'If Parker didn't foul out duke wins easily'

[RF2044]

And if Parker isn't out, then Thornton doesn't come in and nail three consecutive three pointers.

The transitive property doesn't work in sports. It's like when Kansas fans used to whine about how if "Simien had played, we would have beaten Syracuse in 2003." Well, not necessarily, because the guy who replaced him got 16 points and more importantly 16 rebounds. So it wouldn't be Simien ON TOP OF that production. The same way that Jabari Parker wouldn't have replaced some of the production that they did have in his absence.

Honestly, it was a great game, and both teams played well enough to win. Epic game. But some of the Duke hand wringing is too much. I had a college friend congratulate me on the game yesterday, but insinuate that we wouldn't have won without help from the refs. We scored 91 points. We played great. We certainly weren't handed the victory by the refs.

 

[SWC75]

I've often wondered what might have happen if John Wallace hadn't fouled out of the 1996 title game.

I'm sure John Feinstein, (who said this morning that Duke was robbed because of the fifth foul), doesn't care.

 

[PeteCalvin]

And if Parker isn't out, then Thornton doesn't come in and nail three consecutive three pointers.

The transitive property doesn't work in sports. It's like when Kansas fans used to whine about how if "Simien had played, we would have beaten Syracuse in 2003." Well, not necessarily, because the guy who replaced him got 16 points and more importantly 16 rebounds. So it wouldn't be Simien ON TOP OF that production. The same way that Jabari Parker wouldn't have replaced some of the production that they did have in his absence.

Honestly, it was a great game, and both teams played well enough to win. Epic game. But some of the Duke hand wringing is too much. I had a college friend congratulate me on the game yesterday, but insinuate that we wouldn't have won without help from the refs. We scored 91 points. We played great. We certainly weren't handed the victory by the refs.

Excellent post!!!

 

[QManCuse]

He played the first 38 minutes and we were winning then. How do we lose badly if he plays the last 7?

 

[BludOrange]

Don't pick up four fouls, then you not have to worry about a fifth. The kid put himself in the position to foul out, not the refs.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Parker was 6-16. If he stayed in he might of been 8-22.

 

[SUskibum]

how many more rebounds, possessions and points do we end up with if he plays more passive during the game, thus not collecting as many fouls?

Also, how many minutes did Dook lead while he WAS in there... like 5 out of 38 or something?

 

[Jasoncuse]

Can you go from a deficit to an easy win in under 2 minutes?

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I feel like I've read that sentiment in other places once or twice.

I decided to look at-the points per possession for duke while Parker was on the bench after his fourth and fifth fouls to see just how badly their offense operated and how lucky we were that Parker wasn't playing.

After Parker's fourth foul and before he came back in with 4 min left, duke had 10 possessions and scored 13 points for a 1.3 points per possession average.

After Parker's fifth foul, duke had 5 possessions in regulation, and they scored 8 points. Totaling 1.6 PPP!

In overtime duke had another 10 possessions and scored 11 points for an average of 1.1 ppp.

So, in summary, poor duke who has averaged 1.2 ppp in conference this year, was forced to survive on only 1.3 ppp without Parker on Saturday night.

Somehow I'm not convinced that losing Parker really hurt them offensively in this game.

I like this game. If Cooney takes 3 more 3s we win by 9 in regulation. Even better, if Arinze doesn't get hurt we win the championship. If Fab Melo doesn't flunk out we go to the Final Four. If John Wallace doesn't foul out and Lazarus Sims doesn't get hurt we beat Kentucky. If Keith Smart doesn't hit that shot we win the national championship.
That was fun.

 

[NineOneSeven]

I don't agree with this.

What would duke have done better with him in there?

Fair enough, I respect that.

But, you don't think having an all-american and future top 3 pick in for the rest of the game and OT would have helped Duke?

I get it- they wouldn't have made all those others 3's, they were losing with him in anyway, etc, etc. Doesn't change the fact that Parker fouling out was a huge benefit to us. I'm not saying we wouldn't have won with him in, I'm just stating a pretty, imo, obvious fact.

If Fair fouls out and Gbinijie comes in to play the 3 to match up with Duke's shooters, and drops 3 threes, does that mean we were better off with him in over Fair?

 

[Cadillac]

Aunt, balls, uncle

 

[Orangezoo]

I like this game. If Cooney takes 3 more 3s we win by 9 in regulation. Even better, if Arinze doesn't get hurt we win the championship. If Fab Melo doesn't flunk out we go to the Final Four. If John Wallace doesn't foul out and Lazarus Sims doesn't get hurt we beat Kentucky. If Keith Smart doesn't hit that shot we win the national championship.
That was fun.

If the refs dont screw us we beat michigan and have a shot to win it all against the ville. If backcourt is called correctly we drop marquette, then unc and maybe even make the ff...

 

[Knicks411]

Parker fouled out with what, 2 minutes left?

Parker is at worst their second best player, so you would assume they would be better off with him int he game of course, but 7 minutes is a pretty small sample, there is no guarantee in those 7 minutes he would have been a significant improvement to Duke's chances. Over 40 or 45, sure.

 

[MikeSU02]

Parker fouled out with what, 2 minutes left?

Parker is at worst their second best player, so you would assume they would be better off with him int he game of course, but 7 minutes is a pretty small sample, there is no guarantee in those 7 minutes he would have been a significant improvement to Duke's chances. Over 40 or 45, sure.

I don't get this commentary of "he'll be at the foul line in the rematch" (I know you are replying to something else). Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But there has to be a reason he wasn't there for this game. We are talking about Coach K, not Tom Crean.

The guys at the foul line really have to be ready to make quick and correct decisions. Maybe Parker isn't ready to handle that for a full game. Maybe K can see that. Look at the game Jefferson put up being the guy at the foul line. He had a great game for the most part. Would Parker really make them better if he is there? He had a bunch of dunks working the baseline. I don't think the solution is as simple as putting him at the foul line (not saying YOU are saying this).

Duke averages 9.5 threes per game. They made 15 against us and still didn't win.

I can almost guarantee something totally off the radar from this past game will be the difference in the next game.

 

[Cheriehoop]

T issue was that they had a circus midget guarding Grant in overtime because the bigs had fouled out. I know Parker isn't any great shakes defensively, burt it was on defense where the bigs fouling out hurt Duke.

They had Plumley, a big man, but Duke decided to have Dawkins etc rather than him guarding Grant. The why for that is on Duke - either related to poor player development, poor player evaluation or recruiting failure , all decisions made off the court and well before our game with them. Big men tend to foul more being the last line of defense so if a team doesn't recruit depth at that position , it seems to be Duke's failure.

 

[Knicks411]

I was definitely surprised Parker didn't see much time at the foul line.
But it might be worth pointing out that Parker has a really low assist rate. Coach K may wanted him more in the position where he was looking to score and leave the foul line for someone else. And they scored 89 points on 68 possessions, and as you point out, Coach K knows a thing or two about hoops. So I wouldn't expect him to be there a lot in the next game.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I feel like I've read that sentiment in other places once or twice.

I decided to look at-the points per possession for duke while Parker was on the bench after his fourth and fifth fouls to see just how badly their offense operated and how lucky we were that Parker wasn't playing.

After Parker's fourth foul and before he came back in with 4 min left, duke had 10 possessions and scored 13 points for a 1.3 points per possession average.

After Parker's fifth foul, duke had 5 possessions in regulation, and they scored 8 points. Totaling 1.6 PPP!

In overtime duke had another 10 possessions and scored 11 points for an average of 1.1 ppp.

So, in summary, poor duke who has averaged 1.2 ppp in conference this year, was forced to survive on only 1.3 ppp without Parker on Saturday night.

Somehow I'm not convinced that losing Parker really hurt them offensively in this game.

It didn't hurt them offensively. They were shooting 3s instead of 2s with him out, and they were making most of them. Duke will trade 3 points for 2 every time.

Where they were hurt most, obviously, was on defense. CJ went nuts when Parker went out with his fourth, and then Grant went crazy in overtime when they were trying to deny CJ the ball.

 

[cuseinseattle]

It's pretty obvious Parker fouling out helped us but outside of the elbow which I thought was a foul he had no fouls that were questionable so it was part of the game. When you are not shooting the ball from outside and are driving and getting in the lane then that is what happens. Personally the fact Duke hit 15 3's and didn't beat us I find amazing. What a great performance.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Just some basic math based on taking 45 shots:

13 FGA x 48% success x 2 points = 13
32 3PA x 41% success x 3 points = 40
Total: 53 points

28 FGA x 48% x 2 points = 27
17 3PA x 41% x 3 points = 21
Total: 48 points

Duke isn't going to do anything differently next time. SU will adjust the D and force more 3s or low percentage 2s. They can put Parker at the FT all game and he will be met by Rak and Grant at the rim. He might get to the line more, but he's not a distributor. He's going after the rim hard every time and with Duke's porous defense, I'll take them attempting 2s all night long.

 

[Cusefan0307]

This game reminded me of the Pitt game for the fact we took a 7 point lead and I though we would run away with it. At that time Duke was 8-24 from three. They made 7 out of their last 12. This time Thornton played the roll of Patterson. I thought Jefferson killed us more than Parker for sure. Roc blocked Parker at least three times. Parker hasn't seen guys who could stop him at the rim all year until Saturday. You have to give our guys credit. He was clearly outplayed by grant in this game.

 

[upperdeck]

it seemed the whole 2nd half we were one stop away from a 10pt lead. we were up 6 scored 3 times in a row and the lead was down to 3.. we shot %57 but when you have 7-8 dunks and 10 layups you should shoot a good number. we might shoot 45% next game but make 7-8 3's and score more.. cooney is due to have a big game sometime why not at duke.

 

[cuseincincy]

The last person I ever want to hear complaints about the refs from is a Duke fan. If I heard anyone say that I may have to pop them one. Man woman or child. Ok maybe I woudln't hit a child but I'd laugh right in this one's face!

 

[Col. Bleep]

If...If ...If...If...If.
You have to deal with whatever situations arise.
Great teams find a way.

An Duke did find a way

They just came up a hoop short aginst the # 1 team in America.

 

[Delmar]

If on the first play from scrimmage the center doesn't hike the ball out of the end zone, if Manning doesn't throw 2 interceptions; if Harvin doesn't return the 2nd half kickoff all the way for a touchdown; if the Broncos don't commit 4 turnovers, and the Seahawks did; if the Seahawk field goal kicker missed on both of his attempts; if the Seahawks all ate raw oysters for lunch and everyone of them got food poisoning;…then the Broncos would have won easily.

If the game had turned out differently from what it actually did, then Duke would have won easily.

 

[Orangemen]

Dukes defense is so bad against us that over 50% shooting is well within reason in the rematch. Will duke it 15 3's again? Very possible, but a tougher option than slicing through a porous d and shooting layups like we did.