders. Last year, midseason, K said on his TV show that Tyler is a leader. Apparently so.

[Billy Dat]

-To address the comments about rebounding and perimeter defense, Bellarmine ran en extremely active and efficient motion that set-up lots of drive and kick 3s, and it seemed that everyone on their team could handle and shoot. As a result, our bigs were constantly guarding smaller quicker players on the perimeter who they naturally laid off for fear of the drive but, more often than not, faked drives and rose up for 3s. They also didn't crash the offensive boards fearing our transition so the result was many uncontested rebounds for us an our bigs scrambling around the perimeter chasing quicker smaller guys. Had we tried to match their size by going small, I think that veteran squad may have chewed us up.

[ncexnyc]

OMG, after just one exhibition game we've already got a Quinn Cook thread and some woe is Dre talk. Can we let things play out over the next few weeks without getting to crazy around here?

[CameronBornAndBred]

My favorite stat was the zero fouls that Mason recorded. He was very active, so to come up with that goose egg was very nice to see.
I also loved the turnout the fans from Bellarmine put together. They were loud and proud, and have every right to be. I was pretty impressed with them; obviously they can play some good ball. There are some ACC teams this year that wish they could be only down by three at the half. I thought the refs did give a lot of calls to Duke that should have been called to Bellarmine's advantage. I was having fun though watching their fans raise hell every time they got robbed. And I TOTALLY enjoyed watching K go off on an extended rant about something that pissed him off. Poor refs, every time they ran by him they got an earful.

[Billy Dat]

As for Rivers, I thought he looked really solid. I didn't see the first 5 minutes, but otherwise I saw a guy playing within himself, making simple passes, etc. If anything, I didn't think he was aggressive enough on offense. He can really blow by his man at will. I think he's going to be really good this year.

As for the bigs and post moves, I think our best bet for feeding the post is going to be using Kelly or Murphy in the role playing a little two man game. Our bigs are so used to redirecting post feeds for 3s that I think, if they can develop some good ball fakes, that they should be able to fake and drop step, or fake and spin into the lane for bunnies. We'll see.

[watzone]

Here is Coach K's presser from last evening http://bluedevilnation.net/2011/10/b...ss-conference/ He says a lot of interesting things which helps one to understand how the game went and the decisions he made. This team is a work in progress and before the year is out, they'll be a tough out. Coach gave props to Tyler Thornton and loved the second half effort.

[Kedsy]

I wouldn't say that Kelly's rebound totals were disappointing. The Plumlees got 17 boards while Kelly frequently played the high post and often had to defend on the perimeter (Bellarmine spread it out).

Between all the long rebounds (Bellarmine shot a lot of 3s) and the fact that the Plumlees were pounding the glass together, I wouldn't read too much into Kelly's 1 rebound. I thought he played just fine.

Dawkins, on the other hand...

Well, I didn't see the game, but when Ryan was in the Plumlees couldn't have been pounding the glass together, because only one of them was in the game. And presumably Seth and Austin had to defend on the perimeter and they got 6 and 5 boards. Ryan was 3 inches taller than Bellarmine's tallest guy and based on Bellarmine's roster was possibly 4 or 5 inches taller than his man. I assume he also had a lot of weight on whoever he was matched up with. Again, I didn't see the game, but I'd expect a lot more than one rebound from him. And some blocked shots as well, which according to the box score didn't happen, either.

This is not to rag on Ryan. It was just an observation that the two guys who I expected to start and didn't both performed less than optimally. Are they in slumps and that's why they didn't start? Or was it a self-fulfilling prophecy? Or am I reading way too much into a box score for an exhibition game?

[Devilsfan]

Great to see him giving props to a PG. Thought for a while that this season while truly being a work in progress might be pointless for sometime.

[loldevilz]

1. Except that there's no evidence that Hairston is more capable of defending mobile, undersized big men. He's never shown that skillset before. Lance Thomas showed that skillset. Hairston is a different player than Lance Thomas.
2. No difference in fouls to give. We'll still have 20 fouls to give amongst those four players, regardless of how the minutes play out.
3. Actually, no that's not true. It means that one of the three big men is playing both positions. If you assume that Kelly is a 4 and Miles a 5, then Mason is a 4/5.

My counterpoints:
1. I don't think the benefit gained here (which is very small, if anything) is worth the loss of minutes of one of the better players in favor of more minutes for one of the weaker players.
2. What happens when you get a guy or two in foul trouble? Then you'll have to split up the teams anyway. Might as well have the three key guys comfortable with playing with each other first.

The "two lines" approach worked because seniors Zoubek and Thomas were so far advanced compared to the Plumlees that it made sense to play them together. So they did, for like 75% of the playing time down the stretch. The Plumlees played fill-in minutes. In this year's team, you have 3 players far ahead of the other options. Splitting them into groups of two would either limit all three's minutes too much (if the lines were split equally) or limit one of those player's way too much (if the lines were split 25/15 or more).

Whoa Zoubs and Thomas didn't play 75% of the minutes. It was almost split 50/50. Go back and look at the season stats. If you remember Zoubs had some trouble staying in games as did the Plumlees. Zoubs started to play better when he was out for 20 minutes and could just give it his all. Obviously Coach K trusted the seniors more down the stretch, but the two frontlines absolutely killed teams. The other team had to make adjustments, and that much size and energy just wore people down.

Anyways your counterpoints don't make any sense. How do we have 20 fouls to give if we play a rotation of 3. I suppose Hairston hasn't shown an ability to guard small bigs, but he hasn't played at all. More importantly Mason and Kelly have shown a marked inabiliy to guard quicker undersized bigs. Look at Arizona, Virginia Tech ect.

My point is that no way does Duke win the national championship in 2010 with a 3 man big rotation. It would've messed everything up. Plus, I just noticed that in the press conference, Coach K mentioned that Hairston had a great game and brings an energy level that the other guys don't bring so we might go to 4 bigs.

[El_Diablo]

Or am I reading way too much into a box score for an exhibition game?

I think this is probably the case. He had a pretty quiet game overall, but I don't think he played bad at all. I remember Ryan pulled down one offensive board in the first half that had the Bellarmine fans screaming for an over the back call, but that offensive rebound was not included in the box score, so he had at least two. I want to say he also tipped a couple balls to other Duke players, and I distinctly remember Mason knocking one defensive board out of Ryan's hands (causing a bunch of fans to yell "same!") before it was ultimately tracked down by one of the guards--Thornton I believe. We outrebounded Bellarmine 43-24, and Ryan's positioning was fine, so I would not worry too much about his individual rebounding total here.

As for the lack of blocks, Bellarmine shot a TON of jump shots. They frequently would drive, kick it back out, and reverse it around until someone had an open look. Kelly spent a lot of time closing out on three-point shooters (something he did better than Mason, which may also help explain why he did not grab as many rebounds) rather than defending shots in the paint, so again I think it was more a product of the style of play. We only had one block as a team--that should tell you how cautious Bellarmine was in their shot selection.

[CDu]

Whoa Zoubs and Thomas didn't play 75% of the minutes. It was almost split 50/50. Go back and look at the season stats. If you remember Zoubs had some trouble staying in games as did the Plumlees. Zoubs started to play better when he was out for 20 minutes and could just give it his all. Obviously Coach K trusted the seniors more down the stretch, but the two frontlines absolutely killed teams. The other team had to make adjustments, and that much size and energy just wore people down.

When we went to the "two separate lines" approach (which only happened in the tournament), Zoubek and Thomas played the vast majority of minutes in the post. When the split was 50/50 throughout the year, the guys were subbing (and starting) interchangeably.

Anyways your counterpoints don't make any sense. How do we have 20 fouls to give if we play a rotation of 3. I suppose Hairston hasn't shown an ability to guard small bigs, but he hasn't played at all. More importantly Mason and Kelly have shown a marked inabiliy to guard quicker undersized bigs. Look at Arizona, Virginia Tech ect.

I didn't say we'd only play 3. I said we'd play mainly the first 3, and then sub in Hairston when foul trouble dictates. That means we have 20 fouls.

And neither Virginia Tech nor Arizona beat us because of an undersized big. Virginia Tech beat us because we couldn't shoot (4-20 on 3s, under 40% from the field). We actually held them quite well. And Arizona didn't beat us due to an undersized big. They beat us because their actual big (Williams) was unbelievable, and their PG had a career game. Hairston wasn't going to slow down Derrick Williams.

My point is that no way does Duke win the national championship in 2010 with a 3 man big rotation. It would've messed everything up. Plus, I just noticed that in the press conference, Coach K mentioned that Hairston had a great game and brings an energy level that the other guys don't bring so we might go to 4 bigs.

First, I have never said we'd only go with a 3-big rotation, so that first sentence is irrelevant. Hairston will play. He'll just play about 10 mpg as needed. Not in some set rotation paired with another big. It just doesn't make any sense to do that.

[CDu]

Well, I didn't see the game, but when Ryan was in the Plumlees couldn't have been pounding the glass together, because only one of them was in the game. And presumably Seth and Austin had to defend on the perimeter and they got 6 and 5 boards. Ryan was 3 inches taller than Bellarmine's tallest guy and based on Bellarmine's roster was possibly 4 or 5 inches taller than his man. I assume he also had a lot of weight on whoever he was matched up with. Again, I didn't see the game, but I'd expect a lot more than one rebound from him. And some blocked shots as well, which according to the box score didn't happen, either.

This is not to rag on Ryan. It was just an observation that the two guys who I expected to start and didn't both performed less than optimally. Are they in slumps and that's why they didn't start? Or was it a self-fulfilling prophecy? Or am I reading way too much into a box score for an exhibition game?

I think you're reading too much into a box score for an exhibition game. Kelly was in position for a few more rebounds, but a Plumlee got to it first. The guards got to a lot of long rebounds because they're quicker. As for shotblocking, there just weren't a ton of chances for such things. Bellarmine shot a lot of threes and got a lot of weakside cuts for layups. They rarely ever beat their man off the dribble (setting up a helpside block) and I don't think they posted up at all (another opportunity for blocks). The only block was a very athletic block by Mason.

Kelly was fine. I didn't come away from that game thinking that Kelly was unproductive. He didn't dominate, but he was fine.

Dawkins, however, was not fine. He just looked his usual passive self. They ran a couple of mid-range curl plays for him (he hit one but missed badly on another), but otherwise he stood around on the perimeter a lot. It looked a lot like last year for him. Hopefully things get better soon.

[loldevilz]

And neither Virginia Tech nor Arizona beat us because of an undersized big. Virginia Tech beat us because we couldn't shoot (4-20 on 3s, under 40% from the field). We actually held them quite well. And Arizona didn't beat us due to an undersized big. They beat us because their actual big (Williams) was unbelievable, and their PG had a career game. Hairston wasn't going to slow down Derrick Williams.

Well the starting frontline for Virginia Tech scored 41 out their 64 points. So I'd say they pretty much had their way with our bigs. Jeff Allen in particular killed us and if I recall correctly Victor Davilla had his career high against us.

As for that Arizona game, we had to move Singler over to the four because Kelly and Mason couldn't guard Williams.

Maybe the word undersized is the problem. I mean like a quicker, more athletic 6-7 or 6-8 forward.

[J4Kop99]

Do any of you know where I could find highlights from last nights game?

[dcar1985]

Do any of you know where I could find highlights from last nights game?

GoDuke.com

[MCFinARL]

Based on the box score, it's interesting that the two guys whose lines were most disappointing were Andre (15 minutes, 1 made shot) and Ryan (1 rebound), who were also the two guys I expected to start who ended up on the bench. Cause, or effect?

Such a good question--just what I have been wondering.

[ChillinDuke]

Dawkins, however, was not fine. He just looked his usual passive self. They ran a couple of mid-range curl plays for him (he hit one but missed badly on another), but otherwise he stood around on the perimeter a lot. It looked a lot like last year for him. Hopefully things get better soon.

There was a time or two I saw Dawkins working his man without the ball on the baseline and popping off a screen for a three look. Perhaps these were the curls you refer to. Listen, Dawkins didn't play well, there's no getting around that. But if nothing else, at least this appeared in the first exhibition game so maybe we'll see more of it. And hopefully with better results.

- Chillin

[Kedsy]

Whoa Zoubs and Thomas didn't play 75% of the minutes.

Before Z entered the starting lineup, to the extent we played "two lines" it wasn't Lance and Z, because Lance was starting and Z wasn't. My recollection, however, is we didn't really play two lines at that point so much as mix and match.

After Z entered the starting lineup (first Maryland game), Z and Lance combined for 64.4% of the inside minutes, with Mason and Miles playing 35.6% of the minutes. That 64% would have been a bit higher if Lance hadn't gotten injured in the UNC game.

So, it wasn't 75%, but it wasn't close to 50/50, either. If CDu had said two-thirds, instead of three-quarters, he would have been correct.

Also, just because an opposing big man scored a lot of points, doesn't mean he "had his way" with the Duke big-man defender. In Duke's team defensive system, opposing bigs often have big scoring nights, even when our bigs are doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing. Look at some of the lines of opposing big men when Shelden Williams was a senior (e.g., Marco Killingsworth for 34 points), and Shelden was the national defensive player of the year.