Stanford

STANFORD 80

DUKE 79

November 11, 1999

Overview:

You will hear a lot of shouting about this being Duke's worst start since 1959, or that ACC teams that start off 0-2 rarely come back to make the NCAA tournament, or that it was one of the worst showings for a team that had made it to the championships in the prior year. You can throw all of that out the window immediately. It's meaningless number-mongering, and has little to do with what happened in New York this week.

No doubt the readers of this website already know that Duke lost to Stanford in OT 80-79 in the first round of the Coaches vs. Cancer Classic, and then to Connecticut 71-66 in the consolation game. Thus, I will spend less time detailing what actually happened in the games and more time on analysis. While
there is no reason to panic, these games gave Coach K a very detailed capsule of his team's strengths and weaknesses thus far.

A coach (I believe it was Henry Iba) said that the only two good plays are "South Pacific" and putting the ball in the basket. In other words, no matter how clever an offense is or how good the form on one's shot is, if it doesn't go in, it's meaningless. And Duke had an astonishing number of shots that looked good going up, but simply didn't fall. What is amazing in these two games was not that Duke lost, but that Duke didn't get blown out. The fact that the Devils found ways to scratch and claw their way back into these games is a reflection on the upperclassmen and the Coach. Shots that were falling in Cameron were bouncing off the rim in Madison Square Garden, and it's clear that this was frustrating the freshmen in particular. There were certainly ways that shot selection could have been improved (especially in the Uconn game), but there are simply times when your shot won't fall no matter what you do, and Duke simply didn't have the tools and experience to manufacture enough points using other methods. The rest of this article will focus on the Stanford game. My UConn commentary will appear as a separate article.

Stanford is a very young team, having graduated a very successful senior class. But coach Mike Montgomery had some talented underclassman and used Stanford's Final Four berth two years ago to secure an excellent freshman class. Included in that group was Casey Jacobsen, an excellent shooter that Duke bypassed in favor of Mike Dunleavy. Jacobsen would go on to have a huge game against Iowa after an average performance against Duke.

The Cardinal, though young, were promising because of good depth, good shooters and lots of size up front. But their young playmakers made lots of mistakes in the first half and couldn't capitalize on Duke's youth in the post. In fact, Matt Christensen did an excellent job on Mark Madsen in the half. At this point, he is the only Duke player who seems willing to play physically other than Shane Battier.

In the first five minutes, Stanford got out to a 10-0 lead thanks to some good penetration and outside shooting. Duke's poor defense against the three pointer would be one of the biggest weaknesses exposed all weekend. They also were driving far too weakly against Stanford's trees, getting many
weak attempts rejected. Interestingly, Carlos Boozer scored Duke's first points, but this would turn out to be his only score of the night.

Duke fought back with a 7-0 run thanks to some pressing and a Shane steal. At the 11 minute mark, Duke was only down 13-9 despite 4-18 shooting! The rest of the half was pretty close. Stanford went up 23-18 with 8 minutes left, but Carrawell came alive to draw Duke closer and eventually took a 28-25 lead
with 8 minutes left. The half ended with a big Horvath steal and three, giving Duke some momentum going into the second half.

Stanford made some adjustments at the half and used more post passing to get easy scores. They went on a run and controlled the game for the first 8 minutes or so, going up 47-38. Duke clawed its way back behind Battier and Carrawell, each hitting some huge threes and hitting clutch foul shots. Duke took the lead with two minutes left and looked like they put the game away with a Carrawell three with a minute left, but Stanford put on a furious comeback. They traded three-for-two for a bit, taking advantage of soft perimeter defense. I think some of the younger players may have thought the game was over, but Stanford never stopped trying. Down two with 22 seconds left, they had Williams in a corner and forced him into a bad pass. In his defense, everyone thought that Stanford would simply foul him and so no one came over to help. Stanford tied it up, and Williams made a rookie mistake--he called a timeout after wasting 5 seconds on the clock and allowed the Cardinal to set up its defense. Battier missed a tough jumper from 15' and overtime it was.

After C'well hit some foul shots to put Duke up, Stanford went on a 10-0 run and the game looked over. Duke refused to give up, as Williams and C'well teamed up to play some dynamite defense. After Jason airballed a potentially game-tying three, he had a steal on the next play and C'well rebounded his miss. Stanford took advantage of an experimental rule that gives teams the options of throwing the ball in after 10 team fouls instead of taking foul shots, helping to run down the clock a bit. With seconds left, Casey Jacobsen missed two foul shots and Stanford rebounded but travelled, giving Duke one last shot. Nate James shot it just a bit early from about 40', allowing Stanford to survive.

After the game, Coach K was far more forgiving than Carrawell. Chris was furious at some of the defense, saying that the rotation was awful. K was happy with the team's effort and overall shot selection. My concern was to make sure that the frosh understood what their mistakes were while providing positive reinforcement to keep their confidence levels up. One of the best things about the loss was that they had to go out 24 hours later and play the #1 team in the country (for now), giving the young players a lesson in how to bounce back quickly.

Negatives:

1) Perimeter defense. Stanford made a living off of setting high picks for open threes. At the end of the game when the Cardinal was desperate, Duke did a very poor job on rotating and putting a hand up, and Stanford gained a lot of momentum in a game they should have lost at the end. Fighting through picks and communicating on defense are tough things to learn for young players, but it should come in time.

2) Post offense. Non-existent. If you could combine the aggressiveness of Christensen with the skills of Boozer, you'd have, well, Elton Brand.

3) On-ball pressure. Duke must stop the point guard from penetrating, which led to many easy passes for Stanford. Duke's post defense was actually pretty good on-on-one, as Battier and Christensen allowed no easy scores in such situations.

Positives:

1) Valuing the ball. Duke did an excellent job of preventing mistakes with both ballhandling and passing. Williams had a few breakdowns but was mostly very solid. Carrawell has really improved his ballhandling. Christensen did a great job of keeping the ball high in the post.

2) Rebounding. Duke got outrebounded, but not by much (51-50). Every starter had at least 5 rebounds.

3) Foul shooting. Excellent in some high pressure situations, 19-24 for the game. Included Shane driving to the basket and creating contact and hitting both shots to put Duke up one, and Jason hitting 4 clutch shots.

Player-By-Player Breakdown:

** Christensen: I felt horrible for Matt because he was working his ass off in the post and couldn't convert anything. He reminds me a bit of Erik Meek in that he is incredibly strong and smart yet has almost no touch whatsoever. I kept thinking "dunk it!", but it's clear that he's not explosive enough to do this at a dead stop. At the same time, it was clear that his presence was invaluable because he was one of the few players who was playing physical post defense. While not quick, it was clear that he wasn't intimidated by anyone and wasn't going to tolerate being pushed around. Stanford's grabby style has frustrated many players (see: Duncan, Tim in the 1997 NCAA tourney) but Matt was dishing out punishment as well as taking it. Stanford adjusted by trying to draw him out from the basket, where a good pass would leave the hoop undefended. Duke's young players had trouble rotating back and Matt is too slow to get back himself. Matt did hit a couple of crucial free throws, a weakness for him. I'd love to see him develop a little half-hook to use around the basket, because it's clear that he'll get plenty of opportunities. Matt also had five boards--all offensive. He knows how to use positioning and his body. All things considered, Duke is getting almost everything it can from Christensen, with the exception of a few more defensive rebounds.

** Battier: One of the best nights of his career, really, although it would have been obviously sweeter if he had had the game winning basket in regulation. Battier provided most of the offense in the early going, scoring 8 of Duke's first 18 points. He was hitting the boards (5 in the half), dishing off (3 assists) and playing great defense (1 charge, 1 steal and 2 blocked shots). He really stepped up and kept the Devils in the game. Shane found ways to score despite the fact that he shot poorly (5-19). He and C'well were the only Duke players who were trying to draw fouls on drives, and as a result made a few trips to the foul line. About his only mistake was drawing his fifth foul in OT, because the team could have used him for that last shot. On the other hand, I sensed that he did it because no one else was moving quickly enough to recognize what needed to be done. It was clear that Shane is still growing into his role as the team's main man, and is looking for ways to do things more efficiently. His energy and focus were excellent, and he needs to continue to channel this energy and inspire the rest of the team.

** Carrawell: Simply put, Chris had a career night. He and Battier alternated in taking over the game. When Duke's shots weren't falling in the first half, he started driving to the basket and pulling up for short jumpers. When Duke looked all-but-dead in the second half, he took over with shooting and defense. His three with a minute left looked like Stanford's death knell. In the overtime when Stanford was tearing Duke to pieces and led by 8 with three minutes left, Chris became a one-man wrecking crew, scoring 7 straight points, blocking shots, deflecting passes and nearly winning the game by himself. His numbers were remarkably similar to Battier's: 4 assists, 2 steals, a block, and only one turnover. C'well spent a lot of time at point and often ran the team with four freshmen surrounding him. He's been asked to do a lot and ironically had a far better shooting night (9-20) than most of the players with more graceful offensive games.

** James: Nate had a very tough night. It's clear that his confidence was shaken in the second half, when he only took two attempts, one of them an airballed three. While this is understandable, it put more pressure on the rest of his teammates. While Nate's primary role is defense (which he excelled at) and rebounding (a decent 4), he must become a viable 4th option behind Battier, Carrawell and Williams. Early in the year, his shooting was excellent, so I think that this game was only an aberration. (His shooting in the UConn game improved from 0-8 to 4-10.) It must also be understood that this is the first time in his career when a lot's been expected out of him, and that a period of adjustment will be necessary.

** Williams: What a topsy-turvy debut for Duke's budding star point guard. As one might expect from a young and talented player, there were as many gaffes as there were great plays. For every delightful fast break dish to Mike Dunleavy there was a missed defensive assignment on Michael McDonald. For every clutch free throw he made down the stretch, there was an errant pass in a crucial situation. For every airball three there was a clutch steal on the next possession. In other words, this game was a magnificent learning experience for Jason. It showed him what he needs to work on to improve. First and foremost: he must learn to drive harder to the basket and not fear contact. He had several botched layup attempts that were simply bad shots taken from too far out. Secondly, the Duke point guard should be the captain of the defense. He must increase his on-ball pressure and prevent passes into the post as well as penetration. Considering that he played much harder on D the second night, I think this will come. Third, he just needs some more shooting reps to get that shot to release just a bit quicker. Now that I have the constructive criticism out of the way, the kid's talent is just astounding. A 6-2 guard had 10 rebounds, 4 offensive. He had 13 points against top competition in his first game in the world's most famous arena. He had no trouble penetrating at any time. He hit some extremely high-pressure free throws Best of all was his attitude. He wept after the loss and blamed himself, vowing to improve. I have no doubts that Jason will emerge as one of the team's biggest stars this year.

** Dunleavy: Mike played the most minutes of all the reserves (26) and had a decent start. He ran the floor well and showed he really knows how to fill the lanes correctly. He played relatively smart D although he had some problems on switches here and there. He did come up with a couple of steals with his quick hands. He had one three and took another ridiculously long attempt that missed, although he does have insane range. On that same play, the shot led to a long rebound and break. He tried to go after a steal recklessly and it ended up as a UConn score. Error of commission here as he was trying to make up for his error, but he must learn to pick his spots. He did not play at all in the OT period, probably for defensive reasons. As his defense improves, he will become a much bigger factor down the stretch. Plus, his offensive firepower works well coming off the bench, where he can play several positions.

** Boozer: Carlos is a rebounding machine without trying very hard--he had four in 11 minutes! However, he needs to play much more physically. He was tossing up very weak attempts at the basket which clanged off. He did have one very nice back-to-the-basket move for Duke's first score. Carlos has an excellent attitude however--no one was cheering harder when Duke was making their comeback. As he gets in better shape and can leap more, he will need to really attack the basket. With his fine shooting touch, he'll really be able to clean up at the foul line. Boozer's development is absolutely crucial for Duke's chances this year. If he doesn't develop into a good low-post player, Duke will have many shooting struggles in the future. Developing good offensive balance-- post, mid-range and long-range -- will make Duke into a far more efficient team.

** Horvath: Played very aggressively and had some big plays. The biggest was the steal and subsequent three pointer right before the end of the first half, but he also had a huge block and made a nice pass to Battier for a score. Still looks a little tentative out there, but this game was a good experience for him.

** Sanders: Didn't play much, had a nice rebound. I suspect that he will really benefit from having 7 days of practice without a game.

Reported by Rob Clough, tmc@duke.edu