An Interesting Twist on "Stall-Ball"

[MChambers]

I don't think most of the folks posting here have given Paulus sufficient credit for playing last year. We'll probably never know how much the injury affected his game, but I'm willing to bet you are right.

[CDu]

I really didn't understand your point. It did turn out that Paulus had played the entire season with a broken foot that needed surgery. Maybe you are right. I had a broken foot once; probably just projection on my part. Probably didn't effect his ability to deal with intensive pressure one bit. Heck, I bet when he was forced by pressure to plant and turn on that foot, and made some weak tepid pass to nobody, it had nothing to do with shooting pain. Man, where did I get such silly notions. Ridiculous? You sure about that CDU? You sure about that!

You do think that the point guard is a more important position than I do, and you have never regarded Paulus as competent to that task. That is my recollection.

I thought that we both agreed last year that Paulus did not belong out there--me, because I thought he was seriously injured (I said so a million times from the beginning of the season through the end) and you because you thought that he was performing poorly and that Scheyer and Henderson and Nelson could share the point duties and make for a stronger squad. You telling me now that I got that wrong? Come on, I don't remember so good anymore, CDU, but this I remember.

Now, your statement that you think that Paulus is the best point guard that K could put out there this year surprises me. I do not believe that even K believes that. Not in the way that you conceive it, anyway. I do not think Paulus is out there to play the position that Hurley, JWill, or Amakar (well maybe him, but only when Dawkins was running with him) played. That, in my opinion, is not his position on this season's ball club.

If you disagree with that, that is fine. You definitely know ball. You also have very firm and on-the-record opinions of what a point guard should possess (Lawsen, right), and have made it clear that you do not believe that Paulus fits the bill.

My opinion, if K wanted to play with a conventional concept of a point guard on the floor he'd be using Scheyer and Smith collectively at the 1 for more minutes than Paulus.

People asked why Smith backed the ball up the court against Marquette. I think it's because that is what K wants. He wants him to withstand the force of the defense, absorb it, and get the thing into the hands of others to create. Paulus does that better.

Using Scheyer or Nelson or Henderson to pull such duty would be a waste. Absorbing the force of the defensive pressure (picture the Marquette game here fellas) and delivering the ball to the wing creators is not easy work. Nor is it glamorous, especially as compared to the guys he is going up against who get to do so much more. Sacrificing your game for the good of the team in such a context constitutes leadership. It speaks to courage much more than diving for a million loose balls on the floor.

I think that K knows that and so do his teammates. Frankly, I don't know why I referenced Braveheart. I can't stand what's his name, for reasons that should be obvious.

1. My stance has always been that Paulus is not an elite college point guard. I do think the position is very important and a key to being an elite team. I'm quite sure that I've never suggested the team has a better option at point guard. My point last year was that the team is limited BECAUSE they don't have a better option.
2. We aren't going to get anywhere discussing Paulus' injury. It's pointless to continue to debate it.
3. I agree that Paulus isn't out there to play like Hurley, Williams, etc. That doesn't mean he's not our best option at PG. It just means he isn't capable of doing what they could do (and few could). The fact is, we don't have any other point guards on the team (Smith played SG in high school). I completely disagree that Scheyer or Smith would be better options to play the "conventional point guard role."
4. I don't think Coach K wants his PG to back the ball up court. I think that's a function of Smith's lack of experience at PG.
5. I never said Lawson was the prototypical point guard. Just that Lawson has the explosiveness/athleticism at PG that Paulus doesn't.
6. Courage is not the right word for "sacrificing himself up for the good of the team." Moreover, that's not what he's doing. He's playing the point guard position. The point guard's job is to set up the offense and set up others for baskets. It's not courage, it's the requirement of the position.

[CDu]

And, the one thing that is a bit scratchy here CDU is what your take is on this year's offense and whether you think my parabole presents an apt picture of K's strategy and how it fits in the current landscape that comprises most of Duke's opponents.

That was the point of my parabole, and I do think that Paulus plays the lead and courageous role in it. I get that I am prone to hyperbole. Now we know two things: I can't spell and puff a bit when making a point. You got a take on basketball or are you teaching English like the other guy?

I simply think you're overstating the courageousness of Paulus' role. That was what I disagreed with in your first post. I think he's simply playing the point guard role: bring the ball up court, set up the offense. He's a point guard. That's his job. I don't think it's courageous to play the point guard position when you are supposed to be a point guard.

And I don't think I've ever critiqued your grammar. I'm certainly not here to teach ANYONE English, as I don't even know what a parabole is. I just feel like you have a tendency to sometimes apply much greater significance to something than it probably deserves.

[CDu]

While I don't always agree with greybeard (or anyone, for that matter), I am in 100% agreement with him about Paulus. He is the most criticized, most underrated player on the team. I look for great things for him in the next two years if he continues to remain healthy. His length of the court pass (to Singler?) has to go into the Duke BB archives. Great. He sees the court very well, and generally makes good decisions. After playing injured last year, I think he is still a bit gunshy about making the big play, but is working on it.

I hope you're right. I don't see it that way, but I sure hope you're right. We don't have any better options at PG this year, and we aren't going to have a better option next year either. So I definitely hope Paulus can figure out how to make his high school prowess translate to the college game.

[Jumbo]

People asked why Smith backed the ball up the court against Marquette. I think it's because that is what K wants. He wants him to withstand the force of the defense, absorb it, and get the thing into the hands of others to create. Paulus does that better.

What do you mean by that? Could you explain it in a different way?

[greybeard]

CDU, thanks for the clarification.

Jumbo, my thought is that K sees the point guard position for this year differently than most. Rather than being the initiator of the offense, the job principally is to absorb the defensive pressure that most defensive schemes are designed to place on the PG position, maintain poise, and get it to one of the initiators, which in the main will be either of the two wings. Paulus then becomes an option off of the flow that comes after the offense is initiated, in one of a number of ways, but often off of penetration by Henderson, Scheyer, or Nelson. I have not seen enough of King to know whether to include him in that group.

When the pressure is not focused on him, he has leeway to create as an initiator but that is not his primary role. And, he can start the offense by a penetrating pass, but that also is not option 1. Screen and role with one of the two bigs coming towards the top of the circle is also an option, but that I again think is reserved for when the exterior defense is not set to stop the point but rather is focused on tight guarding of the wings.

Absorbing the pressure that defenses are designed to throw at the point, especially when, as I believe, the point has constraints against taking the ball and trying to hurt the pressure by beating it to create for himself first and then others, is extremely difficult. I think it is that that Paulus is better at than Smith.

Smith I believe would follow what he's done until now; you pressure him and he will try to bury him. All scorers relish having a defender come after them. Smith can score the ball. K does not want the point to initiate according to the defense's dictates. You put the reigns on a young colt and ask him to change a mindset that plays to his intelligence as developed thus far and the point of moderation is often missed.

This is the same essential point I made about the play of Nelson and Henderson. I see both as posssessing keen vision (smarts) that matches their athleticism (I hate that term). The things that they saw most possible in the game last year they were restrained from doing by the occupy-the-clock imperative K employed. This year they have no such constraints. I see each able to beat defenders every bit their equal athletically, and often an inch or two bigger. I think it is because they are smarter (there is no movement absent the mind, none).

For the point guard position, the reign is still tight. How to ease up on the pedal without going to slow, how to recognize appropriate opportunities when the most appropriate ones you see are denied to you, etc, takes time to develop a feel, a vision, a wisdom for. Smith is not where Paulus is yet with those things.

That can't be clearer, but it was a sincere try.

[Jumbo]

Greybeard,
I guess I don't understand what you mean by "absorbing the pressure." That's why I'm still confused.

[greybeard]

Greybeard,
I guess I don't understand what you mean by "absorbing the pressure." That's why I'm still confused.

Classic point, say Hurley, Paul, Lawsen, you pressure them to get them to give up the ball or turn it over, they make you pay if they can. Look to blow past, create penetration and score or drop off for an inside play by a big. At the least, penetrate the pressure and look to make a special pass.

Paulus's job is to get the ball into attack position. You don't threaten the defense as described above, you embolden them. The defense is looking to "kill the head" and the body dies. They are trained, organized to do it. Paulus's job is to take the risk without posing the threat. Maintain composure, and put it in the hands of a wing. The wing initiates, if he draws Paulus's guy, Paulus is an offensive piece. In that posture, the defense in a sense has pressured the wrong guy. So Paulus takes the heat reserved for the classic point, the Paul's of the world, and Duke's initiators have fresh legs and minds not cluttered by the first aggressive wave of the defense.

If the defense backs away from the asssault on the point, that is pressure by a superior athlete with help coming from who knows where, and seeks to stay at home on the wings, then Paulus reads it and can act as a classic point.

The high screens for the initiators remove the need to spend a good move to get the edge on their defender. They then can turn the corner as they enter the middle with more tricks in their arsenals and get up and go in their tanks. Much of the exterior intensity has been extended on the point.

Now, could Paulus take on the pressure like a classic point and look to beat the defense, finish with a pull up or charge to the rim or dish, and do it effectively, CDu says not as well as you'd want. I've always felt that he showed a lot of that ability year 1, and that since then has not been whole enough to tell. Even this year I have some doubts (having foot surgery is a last resort and often presents less than ideal results) as to his complete health. However, I have a more optimistic view than CDu on that score, but cannot say he's wrong. He, like I said, as a better appreciation and fondness for the position than I. I am not a fan of the dominant point.

I have to think that Paulus would love to hurt folks who look to challenge him more than he tries to now. Exercising self restraint keeps him under more pressure longer than if he excaped and attacked. He'd also have a chance to make the other guys look real bad, which they can do to him if they catch him right. That is what they are trained for. So, he essentially needs to get the ball into the forecourt in balance and be able to start the ball rolling so that an initiator, attacker, can penetrate the defense, score the ball, or initiate inside out play. A division of responsibilities reposited on some teams in one player, the star point.

[CDu]

Classic point, say Hurley, Paul, Lawsen, you pressure them to get them to give up the ball or turn it over, they make you pay if they can. Look to blow past, create penetration and score or drop off for an inside play by a big. At the least, penetrate the pressure and look to make a special pass.

Paulus's job is to get the ball into attack position. You don't threaten the defense as described above, you embolden them. The defense is looking to "kill the head" and the body dies. They are trained, organized to do it. Paulus's job is to take the risk without posing the threat. Maintain composure, and put it in the hands of a wing. The wing initiates, if he draws Paulus's guy, Paulus is an offensive piece. In that posture, the defense in a sense has pressured the wrong guy. So Paulus takes the heat reserved for the classic point, the Paul's of the world, and Duke's initiators have fresh legs and minds not cluttered by the first aggressive wave of the defense.

If the defense backs away from the asssault on the point, that is pressure by a superior athlete with help coming from who knows where, and seeks to stay at home on the wings, then Paulus reads it and can act as a classic point.

The high screens for the initiators remove the need to spend a good move to get the edge on their defender. They then can turn the corner as they enter the middle with more tricks in their arsenals and get up and go in their tanks. Much of the exterior intensity has been extended on the point.

Now, could Paulus take on the pressure like a classic point and look to beat the defense, finish with a pull up or charge to the rim or dish, and do it effectively, CDu says not as well as you'd want. I've always felt that he showed a lot of that ability year 1, and that since then has not been whole enough to tell. Even this year I have some doubts (having foot surgery is a last resort and often presents less than ideal results) as to his complete health. However, I have a more optimistic view than CDu on that score, but cannot say he's wrong. He, like I said, as a better appreciation and fondness for the position than I. I am not a fan of the dominant point.

I have to think that Paulus would love to hurt folks who look to challenge him more than he tries to now. Exercising self restraint keeps him under more pressure longer than if he excaped and attacked. He'd also have a chance to make the other guys look real bad, which they can do to him if they catch him right. That is what they are trained for. So, he essentially needs to get the ball into the forecourt in balance and be able to start the ball rolling so that an initiator, attacker, can penetrate the defense, score the ball, or initiate inside out play. A division of responsibilities reposited on some teams in one player, the star point.

First, I really don't think it's any strategic gameplan for to have Paulus absorb the pressure and not attack. In fact, I think Coach K would much prefer it if Paulus could make defenses pay for pressure defense more often. I don't think the "back to the defender" approach is/was an exercise in self-restraint, but moreso an exercise in necessity for Paulus. Second, Paulus doesn't exclusively bring the ball up the court this year. Henderson, Scheyer, Singler, and Nelson often do as well. So that blows the whole "fresh legs" theory. If the intent for Paulus was to save their energy by absorbing the pressure of bringing the ball up court.

Further, I think the net effect of the approach you suggest is not a benefit. The offense would be much more effective if you could attack pressure and not have to withstand the pressure. And it's actually saving the rest of the defense energy, because they can relax and get into position, and not have to react as much to the threat of the point guard beating his man.

It appears to me this season that Coach K wants to get to the offensive end as quickly as possible to try to create easy scoring chances. That would seem to be counter intuitive to the absorb the pressure approach. Thus, I think you're misclassifying what is actually a limitation of Paulus as a courageous strength of his.

Also, I don't think I've never said I was a fan of the dominant PG. I don't want one guy dribbling 90% of the clock and necessarily determining every possession. What I do want is a point guard who's athletic enough to create easy scoring chances for others regularly. Can you succeed without one of those? Sure, but I think it's a lot harder.

[greybeard]

First, I really don't think it's any strategic gameplan for to have Paulus absorb the pressure and not attack. In fact, I think Coach K would much prefer it if Paulus could make defenses pay for pressure defense more often. I don't think the "back to the defender" approach is/was an exercise in self-restraint, but moreso an exercise in necessity for Paulus. Second, Paulus doesn't exclusively bring the ball up the court this year. Henderson, Scheyer, Singler, and Nelson often do as well. So that blows the whole "fresh legs" theory. If the intent for Paulus was to save their energy by absorbing the pressure of bringing the ball up court.

Further, I think the net effect of the approach you suggest is not a benefit. The offense would be much more effective if you could attack pressure and not have to withstand the pressure. And it's actually saving the rest of the defense energy, because they can relax and get into position, and not have to react as much to the threat of the point guard beating his man.

It appears to me this season that Coach K wants to get to the offensive end as quickly as possible to try to create easy scoring chances. That would seem to be counter intuitive to the absorb the pressure approach. Thus, I think you're misclassifying what is actually a limitation of Paulus as a courageous strength of his.

Also, I don't think I've never said I was a fan of the dominant PG. I don't want one guy dribbling 90% of the clock and necessarily determining every possession. What I do want is a point guard who's athletic enough to create easy scoring chances for others regularly. Can you succeed without one of those? Sure, but I think it's a lot harder.

Interesting perspectives. Makes me reexamine.

[Jumbo]

Greybeard,
I agree that Duke is asking its point guards to do less -- i.e. get the team into the offense, but not look to create on their own right away. But that doesn't mean it's a "courageous" thing. I can also tell you that no coach would ever teach a point guard to back the ball up the court. Why? It cuts off his vision. Even if you want your point guard to merely get the ball over halfcourt an deliver it to the wing, you want him to be able to see as much as possible. So, Smith isn't turning his back because Duke's coaches are telling him to do that. He's turning his back because he isn't confident running the position yet, and might be a little shaky with his handle in the process.

[greybeard]

Greybeard,
I agree that Duke is asking its point guards to do less -- i.e. get the team into the offense, but not look to create on their own right away. But that doesn't mean it's a "courageous" thing. I can also tell you that no coach would ever teach a point guard to back the ball up the court. Why? It cuts off his vision. Even if you want your point guard to merely get the ball over halfcourt an deliver it to the wing, you want him to be able to see as much as possible. So, Smith isn't turning his back because Duke's coaches are telling him to do that. He's turning his back because he isn't confident running the position yet, and might be a little shaky with his handle in the process.

The game has changed a bit over the years, Jumbo. On some issues, it even might be said to pass one by; but not if a guy keeps his ears open (deliberate, does tickle the mind, right). Go Duke, and thanks for an insight, especially the patience in the set up!

[throatybeard]

Allow me to clarify, gentlemen. This post was misplaced, inadvertently I can assure you. It was meant to be placed after the still last post on the thread, "Next Step."

We can move it.

[throatybeard]

Thanks for the (backhanded?) compliment?

Aw, c'mon, what's backhanded about comparing a guy to Putin or Ahmadinejad?

[greybeard]

We can move it.

No need. Jumbo showed great patience in getting me to be clear after I had "clarified" things (Prof White: there is only good rewriting), and then both he and CDu made some particularly apt counterpoints.