Welcome to SHOO-SHOO, RAH-RAH! The Duquesne Dukes Basketball Fan Message Board!
One of America's Great Message Boards - Any Inappropriate Posts Will Be Deleted!

duke-passing



You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



1/19/2017 12:41 pm  #1


Constructive (I hope)

So four small and hoisting threes is not working. At least not to anyone watching DU games with a vantage point other than the Duquesne bench. It hasn't worked for five years, in fact.

So far the only response from Ferry is to throw players under the bus, whine about those darned "bloggers" (he has the same social media coach as Belichick), and turn to players who aren't small but play small. It's his calling card, it's worked twice in 10 years in the NEC but never in his A10 tenure, and I think the thought of doing anything else makes him dizzier than a 10 year old girl on Mom's high heels.

What if he were to try something ... mmmmm ... different.

That might be a lot of things, and I'm certainly no expert. But what if, for example, he put out a true 5-4-3-2-1 lineup (Robinson, Sanders, Mike, Lewis, Smith)? What if defensively he put Mike at the top of the key with his long arms and long frame and dared teams to attack the Dukes inside where they have Robinson and Sanders (and Lewis in reserve)? What if the guards played fast and aggressive on defense and ball-hawked a little to try to create more running? What if when we had to walk the ball upcourt, the offense was built around short and mid-range jumpers, and trying to get Robinson and Sanders free close to the hoop? With threes used strategically and sparingly, and more as a tactic to open up the paint?

What if because your guards were pressing you could play a modified 10-40 with Castro and Blackman and Eric James coming in looking to run and gun (from closer to the basket)?

If you take 10 high percentage 2 point shots and hit 5, you have 10 points, If you take 10 3 point shots and hit 2, you have 6 points.

Some of you guys who understand the game better may have a better solution than this, and I'd love to hear it. At least we'd have something to discuss other than Smalltime basketball.

 

1/19/2017 1:12 pm  #2


Re: Constructive (I hope)

I'd like to see more variety. Ferry should adjust the size of his lineup based on the team we are playing or the opposing lineup that is in at any given time. Solely relying on 4 small, 1 big all the time makes it easy to prepare to play us. I think the cavaliers are a good example. Sometimes they have a big lineup with Thompson, love and Lebron. Other times, they'll throw Lebron in at the 4 and try to beat teams with pace.

 

1/19/2017 1:47 pm  #3


Re: Constructive (I hope)

ElDuque wrote:

So four small and hoisting threes is not working. At least not to anyone watching DU games with a vantage point other than the Duquesne bench. It hasn't worked for five years, in fact.

So far the only response from Ferry is to throw players under the bus, whine about those darned "bloggers" (he has the same social media coach as Belichick), and turn to players who aren't small but play small. It's his calling card, it's worked twice in 10 years in the NEC but never in his A10 tenure, and I think the thought of doing anything else makes him dizzier than a 10 year old girl on Mom's high heels.

What if he were to try something ... mmmmm ... different.

That might be a lot of things, and I'm certainly no expert. But what if, for example, he put out a true 5-4-3-2-1 lineup (Robinson, Sanders, Mike, Lewis, Smith)? What if defensively he put Mike at the top of the key with his long arms and long frame and dared teams to attack the Dukes inside where they have Robinson and Sanders (and Lewis in reserve)? What if the guards played fast and aggressive on defense and ball-hawked a little to try to create more running? What if when we had to walk the ball upcourt, the offense was built around short and mid-range jumpers, and trying to get Robinson and Sanders free close to the hoop? With threes used strategically and sparingly, and more as a tactic to open up the paint?

What if because your guards were pressing you could play a modified 10-40 with Castro and Blackman and Eric James coming in looking to run and gun (from closer to the basket)?

If you take 10 high percentage 2 point shots and hit 5, you have 10 points, If you take 10 3 point shots and hit 2, you have 6 points.

Some of you guys who understand the game better may have a better solution than this, and I'd love to hear it. At least we'd have something to discuss other than Smalltime basketball.

 
ElDuque:

I like your suggestions, especially with JRob taking inside to 12 ft shots, he can nail them.
When your team has very little sharp shooters from the three-land, pounding inside and creating and drawing fouls also gives you points.

I always was taught to use the same routine with each free throw, that means you don't walk off the line between shots, don't slap hands of team mates ( sometime incredibly when you miss?) but zero in on the wide open, unguarded 15 footer and toe the line and make the shot.


A diehard fan since 1961
 

1/19/2017 3:18 pm  #4


Re: Constructive (I hope)

I can walk outside right now with a badly damaged right shoulder (two bone spurs and a mass of arthritic muscle where I had a dislocation years ago) and hit 8 of 10 without thinking about it. I could even do it with a pair of reading glasses on. Because, Phil, you're right. It's a matter of repetition. How the hell can LaSalle hit what, 27 of 28 and we shoot 50%?

     Thread Starter
 

1/19/2017 5:31 pm  #5


Re: Constructive (I hope)

Shooting for teams must be a forgotten practice.  It was standard procedure when I was growing up and I learned very quickly that if I wanted to win I better be able to hit free throws because that got me on the team with the better players - the players that could make their free throws.

 

1/19/2017 5:59 pm  #6


Re: Constructive (I hope)

DU is 9th in the A10 at .662 which is better than Dayton at .659.  Davidson is on at  .771.

Mike Lewis is 9th in individual shooting at .825

 

1/19/2017 6:39 pm  #7


Re: Constructive (I hope)

Econ69 wrote:

DU is 9th in the A10 at .662 which is better than Dayton at .659.  Davidson is on at  .771.

Mike Lewis is 9th in individual shooting at .825

Davidson is a perfect example of how a small thing like free throws can be big. You see them, and they usually will have one stud on the team, and a bunch of guys who play smart, and do the little things. At the end of the year, they have 20+ wins. I don't want to blame the free throw thing on Ferry, as I've seen many a coach way better than him struggle with dreadful free throw shooting teams over the years.
 

 

1/19/2017 6:48 pm  #8


Re: Constructive (I hope)

Remember Sean Miller as a point guard at Pitt, he wasn't much above average in size, not quick at all but could pass and get it to the open man. He also shot about 90 from the free throw line, and was above average shooter but not a three specialist like Our Mason.

Make the best of your talent and your team will win.


A diehard fan since 1961
 

1/19/2017 7:17 pm  #9


Re: Constructive (I hope)

And we're talking Free Throw Shooting with NO MENTION OF RICK SUDER???  Didn't he Actually lead the NATION one year.  Of course maybe some of the guys could swallow their pride and ask CHASSIDY for some advice!!!  NAH gotta work on the triple spin, double pump alley oop move!!!  Might actually get to use it once a year -- and how often do they actually shoot free throws in a game????

 

1/19/2017 8:14 pm  #10


Re: Constructive (I hope)

Coach ElDuque, your points are quite valid. If there was ever a team that is built to play a 1-3-1 type of zone, this is it. I Mike at the top (or sub Eric James) would certainly disrupt offenses. And you could extend the zone on the wings with your guards, while having Sanders/Robinson/Lewis clean up any penetration.

The current pack line man to man defense just sucks; it accomplishes nothing except training your guards not to work to stop ball penetration (because help will be there) and not to fight over ball screens (because you switch, creating mismatches to be exploited).

On offense, allowing your overall poor shooting team to launch 3 after 3 after 3 is beyond me.

 

1/19/2017 11:10 pm  #11


Re: Constructive (I hope)

El D your lineup is something that should be tried, and many of us here have advocated a bigger line-up, but I will be very surprised if it does.  The reason it would work is that JRob gives you a solid offensive game and athletic inside presence, which doesn't happen with Lewis or Sanders.  Sanders should play the PF and IMike at the 3.  Sanders can rebound, play D and get some points around the basket (hopefully he is not fouled attempting any put backs) and IMike can certainly fill the 3 spot and he can score in a variety of ways - which is what you need at the SF spot.  However, I think the best we can hope for is that JRob gets most of Lewis' minutes from here on out.  On defense I would like to see how that would work and again I like the idea, but the D hasn't been that bad over all, it's more the offensive scheme in my view - shooting 3's and not having a set play half way through the shot clock when that weave isn't working.  Another buddy and DU supporter pointed out to me to watch UCLA how Alford runs the weave.  Granted they have better players, but if the weave doesn't get any traction they go to a set play with time still left on the shot clock - it's called an option Jimmy.  We get way too caught up in the weave at times and then end up really forcing shots (3's anyone) or turning the ball over.

 

1/20/2017 7:05 am  #12


Re: Constructive (I hope)

Pete the weave is supposed to result in easy layups. With Ferry it ends up being a bad shot. Pete Carrill would be exasperated watching us.

     Thread Starter
 

1/20/2017 9:51 am  #13


Re: Constructive (I hope)

Great coaches adapt their system to the players they have. Ferry slots players into the system. Thus, Sanders, Lewis and Robinson are 5s. The third five seems to get the last three minutes of the first half if the first two are coming up short. Guess who has been third all year? Mike and Abrahamson are 4s. Blackmon gets nearly 30 minutes, so James and Littleson are little used 3s. Smith and Castro handle the ball, so Lewis II can shoot. No flexibility. No one plays another position. No chance for development except in your role. The women are just the opposite. They play multiple positions and almost every game, everyone gets in. Omogrosso plays the 1 and 2. Aho and Richardson play 1, 2, and 3. The bigs shoot threes and post up. Thomas, Staffolino and Cannon have showed at the 3, 4, and 5. And, the team is developing and growing. Stagnant and stubborn with a system seems to be the men's M.O. Give me the women's approach which is always coaching up, no matter who is in the game!

Last edited by HookShot (1/20/2017 9:53 am)

 

1/20/2017 10:16 am  #14


Re: Constructive (I hope)

PistolPete wrote:

El D your lineup is something that should be tried, and many of us here have advocated a bigger line-up, but I will be very surprised if it does.  The reason it would work is that JRob gives you a solid offensive game and athletic inside presence, which doesn't happen with Lewis or Sanders.  Sanders should play the PF and IMike at the 3.  Sanders can rebound, play D and get some points around the basket (hopefully he is not fouled attempting any put backs) and IMike can certainly fill the 3 spot and he can score in a variety of ways - which is what you need at the SF spot.  However, I think the best we can hope for is that JRob gets most of Lewis' minutes from here on out.  On defense I would like to see how that would work and again I like the idea, but the D hasn't been that bad over all, it's more the offensive scheme in my view - shooting 3's and not having a set play half way through the shot clock when that weave isn't working.  Another buddy and DU supporter pointed out to me to watch UCLA how Alford runs the weave.  Granted they have better players, but if the weave doesn't get any traction they go to a set play with time still left on the shot clock - it's called an option Jimmy.  We get way too caught up in the weave at times and then end up really forcing shots (3's anyone) or turning the ball over.

Also agree with El D. While watching the GW game I literally had the same thought. A starting line up of Smith/Castro (depending on who's hot at the time, both streaky), Lewis II, Mike, Robinson and Sanders. I would put Robinson at the 4 because he is better on offense than Nakye and not as good on D. This lineup would be much stronger defensively, and could actually use its size and strength to get the ball inside for once and not just settle for passing around the perimeter and jacking up a contested three.

I too am sick of these 3 guard two forward lineups or smaller. If you can actually establish an inside game it can lead to better looks from the perimeter. The lineup we have is so one dimensional right now. We have to hope to make a three like I said or rely on a long contested drive to the hoop from a smaller guard which isn't effective if you try to do it over and over. They need to spread the floor and move the ball.

Our offense is so stupid right not. Guard dribbles up, PASSES TO THE 5 STANDING AT THE 3 POINT LINE???? Who then hands the ball off, runs a super weak pick and roll and never gets the ball, and then the guards and mike dribble around the perimeter, passing right before they turn the ball over, and eventually jack up a three or try to drive to the hoop with seconds left on the clock. Like we do that so often I don't know how teams don't just laugh watching our tape. It's so predictable, the sad thing is they have the personnel to actually play real basketball.

It's really sad to look at a season like this and be able to pick out game after game that we should have won, including gw and probably another conference game I'm not thinking of. This team has talent but someone correctly stated this idiot coach wants to put kids in his brilliant system. Who does he think he is, Phil Jackson?? If we had a real coach this team could be so much higher in rpi and conference standings it's just laughable. Anyone who knows anything about basketball can see the gaping holes in Ferrys logic.

With the proposed starting lineup you have Blackman coming off the bench giving instant offense and change of pace and then you have Lewis for interior depth. After that I would have James and abrahamson playing rotation minutes to provide depth when needed. This is just idiotic.

Jordan Robinson is the best interior offensive player on this team by miles and miles and until now couldn't get a sniff of playing time. Just shows Ferrys arrogance and incompetence in my opinion.

Last edited by Duques102 (1/20/2017 10:19 am)

 

1/20/2017 4:50 pm  #15


Re: Constructive (I hope)

El D I could almost see Pete C cringing watching us run the weave - so true.  D102 you make a good point of Sanders at the 5 and JRob at the 4, that makes sense.  Well we'll see what the next few games bring, but looking at the schedule, I honestly don't see any W's.  Why?  RI is one of the top teams in the league and when was the last time we beat Richmond or Davidson?  This is why you don't lose winnable OOC games against weak opponents or winnable games in conference - GW. I have always said the first building block is to just win the games you should win, then you progress by stealing one you shouldn't. That is the true brick by brick approach.

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum