MBB: Duke vs. Oregon, NCAAT R16 (Thur ~2200 EDT, TBS) PreGame and Ingame Thread

[budwom]

If K decides to play man (which I sort of doubt), having Ingram on Boucher makes more sense than having him trying to be strong enough to Cook. Marshall can sag off Cook if need be to provide help in the pain as you'll gladly let Cook try to beat you from 3-point range (which he will try to do, he's just not that good of shooter out there). Cook's a lot like ND's Colson and Ingram had a lot of trouble with that matchup.

I do expect a ton of zone though. The 1-3-1 makes a ton of sense since Ingram's length at the top gives a bunch of cover, etc. Like you said, you'll let anyone not named Dorsey take 3s. They just don't shoot them that well, but love to take them. As long as you can rebound, they're an eminently beatable team.

Yeah, I think playing zone is a given...

[duke79]

As long as they don't redo the floor to look like that gawdawful real home court of theirs!

I HATE that court. IMHO, the ugliest court design in college B-ball. I can't even stand to watch one of their home games. Give me headaches.

I've often thought, we should have a thread (maybe during the slow off season) on the ugliest courts in the country.

[kAzE]

I HATE that court. IMHO, the ugliest court design in college B-ball. I can't even stand to watch one of their home games. Give me headaches.

I've often thought, we should have a thread (maybe during the slow off season) on the ugliest courts in the country.

Probably gives them a competitive advantage in all seriousness. How the hell are you supposed to tell where you are supposed to be on that floor?basketball_3b.jpg

Typical Dana Altman time out:

Okay guys, you spot up behind tree #4, and you set a screen by the 2nd rock near the river.

[duke79]

Probably gives them a competitive advantage in all seriousness. How the hell are you supposed to tell where you are supposed to be on that floor?basketball_3b.jpg

Typical Dana Altman time out:

Okay guys, you spot up behind tree #4, and you set a screen by the 2nd rock near the river.

Couldn't agree more....what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

[BandAlum83]

Couldn't agree more...what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

I wonder if it's only that obnoxious from above on television. If you're standing on the court, is it not as noticeable?

[flyingdutchdevil]

Couldn't agree more...what is the POINT of that court design? Looks to me like it was designed by someone on a bad LSD trip.

Given that its Oregon, I'd say it's more likely to be a bad weed trip.

[kAzE]

Given that its Oregon, I'd say it's more likely to be a bad weed trip.

There's no such thing as "bad weed trip" . . . come on, FDD, you're from the Netherlands, you should know this

But I'd say the court clearly has a purpose: to confuse opposing teams. If you aren't used to playing on that thing, in concert with staring at Oregon's ridiculous uniforms, you might not play as well as you normally can.

I went to Vanderbilt for my undergraduate degree. They have a normal looking court, but it's raised from the ground on an elevated platform. I can't tell you how much of a home court advantage we had just from that. Having a unique court is huge.

[flyingdutchdevil]

There's no such thing as "bad weed trip" . . . come on, FDD, you're from the Netherlands, you should know this

There is definitely such thing as a bad weed trip. I'm from the Netherlands, I know this

In truth, I haven't had a bad high. But I've been with friends on bad highs. It's a sight for sore eyes (not unlike Oregon's court).

[CDu]

This is a really interesting matchup. Strangely, it's one of the few times this year where we'll face a top-25 caliber team in which we actually have the size advantage.

C: Oregon starts Chris Boucher at center. Boucher (6'10", 200 lb) is a lanky, athletic big who rebounds decently but blocks shots really well. He also scores it well, and shoots okay from 3pt range for a big. Behind him, they bring Jordan bell (6'8", 225). Bell does a little bit of the same thing as Boucher (blocks shots, rebounds) minus the shooting touch and scoring ability. After that, they have a 6'10" Israeli (Sorkin) who rarely plays and is more of a stretch big than a post guy.

Forwards: Oregon plays most of the game without a PF. Sometimes Bell and Boucher will be in there together, but that's for maybe 5-10 minutes per game. Against a team like Duke, I'd expect them to use a big lineup no more than that. The primary forwards are Elgin Cook (6'6", 205) and Dillon Brooks (6'6", 225). Brooks and Cook are almost carbon copies of each other. Both are athletic and strong, both score and rebound solidly and shoot well from the FT line, neither is a particularly good shooter from the perimeter. Brooks is the better all around player pretty much across the board, and he's the more dangerous 3pt shooter of the two. They will be aggressive and tough matchups on the wings though. They'll also make it tough on Ingram, as they're plenty athletic enough to defend him on the perimeter and they are both stronger than than Ingram down low. The Ducks bring Dwayne Benjamin (6'7", 210) off the bench. He's sort of like a poor man's version of Cook, who is a not quite as good version of Brooks. As mentioned, Bell will play some at PF when one of these guys is sitting.

Guards: The top billing goes to Tyler Dorsey (6'4", 200). Dorsey is the primary shooting threat on the team. He is kind of a poor man's Grayson Allen, though he isn't quite as explosive off the dribble or as proficient getting to the line. But he can really shoot the 3 (41.8%). The other starter is Casey Benson (6'3", 185). Benson is purely a game manager type at PG, though he can hit the 3 a little (35.6%). The third guard is Kendall Small, but he rarely plays.

So Oregon is only very slightly deeper than us (and actually less deep at guard). They don't shoot well aside from Dorsey. They are athletic and defend okay. They don't have a true PG, so like us they run the offense through their wings. And they are undersized up front. They are better defensively than us, and if we aren't hitting our 3s (or if they shoot surprisingly well from 3) it will be a tough game for us to win. But it's a very winnable game for us. I'd put it at close to 50/50.

[itshoopsbabee]

Yeah, I think playing zone is a given...

I'm wondering if K doesn't go "off the menu" for at least some significant minority of minutes - say 10 mins - play without a "big" - let BI guard Oregon's stick-like center - pull him away from the basket to open up the lanes to the hoop.

Derryck/Grayson/Matt/Luke/Brandon - could we defend Oregon with that grouping on the floor? Because on the offensive end that is a dynamite combo if the opposing center has to respect BI's outside shot.

[Mike Corey]

(Without the ability to spork many of you, just wanted to say 'thanks' to those of you offering such great analysis of the Ducks' team.)

[uh_no]

I'm wondering if K doesn't go "off the menu" for at least some significant minority of minutes - say 10 mins - play without a "big" - let BI guard Oregon's stick-like center - pull him away from the basket to open up the lanes to the hoop.

Derryck/Grayson/Matt/Luke/Brandon - could we defend Oregon with that grouping on the floor? Because on the offensive end that is a dynamite combo if the opposing center has to respect BI's outside shot.

I'd be highly surprised if we went without marshall of chase on the floor for any significant portion of the game. Rebounding and defense are the issues for this team...the offense is one of the best in the land...there's no reason to further compromise a shaky defense for a sliver of efficiency on the other end.

[flyingdutchdevil]

This is a really interesting matchup. Strangely, it's one of the few times this year where we'll face a top-25 caliber team in which we actually have the size advantage.

C: Oregon starts Chris Boucher at center. Boucher (6'10", 200 lb) is a lanky, athletic big who rebounds decently but blocks shots really well. He also scores it well, and shoots okay from 3pt range for a big. Behind him, they bring Jordan bell (6'8", 225). Bell does a little bit of the same thing as Boucher (blocks shots, rebounds) minus the shooting touch and scoring ability. After that, they have a 6'10" Israeli (Sorkin) who rarely plays and is more of a stretch big than a post guy.

Forwards: Oregon plays most of the game without a PF. Sometimes Bell and Boucher will be in there together, but that's for maybe 5-10 minutes per game. Against a team like Duke, I'd expect them to use a big lineup no more than that. The primary forwards are Elgin Cook (6'6", 205) and Dillon Brooks (6'6", 225). Brooks and Cook are almost carbon copies of each other. Both are athletic and strong, both score and rebound solidly and shoot well from the FT line, neither is a particularly good shooter from the perimeter. Brooks is the better all around player pretty much across the board, and he's the more dangerous 3pt shooter of the two. They will be aggressive and tough matchups on the wings though. They'll also make it tough on Ingram, as they're plenty athletic enough to defend him on the perimeter and they are both stronger than than Ingram down low. The Ducks bring Dwayne Benjamin (6'7", 210) off the bench. He's sort of like a poor man's version of Cook, who is a not quite as good version of Brooks. As mentioned, Bell will play some at PF when one of these guys is sitting.

Guards: The top billing goes to Tyler Dorsey (6'4", 200). Dorsey is the primary shooting threat on the team. He is kind of a poor man's Grayson Allen, though he isn't quite as explosive off the dribble or as proficient getting to the line. But he can really shoot the 3 (41.8%). The other starter is Casey Benson (6'3", 185). Benson is purely a game manager type at PG, though he can hit the 3 a little (35.6%). The third guard is Kendall Small, but he rarely plays.

So Oregon is only very slightly deeper than us (and actually less deep at guard). They don't shoot well aside from Dorsey. They are athletic and defend okay. They don't have a true PG, so like us they run the offense through their wings. And they are undersized up front. They are better defensively than us, and if we aren't hitting our 3s (or if they shoot surprisingly well from 3) it will be a tough game for us to win. But it's a very winnable game for us. I'd put it at close to 50/50.

Thanks for the scouting report, CDu. I think it's safe to say that we match up well against these guys, unlike Kansas or UNC (although we play well against UNC). They aren't great at rebounding (Duke is terrible at rebounding), they aren't great at 3pt shooting or defending the 3 (Duke is pretty good at both), and they steal a lot (Duke doesn't turn the ball over much).

I think having at least 3 excellent 3pt shooters (and hopefully 4) on the court at all times will help, especially given that our drives may not be effective. I really think that Grayson, Ingram, Kennard, and Jones all play 32+ min (and wouldn't be surprised to see them play 35 min, barring injury). If Thornton comes on, he needs to be under control. I'm not sure what happened, but Thornton seems to have hit a pretty big wall lately.

I also think, despite having a size and height advantage, MP3 isn't going to be a factor on offense. Boucher is a legit defensive C, and he averages 3.0 blocks a game. The good news is that he also averages 4.2 fouls per 40/min, so hopefully our guards can take advantage if they do decide to drive.

Against a 1-seed (and given that I think we're more of a 5-seed than a 4-seed), I like our chances. Not saying it's 50/50 or even better, but I like em. I think we're a clear underdog against any other 1 - or even 2 - seed.

[BD80]

Because the Ducks have so many athletic wings, this will be a big game for Matt Jones. Defensively.

He can't get silly fouls, we can't afford them against these guys.

I see Luke getting in foul trouble quickly, so we need Matt to stay on the court nearly the whole game.

[BandAlum83]

Thanks for the scouting report, CDu. I think it's safe to say that we match up well against these guys, unlike Kansas or UNC (although we play well against UNC). They aren't great at rebounding (Duke is terrible at rebounding), they aren't great at 3pt shooting or defending the 3 (Duke is pretty good at both), and they steal a lot (Duke doesn't turn the ball over much).

I think having at least 3 excellent 3pt shooters (and hopefully 4) on the court at all times will help, especially given that our drives may not be effective. I really think that Grayson, Ingram, Kennard, and Jones all play 32+ min (and wouldn't be surprised to see them play 35 min, barring injury). If Thornton comes on, he needs to be under control. I'm not sure what happened, but Thornton seems to have hit a pretty big wall lately.

I also think, despite having a size and height advantage, MP3 isn't going to be a factor on offense. Boucher is a legit defensive C, and he averages 3.0 blocks a game. The good news is that he also averages 4.2 fouls per 40/min, so hopefully our guards can take advantage if they do decide to drive.

Against a 1-seed (and given that I think we're more of a 5-seed than a 4-seed), I like our chances. Not saying it's 50/50 or even better, but I like em. I think we're a clear underdog against any other 1 - or even 2 - seed.

It's REALLY hard to block dunks without fouling.

[subzero02]

It looks like Oregon is favored by 2.5 points across the board right now. They opened as 1.5 or 2 point favorites at most books.

[devildeac]

Because the Ducks have so many athletic wings, this will be a big game for Matt Jones. Defensively.

He can't get silly fouls, we can't afford them against these guys.

I see Luke getting in foul trouble quickly, so we need Matt to stay on the court nearly the whole game.

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)

[BD80]

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)

Whistle blows ... Fowl called.

[CDu]

As far as 1 seeds go, this was easily our best possible draw. If we are hitting our 3s, I have trouble seeing Oregon beat us. The downside is that if we are not hitting our 3s, we are very beatable. But that's true of any matchup the rest of the way. In terms of their strength against our strength, I think this is about as favorable a matchup as we could have hoped for against a 1 seed.

That being said, I definitely don't want to take them lightly. They are 12-3 against the RPI Top-50 and 22-4 against the RPI Top-100. Granted, 10 of those Top-50 wins came against the Pac-12, which may very well have been overrated by the RPI. They are clearly the class of the Pac-12 though, and they did destroy Utah (a common opponent that we lost to) and LBSU (who we also destroyed). Their athleticism can give us fits. But I'm happier facing them than any of the other possible #1 seeds we could have faced.

[Reilly]

Ducks?

Wings?

(heh-heh)

Whistle blows ... Fowl called.

You guys really think that sort of word-play will fly around here?