The two simple strategies that Coach K often uses for Duke, but most college coaches do not

"And so for my whole career I've played guys with two fouls [in the first half]. And if I'm playing against a coach that doesn't, then I try to go at that guy at different times during the half because that's the best way to play defense on them. But again, sometimes when we have done that, in the second half, that coach has beaten me. "

Either way, the most interesting thing Krzyzewski said, I thought, was that he's very aware of which coaches auto-bench players with two first-half fouls, and that sometimes it leads to him attacking a certain player possession after possession because he knows the opposing coach will voluntarily remove said player from the game once he's whistled twice in the first half. That alone is reason enough to not have a hard-and-fast rule about sitting players with two first-half fouls. But the main reason it's a nonsensical approach is because when coaches auto-bench players with two first-half fouls, it prevents them from maximizing the playing time of their best players and lineup combinations. I mean, how many times have you seen a starter get benched after two fouls in the opening six minutes, sit the next 14, then finish the game with four fouls?

Answer: A lot.

Most coaches don't have 2-3 more McDonald's All Americans to put in when the starter fouls out.

(11-29-2018 01:02 PM)geezerhawkdad Wrote:  Most coaches don't have 2-3 more McDonald's All Americans to put in when the starter fouls out.

That’s very true, but his point in going after that player immediately is still valid because he knows the instant that player gets whistled for the 2nd time his team is going to be able to play at a likely more efficient level on offense, and potentially not have as difficult an assignment on defense.

You have to wonder how many CAA coaches are seeing the trend with Cacok going to the bench after his 2nd foul and adjusting their game plan accordingly. Although, Tues night vs ECU proved that we are capable of winning via a lot of offense without Cacok. Where we struggled was being out-sized on defense.

I’m hoping Cacok seeing such strong results from the rest of the guys playing team ball and being extremely efficient on offense playing within their roles takes more pressure off of him and reminds him not to try and do too much. Those are the times where he’ll commit some silly reach in fouls.

All in all though, the constant is still the CAA refs. They’re garbage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Heck, as fans, when we draw up predictions and game plans we use the same thinking. If there is a problem player go after them to get them out or if during the game a star picks up a 2nd and stays in, change focus and make sure they pick up a 3rd. Not all coaches actually do that but fans have called for that type of stuff for many years. I am not surprised K would implement a smart strategy.

Obviously it's not college ball, but Brad Stevens has been doing this with the Celtics for years. He believes sitting a player because of foul trouble messes with the rotation to much and takes players out of the rhythm of the game.

The sit after two fouls concept places more priority on the second half then on the first half. Not sure why that is considered a better strategy. How many times have we had to fight back from huge deficits we were unable to overcome due to this strategy?

This is especially difficult on big men who are put in a position to foul more than any other players. They not only have to guard their own player, they are the last line of defense when a guard drives and can pick up fouls there as well.

Perhaps a good strategy would be to mix in quite a bit of zone before the first substitutiion for your starters. What kills us are those multiple, early fouls that put starters on the bench for more than half of the first half. It screws up rotations and really puts us in a position of fighting from behind the whole game.

(11-30-2018 05:24 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The sit after two fouls concept places more priority on the second half then on the first half. Not sure why that is considered a better strategy. How many times have we had to fight back from huge deficits we were unable to overcome due to this strategy?

I agree. If you want a player to play 30 minutes but he is going to foul out after 20 minutes, why does it matter how of those minutes are in each half? Points don't double in the second half like in Jeopardy. There are times when coaches have to do things that the media and fans expect even if the coach knows they are bad strategy. If a player plays 20 of the first 25 minutes and fouls out, fans and the media (which may not be much for some CAA teams but matters to Duke) will complain more than if he has the same statistics in 20 minutes but fouls out with 1 minute left. Likewise, when the Yankees didn't win the World Series from 2001 through 2008, somebody said that signing expensive players was the best strategy to maximize revenue from fans, but not the best strategy to win. By the same logic as people saying the end of games matter more, I hate the complaint that the most important regular season games are at the end because every game gives you 1 win or 1 loss.

In our case, if everyone else played some damn D it wouldn't put Cacock in the position where he has to foul.

(11-30-2018 09:46 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  In our case, if everyone else played some damn D it wouldn't put Cacock in the position where he has to foul.

Ty Gadsden should help with this. He's the guard that is best equipped to stop dribble penetration.

Toews is fantastic on offense, but as a freshman, he of course has a lot of improvement to make on the defensive end. That will come in time, but there will be growing pains early on.

Taylor and Fornes need to earn their way back into the starting lineup, and great on-ball defense would be the best way to do just that.

(11-30-2018 10:48 AM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 09:46 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  In our case, if everyone else played some damn D it wouldn't put Cacock in the position where he has to foul.

Ty Gadsden should help with this. He's the guard that is best equipped to stop dribble penetration.

Toews is fantastic on offense, but as a freshman, he of course has a lot of improvement to make on the defensive end. That will come in time, but there will be growing pains early on.

Taylor and Fornes need to earn their way back into the starting lineup, and great on-ball defense would be the best way to do just that.

I like the defense of Estime as well. Seems to stay wide and stay in front of the ball to prevent penetration.

What I really like about the current rotation with Estime and Gasden starting, is that we actually lose nothing offensively when we go to the bench. Right now, O'Connell, Taylor and Fornes are are subs. Not bad when you look at how much we used to drop off when we went to the bench.

If McGrath can keep the rotation tight, and keep to these three for the most part, they are going to play almost as much as the starters and their scoring should look pretty good since they will be facing bench players from the other team when they sub.

I know Fornes and Taylor likely see it as a demotion, but it really isn't. It's just a better strategy to win. Both of them can come off the bench and get right into the flow, providing instant offense. And if Cylla or Cacok sits, the offense will focus more on those two as guards. As much as i've complained about our strategy, I really like this and what it's showing on the court.

Can't argue with the D of Gadson, he's been the best defender by far!

(11-30-2018 11:07 AM)82hawk Wrote:  As much as i've complained about our strategy, I really like this and what it's showing on the court.

Yep. A good portion of the criticism for McGrath the first season and the early part of the 2nd was indeed warranted. But opening the season with a lot of guys getting minutes and now moving towards a tighter rotation is paying dividends.

I think we know what we have for the most part now. Hopefully Sims and Elmore develop over the course of this season to become contributors, but beyond that, we pretty much know who our top 8 are and what they're capable of.

McGrath is making some nice adjustments. Let's see if they pay off against a quality opponent tomorrow. Greatly looking forward to this one.

(11-30-2018 12:45 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:07 AM)82hawk Wrote:  As much as i've complained about our strategy, I really like this and what it's showing on the court.

Yep. A good portion of the criticism for McGrath the first season and the early part of the 2nd was indeed warranted. But opening the season with a lot of guys getting minutes and now moving towards a tighter rotation is paying dividends.

I think we know what we have for the most part now. Hopefully Sims and Elmore develop over the course of this season to become contributors, but beyond that, we pretty much know who our top 8 are and what they're capable of.

McGrath is making some nice adjustments. Let's see if they pay off against a quality opponent tomorrow. Greatly looking forward to this one.

The main difference between Gadsden and Estime on defending is Gadsden can get up in his man's grill around the three point line and still prevent the dribble drive. I think Estime can, and eventually will be able to do the same. But right now he tentatively sags a little too much off his man and gives him a better opportunity for the 3.