Dr. Krzyzewski or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Stall

[OldPhiKap]

I know how much the stall ball is hated by many, and I don't think there is any argument that will bring those in that camp around. But I would invite people who watch basketball games other than Duke to keep track of how many games are choked away in the final four minutes when the team that was ahead takes quick shots instead of working the clock down. I see this all the time. And when it is happening, I think...there goes another team losing a game just because they don't understand the situation.

I don't think the "no stall" folks are suggesting that we should come down and take a quick shot. If we agree that the goal of each offensive trip is to move the ball and get the best possible shot, and it has given us the lead to that point, why go away from that by just having the pg hold the ball until 10 seconds before initiating?

Again, I do not have a problem with the foul-line extended set we run in games when we are ahead. It is one of our best offensive sets, frankly. But just lobbing the ball between two guards from 40 feet, while the other team sits in a zone, does not seem to lead to good offensive opportunities. If the mantra is "attack, attack, attack" -- why become passive when the defense wants you to do exactly that? Aren't you doing exactly what the defense wants you to do when you throw up a rushed outside shot because there were no screens, drives, etc. to try and break down the zone?

[Chitowndevil]

Coach K said in the postgame presser that we were NOT in a designed delay against Michigan. He seemed to suggest it was our guards' lack of experience against the 1-3-1. He also suggested that this was exacerbated by Kyrie having only 3 practices.

Did you watch the game? Do you think this is really true? Do you think when Kyrie and Nolan were dribbling and passing back and forth 30 feet from the basket they were "confused" by the zone?

Yes, I watched the game.

Yes, I think there is an element of truth to what Coach K said. Besides, I felt our Coach's comments on our late game offense were pertinent to the current topic.

More precisely, a lot of the discussion in this thread (and on this topic in general) is about the mathematics of the stall, i.e. whether it is optimal to run a delay offense when you are up by X points with Y minutes left. But as Sunday's game suggests (and other posters have mentioned), the value of the stall depends on factors other than time and score, for example Kyle having four fouls and Michigan switching to a trapping 1-3-1- zone, which we hadn't had much work against. I took K's comments as being less about WHETHER we were in a delay than WHY we were in one.

[Kfanarmy]

If what we've been running has jumped us out to a big lead, why go away from it (absent foul problems)?

By limiting possessions, you limit what is in the realm of the possible for the other team. If you are ahead by 10 but only give the opposing team four possessions to beat you, odds are against them as they need to outscore you by 2.5 points per offensive/defensive set of possessions.

If you give them 8 possessions, however, they only need to outscore you 1.25 points per possession...which is much more possible with decent shooting, solid defense and a little luck.

[Kfanarmy]

How do you measure the results of stall ball? ... I'm not saying you should never go to stall ball, I just think Coach K went to it too soon against Michigan and against precisely the wrong defense.

I was VERY uncomfortable with going into stall ball that early; however, I would say coach K ALMOST went to it to soon. Fortunately this isn't throwing hand grenades and almost didn't cost Duke the win. Ultimately measuring everything about how a coach does in basketball (not the moral/ethical piece) is measured in Ws and Ls, so while it may make the game more exciting than it needs to be, it seems to work in Coach Ks hands and keeps audiences watching until the end...

[OldPhiKap]

By limiting possessions, you limit what is in the realm of the possible for the other team. If you are ahead by 10 but only give the opposing team four possessions to beat you, odds are against them as they need to outscore you by 2.5 points per offensive/defensive set of possessions.

If you give them 8 possessions, however, they only need to outscore you 1.25 points per possession...which is much more possible with decent shooting, solid defense and a little luck.

That assumes that we're not putting points on the board on our possessions, though, which goes back to my original question: what is the offensive efficiency of our "stall" ball as opposed to just running the offense?

Even if you assume they are even (let's say an average of 1.5 points per possession), if we have four possessions we score 6 points in the stall ball. In the "normal" eight possessions, we score 12 points. Again, by scoring more, we force the other side to foul which gets their players off the court.

[Matches]

By limiting possessions, you limit what is in the realm of the possible for the other team. If you are ahead by 10 but only give the opposing team four possessions to beat you, odds are against them as they need to outscore you by 2.5 points per offensive/defensive set of possessions.

If you give them 8 possessions, however, they only need to outscore you 1.25 points per possession...which is much more possible with decent shooting, solid defense and a little luck.

Actually harder than it sounds. If you score only .5 points per possession (i.e. hit a shot 1 out of every 4 times down the floor - pretty poor execution), they've got to score 1.75 points per possession. Not out of the question, particularly with a limited sample, but still pretty darn hard to do.

[dukelifer]

I keep seeing the use of the term "almost lost" in this thread, and in previous threads about stall ball.

The cogent issue here, in my opinion is this: "almost lost"= won.

An "almost loss" is a win. Period. In other words, there's really no such thing as an "almost loss." It's like an "almost miss." If you take a shot from behind the 3-point line, and it bounces around or rolls around the rim and ultimately goes through the basket, what just happened is that you MADE a shot. "Almost miss" is EXACTLY THE SAME as "made." Similarly, "almost lost" is EXACTLY THE SAME as "won."

I would love to have an entire season of "almost losses." That would make us undefeated.

But "almost loss" by blowing a lead is much more stress inducing for the fan base- fans would rather come from behind and win a close game than have a big lead and almost lose- even though, as you say, the result is exactly the same. Somehow pulling out a win- like UNC did in the first two ACC games- makes you feel better than blowing the big lead to just win with a missed shot. Even the press/media/talking heads give a team many more kudos for coming from behind and winning than those that hang on- you somehow forget they managed to get a huge lead somehow. In my book, they are both close games. But in the end- you have to win them and K is pretty good at it. You win and move on- every game is different and sometimes the stall can work to perfection as it has many, many times.

[Kedsy]

That assumes that we're not putting points on the board on our possessions, though, which goes back to my original question: what is the offensive efficiency of our "stall" ball as opposed to just running the offense?

Even if you assume they are even (let's say an average of 1.5 points per possession), if we have four possessions we score 6 points in the stall ball. In the "normal" eight possessions, we score 12 points. Again, by scoring more, we force the other side to foul which gets their players off the court.

1.5 is way high. From a "raw" (unadjusted) offensive efficiency perspective, only one team in the country has scored more than 1.2 points per possession (Ohio State). Duke has scored 1.15 points per possession.

But that's not relevant to Kfanarmy's point. The better team doesn't always win, or score exactly what they've averaged over the course of the year. If you have a 10 point lead and you and your opponent both get 12 possessions, then if they get 1.9 points per possession and you get 1.0 points per possession, they win. If you limit the number of possessions to six each, even if you can only manage 0.5 points per possession yourself, your opponent would have to average more than 2.3 points per possession to beat you, which would be verrry difficult.

[Indoor66]

I know how much the stall ball is hated by many, and I don't think there is any argument that will bring those in that camp around. But I would invite people who watch basketball games other than Duke to keep track of how many games are choked away in the final four minutes when the team that was ahead takes quick shots instead of working the clock down. I see this all the time. And when it is happening, I think...there goes another team losing a game just because they don't understand the situation.

Yeah, check out a couple of unc wins this year!

[Mcluhan]

One point that can't be left out:

A key to effective stall ball is: don't stall too long! Stall for 15-20 seconds, not for 25 or more.

And even in the stall phase, other players could easily continue to run around, and try to shake something loose. We could end up with an easy Plumlee-oop.

[SCMatt33]

I was VERY uncomfortable with going into stall ball that early; however, I would say coach K ALMOST went to it to soon. Fortunately this isn't throwing hand grenades and almost didn't cost Duke the win. Ultimately measuring everything about how a coach does in basketball (not the moral/ethical piece) is measured in Ws and Ls, so while it may make the game more exciting than it needs to be, it seems to work in Coach Ks hands and keeps audiences watching until the end...

What's too soon. If we agree that stall ball is waiting until the clock hits 10 to start the offense, then we didn't go to it until there was 4 minutes left. With about 6 minutes left, we went to a semi-stall offense where we started to move at 15-20 left on the shot clock. Michigan was able to whittle that lead down from 8 to 1 with Duke only having two possessions (The lead had been hovering around 8 long before Duke went to stall ball). In that time, Tim Hardaway Jr. had a layup on a good play drawn up in a time out, a really tough shot clock beating jumper, and a contested three pointer. In Duke's two possessions in between, Nolan missed an open three that came off of a Kyrie drive and kick (so it wasn't just "settling"), and then we turned it over after Kyrie got stuck in the lane. Two possessions and some hot shooting from Hardaway was all it took. Again, out of just four "true" stall possessions, Duke scored on two of them.

This game was made close by letting get down to 8 before slowing it down, and some hot offense once we did.

[Lauderdevil]

Here's legendary statistician Bill James on when a college basketball lead is unassailable:

The Lead Is Safe
How to tell when a college basketball game is out of reach.
http://www.slate.com/id/2185975/?from=rss

[superdave]

Here's legendary statistician Bill James on when a college basketball lead is unassailable:

The Lead Is Safe
How to tell when a college basketball game is out of reach.
http://www.slate.com/id/2185975/?from=rss

Pretty cool. I played around with his calculator and here's what I found:

10 point lead

with 5 minutes left = 19% safe
with 4 minutes left = 23% safe
with 3 minutes left = 31% safe
with 2 minutes left = 47% safe
with 1 minute left = 94% safe
with 59 seconds = 95% safe
with 58 seconds = 97% safe
with 57 seconds = 99% safe
with 56 seconds = 100% safe

[Kedsy]

with 56 seconds = 100% safe

Apparently Mr. James hasn't heard of "gone in 54 seconds."

[uh_no]

Pretty cool. I played around with his calculator and here's what I found:

10 point lead

with 5 minutes left = 19% safe
with 4 minutes left = 23% safe
with 3 minutes left = 31% safe
with 2 minutes left = 47% safe
with 1 minute left = 94% safe
with 59 seconds = 95% safe
with 58 seconds = 97% safe
with 57 seconds = 99% safe
with 56 seconds = 100% safe

so clearly we should be playing stall ball only from the 2 minute to the 1 minute mark...i mean its worth like 47% points! not the measely 10 or 15 everywhere else

[SCMatt33]

Pretty cool. I played around with his calculator and here's what I found:

10 point lead

with 5 minutes left = 19% safe
with 4 minutes left = 23% safe
with 3 minutes left = 31% safe
with 2 minutes left = 47% safe
with 1 minute left = 94% safe
with 59 seconds = 95% safe
with 58 seconds = 97% safe
with 57 seconds = 99% safe
with 56 seconds = 100% safe

That's only if the team has the ball. Maryland never had possession up 10. To be safe without possession up 10, there has to be 42 seconds or less.

[OldPhiKap]

So with 2 minutes left, you only win 47% of the games in which you have a ten-point lead? That can't be right.

[InSpades]

So with 2 minutes left, you only win 47% of the games in which you have a ten-point lead? That can't be right.

You didn't read the article... it's not the percentage chance that you win, just the percentage that the lead is "safe". He says something along the lines of the team with that lead is 47% of the way towards being entirely safe.

[Reilly]

You can't judge a strategy after the fact. If historically and mathematically stalling gives us the best chance to win, then it makes no sense to deviate from it.
...

The football team had a large lead at Navy last Fall. Went very conservative and bled the clock. Nearly everything that could go right for Navy and wrong for Duke did in fact happen, and yet still Duke won b/c there was no more time left. A lot of fans said "we almost lost; look what happens when you stall; we better not do it again." My response was that if we find ourselves up 24 in the 4th quarter again, I hope to God we're stalling. All K can do is give us the greatest percentage chance of victory. Limiting the other team's possessions is a great way to give a large chance of victory.

Even if the stall had resulted in a loss to Michigan that does not make it the "wrong" call. Perhaps we would have lost by even more had we tried to increase the number of possessions each team had at the end of the game. Just as if Hayward's prayer went in does not mean K having Z miss the second FT was the "wrong" call --- still the right call. Judge the strategy at the time it was made, not after, and only on whether it gave the greatest chance of victory, not whether victory followed the strategic call.

For our psychological health, instead of viewing the "stall" as a "delay" that "almost" loses Duke games, next time you see it, get happy, as the "final twist of the knife" is being implemented that "guarantees" victory.

[mehmattski]

Yeah, check out a couple of unc wins this year!

For example, check out this team's sequence after they built a 16 point lead with 7:35 to play (a larger lead at the same time Duke's "stall" started against Michigan):

7:35 16 point lead-- 17 seconds, turnover
7:12 13 point lead-- 30 seconds, missed jumper
6:35 10 point lead-- 17 seconds, missed jumper
6:07 7 point lead-- 19 seconds, missed 3 pt jumper
5:33 7 point lead-- 7 seconds, missed layup
5:15 4 point lead-- 32 seconds, missed 3 pt jumper
4:26 4 point lead-- fast break, fouled (made 1 of 2)
4:21 3 point lead-- 17 seconds, offensive foul
3:55 1 point lead-- 25 seconds, made layup (and 1, missed)
3:20 1 point lead-- 19 seconds, 3 missed layups followed by offensive rebounds, finally a foul on the floor
2:39 1 point lead-- 18 seconds, missed layup
1:55 1 point lead-- 14 seconds, missed 3 pt jumper
1:01 1 point lead-- foul on defensive rebound, made 1 of 2
0:48 tie game-- turnover (last possession)

Yeah, the Hurricanes left about a full minute on the clock for Carolina to get back in that game. Anecdotal cherry-picked evidence? Yes, but so is pointing at the 2002 Duke-Indiana game every time.