The Dukes offensive system & execution are that of a bottom 3 A-10 school. The good news is that the offensive talent on the roster is somewhere between 6th & 8th in the league.  For this team to be a respected & serious winner in this league KD will need an offensive coordinator & to listen to that offensive coordinator. 

Most nights, the Dukes platoon system of bigs is going to work well in this year's A-10. No other A-10 team is going to throw 4 players as big, skilled, experienced, long, & athletic as Holmes, Camara, Blakney & Amzil at the Dukes.

Reece & Q were not ready for this stage & level of competition tonight. Brewer & Tre Clark were.

Chabbi has some serious upside.

I understand why Gunn went in the game, I don't understand why he got so many 2nd half minutes while things fell apart & he was gumming up the already struggling offense.. He has been injured so much & for so long he hasn't really, in my eyes, earned that much run when things aren't going well for him. His becoming an impactful A-10 player over the next 18-19 games seems like an incredible longshot. 

Phil I agree 1000% and as others have pointed out no rhythm offensively.  Not enough ball movement and movement without the ball, way too stagnant and dependent on this high pick and roll.  Reece and Tre will have problems against legit size at the 4 and 5, which Dayton exposed.  Barre can be really good, he has the length and was a presence defensively and is not bad offensively at this point - his future is bright.  He and Dixon would be legit A-10 4 and 5, but not this year.  Brewer and Kareem get exposed on D with their lack of height, but Brewer gives so much more offensively at this point and he hit some key shots tonight to keep us in it.  We will bounce back from this, but i also want to see an offense with a better scheme when you have to play half court and KD has to determine soon what his rotation will look like.  

A replay for those who dare to review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTIFqd_agCs

It was the first game against an excellent opponent away.  What does concern me, is they beat us like this with 2 starters out.  This had nothing to do with coaching...they have better players.

FAM wrote:

It was the first game against an excellent opponent away.  What does concern me, is they beat us like this with 2 starters out.  This had nothing to do with coaching...they have better players.

You are correct, FAM. No matter who they have coaching, they have always had better players than us. They are not on Gonzaga's level, to be sure. However, it's the same effect. Until you have three or four Dance invitations in a five-year span, or so, you are going to recruit the second and third tier of players. You may get lucky one year (if we win the Temple A-10 championship under RE) and sneak into the Dance, but that's not enough. At this point, for me, I am just praying for that one lucky year. Please Lord...
 

We lose to the best team in the conference, at their arena, by 12 points. Everyone run-around and lament that the sky is falling. What is Dayton's win record at home? I guess that maybe we  won't be the only team to lose at Dayton this year.
Why is it that everytime we have a a bad game we revert to criticizing the coaches, the offensive/defensive schemes, the recruiting, the equipment manager and everything about the men's basketball program?
So now losing to Dayton is absolute proof that we are a bottom-dwelling loser. No hope for us!
Did we have a bad game? Yes.  Were there mistakes? Yes.  Was this game indicitive of how this team will play the rest of the year? We don't know, do we? So quit the apocalyptic outlook everytime we lose and the nothing-but-sunshine outlook when we win. We are not perfect, can you deal with that? I predict that Duquesne will lose at least one more game this year. Oh-noooooo!

Bleeds Red & Blue wrote:

We lose to the best team in the conference, at their arena, by 12 points. Everyone run-around and lament that the sky is falling. What is Dayton's win record at home? I guess that maybe we won't be the only team to lose at Dayton this year.
Why is it that everytime we have a a bad game we revert to criticizing the coaches, the offensive/defensive schemes, the recruiting, the equipment manager and everything about the men's basketball program?
So now losing to Dayton is absolute proof that we are a bottom-dwelling loser. No hope for us!
Did we have a bad game? Yes. Were there mistakes? Yes. Was this game indicitive of how this team will play the rest of the year? We don't know, do we? So quit the apocalyptic outlook everytime we lose and the nothing-but-sunshine outlook when we win. We are not perfect, can you deal with that? I predict that Duquesne will lose at least one more game this year. Oh-noooooo!

Good post. No team wins every game, even the best teams don't. But every game is a learning experience and  for the teams that end up on top, they adjust. I still believe this team is in the mix. 20 plus wins, At least 12-6 in the A-10 and in the top 4 at tourney time. I traveled to Dayton when RE coached. 13,000 seat arena at full capacity. Ron told me going there that the crowd noise is like nothing you every heard. The Dukes held the lead all the way to around 3 minutes left when Dayton on a 3,  took the lead for the first time, then the crowd yelled so loud I couldn't even hear myself talk. Billy Clark came right back and buried a 3 and shut them up. We lost that game by 1 point. That arena was built to win and the town of Dayton only has one sports team. The flyers. That's why the arena is full all the time and why they do get top recruits. Still, this Dukes team could have won if everything fell into place. It's a long season and this was a good effort. 

Last edited by NapaDuke (12/29/2022 2:26 pm)

Im a glass half full guy.  We spotted them 10 points right off the bat and basically played them even for the the last 34 minutes despite terrible outside shooting on the road at the one of the toughest venues in the league.  I like the way our guys fought all night.  Going into the season you look at an A-10 opener on the road against Dayton and you consider that a loss.  It would have been nice to steal one but that didnt happen.  The results were not "encouraging" but they were not discouraging either.  I think we will know a lot more about this team at 3pm on Saturday.

CLK wrote:

Just watched the replay, brutal.  For every game to be a learning experience you have to correct what you are doing wrong.  However, we have the same guys continually making the same mistakes. There is a reason why we were raked 269 in 3-point defense going into last night's game.  Against the Dukes it seems like every team has a player having a season high shoot the 3.  It was the same last night.  Certain guys seem absolutely clueless on who they should guard, and then make half ass attempts in closing out late.  

The A10 is a guard dominated league for the most part with players who will consistently drain wide open shots.  Three-point defense has to improve if we are going to compete for a championship. It is up to the coaches to fix this. 

One last point, I understand that KD wanted to play Gunn at the 4 to stretch the floor however, there is a reason why he played the 2 & 3 in D2.  One rebound in 22 minutes does not cut it.  I realize he is coming of an injury and playing rusty, I just think there are better options for the 4 slot.  Maybe play bigger with Gunn as the SF.  

 

Statistics do not lie. 269 in 3 point defense.Duquesne did not earn this ranking based on the Dayton game. Defense is simply a willingness to play with desire. Much easier coaching defense vs. offense. Needs to improve in league play asap

I have been refraining from posting to this point as I wanted to see what this team really is. The OOC isn’t a great indication because for the most part (and like other years) it was basically a cake schedule and almost all home games. Our best win to me is UCSB who is 10-2 now. Colgate was supposed to be a big win, they are 6-7 now, and we beat DePaul without multiple of their regular contributors playing. We should have lost to ball state save for a miracle shot.

Dayton went into this game with two less wins than us, with preseason matchups against teams like SMU, UNLV, Wisconsin, NC State, BYU, and Virginia Tech, and a lot of those were road/neutral games. They compete with these level of schools for recruits, and win some of those recruiting battles. Their center is probably a jump shot away from being a contributing NBA power forward, and probably the other 2-7 guys would all start and be a top 3 guy on our roster.

This is and has been the reality for awhile. I was hoping Grant could lead this team and it could use its depth to backfill, but this looked like every other Dayton or previously City game over the past 14 years or so I have been a fan where we are going in optimistic. Say what you want about the start, it just underscored for me that the the team wasn’t ready for that environment because they have only played at home in front of 1,000 fans all season. The atmosphere and talent gap punched them in the mouth. Credit to them for fighting throughout, but this was never really a game save for the run the dukes had to cut it to 5 at the end of the half. You know your not as good as the other team where your down basically double digits the entire game and their color person (who was good) is crediting us on our “fight” and lack of “give up” down 10. Basically saying we were doing a great job of keeping it at 8-11 when it could have easily been 15-20…..yeah.

We were overwhelmed all over the court, and Dayton didn’t have their two best point guards. Players like Holmes and Amzil are super skilled big men that could be starting at a lot of Power 5 schools. One might be an NBA player and both will be long time pros. Their guys look like the guys you see on tournament teams. Big, long, athletic, composed, skilled.

I think in regards to our roster, we have mistaken depth in numbers for depth in talent. This is obviously heavily influenced by watching them smash cupcake after cupcake in the friendly confines. Hronsky and Dixon have looked really good at times this year, but give them limited minutes in what I would consider a “real” college basketball game, and they look like they are freshman who aren’t ready for this level. This is why I think Gunn played as much as he did. Needed to match up with Daytons length and the freshman weren’t ready.

Daytons players are extremely well rounded as I highlighted above where our guys seem to maybe possess one or some of the qualities held by the Dayton players. It is because of this we will beat most inferior teams, but will likely struggle against a lot of good to better teams. Some examples below:

Brewer and Rozier
Pros: Both seem like really good ball handlers and pretty good distributors. Both can make open shots.

Cons: One is prob 5’6” and the other probably 5’8”. Makes them a defensive liability, and extremely limited offensively from a scoring opportunity standpoint.

Gunn: jury out

McGriff
Pros: good ball handler and passer, can score in bunches at times.

Cons: not in division 1 basketball shape and average to below average perimeter defender as a result, inconsistent scorer, seems to make a lot of bad turnovers.

Jimmy Clark
Pros: excellent ball handler, can create offense and jump shots for him and others with his athleticism and dribbling skills (think NBA guard dribble set ups to create space for himself to take a jump shot). A good example of this would be looking at some of his buzzer beaters. Excellent finisher around the cup, top notch. Can generate a decent amount of steals and probably our best spot up perimeter defender in terms of manning a guy up due to his athleticism.

Cons: Can take to many risks defensively because he can steal, and this can lead to open looks, easy cutting and kicking baskets, and fouls for him (probably trying to overcompensate and make plays to make up for lackluster perimeter D from others). Not a consistent jump shooter.

Dae Dae
Pros: pure scorer, can shoot from anywhere and carry a team offensively most nights. Does not get too up or down if he’s making or missing early, level headed scorer. Also an underrated passer, some of the best passes I’ve seen from our offense in half court sets to set up someone else have actually been from him.

Cons: opportunistic but not a great or committed defender from start to finish. Would like to see him drive and try to finish at the rim more, he draws fouls when he does. Only other concern is now after the Dayton game, is he going to be as good as his non con and MAC numbers indicate against “real” college basketball competition??????

Joe Reece
haven’t seen what others have seen to this point in limited action for Reece. Not a top tier A10 starting center (think Holmes or Osunniyi or Toppin or French or Langevine even recently) offensively or defensively. Misses a ton of bunnies on O, gets called for a lot of fouls on D, and doesn’t do much production wise on either side of the ball. Not to mention he’s undersized. Would feel way better with him coming off the bench.

Tre Williams
Pros: high motor on both ends and pretty soft hands.

Cons: way undersized, I think he is 6’5” maybe 6’6”. Inconsistent in the post on O. No jump shot. Struggles to rebound on both ends of the floor due to size. Mike Hughes changed his body here, this kid has not and needs to, especially with his height disadvantage.

Rotroff
Pros: actual good size for the position and as a result our best rebounder. Has really improved scoring around the basket and going up strong this year. One of the last loyal guys in college b ball.

Cons: not athletic enough to compete offensively and defensively at a high level most nights as a starter. Slow to get up and down the court. No longer a threat from 3, would actually open up our game offensively if he still was. Gets blocked or fouls a player often on O and D because he is second to those plays in terms of speed. He’s a good depth big and has played that role well this year.

Barre
Pros: definitely the highest upside big on the roster, I would be starting this guy, or at least giving him sixth man minutes. Legit 6’9” with a 7’4” wingspan. He is athletic, rebounds well, and cuts to the rack extremely effectively. He is our only big who does this. Has pretty good hands, not scared to throw a hard pick or go up to the basket strong. Rebounds pretty well

Cons: definitely raw (but not to where he shouldn’t be getting more and more minutes). You see some missed layups or walks because of that rawness, or bad fouls defensively at times, but this kid is probably almost better than Reece right now. I want to see him starting by the end of the year.

Dixon
Lots of upside, looked like he was seeing ghosts last night, need more time in A10 play to see what he will be moving forward. Less worried now about him getting snapped up by a P5 next year.

Hronsky
Jury out, definitely still needs time to adjust and develop to D1 American hoops, but has an interesting size and skill set. Could honestly see this guy being awesome down the road, or the next Gavin Bizeau.

Point is a lot of these guys have strengths to their games, but most also have glaring weaknesses or holes that will in most cases prevent them from beating a team like Dayton, especially in a hostile road environment when they haven’t been in that situation all year.

Lastly, kudos to their young former womens player who did the color commentary, she was concise, informative, and her timing to add analysis was spot on.

Don’t know what the bigger talent mismatch was: Dayton vs the Dukes on the floor or Christine Szabo vs Ellis Cannon

Last edited by Duques102 (12/30/2022 11:36 am)

Ellis "Loose" Cannon needs to be muzzled.
 

I will be watching Daron Holmes draft stock closely because he is an interesting case There is no consensus on where he will go & why. Respected draft boards have him going as early as 39-46 while others, including the official NBA.com one, have him as the last pick. ESPN has him 10 spots out of the money. He has a lot to play for.