Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 218
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    North Carolina

    2015 Minutes/Rotation/NBA Prospects

    Quote Originally Posted by Saratoga2 View Post
    More likely in my mind would be:

    Obi, Plumlee
    Jefferson/Jeter
    Ingram/Jones
    Allen/Kennard
    Thornton/Allen

    We will have to see how things develop but Plumlee has been a good backup in his career to date and is unlikely to earn a starting position or play big minutes. Jefferson is likely to start over Jeter, as he is a proficient defensive player and may (hopefully) have improved his offensive game. Ingram is a rare talent is likely to get major minutes with Jones a very good defensive player with experience and fairly good offense as his backup. Jones in also a possible for other guard positions depending on how well Allen and Kennard do. I would think Allen has shown enough to start at the 2 guard and backup the point. Kennard is an unknown at this time but his size and superior scoring ability will get him time and how much will depend on his defensive prowess. Thornton will likely be the starting point and will need to show he is handling to college game to maintain his starting role. He will need to be subbed for during the game and I can see that falling to Allen as a decent handler, Kennard, also supposed to be decent and even Ingram at times. With three superior guards in the game do you need a defined point?
    This makes sense to me. I really like these line ups!! I wonder if we could have some sort of platoon system at some point?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    You and Sagegrouse have taken opposite sides of a debate that presumably will rage on DBR throughout the 2015-16 season. Assuming we have 9 players taking up the minutes (i.e., Justin Robinson and Antonio Vrankovic will both either redshirt or, alternatively, just not play), at least one and probably two of the nine most likely aren't going to be in the regular rotation.
    Sorry to gum up the works, Keds, but I was just asking a question about whether a small line-up can properly be said to be playing a "4." This is important only when some one says, as surely they will, "Ingram can't play the 4 -- he's too skinny." Well, IMHO (where the H is silent), this is putting the cart in front of the horse -- reasoning in the wrong direction.

    Traditionally, in close games after January 1, Coach K has played a rotation of 4 (sometimes 5) perimeter players and 3 interior players. The question of whether Brandon Ingram plays as a perimeter player or an interior player will therefore have a great impact on who else plays. And by this I mean, what position will he play on defense. Ryan Kelly, for example, played on the perimeter a lot, but by my definition he was an interior player.

    If Brandon plays as a perimeter player, as you seem to believe, then one of our other perimeter players, most likely Luke Kennard, will probably not get regular rotation minutes. (In that case, one of our interior players will also not get regular rotation minutes.) If Brandon plays as an interior player, as Sagegrouse contends, then Luke will play regularly (we only have four perimeter players, not counting Brandon) but in all likelihood only two other big men (among Amile, Marshall, Chase, and Sean) will see regular rotation minutes.
    I have no idea which way it will go. I agree with Sagegrouse that Coach K has gone small whenever he could, over the years. Even this past season, by tourney time Justise Winslow was the starting PF. On the other hand, all four of our non-Brandon bigs would seem to have resumes deserving of playing time. I'd love to see him find 10+ mpg for all nine of them, but historically speaking that's very unlikely. This debate may not be settled until March 2016.[/QUOTE]

    I agree that all four of our "bigs" should play. In fact, I have gone so far in past years as predicting that "everyone" will be in the rotation. That's really only nine players (excl. Vrank and Justin). Sure, K hasn't done it much (1998 and maybe 1999), but this is a different world. The old model of tight rotations, consisting of players highly trained in Duke defense and an emphasis on upperclassmen, looks to be gone for good in the one-and-done era.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Sorry to gum up the works, Keds, but I was just asking a question about whether a small line-up can properly be said to be playing a "4." This is important only when some one says, as surely they will, "Ingram can't play the 4 -- he's too skinny." Well, IMHO (where the H is silent), this is putting the cart in front of the horse -- reasoning in the wrong direction.



    I have no idea which way it will go. I agree with Sagegrouse that Coach K has gone small whenever he could, over the years. Even this past season, by tourney time Justise Winslow was the starting PF. On the other hand, all four of our non-Brandon bigs would seem to have resumes deserving of playing time. I'd love to see him find 10+ mpg for all nine of them, but historically speaking that's very unlikely. This debate may not be settled until March 2016.
    I agree that all four of our "bigs" should play. In fact, I have gone so far in past years as predicting that "everyone" will be in the rotation. That's really only nine players (excl. Vrank and Justin). Sure, K hasn't done it much (1998 and maybe 1999), but this is a different world. The old model of tight rotations, consisting of players highly trained in Duke defense and an emphasis on upperclassmen, looks to be gone for good in the one-and-done era.
    Well, anyway, I managed to mostly to "gum up" my use of the **quote** function. The paragraph that is double indent was originally by Kedsy.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    Kennard is projected to be the backup point guard. And I would be stunned if Jeter doesn't play a lot at the 5.
    Luke -- Absolutely, yes, the highly likely backup PG. I'm a little surprised that anyone might speculate that either Matt or Grayson is the more likely backup PG. For Luke, compared to Grayson and Matt, possesses the superior handle, crossover, hesitation, vision, passing, court sense, teammate involvement. I think we want Grayson to shoot, powerdrive, and generally drive opponents nuts with ultra-energetic O and D. We want Matt to be a fierce perimeter defender, an improved 3-bomber, and a sneaky driver when crowded out on the wing.

    Now it's true that Luke has yet to play a single college game. (Not to put too fine a point ... on it, but neither has Derryck.) Luke has, however, played a lot against top-level HS and international competition. He has more than borderline PG-type skills. I haven't seen those skills in Matt or Grayson, who have other admirable, valuable skills. Which other valuable skills I expect to see them exhibit. On the wings. Exclusively.

    Chase -- But the more intriguing comment is jimsumner's "stunned" comment. Does "a lot" mean, say 15-18 mpg? Or does it mean of Chase's X mpg, he'll play much more at the 5 than at the 4?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    I'm a little surprised that anyone might speculate that either Matt or Grayson is the more likely backup PG. For Luke, compared to Grayson and Matt, possesses the superior handle, crossover, hesitation, vision, passing, court sense, teammate involvement.
    Will he cook the team meals, too?

    I think people might speculate as to who might be the more likely backup PG because none of us have ever seen Luke Kennard play in a college basketball game -- some of us (myself included) have never seen him play in a real (non-all star) game at all -- and his scouting report from the experts doesn't call him a PG. It very well may be that Luke will be our backup PG this season (that seems to be the expectation, per Jim Sumner), but I don't think it's surprising that people speculate otherwise.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Getting Jackson obviously means there is zero chance we'll get Smith, which I think is fine.
    Not quite zero chance - there's still the scenario in which Smith waits until spring to decide, Thornton has a surprisingly good year and enters the weak 2016 draft leaving a spot for Smith. But that all seems unlikely.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Will he cook the team meals, too?
    "...superior handle, crossover, ... passing, ... teammate involvement..."

    Sounds like pancakes and omelets are Luke's specialty.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Will he cook the team meals, too?

    I think people might speculate as to who might be the more likely backup PG because none of us have ever seen Luke Kennard play in a college basketball game -- some of us (myself included) have never seen him play in a real (non-all star) game at all -- and his scouting report from the experts doesn't call him a PG. It very well may be that Luke will be our backup PG this season (that seems to be the expectation, per Jim Sumner), but I don't think it's surprising that people speculate otherwise.
    On second thought, I don't think it's surprising, either.

    Re cooking, I vaguely recall, but have not bothered to go back and check, that the Culinary RSCI had both Matt and Grayson in the top 30, whereas Luke wasn't even in the top 100.

    Vrankovic, btw, was #9. I don't know whether to be surprised or not.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    Luke -- Absolutely, yes, the highly likely backup PG. I'm a little surprised that anyone might speculate that either Matt or Grayson is the more likely backup PG. For Luke, compared to Grayson and Matt, possesses the superior handle, crossover, hesitation, vision, passing, court sense, teammate involvement. I think we want Grayson to shoot, powerdrive, and generally drive opponents nuts with ultra-energetic O and D. We want Matt to be a fierce perimeter defender, an improved 3-bomber, and a sneaky driver when crowded out on the wing.

    Now it's true that Luke has yet to play a single college game. (Not to put too fine a point ... on it, but neither has Derryck.) Luke has, however, played a lot against top-level HS and international competition. He has more than borderline PG-type skills. I haven't seen those skills in Matt or Grayson, who have other admirable, valuable skills. Which other valuable skills I expect to see them exhibit. On the wings. Exclusively.

    Chase -- But the more intriguing comment is jimsumner's "stunned" comment. Does "a lot" mean, say 15-18 mpg? Or does it mean of Chase's X mpg, he'll play much more at the 5 than at the 4?
    Jeter? I was responding to an post upthread that implied that Jeter would only be Jefferson's backup at the 4 and that Plumlee and Obi would be the only 5s. I suspect Jeter will play a good bit at the 5.

    How much? Lots of unknowns here. Is Plumlee a career backup? Or can he make the jump to a 15-20 mpg guy? Is Obi ready for primetime? How often does Duke go super-small, with Jefferson at the 5 and Ingram at the 4?

    I wouldn't be surprised to see Jeter begin the season as the number 3 center and end the season starting and playing a lot. Shelden Williams went through a period midway through his freshman season when he was barely getting off the bench. He ended the season playing ahead of senior Casey Sanders. A similar season-long arc seems entirely plausible for Jeter.

    We are talking about a 6-10/11. 230-pound or so, top-15 guy. He's a freshman and it might take some time for the lights to come on. But I think it's fair to sya that he has the highest ceiling of any of Duke's five post players.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    "...superior handle, crossover, ... passing, ... teammate involvement..."

    Sounds like pancakes and omelets are Luke's specialty.
    Better than Lebron?

    https://vine.co/v/OUJDKQUUtvi

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    I suspect Jeter will play a good bit at the 5.
    That makes for a bit of a crowd at the 5, but it's manageable. I don't see any of the three (Jeter/Obi/Plumlee) having ego problems around PT next year. So long as none becomes marginalized, going to a more athletic lineup with both Plumlee and Obi on the bench for stretches seems likely.

    Maybe Plumlee could play some 4. Best 3 point shooter on the team after all. Or how about a lineup that has Thornton and Ingram out front and Jeter, Obi, and Plumdog down low, with Jeter at the 3? If you liked the Plumlee/Okafor twin towers concept, you'll love the tri-towers "PlumJObi" concept.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by Henderson View Post
    Maybe Plumlee could play some 4. Best 3 point shooter on the team after all. Or how about a lineup that has Thornton and Ingram out front and Jeter, Obi, and Plumdog down low, with Jeter at the 3? If you liked the Plumlee/Okafor twin towers concept, you'll love the tri-towers "PlumJObi" concept.
    Or move Plumlee to the 1. He could pass over the defense.

    I, for one, would love a Plumlee-Jeter-Ingram backcourt. Let Obi roam the paint alone.

    Heck, just play those 4 on the court. Who needs 5?

    - Chillin

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Henderson View Post
    That makes for a bit of a crowd at the 5, but it's manageable. I don't see any of the three (Jeter/Obi/Plumlee) having ego problems around PT next year. So long as none becomes marginalized, going to a more athletic lineup with both Plumlee and Obi on the bench for stretches seems likely.

    Maybe Plumlee could play some 4. Best 3 point shooter on the team after all. Or how about a lineup that has Thornton and Ingram out front and Jeter, Obi, and Plumdog down low, with Jeter at the 3? If you liked the Plumlee/Okafor twin towers concept, you'll love the tri-towers "PlumJObi" concept.
    I assume you're having a bit of levity here.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    Quote Originally Posted by Henderson View Post
    That makes for a bit of a crowd at the 5, but it's manageable. I don't see any of the three (Jeter/Obi/Plumlee) having ego problems around PT next year. So long as none becomes marginalized, going to a more athletic lineup with both Plumlee and Obi on the bench for stretches seems likely.

    Maybe Plumlee could play some 4. Best 3 point shooter on the team after all. Or how about a lineup that has Thornton and Ingram out front and Jeter, Obi, and Plumdog down low, with Jeter at the 3? If you liked the Plumlee/Okafor twin towers concept, you'll love the tri-towers "PlumJObi" concept.
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    Or move Plumlee to the 1. He could pass over the defense.

    ...

    - Chillin
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    I assume you're having a bit of levity here.
    Over our heads

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Henderson View Post
    So long as none becomes marginalized...
    That's the question, isn't it? What's your definition of "marginalized"? Especially if Brandon plays a decent amount at PF, minutes are going to be tight for the three you mention.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Quote Originally Posted by BD80 View Post
    Over our heads
    Welcome to the off-season.

    How about Ingram at the point, Matt and Grayson on the wings, and Plumlee and Jeter down low? Sort of a 1-2-2 offense, subbing Amile, Obi, Thornton, and Kennard as appropriate for a standard 9 man rotation.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by Henderson View Post
    Welcome to the off-season.

    How about Ingram at the point, Matt and Grayson on the wings, and Plumlee and Jeter down low? Sort of a 1-2-2 offense, subbing Amile, Obi, Thornton, and Kennard as appropriate for a standard 9 man rotation.
    Or a 4-2-5 to match the football team.

    This way we don't have to worry about minutes crunches. Just set up Amile/Plumlee/Obi/Jeter up front. Or slide in Vrank in Amile's spot and drop him back into the midcourt alongside Robinson. Ingram, Allen, and Thornton out wide with Jones and Kennard playing the backcourt.

    On second thought, I'm sure someone would complain that Nick or Brennan should see more burn in this scenario.

    - Chillin

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    Or a 4-2-5 to match the football team.

    This way we don't have to worry about minutes crunches. Just set up Amile/Plumlee/Obi/Jeter up front. Or slide in Vrank in Amile's spot and drop him back into the midcourt alongside Robinson. Ingram, Allen, and Thornton out wide with Jones and Kennard playing the backcourt.

    On second thought, I'm sure someone would complain that Nick or Brennan should see more burn in this scenario.

    - Chillin
    OPK has changed us to a 4-3-5.

    We already play 8 on 5 anyway if you listen to our opponents fan base and/or some of the jackarses on espn.
    [redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    Or a 4-2-5 to match the football team.

    This way we don't have to worry about minutes crunches. Just set up Amile/Plumlee/Obi/Jeter up front. Or slide in Vrank in Amile's spot and drop him back into the midcourt alongside Robinson. Ingram, Allen, and Thornton out wide with Jones and Kennard playing the backcourt.

    On second thought, I'm sure someone would complain that Nick or Brennan should see more burn in this scenario.

    - Chillin
    Since Nate James would have a year of eligibility left in this hybrid form of basketball - he would definitely be the leader and heart of our defense. Can I get a HOO-HA Two Times Tuesday?

  20. #20
    November is taking way to long to get here

Similar Threads

  1. 2015-16 Minutes Discussion
    By uh_no in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 221
    Last Post: 03-25-2016, 08:34 PM
  2. Why can't we have a 9 man rotation?
    By Stratrat in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 01-05-2011, 01:12 PM
  3. 8/9-man rotation
    By gumbomoop in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 12-31-2009, 11:42 PM
  4. Czyz now in Rotation?
    By dukelion in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 06-27-2009, 01:36 AM
  5. Next Years Rotation
    By dukeimac in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-07-2008, 09:41 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •