New line up?

[Troublemaker]

I always thought the corner three is the primary responsibility of the wing in a 3-2; that the inside player only covers the corner if the opponent plays 4-out (or 5-out), or if the wing misses his assignment.

Is that not true?

4-around-1 offense is pretty standard in basketball; it's certainly how Louisville attacked the 3-2 zone.

Both Pitt and Lville were getting the ball to the corners pretty easily, and they were either open right away or able to attack the closeout of our bigs to get a look around the basket.

[DukieInBrasil]

I think the best option this team has is JGold at point. I'm not saying he's a stellar PG. It's just that I think he's the best option in terms of overall play both offensively and defensively, adding in his experience. My level of angst with this team seems lowest with him at point. If he had a shot that teams respected, there wouldn't be a contest. Roach can back him up, but with Roach the team on the floor would require secondary distributors to avoid him starting in on those suicide drives he often makes. With him the unit would need guys who can pass (like Johnson, perhaps). It's all pretty dicey, at this point there's no one on this team even in the same PG universe as a Hurley, Wojo, the Jones boys, etc.

As I type this, I thought of a wild idea. Box and one, with JGold shadowing the guard who is the biggest offensive threat (scoring and/or distribution). Desperation? Maybe. But these are starting to be desperate times!

9F

i agree with your take, primarily for the bolded reason. Don't know much about box and 1 defense, but JGold's primary defensive value comes from steals and help, not necessarily by being such a great 1on1 defender.

[Kedsy]

selected Duke freshman point guards (2016 to 2021), sorted by oRtg

Player			height	mpg	PER	oRtg	eFG%	OR%	DR%	Asst%	TO%	stl%	usg	RSCI
Tre Jones		6'2"	34.2	15.4	114.4	45.6	2.8	8.4	24.0	13.2	3.0	15.1	#13
Trevon Duval		6'3"	29.8	13.7	104.3	47.3	2.1	4.9	30.3	20.8	2.8	21.3	#5
Jeremy Roach		6'1"	30.2	11.7	100.6	48.8	3.9	6.5	17.8	20.6	1.7	19.4	#20
Derryck Thornton	6'3"	26.0	9.4	97.9	44.6	1.2	6.5	16.7	17.8	1.7	17.5	#13

selected Duke freshman shooting guards/wings (2016 to 2021), sorted by oRtg

Player			height	mpg	PER	oRtg	eFG%	OR%	DR%	Asst%	TO%	stl%	usg	RSCI
Gary Trent		6'6"	33.9	16.7	124.4	52.8	2.9	10.3	6.8	7.4	1.9	19.5	#13
Luke Kennard		6'5"	26.7	19.5	123.4	50.3	4.1	10.7	10.8	6.8	2.1	21.3	#21
Frank Jackson		6'3"	24.9	17.0	119.0	50.7	3.1	8.3	12.6	12.9	1.3	21.1	#14
Cassius Stanley		6'6"	27.4	18.5	112.3	53.1	7.6	11.7	6.6	14.4	2.9	21.9	#33
DJ Steward		6'2"	32.0	16.8	104.7	50.0	4.0	13.0	12.0	15.8	2.3	22.0	#24
Cam Reddish		6'8"	29.7	13.6	97.9	45.9	2.0	10.7	10.7	16.5	2.9	25.3	#2
Wendell Moore		6'6"	24.0	11.7	95.0	42.9	7.4	11.7	12.6	24.7	2.0	19.2	#25

Closest comp for Jeremy is Derryck Thornton. Closest comp for DJ is Frank Jackson (although Jackson's oRtg is significantly higher). Also note that both Jeremy and DJ are the shortest in their group, which may (or may not) have a negative impact on our defense.

[jv001]

The other reason that the 3-2 zone is problematic is because it often means you have just 1 rebounder inside. If corner(ish) 3 is taken, one of your bigs is away from the basket. That puts a lot more pressure on the guards/wings to crash down. With the 2-3, you have 2 (sometimes 3) bigs near the basket to rebound. And with man-to-man, you should have as many bodies near the basket as the other team has.

The 3-2 defense is a pretty good defense for preventing 3s and trapping on the perimeter. But it certainly has its weaknesses as it exposes more of the "innards" of the defense without really good rotation from the guys up front.

As for personnel, Hurt will have problems with any defense other than the 2-3 I think. It's possible to hide him in man-to-man except against teams disciplined enough and with capable enough guard play to exploit him in switches. Louisville (and some teams last year) illustrated this by getting Hurt stuck on Jones, who roasted him repeatedly. Many teams have a guard capable of doing this, which makes man-to-man problematic. But it takes a disciplined team to take advantage of it.

But I agree that he's especially not a great option in the 3-2 because of his limited mobility and the extra range needed on the back line in a 3-2.

Of the three zones; 3-2, 1-3-1, 2-3, which should be the best at keeping the opponent from getting the ball to the FT line in? It seems like the 1-3-1 would be the best. Years ago, Duke went to a 1-3-1 zone and Duke had a guard that ran the back line. I believe his name was Jack Mullen and he served in the Navy. I think he and John Frye were the guards in the late 50's early 60's. Jack kicked his legs back when he shot a jump shot.

GoDuke!

[CDu]

Of the three zones; 3-2, 1-3-1, 2-3, which should be the best at keeping the opponent from getting the ball to the FT line in? It seems like the 1-3-1 would be the best. Years ago, Duke went to a 1-3-1 zone and Duke had a guard that ran the back line. I believe his name was Jack Mullen and he served in the Navy. I think he and John Frye were the guards in the late 50's early 60's. Jack kicked his legs back when he shot a jump shot.

GoDuke!

The 2-3 is far and away the best of those three zones at keeping the ball out of the paint area. You'll always have at least two post guys available to slow drives. It's biggest weakness is on the 3pt line.

The 1-3-1 is a high risk/high reward defense. It will force a lot of turnovers but will also give up a lot of layups. It's also not a defense we're likely well suited for, as it generally requires a lot of length and athleticism and defensive coordination to work well. You need your wings to be long to effectively trap, you need a point man (usually a forward like Battier) with length, defensive IQ, and energy to burn. We do have a perfect candidate for the back of the 1-3-1 in Goldwire, and we might have the right guy to put at the top in Moore. But we're probably weaker in the middle 3.

The 1-2-2 (which is really what we've been playing) is effective at denial of straight-line drives from the perimeter, but is weaker at defending passes into the high post and to the corners. And is weak for rebounding, and exposes slower defenders on the baseline.

The true 3-2 (where the middle man up top doesn't pressure the top of the key) is weaker against drive and kicks, but can keep the ball away from the rim a bit better than the 1-2-2 or 1-3-1. But it will give up straight-on look from 3 at the top of the key as well as corner 3s if the drive collapses the defense.

[Saratoga2]

If I were coaching against Duke, I would concentrate my defense against Hurt as no one else is that much of a threat.

[kako]

Hate to break it to you, but I came up with the box and one idea a few days ago and posted it to the board. Great minds think alike, they say.
But you have to take it with a grain of realism. The day K institutes the box and one, or any other unorthodox D, for that matter, will be the day there are icicles forming in hell.

Sorry, didn't read it. I cede any patent requests lol.

Normally I'd agree with you that K would never do this. Of course, I never thought he'd go to a zone regularly at all until 2015.

It's pretty cold here in the Bay Area today. There's a frost freeze warning. This almost never happens, so...

And regarding any zone that the Devils may play - my feeling is Duke needs to keep it's best offensive players (Hurt and Johnson) in the game. Whatever zone is played is fine with me, even the box and one.

9F

[jv001]

The 2-3 is far and away the best of those three zones at keeping the ball out of the paint area. You'll always have at least two post guys available to slow drives. It's biggest weakness is on the 3pt line.

The 1-3-1 is a high risk/high reward defense. It will force a lot of turnovers but will also give up a lot of layups. It's also not a defense we're likely well suited for, as it generally requires a lot of length and athleticism and defensive coordination to work well. You need your wings to be long to effectively trap, you need a point man (usually a forward like Battier) with length, defensive IQ, and energy to burn. We do have a perfect candidate for the back of the 1-3-1 in Goldwire, and we might have the right guy to put at the top in Moore. But we're probably weaker in the middle 3.

The 1-2-2 (which is really what we've been playing) is effective at denial of straight-line drives from the perimeter, but is weaker at defending passes into the high post and to the corners. And is weak for rebounding, and exposes slower defenders on the baseline.

The true 3-2 (where the middle man up top doesn't pressure the top of the key) is weaker against drive and kicks, but can keep the ball away from the rim a bit better than the 1-2-2 or 1-3-1. But it will give up straight-on look from 3 at the top of the key as well as corner 3s if the drive collapses the defense.

Thanks for the zone info. Which of the zones do you think work best against a team like GT? My preference would be the 2-3 based on the information you supplied.

GoDuke!

[MarkD83]

Of the three zones; 3-2, 1-3-1, 2-3, which should be the best at keeping the opponent from getting the ball to the FT line in? It seems like the 1-3-1 would be the best. Years ago, Duke went to a 1-3-1 zone and Duke had a guard that ran the back line. I believe his name was Jack Mullen and he served in the Navy. I think he and John Frye were the guards in the late 50's early 60's. Jack kicked his legs back when he shot a jump shot.

GoDuke!

The donut and five is my preferred “zone”

[CDu]

Thanks for the zone info. Which of the zones do you think work best against a team like GT? My preference would be the 2-3 based on the information you supplied.

GoDuke!

Given that Tech is a very good shooting team and not a great rebounding team, probably the 1-2-2. But worth mentioning that a well-disciplined, good offense should be able to beat any zone. So I don’t expect us to defend Tech terribly well, regardless of the strategy.

[jv001]

Given that Tech is a very good shooting team and not a great rebounding team, probably the 1-2-2. But worth mentioning that a well-disciplined, good offense should be able to beat any zone. So I don’t expect us to defend Tech terribly well, regardless of the strategy.

I guess we better have our best offensive output of the season if we hope to win and hope they don't shoot well.

[Troublemaker]

Just play m2m now that Jalen's back. (And play it from the beginning, not after the 3-2 zone has failed and we're in foul trouble). That's been my take.

[CDu]

Just play m2m now that Jalen's back. (And play it from the beginning, not after the 3-2 zone has failed and we're in foul trouble). That's been my take.

This is probably the least bad option. But it does put us at a higher risk of our two best players getting in foul trouble, and it allows teams to isolate Hurt on a guard on a switch. Teams would talented guards like Tech could really abuse Hurt defensively.

[Troublemaker]

This is probably the least bad option. But it does put us at a higher risk of our two best players getting in foul trouble

Interesting to note. The two 3-2 zone games are the two highest opponent FT rate games of the season. Pitt was the worst, and Lville was tied for second-worst with the Illinois game. The zone so far has not helped with fouling. It arguably has helped cause the fouling due to unfamiliarity with the zone.

and it allows teams to isolate Hurt on a guard on a switch. Teams would talented guards like Tech could really abuse Hurt defensively.

We'd have to get some per-possession data on Hurt isos to be sure, but I like it when teams attack him 1-on-1 after the switch. I feel like they force up bad shots (long 2s, step back 3s, floaters where he's in position) just as much as they score on him.

[CDu]

Interesting to note. The two 3-2 zone games are the two highest opponent FT rate games of the season. Pitt was the worst, and Lville was tied for second-worst with the Illinois game. The zone so far has not helped with fouling. It arguably has helped cause the fouling due to unfamiliarity with the zone.

I was referring specifically to Hurt and Johnson (especially Hurt), not the team in general. Hurt didn’t get in foul trouble in the Pitt game and didn’t get in foul trouble until the second half (when we switched back to man) against Louisville. We committed 9 fouls in the first half (and some of those were offensive or in transition) against Louisville compared to 14 in the second half when we went man.

Also worth noting that Pitt happens to be the best FTR opponent we have faced, with Louisville fifth. MSU, Wake, BC, and ND simply do not draw fouls at all. Coppin St does, but they are so far below us talent wise that we mitigated a bit of that. So I don’t think I buy the “zone is causing fouls” argument.

We'd have to get some per-possession data on Hurt isos to be sure, but I like it when teams attack him 1-on-1 after the switch. I feel like they force up bad shots (long 2s, step back 3s, floaters where he's in position) just as much as they score on him.

Yes, it would be helpful to see those data on Hurt defending guards - unfortunately I don’t know of any site that does this at the college level. I have a very different impression of Hurt’s defense on guards than you. For example, Jones absolutely dissected Hurt in high-ball screens down the stretch, repeatedly drawing fouls. If I was a coach with a good guard facing a man-to-man Duke D, I would be calling for high ball screens to iso Hurt repeatedly. Teams did it successfully as the season progressed last year, and I fear Louisville put forth the blueprint moving forward. Hopefully not, but we will see.

[Jaks19]

Not sure at this point if there is a line up that works. Johnson and Hurt, yes, and 2 of Roach, Steward and JGold (all three haven't been too effective), but the 5th starter is a complete question mark. Most everyone thought Moore would fill that role but his season has been less than expected. Baker has not done much and as said by J Evans, Breakfield would struggle defensively. Playing Tape or Williams has been overly productive nor has Coleman. So again, the 5th starter unless K stays with the 3 guards has not produced.

[CDu]

Not sure at this point if there is a line up that works. Johnson and Hurt, yes, and 2 of Roach, Steward and JGold (all three haven't been too effective), but the 5th starter is a complete question mark. Most everyone thought Moore would fill that role but his season has been less than expected. Baker has not done much and as said by J Evans, Breakfield would struggle defensively. Playing Tape or Williams has been overly productive nor has Coleman. So again, the 5th starter unless K stays with the 3 guards has not produced.

I think Moore has settled back into the starting 5. Especially as long as we stay with a zone as part of the package, as playing 3 short guards in a zone is a nonstarter. And I think Moore has been solid the past couple of games.

Of all the guys so far, Moore has seemed to figure out how to play alongside Johnson most quickly. Hopefully Hurt and the guards figure it out soon, too. If they do, we are a dangerous team. If we keep having issues with cohesion, not so much.

[Kedsy]

Also worth noting that Pitt happens to be the best FTR opponent we have faced, with Louisville fifth. MSU, Wake, BC, and ND simply do not draw fouls at all. Coppin St does, but they are so far below us talent wise that we mitigated a bit of that. So I don’t think I buy the “zone is causing fouls” argument.

I agree. Michigan State (39.7% FTR against us vs. 30.0% for the season) and Wake Forest (43.8% FTR against us vs. 33.8% for the season) both got to the line against us a lot more than they usually do. And I don't believe we played any zone in either game. For the season, our opposing Free Throw Rate is 54th worst in the nation (9th worst in the "Big Six"). So our fouling problem probably has another root.

Neither here nor there, but our offensive free throw rate is even more pathetic: 13th worst in the country (4th worst in the Big Six).

[Sophia Devil]

It feels like Jalen is our best playmaker even if he struggles with turnovers. He can't play the point for 40 minutes but letting him set up the offense might open up some driving lanes for Roach and Steward. Not sure what other buttons K can push, this team is just incredibly limited and plodding. They play at a very lethargic pace with limited players who have the ability to create their own shot.

[Jeffrey]

If I were coaching against Duke, I would concentrate my defense against Hurt as no one else is that much of a threat.

IMO, Steward is also a serious scoring threat. And, Johnson will be, after getting some rust off.