MBB: Ohio State 85, Duke 63 Post Game Thread

[OldPhiKap]

One point that has gotten passing mention but deserves some more I think. It was not just that Duke had an "off night" or even that tOSU had an "on night". They game-planned us very well and took our guards (with the exception of Austin) out of the game. Greg Paulus, who does the video scouting, etc., I suspect had a big role in that.

Which is fine with me. I hope he progresses in coaching if that is what is calling to him.

But, Greg buddy, just don't do it to us in a tourney, okay?

;>)

[sagegrouse]

Sorry I offended you; I intended no offense.

We didn't just get beaten on an off night, we were thrashed in every aspect of the game by a team that, on that night, was clearly superior. Sure, say we had an off night and we'll get you next time; we can do better; we were tired and on the road; that our performance doesn't fairly represent this team's level of play. But the bravado and bluster of asserting that next time we're going to teach Mr. Sullinger "what Duke basketball is all about" struck me as kind of silly in the wake of that defeat.

Didn't get beaten on an off-night? Silly to show Mr. Sullinger a lesson? Maybe in a normal universe, but out here in Hilbert space, Euclidean rules don't apply. I thought we did a decent job on Sullinger -- thanks to Mason and Miles. The other Buckeyes, esp. the three-point shooters, had career nights. Would I like to play them again? You bet!!! Go Duke! Bring 'em on!

sagegrouse

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

We didn't just get beaten on an off night, we were thrashed in every aspect of the game by a team that, on that night, was clearly superior. Sure, say we had an off night and we'll get you next time; we can do better; we were tired and on the road; that our performance doesn't fairly represent this team's level of play. But the bravado and bluster of asserting that next time we're going to teach Mr. Sullinger "what Duke basketball is all about" struck me as kind of silly in the wake of that defeat.

Of course it's ludicrous. Of course it's bravado and bluster. I'm sorry, this is a Duke message board. Do you want me to say "gee, I hope we never play them again! They are so much better than us, we'd never have a chance..."

Sorry, I've only been following Duke basketball for about thirty years. When Duke lost to UNLV in 1990 and got completely dismantled, didn't it make it that much more satisfying in 1991? We were supposed to be an appetizer for UNLV's championship game. Duke was the team that couldn't win the big game and was outmanned at every position. There was articles in the newspaper about how many NBA teams UNLV could beat. Do you think Coach K was hoping UNLV would falter before the Final Four so we wouldn't have to play them again?

Yes, I expect Duke to play better than they did Tuesday in every other game for the rest of the year. Yes, I would love to play OSU in the Final Four. And yes, I believe that we would have a damned good chance to beat them after four more months of prep and coaching. And, I think that Tuesday's loss would only make it more satisfying. I relish the idea, and I think that not being afraid of an opponent is a BIG component of what "Duke basketball is all about."

[Kedsy]

Sorry I offended you; I intended no offense.

OK, I hear you. You were reacting to a comment you thought was uncalled for. We all do that from time to time. Sorry I came down so hard on you.

[JMarley50]

Andre played 4 second half minutes. Ryan played 1. Seth played 9, and Tyler didn't play at all in the second half. Was K "trying to send a message" to all four players? Maybe. Should all four be in danger of losing their roles? I don't think so. I'm not sure why people think Andre is on thin ice any more than the other three.

I can't speak for the others but I guess my logic is this:

-One could argue that Ryan is our most consistent player and a captain. We generally know what to expect from him. Somewhere close to a double-double, good defense and few mistakes. I think it was more of a match-up issue with him against OSU. I say he has a get out of jail free card, definitely not on thin ice.

-Seth (another captain) has more than proved himself. Sure he's pulled a disappearing act before (VaTech) but its few and far in between. Not to mention he is what 10 games into being a PG now? He was going up against one of the best if not the best on ball defender in the country. I'd say he still gets some time to develop as a PG and prove he can handle big time pressure in big games. If that doesn't happen I expect he'll just see more time off of the ball, not really a loss of minutes. I did mention I have a feeling we'll start seeing more Quinn.

-Tyler's heart and defense has earned him the playing time he's getting this season. He is one of my favorite guys on the team. He doesn't have a history of disappearing at all. One off game from a guy like him does not warrant being on "thin ice". I expect to see him back hustling, playing great D, and interrupting the offensive flow of the opponent next game. That's his role, and that's just who he is as a basketball player it don't go away for long.

-Then there is Dre... He is also one of my favorite guys on the team, but unlike some fans it does not prevent me from recognizing his flaws as a player. He has one of the most silky smooth and beautiful shots ever. I'd rank it up there with Ray Allen on the prettiness scale. When he gets hot and starts hitting, its like poetry in motion. Simply amazing! BUT... for every game we get to see it there is probably 3 or 4 games of him standing around, playing marginal defense at best, and shooting 2 of 6 from the field, all while rendering himself pretty much ineffective. I would love to say that there is a pattern with him but we don't even have that. If there were a pattern we would know when to expect a big game. That inconsistency is why I would say he is on "thin ice". IF Silent G gets more playing time and proves he can play consistently at the level he did against OSU then I think its a no-brainer. We would lose some streaky offense, gain consistent perimeter defense, and some slashing ability. Which do you think K would choose?

So I guess what it boils down to for me is that the other guys you mentioned consistently contribute something that helps the team win. I don't see Andre coming off the bench diminishing what he brings to the table. Heck he might even get paid to do just that at the next level, come off the bench and knock down a couple shots. If he's hot ride him, if he's not put him back on the bench. I'm not sure why people feel the need to defend Andre's game at this point and pretend its something its not just because he is a likeable kid. He's not a great defender, he doesn't get out and run the floor to get a lot of layups in transition, he's not a slasher that can get to the rim a lot, and he's not a great rebounder. I apologize if it sounds harsh, that's not my intentions its just my opinion.

[Kedsy]

I'm not sure why people feel the need to defend Andre's game at this point and pretend its something its not just because he is a likeable kid. He's not a great defender, he doesn't get out and run the floor to get a lot of layups in transition, he's not a slasher that can get to the rim a lot, and he's not a great rebounder. I apologize if it sounds harsh, that's not my intentions its just my opinion.

I'm not defending him because he's a likeable kid. I honestly think he deserves to keep his starting role. He's a much improved defender, and a clutch player. In two of the games in which he "disappeared," he hit critical three-pointers in the last minute or two. I think our offense is significantly better when he's in the game, whether or not he personally is doing the scoring.

But obviously it's Coach K's opinion that counts, not mine or yours. CBSSportsline reported earlier today that Quinn might replace Andre in the starting lineup. We'll see what happens.

[roywhite]

I'm not defending him because he's a likeable kid. I honestly think he deserves to keep his starting role. He's a much improved defender, and a clutch player. In two of the games in which he "disappeared," he hit critical three-pointers in the last minute or two. I think our offense is significantly better when he's in the game, whether or not he personally is doing the scoring.

But obviously it's Coach K's opinion that counts, not mine or yours. CBSSportsline reported earlier today that Quinn might replace Andre in the starting lineup. We'll see what happens.

Thanks for the heads-up, Kedsy.

Here's the link:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask.../post/16319794

The perimeter defense struggled against Ohio State, and the Blue Devils are not executing their halfcourt offense well. That may lead to freshman PG Quinn Cook starting in place of Andre Dawkins. Cook would also run the team, sending current PG Seth Curry back to the shooter role he played last year.

[Kedsy]

Thanks for the heads-up, Kedsy.

Well, I got it from airowe's twitter feed, but you're welcome.

[davekay1971]

Thanks for the heads-up, Kedsy.

Here's the link:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask.../post/16319794

Regarding that link:

Is Shawn Krest someone in the know? Honest question there...because from reading what he wrote I have no idea if Krest's statements were pure speculation or likely to be based on information from the Duke coaching staff.

[JMarley50]

I'm not defending him because he's a likeable kid. I honestly think he deserves to keep his starting role. He's a much improved defender, and a clutch player. In two of the games in which he "disappeared," he hit critical three-pointers in the last minute or two. I think our offense is significantly better when he's in the game, whether or not he personally is doing the scoring.

But obviously it's Coach K's opinion that counts, not mine or yours. CBSSportsline reported earlier today that Quinn might replace Andre in the starting lineup. We'll see what happens.

I agree that he can make the big shot in clutch situations. He did it against Baylor in 2010 and several times since. That is why I think he'll have a spot somewhere at the next level, whether it be NBA or Europe. There is always a spot for a guy like that on a team and I'm glad we have him. Robert Horry made a pretty good living hitting a couple of shots a game, they just always seemed to be in critical moments. For the last 10 years of his career he mainly came off the bench, but he was arguably one of the most important players. That's kind of what I was referring to when I said coming off the bench won't diminish what Andre brings to the table.

I know our opinions don't really count but its always fun being able to voice them and get into some good debates. I expected to see more Quinn but not necessarily starting. I guess that will slide Austin to the 3. Should be interesting.

[oldnavy]

Sorry I offended you; I intended no offense.

We didn't just get beaten on an off night, we were thrashed in every aspect of the game by a team that, on that night, was clearly superior. Sure, say we had an off night and we'll get you next time; we can do better; we were tired and on the road; that our performance doesn't fairly represent this team's level of play. But the bravado and bluster of asserting that next time we're going to teach Mr. Sullinger "what Duke basketball is all about" struck me as kind of silly in the wake of that defeat.

I know we got whooped good, but I really didn't ever get the feeling during that game that we were getting "thrashed". I have watched us get "thrashed" before (as mentioned above; the UNLV beat down in 90, second half of last years AZ game), but this didn't ever feel like that to me.

I just saw a team that was flat (Duke), whose shots were not falling, playing a team that was red hot and playing about as well as possible.

Now, granted I had just watched the team play three games in Maui and was really impressed and actually pleasently surprised at the growth so far, so maybe I just had that in the back of my mind watching the OSU game.

[CDu]

I know we got whooped good, but I really didn't ever get the feeling during that game that we were getting "thrashed". I have watched us get "thrashed" before (as mentioned above; the UNLV beat down in 90, second half of last years AZ game), but this didn't ever feel like that to me.

I just saw a team that was flat (Duke), whose shots were not falling, playing a team that was red hot and playing about as well as possible.

Now, granted I had just watched the team play three games in Maui and was really impressed and actually pleasently surprised at the growth so far, so maybe I just had that in the back of my mind watching the OSU game.

I'd say it was a thrashing. There might have been reasons that caused the thrashing, but it was a thrashing. The fact that we are probably a better team than we showed and OSU is probably not as dominant as they showed doesn't make it not a thrashing.

[oldnavy]

I'd say it was a thrashing. There might have been reasons that caused the thrashing, but it was a thrashing. The fact that we are probably a better team than we showed and OSU is probably not as dominant as they showed doesn't make it not a thrashing.

You are probably right, but for some reason I wasn't discouraged by it like some of the other thrashings we have had in the past. Like I said, I was probably on a Maui laid back hangover...

[Duvall]

You are probably right, but for some reason I wasn't discouraged by it like some of the other thrashings we have had in the past. Like I said, I was probably on a Maui laid back hangover...

Well, it's November and this team had already banked a few resume wins already. Hard to get too worried with months to get prepared before March.

[oldnavy]

Well, it's November and this team had already banked a few resume wins already. Hard to get too worried with months to get prepared before March.

Yea, I guess that could be it. I have seen the guys make big improvement from the Belmont game (which at the time worried me a little more than the OSU loss has), so I know that this was just one of those things... I still really, really like this team.

[CDu]

You are probably right, but for some reason I wasn't discouraged by it like some of the other thrashings we have had in the past. Like I said, I was probably on a Maui laid back hangover...

Sure, I can get on board with it not being necessarily a discouraging thrashing.

[hq2]

But obviously it's Coach K's opinion that counts, not mine or yours. CBSSportsline reported earlier today that Quinn might replace Andre in the starting lineup.

Not surprising. Andre's not a great defensive player, so when he's not getting good shots, he doesn't contribute that much. Still, I think K needs
to stop and think about it. Andre's kind of a head case type player; benching him for one bad game could really hurt his effectiveness. I think
he may get one more try before K sits him.

[oldnavy]

Not surprising. Andre's not a great defensive player, so when he's not getting good shots, he doesn't contribute that much. Still, I think K needs
to stop and think about it. Andre's kind of a head case type player; benching him for one bad game could really hurt his effectiveness. I think
he may get one more try before K sits him.

Head case is probably unfair. Andre is a little more expressive with his emotions than some. I saw a game in Cameron where he was talking back to the coaching staff when he got yanked after a defensive breakdown. I don't think benching him would hurt anything but his feelings. He seems to respond pretty well after some "coaching".

When I think of head case, I think of Rasheed Wallace or McCants at UNC. There are others from other schools (including Duke), but I like picking on the baby blue!

[mapei]

Re: thrashing, bravado, etc. We got beat by 22(?) points and it really wasn't that close - it could easily have been 30. Or, we could have been on top of our game and lost by 10. Sometimes the other team's better. That doesn't happen often with Duke, but it did this week.

That doesn't mean we can't surprise people and win if there's a rematch down the line. In a single game, anything can happen. We're a good team with a great coach. If it were a seven-game series? You'd have to have a lot of extra cash to feel relaxed betting on us to take the series win.

Meanwhile, it always does seem kind of comical when fans of the team that lost by 20 do the woofing. Win first, than woof. Just MHO.

[oldnavy]

Re: thrashing, bravado, etc. We got beat by 22(?) points and it really wasn't that close - it could easily have been 30. Or, we could have been on top of our game and lost by 10. Sometimes the other team's better. That doesn't happen often with Duke, but it did this week.

That doesn't mean we can't surprise people and win if there's a rematch down the line. In a single game, anything can happen. We're a good team with a great coach. If it were a seven-game series? You'd have to have a lot of extra cash to feel relaxed betting on us to take the series win.

Meanwhile, it always does seem kind of comical when fans of the team that lost by 20 do the woofing. Win first, than woof. Just MHO.

I hadn't noticed any woofing. I have noticed a lot of folks, myself included thinking that this beating wasn't indicative of any major issues or flaws with this team, at least fatal flaws that cannot be fixed. Yes OSU was/is better than us, and right now I think in a seven game series we would lose, but I think (perhaps I hope) that by the end of the year it very well could be a different story. Only time will tell...