Duke MBB v Clemson (1/25, 7:00 PM EST, ESPN2) Pre-game and In-game Thread

[jv001]

Even though there are some very good posts on the Net, T-Rank and Pomeroy, how did we get to those topics instead of Duke vs. Clemson? My main concerns are: when will Duke get Keels back and will he be the outside shooter everyone thought he would be, has Wendell found his way back from turnover issues, will defensive rebounding improve and will our turnovers be a thing of the past.

GoDuke and beat Clemson.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

We're getting into Bill Walton territory here. Are you actually suggesting (as the above quote seems to say) that after every upset, the upset winner is better than the team they beat?

So, like in 2018, Maryland-Baltimore County was a better team than Virginia?

What's the significance of "better" in the context of team sports?

As to any one game, what matters is which team wins the game, not which team is "better."

With respect to a championship series, it matters which team wins the championship, not which team is "better" or "best."

I don't really care whether this season's Duke team is considered "better" than any other team. I want Duke to win every game, the ACC championship, and the NCAA championship.

[Kedsy]

What's the significance of "better" in the context of team sports?

As to any one game, what matters is which team wins the game, not which team is "better."

It may not matter when you're looking into the past. It matters a lot when you're attempting to predict the future.

[CDu]

What's the significance of "better" in the context of team sports?

When trying to determine how many games it will take to win the ACC regular season, "better" is a pretty important place to start. Knowing the ordinal quality of teams is pretty critical in having a reasonable guess as to what number of wins will be enough. So in this particular discussion, the concept is extremely pertinent.

"Better" won't be important once the games are played, but when trying to guess outcomes before the games are played, "better" is a crucial concept.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

It may not matter when you're looking into the past. It matters a lot when you're attempting to predict the future.

I don't bet on Duke games, so it doesn't matter to me!

[CDu]

Even though there are some very good posts on the Net, T-Rank and Pomeroy, how did we get to those topics instead of Duke vs. Clemson? My main concerns are: when will Duke get Keels back and will he be the outside shooter everyone thought he would be, has Wendell found his way back from turnover issues, will defensive rebounding improve and will our turnovers be a thing of the past.

My thoughts on these topics are as follows:

Keels: sounds like he is unlikely to play tomorrow, but maybe by the weekend?

Moore: too early to tell. Syracuse was such a friendly matchup with regards to turnover risk that I'm not sure we know yet. Clemson will give us a potentially more useful data point.

Defensive rebounding: it probably will be bad all season. That's been true of basically all of our teams over the past 15 years. No reason to expect different this year. Just a question of how bad it will be.

Turnovers: this is definitely an area of concern. Our 4 worst turnover games against quality opponents have come in our last 5 games. Let's hope that changes, and soon.

[jv001]

My thoughts on these topics are as follows:

Keels: sounds like he is unlikely to play tomorrow, but maybe by the weekend?

Moore: too early to tell. Syracuse was such a friendly matchup with regards to turnover risk that I'm not sure we know yet. Clemson will give us a potentially more useful data point.

Defensive rebounding: it probably will be bad all season. That's been true of basically all of our teams over the past 15 years. No reason to expect different this year. Just a question of how bad it will be.

Turnovers: this is definitely an area of concern. Our 4 worst turnover games against quality opponents have come in our last 5 games. Let's hope that changes, and soon.

If we improve on just one of turnovers and defensive rebounding, I want it to be the turnover problem. We've had some very good teams that weren't great at defensive rebounding. Turnovers can be like a "pick six" but only two points.

GoDuke!

[knicknut]

No, not really. We moved 2 road games early on to right into the middle of the schedule where we already had a stretch of road games.

Had the ACC schedule played out like normal, it would have been: HAAHAHAHHAAHAHHAAAHA. That's pretty balanced.

Instead, it looks like this: HHAHAHHAAAHAAHHAAAHA. We now have a 5 in 6 away stretch AND a 4 in 5 away stretch, split only by a pair of home games in mid-February. Prior to that, we had just the 4 in 5 away stretch at the end. Most more road-heavy now for the back half of the schedule.

I'm not sure what you're laughing about. The schedule looks tough to me no matter how you slice it

[Kedsy]

If we improve on just one of turnovers and defensive rebounding, I want it to be the turnover problem. We've had some very good teams that weren't great at defensive rebounding. Turnovers can be like a "pick six" but only two points.

GoDuke!

Turnovers are a potential issue on both sides of the ball. The past several games we haven’t been forcing them at nearly the rate we did earlier in the season.

[heyman25]

This afternoon stopped by the Target at South Square. Had a fun informative conversation with Amile. He said Trevor is healing. I mentioned to Amile about his line drive shot. He said they are working with him to get his feet set and to not rush the shot. They are pursuing more guards. 2024 offer today is a teammate of Mbako a 2023 recruit. It was a short friendly encounter.

[MarkD83]

But that's not the argument you made. And it's a lazy way of replying to the point Kedsy made. Put another way: Wake beat FSU. Are they objectively better than FSU? Duke beat Wake. Are they objectively better than Wake? FSU beat Duke. Are they objectively better than Duke? The answer to those three questions can't all be "yes." Which is what Kedsy and I are saying. A single outcome does not create an objective fact that the winner is better than the loser.



We get that. But your approach is flawed.



This is correct. But not terribly useful for what you are trying to do.



Any number of places. They have 12 conference games remaining. It's possible that they've "flipped the switch" and won't lose 4 more times. It's also quite possible that they overperformed in two games (@Duke and vs UNC) and are due for a regression towards the team that stunk in December. We just don't know yet. Because we don't have enough of a sample of them being "good" to know for sure how good they are.

Torvik suggests they're expected to lose @VT, @UVa, @Wake, @Louisville, and @ Syracuse. They might win some of those games, but they also might lose some others. In aggregate, he expects them to go 13-7 in conference.



Ditto to the above, with the additional point that FSU has played discernibly worse than Miami with the exception of eeking out wins against them twice. But everything else about their resume says they're playing worse than Miami (and much worse than Duke) in January.

Torvik suggests they're likely to lose @UNC and @Clemson, and VERY likely to lose @Duke (11-point spread). They then have a toss-up at UVa, and challenging matchups vs Wake (who destroyed them in Winston-Salem) and vs VT. In aggregate, he expects them to go 13-7 in conference.



But the point is that we don't know yet who the top-8 are. 13 teams are within 3 losses of each other at this point, and 7 teams (teams 7-13) are within a single loss of the "top 8". There are just way too many games left, and way too many teams who haven't faced another team in the conference yet.

I will try one last time with the 3 games tonight.

BC vs Wake
Louisville vs UVA
VT vs unc

Ok obviously any loss by unc in any season regardless of the record is good for Duke. In this case VT has 5 losses so even a unc win helps Duke. And I do not care how good or bad anyone tells me that VT is or is not. One loss and they are history!!! That said go Hokies.

BC vs Wake. Ok obviously I want BC to win to give Wake another lose. Are they "better" than Wake...I don't care. Wake needs more losses to get to 6.

Louisville vs UVA is a different issue. The good is a 4 loss team will get a 5th loss and be one away from elimination. But who do we want to get the 5th loss. They play each other again so I hope they split which means I don't care who wins tonight but I will want the loser tonight to win when they meet again.

However, UVA plays Miami twice, FSU and ND. Louisville plays ND once and Miami once (I will restrict this to the 2 loss teams). I want UVA and Louisville to win all of these games.

This is where the shady area comes in...UVA has a greater chance of losing one of their 4 games to a 2 loss team than Louisville does of losing one of their 2 games to a 2 loss team, because UVA plays more games vs 2 loss teams. (Again I do not care how good the 2 loss teams are or are not just that they have only 2 losses). So go Wahoos because it helps Duke the most in the "magic" number calculation.

p.s I appreciate that this is the Clemson thread so as I continue to keep track of what games are left on everyone's schedule I will put that info in a different thread.

[CDu]

Clemson has been a very inconsistent team this year. They blew out UVa in Charlottesville, were close against WVU on a neutral court and against Miami in Coral Gables... but lost to St Bonaventure, went to overtime against Drake, and lost at home to BC. They have talent, but it doesn't always show up.

As DBA mentioned, the thing they do really well is shoot 3s, although they don't shoot that many of them. That said, they've been trending the wrong way over the course of the season there. In conference play, they are 8th in the ACC at just 34.7% (Duke is 4th at 36.4%). But for the season, they are 16th nationally. It's just that 2022 hasn't been so kind to them from deep. Still, they are a threat to be aware of. They also don't really turn the ball over much, although again that has been trending the wrong direction (8th in conference play). What they've done best in conference play is hit 2s: 3rd in the conference behind Wake and Duke. In aggregate though, they've been pretty blah offensively in conference play.

Defensively, they've been better. It's an excellent defensive rebounding team (3rd in the conference), but just average at everything else. They've been the #11 offense in ACC play, compared with the #4 defense. Which is a bit weird, as on the season they've been better offensively (#62 nationally) than defensively (#102). Just another sign of their inconsistency.

They play a compact man defense, and contest 2s well and rebound well. So it will be interesting to see how our offense does, especially with the likely absence of Keels. Some of the matchups will be very interesting.

Centers: PJ Hall (6'10", 235lb sophomore) is the team's best player. A 4-star recruit out of high school, Hall has a good post game offensively and is a capable 3pt shooter. He's very strong and fairly athletic, and will be a tough test for Williams. He's not great defensively, Ben Middlebrooks (6'10", 225lb freshman) is the only other true center that sees action. He is a shotblocker and dunker, but fouls a lot. They'll play Hall has much as he can go, and fill in the gaps with Middlebrooks or one of their backup PFs the rest of the way.

Forwards: Hunter Tyson (6'8", 215lb senior) is the starting PF. Tyson is more of a combo forward. He is tough and scrappy and plays kind of like a poor man's Shane Battier: not overly athletic, but smart and tough and a capable 3pt shooter. Tyson will be quick enough to guard Banchero, but he can't compete with Banchero's height and size or skill. So he'll rely on Clemson's collapsing help defense to try to slow Banchero down, and won't be able to challenge Banchero in the midrange. On the other end, he's a dangerous catch-and-shoot guy and a capable straight-line driver who can punish poor closeouts.
But he's not a go-to offensive threat. Off the bench, Naz Bohannon (6'6", 230lb grad transfer from Youngstown St) is the primary option off the bench for the frontcourt. Bohannon is a very rugged player - a strong rebounder and a capable passer. Sort of a poor man's Aamir Simms, though not nearly as good. He isn't much of a shooter, but is very physical around the basket. The other forward is Ian Schieffelin (6'8", 225lb freshman). Schieffelin had really impressive bit performances in Nov/Dec, but has struggled in 2022. He's a stretch big who isn't terribly athletic, but is strong and battles. He can shoot the 3, though he hasn't hit it in conference play yet. But really, he's a 5-10mpg guy. Clemson pieces together okay size, with a 6'10" guy for ~35+ mpg and a 6'8" guy filling in the rest as needed, and a 6'8" guy or the very rugged Bohannon at the PF spot.

Wings: David Collins (6'4", 220lb grad transfer from South Florida) is the starting wing. Collins has tree trunks for legs. He's not wildly athletic, but he's VERY strong and can power his way to the basket despite not having elite ballhandling skills or explosive quickness. He's a good 3pt shooter, but doesn't take many shots from 3. He's also a terrific rebounder for a wing, leading Clemson in that category on the season. Collins is also good at reading the passing lanes and getting steals. Behind him is Chase Hunter (6'3", 205lb junior). Hunter is a more athletic, less physical wing. He's also not the 3pt shooter that Collins is, although he's still capable. Shot selection and awareness can sometimes be his weakness, but he for the most part stays in his lane. The other wing is Alex Hemenway (6'3", 185lb junior). Hemenway is a pure shooter... and basically nothing else. He's one of the best 3pt shooters in the ACC, and can't be left open. But he doesn't dribble and is a way below-average ACC athlete. He's a dynamite catch-and-shoot threat, but brings nothing else to the table on either end.

Guards: Nick Honor (5'10", 205lb 4th year junior via Fordham) and Al-Amir Dawes (6'2", 180lb junior) are the starting guards. Neither is a true PG, although I guess Honor fits that role a bit more of the two. Honor is a fire hydrant of a player and a dangerous 3pt shooter when he's hot. He is strong with the ball, sort of in the David Collins mold although MUCH shorter. He's a skilled dribbler, but not terribly quick or explosive. But he's tough and smart and is getting a little more daring at scoring off the dribble, using his strength to power for layups or create room for a midrange shot. But 3pt shots are a big part of his game. Dawes is quicker than Honor, but not as physical. He's not an above-the-rim type of athlete, but is shifty and quick. He's also a fantastic 3pt shooter, which represents most of his shots. Dawes is certainly capable of scoring off the dribble, but frequently when he drives he's looking to pass. Dawes is the highlight-reel type, willing to shoot step-back 3s, whereas Honor is the less flashy player. It's a functional backcourt pairing, but not a relative strength at the ACC level.

The Hall matchup against Williams will be interesting on both ends, as will the Tyson matchup guarding Banchero. If either Hall or Tyson gets in foul trouble, things get dicey though. Middlebrooks and Schieffelin are overmatched, and Bohannon would be at a real height disadvantage against Banchero.

How we handle their off-ball movement will be important as well. They have some guys who can bully-ball against Roach (namely Collins, Hall, Bohannon, possibly Tyson), and they have the shooters to punish us if we get lost on screens.

It's a game we should definitely win, but Clemson has just enough grit and ability to make things uncomfortable. Should be a nice test of how far we've come since the Miami and FSU debacles.

[brevity]

I don't think I've ever seen a roster like Clemson's. Everyone, even the coaches and staff, look young and awkward. The neutral gray background and forced smiles make me wonder if they hired a yearbook photographer.

Alex Hemenway looks like every Syracuse player ever.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I don't think I've ever seen a roster like Clemson's. Everyone, even the coaches and staff, look young and awkward. The neutral gray background and forced smiles make me wonder if they hired a yearbook photographer.

Alex Hemenway looks like every Syracuse player ever.

How did you not comment on the assistant coach named Dick Bender?

[Indoor66]

I will try one last time with the 3 games tonight.

BC vs Wake
Louisville vs UVA
VT vs unc

Ok obviously any loss by unc in any season regardless of the record is good for Duke. In this case VT has 5 losses so even a unc win helps Duke. And I do not care how good or bad anyone tells me that VT is or is not. One loss and they are history!!! That said go Hokies.

BC vs Wake. Ok obviously I want BC to win to give Wake another lose. Are they "better" than Wake...I don't care. Wake needs more losses to get to 6.

Louisville vs UVA is a different issue. The good is a 4 loss team will get a 5th loss and be one away from elimination. But who do we want to get the 5th loss. They play each other again so I hope they split which means I don't care who wins tonight but I will want the loser tonight to win when they meet again.

However, UVA plays Miami twice, FSU and ND. Louisville plays ND once and Miami once (I will restrict this to the 2 loss teams). I want UVA and Louisville to win all of these games.

This is where the shady area comes in...UVA has a greater chance of losing one of their 4 games to a 2 loss team than Louisville does of losing one of their 2 games to a 2 loss team, because UVA plays more games vs 2 loss teams. (Again I do not care how good the 2 loss teams are or are not just that they have only 2 losses). So go Wahoos because it helps Duke the most in the "magic" number calculation.

p.s I appreciate that this is the Clemson thread so as I continue to keep track of what games are left on everyone's schedule I will put that info in a different thread.

Wow, an emotional, desire based look at the games without being caught up in wonk rankings. How refreshing.

[Indoor66]

How did you not comment on the assistant coach named Dick Bender?

That can only be discussed after 5:00 PM.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

How did you not comment on the assistant coach named Dick Bender?

Several times lately including during a Duke game I have gotten ads for a drug where you can get information on the drug at bentcarrot.com. He can be their spokesman.

[Phredd3]

Centers: PJ Hall (6'10", 235lb sophomore) is the team's best player. A 4-star recruit out of high school, Hall has a good post game offensively and is a capable 3pt shooter. He's very strong and fairly athletic, and will be a tough test for Williams. He's not great defensively, Ben Middlebrooks (6'10", 225lb freshman) is the only other true center that sees action. He is a shotblocker and dunker, but fouls a lot. They'll play Hall has much as he can go, and fill in the gaps with Middlebrooks or one of their backup PFs the rest of the way.

So is this a game where we will play a fair amount of small ball? We don't have Keels, so that reduces some flexibility, of course, but could a lineup of Banchero, Griffin, Moore, Roach, and Baker be getting some significant some floor time together in this one? I haven't seen Clemson play much, so I'm asking, not suggesting.

[CDu]

So is this a game where we will play a fair amount of small ball? We don't have Keels, so that reduces some flexibility, of course, but could a lineup of Banchero, Griffin, Moore, Roach, and Baker be getting some significant some floor time together in this one? I haven't seen Clemson play much, so I'm asking, not suggesting.

I doubt we'll play much smallball. Clemson plays a center for 35+ minutes per game, so there isn't an inherent reason why we'd be forced to play small. There will always be someone for Williams/John to defend, an none of their bigs are very dynamic off the dribble, so our bigs should be able to recover well on ball screens.

I'm guessing we'd rather see Williams on the floor than Baker. It's possible we'll see some of that smallball lineup, but probably mainly if our bigs get in foul trouble.

I think if we had Keels, there'd be a real chance that we'd consider that smallball lineup to punish Hall/Middlebrooks with Banchero. But without Keels, I think we're better suited playing a more "traditional" lineup.

[Dr. Maturin]

Something I'm keeping an eye on tonight: can we avoid a cold spell offensively? Our offense has been excellent on the whole, but we have had a few offensive lapses recently.

Miami- we built an 8 point lead in the fist half, then let them back in it with 8 straight scoreless possessions.
Wake- after a hot start offensively, we went scoreless in 12 of 15 possessions in the first half
FSU- after taking a 5 point lead into the half, we failed to score on 13 of 15 possessions to start the second
Syracuse- after building a lead early, we went scoreless on 9 of 10 possessions

In 3 of the 4, the lapse happened around the middle of the first half. I'd say the culprits have been turnovers, occasionally poor shot selection, and substitution patterns. K has had a tendency to play Baker/John during that stretch of the game, and our offense seems to have suffered. I wonder if he's considered playing those two at different times. On the other hand, this kind of substitution pattern gives us more minutes with our starting 5 intact, and perhaps contributes to our better offensive stretches.