The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Alvarado (elbow) in hospital
Georgia Tech lost for the seventh time in eight games, this time to No. 9 Duke. However, much more may have been lost in the 80-69 defeat Sunday night at McCamish Pavlion, as point guard Jose Alvarado took a hard fall that resulted in a trip to the hospital.
Duke (20-5 overall, 8-4 ACC) took control from the start, grabbing a 9-0 lead and expanding it to 28-10 with 7:48 left in the first half. Tech (11-14, 4-8) lost to the Blue Devils for the 11th time in a row. Guard Josh Okogie scored a game-high 29 points for the Yellow Jackets.
1. Key injury: Alvarado was lost for the game and likely much longer when he took a hard fall at the 8:14 mark of the first half. He was taken the hospital with a left elbow injury “to ensure that the elbow is located properly and check for fractures,” according to a statement from the school.
Alvarado was injured when he challenged a shot at the basket by forward Javin DeLaurier and was knocked to the ground. Apparently, the fall caused bone to be exposed through the skin.
Going forward without Alvarado
will be a major challenge. Alvarado was averaging 39.3 minutes going into the game in ACC play, ran the team from the point and was showing gradual improvement. Point-guard duties largely fell to Brandon Alston and Okogie for the remainder of the game.
Beyond that, Tech’s rotation had been reduced to six players. More playing time will likely be coming for freshman forwards Evan Cole and Moses Wright.
2. Five-stars vs. no-stars: The talent gap between Tech and Duke was on full display. The Blue Devils were faster, better with the ball and more skilled at shotmaking than the Jackets. They made their contested layups, while the Jackets more often than not did not.
The swiftness and long reach of Duke players gave Tech trouble bringing the ball upcourt. The Blue Devils pounced on missed shots, quickness that resulted in 14 offensive rebounds against 23 defensive rebounds by Tech. (Duke leads Division I in offensive rebounding percentage, per KenPom.)
It was hardly a surprise. Of Duke’s starting five, four were rated five-star players by ESPN as high-school prospects and one was a four-star.
Of Tech’s starting lineup, there was one four-star player (Alvarado), one threestar
player (center Ben Lammers), and three players who did not receive a rating.
3. More pressure, effectively applied: Duke frequently used full-court pressure, a strategy that gave Tech trouble even before Alvarado was injured. Alvarado had at least two turnovers against the press and the Jackets also turned the ball over on a 10-second call.
Undoubtedly, Tech will see more full-court pressure if Alvarado’s absence continues, as Alston and Okogie aren’t as adept handing the ball or as quick as Alvarado.
Coach Josh Pastner has asserted that Tech will have significant difficulty if it turns the ball over more than nine times.
After a 20-turnover game against Louisville last Thursday, the Jackets had 10 against Duke, which the Blue Devils converted into 17 points. Tech had seven turnovers in the first half.
4. Late charge: It was too late to have a meaningful impact on the outcome, but the Jackets made a spirited charge at Duke in the final 10 minutes of the game.
Down by as many as 26 points, Tech reduced the deficit to 12 with 7:05 remaining and again with 3:37 to play. The Jackets did it with energetic play at both ends of the floor and some flashes of promise by freshman forwards Cole and Wright.
Little-used to this point in the ACC season, Cole and Wright played with grit and had a combined 19 points and 12 rebounds. Both, improbably, threw down putback dunks that electrified the student section.
5. Another comeback try: The comeback was tantalizing, perhaps evidence of what Tech is capable of doing when at its best. It did, though, follow a pattern set in losses to North Carolina, Florida State and Louisville. In those three games, Tech also fell far behind only to make late charges that cut significantly into the lead, but not enough to actually challenge.
It’s evidence of the team’s character and unwillingness to give in, but the comebacks were also likely due in part to their opponents letting their guards down with significant leads.