MBB: Duke vs VaTech Pre-Game & In-Game Thread

[davekay1971]

Yeah. It's not too early to wash the taste of the Maryland game out of our mouths by moving on to our next game.

We've got some time to prepare to take on the Hokies at Blacksburg. Virginia Tech is a team that has found ways to lose basketball games. But, even though they've lost, they've managed to put some scares into people. They went to Raleigh yesterday and lost a heartbreaker to the Wolfpack. They went to Chapel Hill February 2 and should have finished off the TarHeels before letting them off the hook. They are team that can beat you, but they haven't managed to close the deal this season.

What to worry about with VT?

1) Eric Green. 25+ ppg this season. We know him well, he knows us well. He's hard to stop. He drives well, finishes well, hits mid-range shots well, and shoots well from deep. He's the complete package as a scoring guard. It's just a long night guarding him.

2) That other guy who gets hot because he's so amped up to play Duke and goes off for his best night ever. We seem to run into those guys a lot. Marshall Wood had that game yesterday, so hopefully he got it out of his system. Jarrell Eddie can get hot and go on a streak from outside.

3) It's a road game, it will be packed, it's their Super Bowl, the usual...

What to take advantage of?
1) Lots. VT doesn't have a dominant rebounding game, inside game, defensive game. They don't have a great set-up player (Green averages just north of 4 apg, and he's their best scorer). They have trouble pounding the ball inside for scores. If Green can be contained, they're pretty much in deep trouble.

How to beat them?
1) Play Duke basketball. This is a team that we should have an advantage of at every position, with the exception of Green (and, if you consider our matchup there is Seth, you could call that a wash). If we play good defense, take care of the ball, and use good ball movement to get good looks for shooters, we should win. Should.

2) Mason. He had a bad game at Maryland. He should be ticked. He should want to absolutely dominate the next time he takes the court. He should be able to dominate VT's interior. Should.

3) Make Green have a looooong night. He's going to be running around, going off screens, dribble-driving, etc. Whoever is on him (I expect that will be a healthy mix of Tyler and Sheed) needs to stay in his face, and everyone else needs to look to help. If we can make Green inefficient, we have a big advantage everywhere else.

If this game was in Durham, you'd look at it as a good chance to get everything clicking after the Maryland game. It's in Blacksburg, so our guys are going to have to eat their Wheaties, put on their big girl panties, go in looking to establish dominance quickly, quiet the crowd, and win a game we should win to get rolling again.

[TruBlu]

OK, back to page 1 with this.

I haven't had the pleasure(?) of seeing a Va Tech game this year. Do they still employ Seth's Thug-Ball game plan? (Note to Seth: There is a reason your team had so many fouls before your team got off the bus.)

[Bob Green]

Do they still employ Seth's Thug-Ball game plan?

Yes! The VT - State game was way too physical. State shot 43 free throws. If the refs hold VT accountable, it will be okay.

[davekay1971]

Agreed with Bob. In the NCSU game, VT clearly looked to slow down State's offense and negate their talent advantage by roughing them up on defense. The refs did a pretty good job of holding VT accountable and State made a living at the free throw line...which they needed since their defense against VT was lousy at the other end. If the refs can get over their fear of being perceived as calling the game for Duke, our guys should get plenty of practice at the charity stripe. And, since Duke should be looking to get Mason going early, we can only hope Mason has one of his 10 of 12 games at the free throw line, not one of his 2 of 12 games!

The other question, when a team tries to disrupt your offensive flow the way VT does, is can guys make the open looks when they get them. I can only imagine how hard it is to nail the open 3 when you've spent all game getting bumped, clawed, and hacked and you finally get that one clean look without someone hanging onto you. Burying those, however, could be the difference between this game being tight vs it being a blowout.

[Reilly]

Having suffered through the 1995 season, and mindful of K's words over the years to not take things for granted -- and to celebrate successes along the way -- it can be fun to think about when we have clinched at least an NCAA at-large bid every year.

If win in Blacksburg on Thursday night, we'll move to 23-3 overall, and 10-3 in conference.

Even if we dropped our last five regular season games, and lost the first game in the ACCT, we'd be 23-9 overall, and have a 10-8 regular season conference record. With 9 overall losses, we'd at least be in the top 6 of the 12-team league in terms of fewest overall losses. Would that record (23-9, 10-8) be enough to get us in?

In the last ten years, here are the ACC teams with winning regular season conference records who did not get invited:

2012: Miami 9-7 (20-13)
2011: VT 9-7 (22-12); BC 9-7 (21-13)
2010: VT 10-6 (25-9)
2008: VT 9-7 (21-14)
2006: FSU 9-7 (20-10)

Maybe we've done enough already. We're 22-3, 9-3. If we lose out, we're 22-10, 9-9. Maybe just one more puts us pretty safely in the tourney. Just one more win, and we're assured of having single digit losses on selection Sunday. When VT was left out in 2010 with a winning conference record and single digit losses overall, they had the worst strength of schedule of anybody in the whole conference -- not a situation we'd be in.

[ChillinDuke]

Having suffered through the 1995 season, and mindful of K's words over the years to not take things for granted -- and to celebrate successes along the way -- it can be fun to think about when we have clinched at least an NCAA at-large bid every year.

If win in Blacksburg on Thursday night, we'll move to 23-3 overall, and 10-3 in conference.

Even if we dropped our last five regular season games, and lost the first game in the ACCT, we'd be 23-9 overall, and have a 10-8 regular season conference record. With 9 overall losses, we'd at least be in the top 6 of the 12-team league in terms of fewest overall losses. Would that record (23-9, 10-8) be enough to get us in?

In the last ten years, here are the ACC teams with winning regular season conference records who did not get invited:

2012: Miami 9-7 (20-13)
2011: VT 9-7 (22-12); BC 9-7 (21-13)
2010: VT 10-6 (25-9)
2008: VT 9-7 (21-14)
2006: FSU 9-7 (20-10)

Maybe we've done enough already. We're 22-3, 9-3. If we lose out, we're 22-10, 9-9. Maybe just one more puts us pretty safely in the tourney. Just one more win, and we're assured of having single digit losses on selection Sunday. When VT was left out in 2010 with a winning conference record and single digit losses overall, they had the worst strength of schedule of anybody in the whole conference -- not a situation we'd be in.

I'll take the bait.

I think we're in regardless.

Wins over UK, OSU, Minny, and UL may look less impressive (rankings-wise) than they did at the time, but it was hard for them to look any better. Those are still wins against at least 3 tournament teams (#10, #4, #6, and #3 seeds, respectively, according to Joe Lunardi as of 2/15). VCU is a #8, UNC is a #11, heck even Florida Gulf Coast is in his field.

Even if we lose out, I'm pretty sure we'd make it in. Squeak in - maybe, embarrassed - definitely. But I'm pretty sure we'd be in, unless all of the teams I listed above tank heading into the tournament also.

- Chillin

[UrinalCake]

This seems kind of silly to discuss, but when was the last time a team ended the season on a seven game losing streak and still made it in to the tournament? The closest I can think of is our 2006-2007 team that lost four straight, then won 4, then lost 3 heading into the NCAA's. But I think the recency bias would keep us out if we were to lose out from here.

[CDu]

Virginia Tech's two best players are pretty good. Green is a scoring machine: the nation's leading scorer, and very efficient at it too. He also does a little of everything for them, leading them in assists and steals. Eddie is a tall, versatile forward (starts at SF but can play PF too) who stretches the defense and can score off the dribble or with a jumper.

Aside from that, they aren't very good offensively. They have a big, physical, athletic big man (Raines), who has virtually no touch whatsoever. He can, however, bully his way to the basket for dunks. But if you force him to shoot it from more than 1 foot from the rim, it's likely to miss. Barksdale is similarly inept. Their backup PF (Wood - the guy with the flat top) is a skinny PF that thinks of himself as a 3pt shooter. And against State, that was accurate (he hit several big 3s). But for the season, he's only a 27% shooter. That's better than Brown, their SG who shoots 32% from the field and 22% from 3.

Defensively, they're physical. At home, that may work to their advantage. Raines played very well against Mason last year, and that was when Mason had his brother as backup. Raines could give Mason problems again with his size, strength, and athleticism. Brown will probably guard Curry (he is the guy that was assigned to chase Wood at State). He's aggressive and relentless, but he can be fooled into fouls if Curry is playing smart. Eddie will guard Sulaimon, and Green will guard Cook. They'll rotate Raines and Barksdale on Mason, and whoever is at PF (Barksdale, Wood, and Van Zegeren) will get the assignment on our PF.

So fortunately for us, they don't have a PF that should give our PFs trouble. Unfortunately for us, we don't have a PF that can take advantage of their primary weakness defensively.

I'd look for Curry to try to get Brown in foul trouble, and for Sulaimon to try to beat Eddie off the dribble. And of course, we'll see if Mason can get Raines in foul trouble. If Raines gets in trouble, the alternatives (Barksdale and Van Zegeren) are MUCH less effective.

[MCFinARL]

This seems kind of silly to discuss, but when was the last time a team ended the season on a seven game losing streak and still made it in to the tournament? The closest I can think of is our 2006-2007 team that lost four straight, then won 4, then lost 3 heading into the NCAA's. But I think the recency bias would keep us out if we were to lose out from here.

Agreed. Obviously the early wins against quality teams help with strength of schedule, but ten losses, seven of which were the last seven games, wouldn't look good to the selection committee. Pretty confident that won't happen, though.

[CDu]

Having suffered through the 1995 season, and mindful of K's words over the years to not take things for granted -- and to celebrate successes along the way -- it can be fun to think about when we have clinched at least an NCAA at-large bid every year.

If win in Blacksburg on Thursday night, we'll move to 23-3 overall, and 10-3 in conference.

Even if we dropped our last five regular season games, and lost the first game in the ACCT, we'd be 23-9 overall, and have a 10-8 regular season conference record. With 9 overall losses, we'd at least be in the top 6 of the 12-team league in terms of fewest overall losses. Would that record (23-9, 10-8) be enough to get us in?

In the last ten years, here are the ACC teams with winning regular season conference records who did not get invited:

2012: Miami 9-7 (20-13)
2011: VT 9-7 (22-12); BC 9-7 (21-13)
2010: VT 10-6 (25-9)
2008: VT 9-7 (21-14)
2006: FSU 9-7 (20-10)

Maybe we've done enough already. We're 22-3, 9-3. If we lose out, we're 22-10, 9-9. Maybe just one more puts us pretty safely in the tourney. Just one more win, and we're assured of having single digit losses on selection Sunday. When VT was left out in 2010 with a winning conference record and single digit losses overall, they had the worst strength of schedule of anybody in the whole conference -- not a situation we'd be in.

We'll win at home against VT and we'll beat BC at home. That alone would put us into the tournament, even if we lost all the others. Heck, I think we might (emphasis on might) get in even if we lost out from here. But we'd be sweating bullets. A 22-10 record (with 8 straight losses) would put us very much on the bubble. And 3 losses to bottom feeders (two at home) late in the season would look pretty bad. I'd put us at 50/50 at that point, as the recency bias would certainly work against us.

Of course, that's not going to happen. I assume we will win our two remaining home games against the bottom feeders. And that alone should put us in. We'd be 24-8 with lots of quality wins and only one bad loss (@Va Tech). That type of team would probably be a 5 or 6 seed, even with the late-season swoon.

And of course, I think we'll win more than just those two remaining home games. But as to the hypothetical, I'd say one more win gets us in. No more wins and we'd be a 50/50 proposition (just depending upon how much the committee weights our early-season success against our late-season catastrophe).

[CDu]

Agreed. Obviously the early wins against quality teams help with strength of schedule, but ten losses, seven of which were the last seven games, wouldn't look good to the selection committee. Pretty confident that won't happen, though.

It would actually be 8 straight losses (the last 7 regular season games plus the ACC tournament game).

[nchfries67]

Va Tech is going to get physical with us, so we need to get physical right back at them, with Green in particular. Rotate Sheed and Tyler on him all night and don't let anything come easy for him. Tyler has a great ability to frustrate his opponents. If we limit Green's scoring this should be a game we win easily. If we can't stop Green, there is a good chance this game will be tight the whole way. And hopefully Mason has a fire in his eyes and will refuse to be stopped. Haven't seen it out of him yet, but we also haven't seen him get beat like he did against Maryland. Hopefully that gets him going.

[Mhgraham]

This is a major statement game for us. We need to have a high level of intensity. Scoring will be there. The passion and fire needs to be exhibited from the tip. Maryland (with the home court) beat us on that aspect of the game. I expect the same thing at VT (being at home). We all know that every team wants to beat Duke, especially at home. It is marked on every team's schedule as the "Super Bowl". We are going to get everybody's BEST game. There should be no excuses by coming to play soft. By coming out with less fire, we are allowing the crowd to get into the game earlier than we want. This team continues to battle night in and night out without Kelly. I just want us to show a little more fire when we are playing away.

As for the game:

1. Contain Green. Because you are not going to stop him. Do it without picking up cheap fouls.
2. Plumlee should be pissed. Katz wrote "Maryland performance may have knocked him out of NPOY". Expect 22 and 12
3. More minutes for Murphy. I know he is still in the developmental stage, but he brings intensity and plays extremely hard.
4. Get Curry going early.
5. Lastly, play Duke Basketball. We gave up entirely too many FT's against Maryland. Less fouls, but keep the defensive pressure up to a high level.

Prediction: Duke 78, VT 69

[Kedsy]

And hopefully Mason has a fire in his eyes and will refuse to be stopped. Haven't seen it out of him yet...

Seriously? You haven't seen that out of him yet? What exactly would it look like?

Him getting 20 and 17 against a bruising Minnesota front line, or maybe 21 and 17 against Ohio State? How about 30 and 9 against NC State, or 32 and 9 against Wake? Or any of his fourteen double-doubles? I can't get over that Mason has one bad game and now he's not good any more.

[English]

We'll win at home against VT and we'll beat BC at home. That alone would put us into the tournament, even if we lost all the others. Heck, I think we might (emphasis on might) get in even if we lost out from here. But we'd be sweating bullets. A 22-10 record (with 8 straight losses) would put us very much on the bubble. And 3 losses to bottom feeders (two at home) late in the season would look pretty bad. I'd put us at 50/50 at that point, as the recency bias would certainly work against us.

Of course, that's not going to happen. I assume we will win our two remaining home games against the bottom feeders. And that alone should put us in. We'd be 24-8 with lots of quality wins and only one bad loss (@Va Tech). That type of team would probably be a 5 or 6 seed, even with the late-season swoon.

And of course, I think we'll win more than just those two remaining home games. But as to the hypothetical, I'd say one more win gets us in. No more wins and we'd be a 50/50 proposition (just depending upon how much the committee weights our early-season success against our late-season catastrophe).

Villanova in the '10-'11 season came down the stretch limping in a similar fashion--they lost 7 of their last 9 games (their two wins were at bottom-feeding Seton Hall and in OT at bottom-feeding Depaul). They lost in the first round of the Big East Tourney to a very middling South Florida team, and then got an 11-seed in the NCAAT before dropping the opener to 8-seeded Mason. I recall their situation being a 50-50 proposition on Selection Sunday. They had a handful of quality wins (beating at-the-time #25, #17, #3) but dropping some head scratchers during their collapse.

It's difficult for me to see Duke missing the NCAAT even if we did lose out...it's equally difficult for me to see Duke escaping the first weekend in that same scenario.

[mgtr]

If only we had Smilin' Ed McConnell here, he could say "Plunk your magic twanger, Froggie!" and Ryan would be OK and Seth's leg would hurt no more. Ah, for the good old days of radio -- miracles could happen - or at least seem to.

Younger posters -- don't even ask.

[Saratoga2]

I think the idea of covering Green with Rasheed and Tyler is the right move. They will make it harder on him but we can't expect him to be held way down. I was wondering whether Amile will have a role in this one. His length and rebounding might help us as much as Alex's hard work. Is VT big and physical or just physical?

[nchfries67]

Seriously? You haven't seen that out of him yet? What exactly would it look like?

Him getting 20 and 17 against a bruising Minnesota front line, or maybe 21 and 17 against Ohio State? How about 30 and 9 against NC State, or 32 and 9 against Wake? Or any of his fourteen double-doubles? I can't get over that Mason has one bad game and now he's not good any more.

I apologize if I made it seem like I was saying Mason wasn't good anymore. Mason is clearly one of the best players in the nation and has had plenty of great games against quality teams as you have just shown. I guess the fire I am talking about is kind that Tyler Thornton shows. I want to see Mason get angry. Then I want to see Mason use that anger to improve his play. Tyler is a great example of this. He gets angry and uses it to lock down on defense and get big stops for our team or hit a big shot. I can't say I've seen Mason get very angry, but that is just my opinion.

Once again, sorry if I made it seem that I think Mason is not a great player. I think Mason should be one of the favorites for NPOY and he is irreplaceable on this team. He had a bad game against Maryland and I fully expect him to put up the numbers that he has been all season. I just don't think he has shown much anger. Maybe he needs Patches O'Houlihan to throw a wrench at his family jewels.

[freshmanjs]

I apologize if I made it seem like I was saying Mason wasn't good anymore. Mason is clearly one of the best players in the nation and has had plenty of great games against quality teams as you have just shown. I guess the fire I am talking about is kind that Tyler Thornton shows. I want to see Mason get angry. Then I want to see Mason use that anger to improve his play. Tyler is a great example of this. He gets angry and uses it to lock down on defense and get big stops for our team or hit a big shot. I can't say I've seen Mason get very angry, but that is just my opinion.

Once again, sorry if I made it seem that I think Mason is not a great player. I think Mason should be one of the favorites for NPOY and he is irreplaceable on this team. He had a bad game against Maryland and I fully expect him to put up the numbers that he has been all season. I just don't think he has shown much anger. Maybe he needs Patches O'Houlihan to throw a wrench at his family jewels.

successful, winning basketball players have a range of personality types. contrast laettner, battier, scheyer, nolan, grant hill. I think the "get angry" type is probably in the minority among the leaders of our championship teams.

[tommy]

I apologize if I made it seem like I was saying Mason wasn't good anymore. Mason is clearly one of the best players in the nation and has had plenty of great games against quality teams as you have just shown. I guess the fire I am talking about is kind that Tyler Thornton shows. I want to see Mason get angry.

You're going to be waiting awhile. It's just not his personality, or the personality he displays outwardly. A guy can be supremely determined and completely committed without being angry. That emotion works for some guys, but not for others, and neither way is intrinsically better than the other, or more likely to lead to success.