Clash of the Titans

It's Duke and UNC baby! The greatest rivalry in all of the world baby!! The heart! The passion! The P-T-P'ers! The Diaper Dandies! It's the greatest game in the universe!

Actually, thanks to Raycom, which controls all of ACC country, I didn't get to hear the triumphant return of Dick Vitale. Instead, I was forced to endure Billy "Scrooge" Packer on WATL. I know many of you probably aren't huge Vitale fans, but at least he actually loves the sport of college basketball. In a previous post, my esteemed colleague Curry criticized Joe Buck for failing to adequately dramatize one of the greatest plays in Super Bowl history. Joe Buck did this because he's Joe Buck and he doesn't know enough about football to recognize historic moments. Billy Packer, however, fails to dramatize important moments because he is so egotistical and condescending, he would rather lead the audience to believe that no matter how incredible a moment in the game might be, he, Billy "Scrooge" Packer, has seen better. Much better. In fact, that the sweet turnaround jumper that Kyle Singler made over Hansbrough at a critical moment in the game was not even worth mentioning. Indeed, Paulus' three point assault only moved Scrooge to complain about Paulus' choice to shoot quickly before getting his feet set (despite the fact that he does set his feet set and a quick release is a good thing, plus the guy shoots well over 40%, so I would think he knows what he's doing). To be fair, Packer doesn't only fail to praise Duke for solid play. He didn't even bother to get excited when UNC went on a nice run to come within three points of Duke at the half. The Dean Dome was rocking. The momentum appeared to be turning, pointing to an exciting second half and another classic finish to a Duke/UNC matchup. There wasn't one person in the entire stadium that wasn't excited . . . except for Scrooge, that is. Dick Vitale maybe over the top, but at least he cares. Ok, enough about that. My rundown of the Duke/UNC Round 1, 2008 edition is after the jump.

Read more...

The Duke/UNC game this Wednesday says far more about UNC than it does about Duke. Needless to say, I was ecstatic to witness Duke handle a strong and supposedly deep UNC team so easily. Though Tar Heel stud Ty Lawson was unable to play due to injury, Duke demonstrated that the doom and gloom from media and blogs in the preseason was premature. Yes, Duke lacks a "true" post presence, but they make up for it in other ways (more on this in a minute). While Lawson would obviously have made a difference for UNC, there is no guarantee he would have been able to win the game for the boys in Powder Blue. In fact, it is possible that the result would have been exactly the same. Why, you ask? UNC has a flaw that is actually more severe than Duke's lack of size in the post. How do I know this? Because Duke had the exact same flaw for the three previous years.

Although J.J. Redick will always be one of my all-time favorite Dukies, he never was able to become a strong defender. He was a smart and savvy player who made up for his lack of quickness with a high basketball IQ. But he could do nothing to prevent opposing guards from entering the paint at will. Last year, the injured Greg Paulus was forced to play mega-minutes through pain, wearing down as the game wore on, and eventually surrendering the paint to the opposing point guard. On all three of those teams, a lack of depth at the guard positions hurt. While Sean Dockery was a quality defender, his inability to run the offense made it difficult for him to make a serious impact. In 2005, Duke only could offer Redick, Daniel Ewing, and Sean Dockery as viable options at guard due to an injury that slowed DeMarcus Nelson. In 2006, after the departure of Ewing through graduation, freshman Greg Paulus was forced to play super minutes at the point, wearing down as the season wore on. 2007 was no different, with Nelson, Scheyer, and Paulus forced to handle all opposing guards as Henderson was not yet ready to help out. While the 2005 and 2006 teams were still really good, this was due to the offensive and defensive presence of Sheldon Williams in the paint. Sheldon could block shots, rebound, and score at the other end. This negated some of the effectiveness of opposing guards. Once Williams departed, McRoberts, who was inferior both defensively and offensively, failed to fill the void, making dribble penetration a big reason why Duke was ousted in the first rounds of the ACC and NCAA tournaments.

With the injury to Bobby Frasor earlier in the season, UNC now has a much smaller arsenal of guards to choose from. Thomas is a serviceable point guard similar to Dockery in that he is significantly better at defense than offense and seems unable to play significant minutes without making important mistakes on the offensive side and wearing down defensively. While speedy starter Lawson was injured during the Duke game, he is actually worse than Thomas at defense as he lacks the size (he's listed at 6 feet but he's probably closer to 5-11 or 5-10), the length (shorter point guards such as Chris Duhon of Duke and Ray Felton of UNC made up for shortness in size with armspan, although neither player is as short as Lawson), and the strength to significantly bother opposing point guards. Wayne Ellington is a solid player, but his quickness is actually little overrated. He struggles to get his shot off against quick and strong defenders and is even more suspect when guarding quick, strong players (such as Demarcus Nelson or former high school teammate Gerald Henderson). On the interior, Hansbrough, despite his amazing work ethic and eye-popping offensive ability, is merely an average defender. He averages only 0.2 blocks per game and lacks the armspan and the athleticism to alter shots. He plays smart defense and is able to compensate for his deficiencies through heady play (much like Redick, actually), but is ultimately a defensive liability.

Which finally brings me to the game itself. Analysts attribute Duke's relatively easy win to hot outside shooting and the absence of Lawson. However, even with Lawson, UNC would have been unable to slow Duke's five guard attack. UNC simply does not have the personnel to match Scheyer, Paulus, Henderson, Nelson, and reserve Nolan Smith. While Hansbrough dominated in the post from an offensive standpoint (28 points), his lack of defensive prowess was exposed by Singler, who was easily able to drive by Hansbrough or shoot over him, and Lance Thomas. In fact, Lance Thomas may have been the biggest surprise of the game. The world knows that Duke can shoot the three and that Singler poses a mismatch to opposing forwards. However, who knew that Thomas could score in the post on Hansbrough? Thomas, in fact, scored at will against Hansbrough. Though he is probably the eighth offensive option on a deep Duke squad and rarely even receives the ball on offense, he was able to catch the ball in the post and use his quickness to shoot right over Hansbrough, finishing 5/6 from the field with 10 points . . . 10 very easy points. The threes certainly were falling for Duke, which made it unnecessary to rely on Thomas or Singler for much offense in the post, but the few times either of those two players squared off against Hansbrough, they were almost always able to score a bucket. For UNC fans, this is now four separate games when quick forwards have been able to score at will against Hansbrough, Thompson and the other UNC post defenders. If Hansbrough had been less effective offensively, scoring even 20 points, it may even be possible to make the argument that Duke won the battle in the post as well as on the perimeter.

Hanbrough's season has been incredible and I actually really like the guy, despite the U-N-C written across his jersey. However, his staggering offensive output is masking the serious defensive liabilities of his team, both in the post and on the perimeter. Since it seems unlikely that Hansbrough, Lawson, and Ellington will develop into stud defenders, there is no reason to think UNC's defensive deficiencies will be fixed. Outscoring opponents will be hard to do against high scoring teams like Duke, Tennessee, Memphis, or Kansas that feature quality guard play. Similarly, disciplined teams with strong defensive post presences like Georgetown in last year's Elite Eight, will be able to slow or even neutralize Hansbrough who, for all of his strengths, is not particularly quick. If Ellington is not hitting his shots and Lawson isn't preventing dribble penetration, Carolina can lose to anyone, just as Duke could lose to anyone in 2005 if Redick failed to hit his shots and Paulus was unable to contain the opposing point guard. Carolina's margin for error is far slimmer than I had envisioned at the beginning of the season, just as Duke's was much smaller in 2005 than most realized thanks to the phenomenal year J.J. Redick had. In fact, it may be smaller than 2008 Duke's, which brings me to my final point. The Heels can make a run at a title, but Lawson, Ellington, and Thomas will either have to morph into lock-down perimeter defenders or their high octane offense will have to operate at max power for six consecutive games against increasingly difficult competition.

Many in the media, including Jay "I swear I never went to Duke" Bilas, have argued that Duke will lose when it faces strong inside team. Many point to the loss to Pitt in Madison Square Garden six weeks ago as proof of that theory. However, this is actually wrong. Duke has won many games in which they've been on the short end of double-digit rebounding deficits. Perhaps even more telling, they've even won those games when they've shot relatively poorly from three-land (Maryland and Clemson games). They've allowed opposing forwards to utterly dominate in the paint and have still rolled on to comfortable victories (J.J. Hickson of NC State). What doomed Duke against Pitt was an inability to exploit their biggest strength, perimeter defense, into a large turnover differential. If Duke is not hitting from outside, turnover margin becomes the most important stat of the game. Against Pitt, Duke turned it over 19 times to Pitt's 22, leading to multiple easy buckets for Pitt which entirely negated the points off turnovers earned by Duke's solid defense. The most recent Forde Minutes on ESPN.com claims that Duke will lose because an opposing forward will dominate them inside the way Dejuan Blair of Pitt was able to. Hansbrough dominated inside more than Blair and UNC has more all around talent than Pitt, yet Duke still won easily. Similar, they defeated Maryland despite stellar games from Gist and Osby. What Pitt was able to do is match Duke's guard play. While Pitt was not exactly turnover free, Levance Fields and company were able to give as much as they received, forcing Duke's guards into multiple unforced errors. Despite poor free-throw shooting (55%) and despite an anemic 22% from three-point land, Duke still could have ground out a victory if they had protected the basketball better at the guard positions. The lack of a large turnover differential made rebounds the deciding factor, something Duke cannot afford. Duke will not necessarily lose when they face a dominant post presence. They will not necessarily lose when they can't hit three's or shoot free throws. As long as Duke's guards take care of the basketball and force turnovers, they do not need to be reliant on the three point shot. The teams that are most dangerous to Duke are teams with strong inside play combined with quality guard play who can take care of the basketball and make sure that Duke's strong perimeter play does not give them an edge in turnovers.

However, keep in mind that Duke was a made free-throw and a made put-back by Singler at the buzzer away from scraping out a win. While Duke is not quite in the same realm as UCLA, Kansas, Memphis, or possibly even a fully healthy UNC, they are very, very close. If opposing guards aren't up to the challenge posed by Duke's strong backcourt and turn the ball over, Duke can beat anyone whether or not the threes are falling. And that is especially true for teams such as UNC that are unable to put pressure on Duke's guards and do not pose much of a shot-blocking threat to Duke's slashers. While there's no doubt that Duke would be an even better team with a strong scorer on the block, chalking Duke's victories up to strong perimeter shooting fails to grasp the more important reason why Duke is looking like Duke again.