kshepinthehouse
Member
You guys want to play foster just to play him?
MBB: Duke 71, Clemson 77: Post-game thread
- Thread starter -jk
- Start date
peteandpete
Member
I was disappointed that they missed Cooper's defender tripping him on the drive just before he slipped on the wet spot. It was clear on the replay from under the basket and should have been visible to the baseline official and the official on that sideline. Also, Cooper took a hand to the face earlier in the game which could have been an F 1. It did seem as if at least Cooper was not 100% which made his late game heroics even more amazing. I wonder if flu shots are required? The announcers were also talking about one of the Tigers who was dealing with the flu. I hope we get well for the stretch run. I would dearly love to win the regular season and have the number one seed for the conference tournament.
peteandpete
Member
Please don't make cancer references. Trust me; there is no comparison.
CajunDevil
Member
Foster’s confidence is what needs to change. Once he becomes playable then perhaps the minutes distribution will be different.
Of course they should count, only point being is that a few of them were prayers that went in. They kept the score closer than maybe it should have been down the stretch.
cbarry
Member
We have either lost to, or almost lost to, teams with physical big men. Man Man just isn’t there yet defensively, and he is too skinny to handle a strong big man. So I think we need to play zone for a majority of the time vs teams like that.
Our opponents have scored at a MUCH lower rate (less than half as much by the eye test) when we go zone.
Their bigs out played our bigs and that was the difference. Man-Man was out played badly, and this was a bad matchup for Maliq. We really missed Mason, even if he's only around 6'6-6'7". Those that were comparing Man-Man to Lively and Mark Williams on defense see how badly that comparison was. I hoped that Jon would have stayed in the zone longer. I know it's harder to rebound in a zone, but we couldn't have done worse than we were doing. From my chair, it looked like we got stuck at 49 points for a long time. On another note, did it look like Coach Brownell got upset with one of his asst. coaches during their last timeout. I told my wife, I'd fire that dude.
GoDuke and Next Play!
GoDuke and Next Play!
OptimisticDevil
New member
Proctor and James earned those minutes. Foster is an excellent talent but right now the ball seems to stick in his hands. I suspect his playing time will increase when he rotates the ball more efficiently. I am rooting for him.
UrinalCake
Member
This might be selection bias but I can recall a few games this season where opposing big men had success scoring one on one in the post. BC's center went 7-11 for 19 points. Miami's went 10-17 for 20. George Mason's 9-19 for 18. There may have been others that I don't care to look up.
Again, maybe I'm just cherry picking the bad games, as there have been other games where opposing bigs were defended well. And maybe part of our game plan in certain matchups is to concede interior scoring in order to shut down the perimeter. But I do have a bit of concern of our interior defense, which sounds crazy when Maluach and Brown are two of the best defenders in the conference and Ngongba has held his own. Yesterday we made Lakhin look like Joel Embiid. Even Reeves made good contributions; he must have thought he was back at Countdown to Craziness.
Last edited:
UrinalCake
Member
Regarding our defense, I'm not a coach but my eyes see us doing a lot more hedge and recover the past two games and not as much switching bigs onto guards up top. We still do sometimes fall into mismatches (I particularly enjoyed when Proctor was matched onto Reeves and was able to force a miss) but it doesn't feel as frequent. Clemson did run a lot of good actions to free cutters into the lane when we did switch. Just part of the growing process of the season - opponents learn what you like to do and adjust, then you have to adjust back.
It was a physical game and the refs let a lot go (I was particularly aggrieved by Lathkin putting his elbow into Coop's neck and pushing off to free himself for a layup) and we can complain about it but the reality is that in the tournament some games will be officiated like this and we need to be prepared. Many of our seasons have ended in a game in which we were out-physicaled, leaving fans to complain about the refs but it doesn't change the result. So again, a good learning moment for the team as much as it sucks to lose like that.
It was a physical game and the refs let a lot go (I was particularly aggrieved by Lathkin putting his elbow into Coop's neck and pushing off to free himself for a layup) and we can complain about it but the reality is that in the tournament some games will be officiated like this and we need to be prepared. Many of our seasons have ended in a game in which we were out-physicaled, leaving fans to complain about the refs but it doesn't change the result. So again, a good learning moment for the team as much as it sucks to lose like that.
Phredd3
Member
"Keep dropping?" This was our third loss of the entire season, and it ended a 16-game win streak! According to your theory, Kansas must be the last "good team" we faced, and Auburn would like to have a word with you about that.
Yes I really want to get them again. The wet floor issue and blackouts on key Duke time outs really ticked me off. Clemson deserved to win but that's not the way to do it.
UrinalCake
Member
Really need to beat Illinois, and also hope that they play well against everybody else. Them and Arizona will be our only wins against ranked teams, unless Louisville can make a surge. If we lose to Illinois, the narrative will undoubtedly be that we are simply taking advantage of a weak ACC this year (which is kind of the narrative already).
Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
Member
Surely we have all watched enough basketball to know that the number of fouls called on each team is not proof of unfair reffing. If so, you could claim that Duke was the beneficiary FAR more often than not based on fewer fould and more free throws.
Remember the stat that announcers used to repeat ad nauseum in the late 80s and 90s about "Duke makes more free throws than their opponents attempt?"
Bummer of a game - Proctor played great, Flagg did not until late. Maluach's foul trouble was a definite impact. Gillis being out shortened our bench. The opponent was a well-coached tough team playing in font of a passionate crowd.
This loss is a bummer this morning, but probably only refocuses the team and may get us back on track for the stretch run.
The refs didn't beat us.
Dr. Maturin
Member
I don't think I'm worried about interior defense. Duke is #3 nationally defending 2 pointers and has the best numbers there for a Duke team since 2005.
Yesterday we made the conscious decision to take away the 3. I'm actually somewhat heartened by the way we did so successfully, as defending the 3 has been our only real weakness on D this year. The trade off was single coverage in the post. To be sure, Clemson outmanoeuvred us on some possessions for easy buckets. They also made a lot of difficult shots as well. If it takes going 12/18 from midrange to beat us, then we are going to win a lot more games.
I thought our offensive execution was more of an issue. The second half felt like the second half against Wake. Had we not hit half our 3s, our offensive numbers would be the talking point I think. Still, we executed at an extremely high level against Carolina and Syracuse, so hopefully this was just a blip.
Yesterday we made the conscious decision to take away the 3. I'm actually somewhat heartened by the way we did so successfully, as defending the 3 has been our only real weakness on D this year. The trade off was single coverage in the post. To be sure, Clemson outmanoeuvred us on some possessions for easy buckets. They also made a lot of difficult shots as well. If it takes going 12/18 from midrange to beat us, then we are going to win a lot more games.
I thought our offensive execution was more of an issue. The second half felt like the second half against Wake. Had we not hit half our 3s, our offensive numbers would be the talking point I think. Still, we executed at an extremely high level against Carolina and Syracuse, so hopefully this was just a blip.
This is always going to happen when referees "let em play." When you don't get whistled for obvious fouls you ratchet up the physicality to see how much you can get away with. It's like Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine - they gave me a strike an inch off the plate, let's see if we can go one and a half, then two. Eventually it gets so bad they're forced to call a million touch fouls to keep an all out brawl from happening.
Personally, I'd rather see games with 100 free throws and the walk ons finishing because everyone's fouled out until the Rick Barnes and Tony Bennett copycats start coaching basketball defense instead of wrestling moves, but I know that's not going to happen. I'd settle for calling it a little tighter at the beginning to keep everybody on their best behavior, especially off the ball.