Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 85 of 85
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    And we can always bring in TT to just worry the heck out of the SG. If I were an opposing player, Tyler would drive me nuts. For our best offense, I believe it's best that TT spells Quinn with Rasheed at the other guard spot. Andre has been used as a 3 for Hood a lot but basically when he's in we have a 3 guard offense. GoDuke!
    But if you put TT on the SG when Sulaimon is on the PG, where is Quinn?

    If there is one consistency I see for the remainder of the year, it's Quinn's minutes. He's average 35.2 min a game, highest on the team. Against BCS schools this year, he's average 37.2 min.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    But if you put TT on the SG when Sulaimon is on the PG, where is Quinn?

    If there is one consistency I see for the remainder of the year, it's Quinn's minutes. He's average 35.2 min a game, highest on the team. Against BCS schools this year, he's average 37.2 min.
    Quinn would be getting a short rest, lol. GoDuke!

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Here are the interior defense numbers, updated to include Georgia Tech. Miller was effective, and I had the same perception that many others on the board did while watching the game -- that Tech would've been well-served to continue pounding the ball into him. The numbers on the first chart back it up. We got "bad results" a very high percentage of the time they got it into the post -- the highest all year, in fact.


    The second chart shows a couple of things, some of which may have been apparent in watching the game casually, some not. Georgia Tech got only two points all night that were not generated in the half court, that is, via the fast break or secondary fast break. That surprises me a little, given that they didn't have Robert Carter, Jr. I would've thought they would've tried to run at least a little. But then again, their inside game with Miller was working. GT did get a high percentage of their points on the interior -- 31.6%. That is pure post play, and doesn't include plays such as when they would drive past our perimeter guys and score in the paint. The efficiency numbers all look pretty good for us. Not as good as against Alabama, but taking all three numbers together, one of the better performances of the year given the competition, hard as that may be to fathom given some of the easy shots we gave up in the first half. I guess the lesson is: it's a 40 minute game, and the numbers reflect what happened over the full course of those 40 minutes, not just the lapses in the first half.


    Code:
    Total
    Total
    Catch %
    Unsucc.
    GR after
    NR
    BR after
    % BR all
    %BR after
    Entries
    Catches
    Entries
    catch
    catch
    entries
    catch
    Davidson
    23
    21
    91.3%
    2
    5
    5
    11
    47.8%
    52.4%
    Kansas
    30
    24
    80.0%
    6
    1
    9
    14
    46.7%
    58.3%
    UNC-A
    10
    9
    90.0%
    1
    5
    3
    6
    60.0%
    66.7%
    ECU
    4
    4
    100.0%
    2
    2
    50.0%
    50.0%
    Vermont
    6
    6
    100.0%
    2
    2
    2
    33.3%
    33.3%
    Alabama
    14
    11
    78.6%
    3
    4
    1
    6
    42.9%
    54.5%
    Arizona
    22
    20
    90.9%
    2
    9
    1
    10
    45.5%
    50.0%
    Michigan
    10
    9
    90.0%
    1
    4
    5
    50.0%
    55.6%
    UCLA
    4
    4
    100.0%
    3
    1
    0.0%
    0.0%
    East Mich
    7
    7
    100.0%
    1
    3
    4
    57.1%
    57.1%
    Notre Dame
    24
    21
    87.5%
    3
    7
    3
    14
    58.3%
    66.7%
    G Tech
    22
    19
    86.4%
    3
    3
    2
    14
    63.6%
    73.7%
    Total
    Poss. w/
    % Attempted
    Total
    Half Court
    Interior
    Interior %
    Interior %
    Interior Def.
    Overall Def.
    Halfcourt Def.
    Halfcourt
    Halfcourt
    Entry
    Entries
    Points
    Points
    Points
    of Total Pts.
    Halfcourt
    Efficiency
    Efficiency
    Efficiency
    Non-Interior
    Sets
    Attempts
    Points
    Def Efficiency
    Davidson
    66
    23
    34.8%
    77
    61
    15
    19.5%
    24.6%
    0.652
    1.09
    0.924
    1.07
    Kansas
    66
    29
    43.9%
    94
    67
    27
    28.7%
    40.3%
    0.931
    1.26
    1.015
    1.08
    UNC-A
    65
    8
    12.3%
    55
    43
    6
    10.9%
    14.0%
    0.750
    0.85
    0.662
    0.65
    ECU
    62
    4
    6.5%
    74
    58
    6
    8.1%
    10.3%
    1.500
    1.01
    0.935
    0.90
    Vermont
    60
    6
    10.0%
    90
    81
    8
    8.9%
    9.9%
    1.333
    1.38
    1.350
    1.35
    Alabama
    61
    14
    23.0%
    64
    46
    17
    26.6%
    37.0%
    1.214
    0.87
    0.754
    0.62
    Arizona
    64
    22
    34.4%
    72
    57
    25
    34.7%
    43.9%
    1.136
    1.08
    0.891
    0.76
    Michigan
    60
    10
    16.7%
    69
    56
    10
    14.5%
    17.9%
    1.000
    1.00
    0.933
    0.92
    UCLA
    57
    3
    5.3%
    63
    59
    4
    6.3%
    7%
    1.333
    0.86
    1.035
    1.02
    East Mich
    57
    7
    12.3%
    59
    40
    2
    3.4%
    5%
    0.286
    0.84
    0.702
    0.76
    Notre Dame
    60
    23
    38.3%
    79
    69
    21
    26.6%
    30%
    0.913
    1.25
    1.15
    1.30
    G Tech
    63
    22
    34.9%
    57
    55
    18
    31.6%
    33%
    0.818
    0.98
    0.873
    0.90




  4. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO

    Two Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Here are the interior defense numbers, updated to include Georgia Tech. Miller was effective, and I had the same perception that many others on the board did while watching the game -- that Tech would've been well-served to continue pounding the ball into him. The numbers on the first chart back it up. We got "bad results" a very high percentage of the time they got it into the post -- the highest all year, in fact.
    ]
    Tommy: This looks like really insightful data, but can you publish a legend every now and then? I don't know what they mean.

    I also admire your ability to work in html -- where did you figure out how to produce real demarcated tables -- beyond just using ?
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Tommy: This looks like really insightful data, but can you publish a legend every now and then? I don't know what they mean.

    I also admire your ability to work in html -- where did you figure out how to produce real demarcated tables -- beyond just using ?
    Sure. The legend was published in one of the early posts, but you're right, I should include it each time. Here it is:



    Legend:
    --------
    Tot Entries: Number of times opponents attempted a post entry
    Tot Catches: Number of opponents' successful entry into post
    Catch %: Ratio of catches to entries (lower % means we denied the entry better)
    Unsucc. Entries: Number of times we denied the entry
    GR after catch: Number of good results after the catch (not including denied entry)
    NR: Neutral results -- our defense didn't allow opponent to capitalize on the post entry, but also didn't get the ball back
    BR: Bad results after catch
    %BR all entries: Bad results as a percentage of total entries
    %BR after catch: Bad results as a percentage of successful entries

    Tot Halfcourt Sets: Number of possessions when opponent ran a halfcourt set
    Poss w/ Entry Attempts: Number of possessions when opponent tried to enter into the post
    % Att: Possessions w/ attempted entry as a percentage of total halfcourt sets
    Total Points: Opponent's total points in the game
    Halfcourt Points: Opponent's points scored from halfcourt sets
    Interior Points: Opponent's points scored through entry (either by the big or an offensive rebound after the big shoots or after a pass from the big)
    Int. % Tot pts: Interior points as a percentage of all opponent's points
    Int. % HC pts: Interior points as a percentage of opponent's halfcourt points
    Int. Defensive Efficiency: Interior points divided by possessions w/ entry attempts
    Overall Def. Eff.: Total points divided by total possessions
    Halfcourt Def. Eff.: Halfcourt points divided by total halfcourt sets


    As for working in HTML, I have no idea how to do that. All I do is follow the instructions in the FAQ thread: maintain the data in an Excel spreadsheet, copy/paste the sheet onto WordPad or whatever similar thing there is on my Mac, then copy paste it again into a post, and put the Code tags around it.


    I used to do charts by just creating a table using the icons at the top of each post, adding columns and rows, etc as needed, but it's much harder to work with and they don't look as good as using the Code tags. That's all I gots!

Similar Threads

  1. Duke's Defensive Rebounding: Numbers That Matter
    By tommy in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-09-2014, 12:37 AM
  2. Duke's Improved Interior Defense
    By Billy Dat in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-06-2012, 11:23 PM
  3. Our Defense vs. UNC (and a few numbers)
    By tommy in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-11-2012, 10:17 AM
  4. Our Defense vs. St. John's (and a few numbers)
    By tommy in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-30-2012, 07:04 PM
  5. Our Defense vs. Maryland (and a few numbers)
    By tommy in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-28-2012, 08:54 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •