Phase V (ish): Maryland through UNC (Sr Day)

[CDu]

Well, the weather kind of threw things off with the phases, but it's time to talk Phase V. Thanks to Tommy for an excellent Phase IV post and wrap-up. He's handed the baton off to me for Phase V. This phase includes Maryland through the last regular season game vs UNC. This previously spanned 6 games, but thanks to the weather this week it is now 7. So here goes:

1. Health: I mean, I'm tired of seeing this number one. Especially on a team this deep. I think it's silly. It made sense during the 2010 season because that team quite literally couldn't afford an injury to anybody on the team. This team has it a little easier. But, people will yell at me if I don't do it, so there you have it. Health: don't get hurt, Duke. Don't get hurt.

2. Continue the dominance: Since the UVa game, we've been a dominant type of team for the past 7 games. The average score from those games was 83-64, and that includes the 2-point loss at Syracuse. That's just awesome. We dismantled everyone else by at least 15 points. Heck, even in the UVa game, we were cruising to a 15+ point win before we slipped off the gas and UVa made a late surge. This stretch of basketball has been the type of basketball I think we were all expecting coming into the season. Can we continue it? Or do we have another gear? Even though we've been truly fantastic over the past 7 games, there have still been several stretches of less-than stellar play. Against BC, we led by only 4 at the half before running away with it in the second half. The defense during this stretch (again, with the exception of Syracuse) has been really good. But one of the keys to this dominance continuing will be...

4. Point guard play: In the past phase, we saw Cook regress a bit. Prior to the BC game, he was shooting just 30.3% (23.8% from 3pt range) in Phase IV. And he was averaging just 3 assists per game. The BC game was a really nice bounceback game from a shooting/scoring standpoint, but the assists were still down. Can he return to early-season form? We've got some tough games in this stretch, so it'd be nice if he did. On the other hand, Sulaimon has stepped up substantially in the playmaker role. In the last four games, he's average 5.3 assists to just 1.3 turnovers (over 4:1!), all while still averaging 12 ppg. So it appears that we have two PG at this point. The question is, can/will both thrive? Or will Cook revert to being "just" a spot-up shooter as Sulaimon commands more of the playmaking duties? If both can play aggressively, we suddenly have a potentially devastating combo at PG, each capable of hitting 3s, driving to the rim, or dishing off the drive. It will be interesting to see how the two work together on the floor during this phase.

5. Return of Superman? In the last four games, Parker has averaged 23 ppg and 11 rpg while shooting over 50% from the field. A big part of that has been due to returning to an aggressive style rather than settling for long jumpers. Aside from the Pitt game, he's attempted just 1 3pt shot in each game of the last phase. His performance has returned to the awesomeness that we all hoped for but had missed during his well-documented early-ACC season slump. Let's hope he's back for good. Obviously he's not a machine, so he'll have some off-games to come. But if he can be more like he was in Phase IV and less like he was in Phase III, that's a good thing.

6. Rebounding, rebounding, rebounding: Don't look now, but we've now outrebounded 5 of our last 7 opponents. In 3 of those games, we've outrebounded our opponent by 14 or more. And when we've been outrebounded, it has been somewhat close (down 5 in each). Parker has averaged 11.4 rpg over that stretch. Jefferson has averaged 6.9 rpg (7.9 over the last 8). Hood has averaged 5 rpg over his last 6 games. Plumlee has added 14 rebounds in limited minutes over the past 4 games. We're suddenly a fairly decent if not good rebounding team. Can it continue?

7. Plumlee's knee? Plumlee hurt himself and did not play against BC. Will that continue to be an issue? Will it set him back and relegate him to spot minutes again? I think our ceiling as a team is reached if he's giving us 12-15 quality mpg backing up Jefferson. If those 12-15 mpg go to Hairston, I think that's a step down for us. Let's hope Plumlee bounces back in this phase.

8. Rotation: Well, we've seen some pretty interesting stuff over the last two phases. Late in Phase III, we saw the "line change" approach. In Phase IV, we've seen continued depth but straying back closer to the old Coach K style. What will we see moving forward? Are we going to go back to a 7+ rotation, or will guys like Plumlee and Jones continue to see meaningful minutes?

9. Preview of NCAA tourney week 2: The one thing the weather this week has created is an interesting "sneak-peak" of what a second-weekend of the tourney might look like. We'll face UNC on Thursday (on the road) and we'll host Syracuse on Saturday. That two-day turnaround and the quality of the opponents is very likely what we might see in a Sweet-16 /Elite-8 weekend. Let's hope it goes well.

10. Staying in the top 4 of the ACC: Given Syracuse's record and UVa's schedule, I think winning the ACC regular season title is a distant memory. In fact, I'd say finishing 2nd is highly unlikely. But we're in good position to stay in the top 4, which is pretty important come ACC tourney time. Avoiding the #5 spot will mean two things: one less tourney game required, and one less game against an NCAA tourney-quality opponent. I'd actually take it a step further. If we can stay in the top 3, we'll likely avoid even a bubble team until the ACC semifinals. That would be great.

So there you have it. Let's go devils!

[Kedsy]

Thanks, CDu, you've given us some good gristle to chew on.

1. Health: I mean, I'm tired of seeing this number one. Especially on a team this deep. I think it's silly. It made sense during the 2010 season because that team quite literally couldn't afford an injury to anybody on the team. This team has it a little easier. But, people will yell at me if I don't do it, so there you have it. Health: don't get hurt, Duke. Don't get hurt.

Next thing you'll tell us you don't believe in rally caps, either.

Seriously, though, Duke has had a major injury to a starter in each of 2011, 2012, and 2013. The Duke women have had one or more such injuries in 2012, 2013, and 2014. In the past month, Quinn Cook's been hobbled by an ankle sprain and Marshall Plumlee missed a game with a knee injury. On the national scale, within the last two weeks the (then) #1 team lost one of its best players for the season. Over the years, major injuries have influenced the outcome of many an NCAA Tournament. Injuries are game-changing in sports, especially in college basketball.

So, to me, health is the paramount question of any phase.

4. Point guard play: In the past phase, we saw Cook regress a bit. Prior to the BC game, he was shooting just 30.3% (23.8% from 3pt range) in Phase IV. And he was averaging just 3 assists per game. The BC game was a really nice bounceback game from a shooting/scoring standpoint, but the assists were still down. Can he return to early-season form? We've got some tough games in this stretch, so it'd be nice if he did. On the other hand, Sulaimon has stepped up substantially in the playmaker role. In the last four games, he's average 5.3 assists to just 1.3 turnovers (over 4:1!), all while still averaging 12 ppg. So it appears that we have two PG at this point. The question is, can/will both thrive? Or will Cook revert to being "just" a spot-up shooter as Sulaimon commands more of the playmaking duties? If both can play aggressively, we suddenly have a potentially devastating combo at PG, each capable of hitting 3s, driving to the rim, or dishing off the drive. It will be interesting to see how the two work together on the floor during this phase.

To me, this is the most interesting question of the new phase, especially after Quinn played just 14 minutes against Maryland. I think the offense runs much, much better with Quinn as the primary ball handler than it does with Rasheed.

6. Rebounding, rebounding, rebounding: Don't look now, but we've now outrebounded 5 of our last 7 opponents. In 3 of those games, we've outrebounded our opponent by 14 or more. And when we've been outrebounded, it has been somewhat close (down 5 in each). Parker has averaged 11.4 rpg over that stretch. Jefferson has averaged 6.9 rpg (7.9 over the last 8). Hood has averaged 5 rpg over his last 6 games. Plumlee has added 14 rebounds in limited minutes over the past 4 games. We're [b]suddenly[b] a fairly decent if not good rebounding team. Can it continue?

Actually, our defensive rebounding has been pretty good all season. Oddly, despite the common perception, it's been falling off over the past several games.

Conversely, our offensive rebounding was pretty poor for the first 15 or so games and has gotten very good lately. Hopefully that will continue.

[NSDukeFan]

Nice post and good topics. I wonder too about the point guard / ball-handler play. It seems to me part of Rasheed's struggles early on were that he had trouble adjusting to not being one of the primary ball-handlers. We all want to see Quinn playing at his best (though we can debate whether we would prefer Quinn or Rasheed, or Tyus for the very impatient, to be the primary ball-handler), but when Quinn is back to being at his best, which I am very hopeful for, what is Rasheed's role? Jabari and Rodney also need to have the ball a fair bit and it's certainly not a bad thing when Amile has the ball at the high post.

Since you mentioned the dominance of the previous phase and Duke wasn't dominant in their first game of this phase, if the next couple of games don't go well, can we get a do-over and get Tommy to post the phase post?

[CDu]

Nice post and good topics. I wonder too about the point guard / ball-handler play. It seems to me part of Rasheed's struggles early on were that he had trouble adjusting to not being one of the primary ball-handlers. We all want to see Quinn playing at his best (though we can debate whether we would prefer Quinn or Rasheed, or Tyus for the very impatient, to be the primary ball-handler), but when Quinn is back to being at his best, which I am very hopeful for, what is Rasheed's role? Jabari and Rodney also need to have the ball a fair bit and it's certainly not a bad thing when Amile has the ball at the high post.

Since you mentioned the dominance of the previous phase and Duke wasn't dominant in their first game of this phase, if the next couple of games don't go well, can we get a do-over and get Tommy to post the phase post?

Yeah, the one thing I'd do over with the post would be to change the "dominance" topic to be more of a "can we start to bring it all together?" question. Also, in my editing haste, I missed point #3 anyway. So I'll take the liberty to correct it now:

3. Can Duke start to bring it all together? We've now seen some terrific highs and some rough lows this season. We've seen several players (Sulaimon, Cook, and Parker most notably) reach some peaks and some valleys. Well, we're just a few weeks away from tourney time, so now is the time to start bringing it all together. Is it possible for Sulaimon, Cook, Parker, Hood, and Dawkins to start firing on all cylinders at the same time? We have lots of weapons, but it seems like they're rarely "on" in concert. It would be fantastic to see some signs of everyone on their "A" game as we approach March. Heck, I'll be fine if they continue to trade off hero duty from game to game, but it would be reassuring to see a monster game sometime in this phase as kind of a harbinger of things that could come in the NCAA tourney. At our best, we might be able to blow the doors off of anyone offensively. But I don't think we've actually seen us at (perhaps even near) our best offensively, which is scary. I'd like to get a glimpse of it in the near future.

[CDu]

Well, so far (we're over halfway through this 7-game phase), we're seeing some answers:

1. Health has not been a problem so far.

2. Our stretch of dominance has wavered. No surprise there as we've only played one team against whom we might have anticipated dominating (Maryland at home). Let's see what happens over the next 2 games leading up to the UNC home game.

3. We haven't had that game where everyone is clicking. Hopefully it is still in store down the stretch. And hopefully it comes against UNC and/or in the next few phases.

4. Point guard play has been a bit of an issue. Cook hasn't quite found his game as a playmaker with any sort of consistency. Sulaimon has looked good at times and shaky at others. That's going to continue to be something to watch down the stretch.

5. Parker has emphatically re-emerged. He's averaged 18.75 ppg and 10.75 rpg in this phase while shooting 50% from the field and going to the line at least 6 times in each game. That aggressiveness to the rim is what we've been looking for. He needs to continue to do that and not fall back in love with the long jumpers.

6. Well, so much for the rebounding dominance, as we have been outrebounded in all 4 of our games so far in this phase. The rebound differential wound up close in the Cuse game, but we were blown away on the glass by UNC (a big part of our loss along with our terrible shooting). We need to keep it close on the glass if we're going to realistically make it deep in the tourney. So hopefully the next topic will help us in that regard...

7. Plumlee has emphatically answered any questions about his knee. He has put up back to back strong efforts and has been rewarded with the most playing time over a two-game stretch in his career. He's in the right spots defensively (hedging and recovering REALLY well), he's getting rebounds, and he's even functional on offense. I'd say he's been our best C over the past two games. If he keeps this up, I think he's a 15-20 mpg type guy. But at the very least he seems ready to be a regular rotation member moving forward. Which brings us to...

8. The rotation. There was a brief return of the line change early in this phase. So some folks were excited. However, over the last two games, we've gotten a glimpse of what is likely to come once we reach the tourneys. Coach K has reverted to the 7.5 man rotation, with Jones getting basically squeezed out (joining Hairston and Ojeleye) and Dawkins getting spot minutes. I suspect that Coach K is simply willing to use Dawkins as a "heat check" player. If Dawkins comes in and hits some 3s, he will get more run. If he comes in and doesn't give us a quick spark, he'll play 5-10 mpg. I think Coach K is more than willing to go to battle with a quartet of Cook, Sulaimon, Thornton, and Hood as our 3-man perimeter rotation if Dawkins isn't bombing home 3s. I think we've established our top-7, and Dawkins can make it 8 if he starts hitting shots again.

9. Well, our week 2 of the NCAA tourney preview ended with mixed reviews. We lost a close one to UNC in a Sweet-16 type game, but we returned with a win over Syracuse in an elite-8 type game. I'll take that as a promising sign regarding our team's chances of making it to the Final Four. We've now clearly proven we're capable of beating a 1- or 2-seed with our close games against Kansas and Syracuse. We're probably going to be a 2- or 3-seed in the tourney unless we win out and claim another ACC title. So a win over a 1- and/or 2-seed may wind up necessary come the second weekend of the tourney.

10. We're technically still in 3rd in the ACC by virtue of having played one more ACC game than UNC. If UNC beats State and VT like they should this week, we'll be in 4th. But thankfully, we have a virtual two-game lead over Pitt (thanks to our win at Pitt). So unless something really unexpected happens against VT or at Wake, we'll be the #4 seed at worst. It's going to come down to the UNC game to decide whether we get the #3 seed.

[superdave]

6. Well, so much for the rebounding dominance, as we have been outrebounded in all 4 of our games so far in this phase. The rebound differential wound up close in the Cuse game, but we were blown away on the glass by UNC (a big part of our loss along with our terrible shooting). We need to keep it close on the glass if we're going to realistically make it deep in the tourney. So hopefully the next topic will help us in that regard...

7. Plumlee has emphatically answered any questions about his knee. He has put up back to back strong efforts and has been rewarded with the most playing time over a two-game stretch in his career. He's in the right spots defensively (hedging and recovering REALLY well), he's getting rebounds, and he's even functional on offense. I'd say he's been our best C over the past two games. If he keeps this up, I think he's a 15-20 mpg type guy. But at the very least he seems ready to be a regular rotation member moving forward. Which brings us to...

The rebounding thing is a concern. We gave up multiple offensive rebounds on a single possession a few times this week. Our opponents were playing volleyball against us. Our big guys have to be very careful when drawn out of the paint. We need our wings to rotate down in those instances and help clog things up and get a body on people.

The good news is Marshall is a viable option when Amile and Jabari are out. The other good news is Jabari had a monster rebound in the lane, in traffic at the end of the Cuse game. It was a big rebound, a big stop and he's clutch.

[vick]

Well, so far (we're over halfway through this 7-game phase), we're seeing some answers:

1. Health has not been a problem so far.

2. Our stretch of dominance has wavered. No surprise there as we've only played one team against whom we might have anticipated dominating (Maryland at home). Let's see what happens over the next 2 games leading up to the UNC home game.

3. We haven't had that game where everyone is clicking. Hopefully it is still in store down the stretch. And hopefully it comes against UNC and/or in the next few phases.

4. Point guard play has been a bit of an issue. Cook hasn't quite found his game as a playmaker with any sort of consistency. Sulaimon has looked good at times and shaky at others. That's going to continue to be something to watch down the stretch.

5. Parker has emphatically re-emerged. He's averaged 18.75 ppg and 10.75 rpg in this phase while shooting 50% from the field and going to the line at least 6 times in each game. That aggressiveness to the rim is what we've been looking for. He needs to continue to do that and not fall back in love with the long jumpers.

6. Well, so much for the rebounding dominance, as we have been outrebounded in all 4 of our games so far in this phase. The rebound differential wound up close in the Cuse game, but we were blown away on the glass by UNC (a big part of our loss along with our terrible shooting). We need to keep it close on the glass if we're going to realistically make it deep in the tourney. So hopefully the next topic will help us in that regard...

7. Plumlee has emphatically answered any questions about his knee. He has put up back to back strong efforts and has been rewarded with the most playing time over a two-game stretch in his career. He's in the right spots defensively (hedging and recovering REALLY well), he's getting rebounds, and he's even functional on offense. I'd say he's been our best C over the past two games. If he keeps this up, I think he's a 15-20 mpg type guy. But at the very least he seems ready to be a regular rotation member moving forward. Which brings us to...

8. The rotation. There was a brief return of the line change early in this phase. So some folks were excited. However, over the last two games, we've gotten a glimpse of what is likely to come once we reach the tourneys. Coach K has reverted to the 7.5 man rotation, with Jones getting basically squeezed out (joining Hairston and Ojeleye) and Dawkins getting spot minutes. I suspect that Coach K is simply willing to use Dawkins as a "heat check" player. If Dawkins comes in and hits some 3s, he will get more run. If he comes in and doesn't give us a quick spark, he'll play 5-10 mpg. I think Coach K is more than willing to go to battle with a quartet of Cook, Sulaimon, Thornton, and Hood as our 3-man perimeter rotation if Dawkins isn't bombing home 3s. I think we've established our top-7, and Dawkins can make it 8 if he starts hitting shots again.

9. Well, our week 2 of the NCAA tourney preview ended with mixed reviews. We lost a close one to UNC in a Sweet-16 type game, but we returned with a win over Syracuse in an elite-8 type game. I'll take that as a promising sign regarding our team's chances of making it to the Final Four. We've now clearly proven we're capable of beating a 1- or 2-seed with our close games against Kansas and Syracuse. We're probably going to be a 2- or 3-seed in the tourney unless we win out and claim another ACC title. So a win over a 1- and/or 2-seed may wind up necessary come the second weekend of the tourney.

10. We're technically still in 3rd in the ACC by virtue of having played one more ACC game than UNC. If UNC beats State and VT like they should this week, we'll be in 4th. But thankfully, we have a virtual two-game lead over Pitt (thanks to our win at Pitt). So unless something really unexpected happens against VT or at Wake, we'll be the #4 seed at worst. It's going to come down to the UNC game to decide whether we get the #3 seed.

I agree with most of your post, but I don't think we should ink in a win for UNC against State just yet. Pomeroy has it a 4 point spread, Sagarin predictor 5, Massey 4. So they'll be favored, but not hugely.

[arnie]

I agree with most of your post, but I don't think we should ink in a win for UNC against State just yet. Pomeroy has it a 4 point spread, Sagarin predictor 5, Massey 4. So they'll be favored, but not hugely.

Wish you were right; but Sagarin, Pomeroy, Massey don't factor in the Woe is Me problem with the Pack. Roy has their number and I think it takes a miracle for Heels to lose this one. We'll need to take care of business at Cameron in 2 weeks.

[CDu]

I agree with most of your post, but I don't think we should ink in a win for UNC against State just yet. Pomeroy has it a 4 point spread, Sagarin predictor 5, Massey 4. So they'll be favored, but not hugely.

UNC is favored by the various systems. Those systems are based on the full season's worth of work. UNC has been playing much better lately. I expect them to win that game. I will not be surprised if they win it quite comfortably.

Regardless, even if UNC loses that game, they have two games they should easily win (@VT and vs ND). So the Duke/UNC rematch will almost certainly decide the #3/#4 seeds. I can't see either team losing 2 games before we play again, so it is going to come down to that game.

[jv001]

Good Phase V(ish), Cdu. I agree about our lack of rebounding in this phase. Amile did not rebound like he did in the other phases and that came from playing against big front lines and a Cuse team that's a good offensive rebounding team. The one silver lining is the development of Marshall. Like you mentioned, he seems to be recovered from his past injuries(ankle & knee). I look for Coach K to use him more and I see no reason for him to regress. He played well against two good front lines(unc & Cuse). My main concern is the point guard play of Quinn and Rasheed. They have been inconsistent on offense but both are playing very good defense. So if I'd have my druthers, I'll take the good defense. GoDuke!

[nocilla]

Regardless, even if UNC loses that game, they have two games they should easily win (@VT and vs ND). So the Duke/UNC rematch will almost certainly decide the #3/#4 seeds. I can't see either team losing 2 games before we play again, so it is going to come down to that game.

It appears that the winner of the Duke/UNC game will get the #3 seed with most likely Syracuse as the #2. While the loser will be the #4 seed with #1 UVA. I certainly want to beat UNC regardless of tournament seedings, but would we rather potentially face Syracuse or UVA in the semi-finals?

[Kedsy]

The rebounding thing is a concern. We gave up multiple offensive rebounds on a single possession a few times this week. Our opponents were playing volleyball against us. Our big guys have to be very careful when drawn out of the paint. We need our wings to rotate down in those instances and help clog things up and get a body on people.

The good news is Marshall is a viable option when Amile and Jabari are out. The other good news is Jabari had a monster rebound in the lane, in traffic at the end of the Cuse game. It was a big rebound, a big stop and he's clutch.

I agree Marshall has looked great in the past three games. And his presence seems to make our offensive rebounding worlds better. But coincidence or not, on the defensive end our team has rebounded a lot worse in games in which Marshall has played 10 or more minutes.

Marshall has played 10+ minutes in 9 games (including Eastern Michigan and Elon). In those 9 games, here are aggregate rebounding percentages:

OR%: 39.0%
DR%: 66.4%

In the other 19 games, here are our aggregate rebounding percentages:

OR%: 30.5%
DR%: 69.7%

So, in games where Marshall has played a big role, our offensive rebounding is almost at 2010 levels (that team collected 40.6% of available offensive rebounds), and when Marshall hasn't played so much our OR% would be the 2nd worst offensive rebounding performance in Coach K's tenure.

But on the defensive side, in games when Marshall has played fewer than 10 minutes our DR% would be the best in Coach K's time here, while in the games Marshall has played a lot our DR% would rank around 280th in the country.

I understand Marshall appears to box out well and, sure, nine games isn't the biggest sample in the world, and those nine games include three games against outstanding offensive rebounding teams (UNC, Syracuse). But the Marshall sample also includes Eastern Michigan and Elon. I also know CDu and others have told me I'm crazy to think we're a worse defensive rebounding team with Marshall than without him, but at least right now I still think it's true.

He's been advancing so rapidly recently that maybe he'll get better in this area as well. I hope so. I noticed he pulled down a couple monster defensive boards against Syracuse the other day. My point is just if your worry is that opponents are playing volleyball against us, Marshall may not be quite the good news that his 7 foot frame would suggest.

[CDu]

I agree Marshall has looked great in the past three games. And his presence seems to make our offensive rebounding worlds better. But coincidence or not, on the defensive end our team has rebounded a lot worse in games in which Marshall has played 10 or more minutes.

Marshall has played 10+ minutes in 9 games (including Eastern Michigan and Elon). In those 9 games, here are aggregate rebounding percentages:

OR%: 39.0%
DR%: 66.4%

In the other 19 games, here are our aggregate rebounding percentages:

OR%: 30.5%
DR%: 69.7%

So, in games where Marshall has played a big role, our offensive rebounding is almost at 2010 levels (that team collected 40.6% of available offensive rebounds), and when Marshall hasn't played so much our OR% would be the 2nd worst offensive rebounding performance in Coach K's tenure.

But on the defensive side, in games when Marshall has played fewer than 10 minutes our DR% would be the best in Coach K's time here, while in the games Marshall has played a lot our DR% would rank around 280th in the country.

I understand Marshall appears to box out well and, sure, nine games isn't the biggest sample in the world, and those nine games include three games against outstanding offensive rebounding teams (UNC, Syracuse). But the Marshall sample also includes Eastern Michigan and Elon. I also know CDu and others have told me I'm crazy to think we're a worse defensive rebounding team with Marshall than without him, but at least right now I still think it's true.

He's been advancing so rapidly recently that maybe he'll get better in this area as well. I hope so. I noticed he pulled down a couple monster defensive boards against Syracuse the other day. My point is just if your worry is that opponents are playing volleyball against us, Marshall may not be quite the good news that his 7 foot frame would suggest.

Your data provide incomplete information. Specifically, you are ignoring the opponents faced in those two samples of games. They are not equivalent samples. Plumlee didn't play a 10-minute game until we faced Eastern Michigan. That means he didn't play big minutes against most of the patsies on our schedule. That inflates the numbers, as he did not play big minutes against Vermont, UNC-A, FIU, Davidson, or Gardner-Webb.

Conversely, let's look at the games in which he DID play 10 minutes per game or more: EMU, Elon, UVa, State, FSU, @Pitt, @Syracuse, @UNC, vs Syracuse. That's 3 games against arguably the best offensive rebounding teams we've faced all season (Syracuse and UNC). When 1/3 of the sample is against the toughest teams we've faced, that's going to skew the results, don't you think? In the other six games (which include some typically good rebounding teams in FSU and Pitt), we won the rebounding battle in all but the UVa game. And we absolutely killed FSU on the glass.

So when you take into account what makes up those two samples, I don't think a direct comparison is fair. It just isn't an apples-to-apples comparison.

Also, you've completely misstated the bolded argument above. You made an off-hand comment that you thought that a team with Cook/Thornton/Sulaimon/Dawkins in place of Plumlee could be a better rebounding team than with Plumlee. That's what I said was crazy. I make no argument that we're a better rebounding team with Plumlee than with Jefferson. Although over the past two games (small sample size caveat), that argument would be correct.

[COYS]

Other posters have already mentioned this, but for me it's still the most important thing going forward. The team has gone through so many different phases this year. We had the early season success on offense with Jabari and Rodney hitting every jump shot they took while the team as a whole played poor defense. We had the games after the death of K's brother when Jabari slumped and the team continued to play poor defense. Then, after the win against UVA, we went on a stretch where we beat the crap out of a few teams, including pulling away against Pitt on the road and trouncing Miami @ Miami, played amazingly but lost @ Syracuse. Jabari slowly got his legs back during this stretch. The defense started out really good during that stretch, but slumped a bit by the end of it. Since then, we've entered a new phase where the defense has actually been pretty dang good. We played good D on Maryland, great D @GaTech, and good D against 'Cuse. Even in the loss @UNC the defense was pretty solid. Unfortunately, the offense has slumped during this stretch.

All along we've also seen individual players go through ups and downs. Rasheed, of course, started the year on the bench, even logged a DNP-CD, but has bounced back to become a key player. Marshall had trouble beating out Josh for minutes. Now Marshall seems to have emerged as a key bench contributor while Josh's minutes have been scant. Jabari was and unstoppable offensive force at the start of the year, logged a few single digit games, then a few inefficient double digit games. Recently, however, he's remade his game as an inside-out player (rather than an outside-in threat) and has regained some of that efficiency. Rodney has gone through a few off games. Andre looked to establish himself as a double digit scorer for a while, but has been very quiet of late. Quinn was leading the most efficient offense in the land before he suffered an ankle injury, went into a slump, and has yet to look quite as good since. Amile was a force on the boards, but has battled foul trouble and had a few sub par (by his standards of consistency) games.

What I would love to see during the rest of this phase is for the defense to continue to play well, and for the offense to reemerge. Basically, I hope the team can start to put it all together, individually and collectively. We've proven that we can be the best offensive force in the land (and, possibly, the best offensive force of the past ten years). We've proven that we are capable of playing good defense. Meanwhile, Jabari, Rodney, Andre, Quinn, Amile, Rasheed, and Marshall have all shown that they can fill their roles at an elite level at times. However, at no point thus far have all of those guys played at a high level at the same time. If they, along with Tyler, can all play defense well while also playing consistently in offense, the team really has the look of a Final Four squad.

To be quite honest, with better free throw shooting and a few more made threes from Andre, Rodney and Quinn, the win against 'Cuse might have been proof that we can put both dominant offense and good defense together against a really good team (and as Kedsy has noted, our performance against Syracuse on offense ranks as a top 3 performance against Syracuse this year with our first game performance being number 1). Despite the recent dip in form on offense, I think we might be closer to having a great team than we think, despite the close win against Maryland and the loss to UNC. I hope the team proves me right over the final regular season match-ups.

[Kedsy]

Specifically, you are ignoring the opponents faced in those two samples of games. They are not equivalent samples. Plumlee didn't play a 10-minute game until we faced Eastern Michigan. That means he didn't play big minutes against most of the patsies on our schedule. That inflates the numbers, as he did not play big minutes against Vermont, UNC-A, FIU, Davidson, or Gardner-Webb.

Actually, I didn't ignore it at all. I explicitly mentioned that 3 of the 9 games were against UNC and Syracuse.

That said, UNCA is ranked #60 in the country in offensive rebounding percentage, so they're not exactly a "patsy" in that area, and FIU has the same offensive rebounding percentage as NC State (a team on Marshall's list). But even counting all your patsies as patsies, they represent 26% of the teams on the "not Marshall" list and 22% of the teams on the Marshall list. Doesn't sound so different to me. And the non-Marshall list includes several games against very strong offensive rebounding teams like Arizona and Kansas. So while there might be a slight skew, it's not nearly as bad as you state.

Also, we "absolutely killed" FSU on the offensive glass (we got an amazing 61.4% of available offensive rebounds). Our defensive rebounding percentage in that game was 74%, which is really good, but I wouldn't put in absolute kill territory.

Also, you've completely misstated the bolded argument above. You made an off-hand comment that you thought that a team with Cook/Thornton/Sulaimon/Dawkins in place of Plumlee could be a better rebounding team than with Plumlee. That's what I said was crazy. I make no argument that we're a better rebounding team with Plumlee than with Jefferson. Although over the past two games (small sample size caveat), that argument would be correct.

I said putting Marshall in a lineup with Amile and Jabari (and thus moving Jabari to the wing, away from the basket) would possibly rebound worse on the defensive end. It may be crazy but I still think it's true.

Also, Amile had a poor rebounding game against UNC. Against Syracuse, his DR% (19.5%) was better than Marshall's (16.1%). And, yeah, "small sample size caveat" is a bit of an understatement here.

[CDu]

Actually, I didn't ignore it at all. I explicitly mentioned that 3 of the 9 games were against UNC and Syracuse.

Your data ignored it, and you made your argument off of that data. Which was my point.

That said, UNCA is ranked #60 in the country in offensive rebounding percentage, so they're not exactly a "patsy" in that area, and FIU has the same offensive rebounding percentage as NC State (a team on Marshall's list). But even counting all your patsies as patsies, they represent 26% of the teams on the "not Marshall" list and 22% of the teams on the Marshall list. Doesn't sound so different to me.

UNC-A and FIU have played much inferior (and almost certainly smaller) competition than the ACC. As such, their rebound percentages are inflated relative to teams that play bigger and better opponents. So, yes, UNC-A and FIU are much more in the "patsy" category than State.

And the non-Marshall list includes several games against very strong offensive rebounding teams like Arizona and Kansas. So while there might be a slight skew, it's not nearly as bad as you state.

So we played 2 really strong rebounding teams in the 19 games (~10%) that Plumlee didn't play 10 minutes. We played 3 really strong rebounding teams in the 9 games (33%) that Plumlee did play 10+ minutes. And you don't think that skews things substantially?

Also, we "absolutely killed" FSU on the offensive glass (we got an amazing 61.4% of available offensive rebounds). Our defensive rebounding percentage in that game was 74%, which is really good, but I wouldn't put in absolute kill territory.

And 74% is far better than our season average (with or without Plumlee), is it not?

I said putting Marshall in a lineup with Amile and Jabari (and thus moving Jabari to the wing, away from the basket) would possibly rebound worse on the defensive end. It may be crazy but I still think it's true.

Right. So you essentially said that a lineup with one of Cook/Sulaimon/Thornton/Dawkins/Jones in the game in place of Plumlee would possibly be a worse rebounding team (since the entire debate was defensive rebounding, I left that out as a given that we were talking defensive rebounding). I can't possibly imagine why you would think that we'd suddenly be a worse rebounding team with, say, Jones on the floor in place of Plumlee.

The argument that "Parker would be stuck on the perimeter" doesn't really hold water to me. You do realize how many times we have 3 guys around the basket when it comes time for defensive rebounds, right? Wouldn't you rather that third guy be Plumlee rather than Jones?

There are a lot of reasons why I don't think a Plumlee/Jefferson/Parker trio on the floor would work. Defensive rebounds just isn't one of them. And quoting individual rebound percentages just doesn't seem like the way to do that.

Also, Amile had a poor rebounding game against UNC. Against Syracuse, his DR% (19.5%) was better than Marshall's (16.1%). And, yeah, "small sample size caveat" is a bit of an understatement here.

I said "over the past two games," not "in each of the past two games." And as I said, I'm not making that argument in general. I was just noting the 2-game sample.

[Kedsy]

So, yes, UNC-A and FIU are much more in the "patsy" category than State.

OK, like I said, if you count them as patsies the "patsy percentage" is 26% with "less Marshall" and 22% with "more Marshall." Essentially no difference.

So we played 2 really strong rebounding teams in the 19 games (~10%) that Plumlee didn't play 10 minutes. We played 3 really strong rebounding teams in the 9 games (33%) that Plumlee did play 10+ minutes. And you don't think that skews things substantially?

Honestly, I'm not good enough with statistics to do a full regression on how much it skews things. My guess is it doesn't skew it nearly enough to account for the difference between 69.7% over 19 games against 66.4% over 9 games. But that's just a guess, I really don't know. If you're better with statistics than I am and can provide more than a guess, please do.

And 74% is far better than our season average (with or without Plumlee), is it not?

Like I said, it's really good. But you said we "absolutely killed" FSU on the boards. If FSU had gotten just two more offensive rebounds in the game, our DR% would have been below our season average. That's not a kill to me.

Right. So you essentially said that a lineup with one of Cook/Sulaimon/Thornton/Dawkins/Jones in the game in place of Plumlee would possibly be a worse rebounding team (since the entire debate was defensive rebounding, I left that out as a given that we were talking defensive rebounding). I can't possibly imagine why you would think that we'd suddenly be a worse rebounding team with, say, Jones on the floor in place of Plumlee.

The argument that "Parker would be stuck on the perimeter" doesn't really hold water to me. You do realize how many times we have 3 guys around the basket when it comes time for defensive rebounds, right? Wouldn't you rather that third guy be Plumlee rather than Jones?

I don't know. That's why I said "might." I do know that Marshall only grabs 13.6% of available defensive rebounds while Andre grabs 10.6% and Matt grabs 8.8%. I realize rebounding is a team thing so individual rebounding percentages is not definitive, but it seems to me the 3% (or 5%) that Marshall outrebounds our taller guards (which I believe is just 1 or 2 rebounds in a game) could easily be overshadowed by the decreased rebounding opportunities for Jabari if he's guarding someone at the three-point line.

[Saratoga2]

Thanks for keeping this thread open. My ideas of important aspect going to the end of this phase are as follows:

1.) The emergence of Marshall in this phase has given us something we just didn't have before. A big who could match up with opponent centers. Amile is a good player, but is not strong enough to keep big bodies from forcing their way inside. When he tried, he picked up fouls forcing Jabari to provide defense inside. Marshall sets screens, get offensive rebounds, handles the ball fairly well and can get dunks if our guards would put him in the plan. Rasheed has been the only one to date to do that and it worked. Marshall has also shown himself to disrupt opponent offenses. He hedges, he is hard to shoot over, can block and boxes out well on rebounds. I think he could to be even more effective if he provided help defense going for blocks and was more aggressive going for defensive rebounds.

2.) Jabari has improved his game in this phase and as others indicate, he is looking to score inside but is also getting more open looks outside. The variety in his game is very difficult for others to stop. His rebounding is excellent and his defense improving. With Rodney, they have improved as a one two punch that opponents can't seem to stop.

3.) Rodney has also found that he can score well against the zone by getting to the top of the key and using shot fakes, and/or his size to get effective shots off. His defense has also been improving. Solving the opponents zone defense has been a big development for the team in this phase. The 1-3-1 zone still gives us fits and has not been solved.

4.) Despite having 5 usable guards, we have seen and inconsistent effectiveness from their offense in this phase. The defensive aspects have been very good and getting better. Quinn and Rasheed work well together defensively and Tyler does a good job defensively with the exception of occasional foolish fouls. Matt is a very good defender with size and might be trusted to handle the ball more. Hope this phase doesn't signal cutting Matt out of the substitution plan going forward.

Our slashing into the zones we see has resulted in too many turnovers. Quinn tends to commit to a shot when he does penetrate. Andre has taken threes that were not high percentage shots. I would like to see the guards start the offense earlier and keep it moving, looking for opportunities to feed Jabari, Rodney, Amile or even Marshall, while trying also to set up threes. The dribbling and passing back and forth on the outside followed by a one on one slashing attempt has been ineffective.

Looking forward to the next three games and how the team plays offense against UNC.

[fuse]

Not sure this belongs here, but one other aspect of this phase that is intriguing to me is the time in between the end of the regular season and the ACC tournament.

Maybe its not but it feels longer than normal.
How will the team use this time? Rest? New wrinkles on offense/defense?

Lots of exciting possibilities!

[Kedsy]

Not sure this belongs here, but one other aspect of this phase that is intriguing to me is the time in between the end of the regular season and the ACC tournament.

Maybe its not but it feels longer than normal.
How will the team use this time? Rest? New wrinkles on offense/defense?

Lots of exciting possibilities!

We usually play our last regular season game against UNC on a Saturday (or Sunday) and the ACC tournament starts the following Wednesday or Thursday, so I think it's exactly the same as always.

What's unusually long is the 8-day break after tomorrow's game until next Wednesday's game at Wake Forest.