Page 9 of 21 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 420
  1. #161
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post

    So (assuming first half was mostly man and second half was mostly zone) I conclude that our halfcourt defense was pretty solid the whole game. Despite how it looked, the difference in the game wasn't really zone vs. man (and if it was, our D was slightly better in the first half). It was really that we finally cut down on Miami transition opportunities .
    Except that the second half was not mostly zone. There were two possessions of zone between the 15 and 14 minute mark, then all zone starting at 9:00. The rest was man.

  2. #162
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Neals384 View Post
    Except that the second half was not mostly zone. There were two possessions of zone between the 15 and 14 minute mark, then all zone starting at 9:00. The rest was man.
    Per Kedsy’s point, it doesn’t matter. Man-to-man and zone defenses were both very effective Monday. What wasn’t effective was our transition defense. And that was spurred more by turnovers.

    We happened to be in zone for the last 8 minutes, and our defense looked fabulous over that time. But it was largely because we stopped giving them easy transition baskets off turnovers.

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Per Kedsy’s point, it doesn’t matter. Man-to-man and zone defenses were both very effective Monday. What wasn’t effective was our transition defense. And that was spurred more by turnovers.

    We happened to be in zone for the last 8 minutes, and our defense looked fabulous over that time. But it was largely because we stopped giving them easy transition baskets off turnovers.
    It's like in fantasy football when the quarterback of the team you're playing at D/ST throws a pick six. It doesn't really have anything to do with your defense, but it gets counted against you anyway. Not exactly the same because some turnover buckets have a realistic chance of running back and making a play, but similar.

    The defense was really good Monday (but Miami's offense sucks, so we'll see if it holds up).

  4. #164
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    While I was researching the above answer, it occurred to me that if transition scoring is so much more efficient than halfcourt scoring, it's possible we're not entirely focusing on the right things when we evaluate Duke's D. I went back to Hoop-Math and assembled the following table with some Duke transition defense information:

    Code:
    Year	%transition	trans eFG%	trans %3att	trans 3pt%	Pom D Rank
    2018	20.8%		54.5%		39.2%		34.6%		86
    2017	23.8%		58.4%		28.0%		32.3%		47
    2016	24.4%		55.7%		30.6%		30.2%		86
    2015	23.5%		52.2%		30.6%		25.9%		11
    2014	22.1%		54.5%		30.7%		24.1%		86
    2013	23.9%		51.7%		32.7%		33.3%		26
    2012	22.1%		58.4%		27.3%		33.3%		79
    I'm not entirely sure what to make of this data, but I have a few semi-random observations:

    - note that the eFG% is on initial transition shot attempt. I couldn't find any data on transition putbacks or transition free throws.

    - Our two best defensive teams in the period had the two best opposing transition eFG%. That said, if this year's team let up an initial transition shot attempt eFG% of 52.2% like the 2015 team did, it would only be a 0.73 points per game improvement in opposing scoring (or about 1 point per 100 possessions). Which isn't close to enough to explain the difference in the 2013 or 2015 defenses and this year's defense. Though a one point improvement in opposing scoring per 100 possessions would move our current KenPom defensive rank from #86 to #67.

    - this year's team is giving up by far the highest percentage of opposing transition three-point attempts, and also the highest transition three-point shooting percentage. This is in transition, though, not in the halfcourt. Are there not enough guys getting back in transition D? Are they not getting back fast enough? Are they running to the wrong spot? Or is it just bad luck which could even out over time?

    - this year's team gives up the lowest percentage of transition opportunities of any team in the period. Possibly because we're so good at offensive rebounding. Whatever the reason, since transition scoring is so much more efficient than halfcourt scoring, this can only be a good thing, right? But does it mean that we have more potential to end up with a good defense because we can limit transition opportunities? Or, since our overall dRtg is so mediocre, does the fact that we're already limiting transition opportunities mean our halfcourt defense is even worse than we think it is? Or both?

    I don't really know the answers to any of these questions, but I thought it was interesting to think about.
    This is fascinating data, thanks for doing so much legwork!

    Is there an even more micro cut available? It would be interesting to see % and points per possession for transition offense that initiates from turnovers vs transition that initiates off of rebounds. I would assume turnovers is a much higher % of transition offense and much more effective in scoring and that few transition opportunities come from missed shots, which would lead to not changing strategy of crashing offensive boards, but would be interested to see if the data bears that out.

    Also, do KenPom or other sources have aggregates stats? Per your point above that more teams are shooting transition threes against DUke, I would posit that is universal - that all teams are shooting more threes in all situations following the NBA's lead in increasing utilization of the three point shot. Is there data available to see whether that is actually true?

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    It's like in fantasy football when the quarterback of the team you're playing at D/ST throws a pick six. It doesn't really have anything to do with your defense, but it gets counted against you anyway. Not exactly the same because some turnover buckets have a realistic chance of running back and making a play, but similar.
    Actually, most fantasy football leagues do not count defensive or special teams touchdowns (pick six, returned kick, returned fumble, blocked kick) as points against the defense. If you have the Ravens D and they give up 21 points in the game due to 1 offensive TD plus 1 pick six and a returned kickoff, the Ravens D has only given up 9 points in the game (TD + 3 point after kicks) according to fantasy scoring.

    At least that is the way both Yahoo and ESPN score their leagues (I think).

    -Jason "you may now return to the truly excellent conversation about Duke's defense" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  6. #166
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Actually, most fantasy football leagues do not count defensive or special teams touchdowns (pick six, returned kick, returned fumble, blocked kick) as points against the defense. If you have the Ravens D and they give up 21 points in the game due to 1 offensive TD plus 1 pick six and a returned kickoff, the Ravens D has only given up 9 points in the game (TD + 3 point after kicks) according to fantasy scoring.

    At least that is the way both Yahoo and ESPN score their leagues (I think).

    -Jason "you may now return to the truly excellent conversation about Duke's defense" Evans
    Is that true? If so, I haven't noticed it that way.

    - Chillin

  7. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by mkirsh View Post
    This is fascinating data, thanks for doing so much legwork!

    Is there an even more micro cut available? It would be interesting to see % and points per possession for transition offense that initiates from turnovers vs transition that initiates off of rebounds. I would assume turnovers is a much higher % of transition offense and much more effective in scoring and that few transition opportunities come from missed shots, which would lead to not changing strategy of crashing offensive boards, but would be interested to see if the data bears that out.

    Also, do KenPom or other sources have aggregates stats? Per your point above that more teams are shooting transition threes against DUke, I would posit that is universal - that all teams are shooting more threes in all situations following the NBA's lead in increasing utilization of the three point shot. Is there data available to see whether that is actually true?
    It's possible sites like Synergy Sports Tech has info like this, but it costs money (I'm not sure how much, but my guess is it's significant) and I'm not willing to go that far to fuel my obsession.

    For what it's worth, in the Miami game, here's my breakdown based on what initiated the transition opportunity:

    live ball turnovers: 10 opportunities, 18 points (1.80 ppp);
    missed shots: 12 opportunities, 20 points (1.67 ppp);
    made shots (all in last minute of game): 3 opportunities, 3 points (1.00 ppp).

    So, at least in this game, turnovers (40%) were not a much higher percentage of transition offense, compared to missed shots (48%), though turnover-initiated opportunities were slightly better in efficiency.

  8. #168
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    Is that true? If so, I haven't noticed it that way.

    - Chillin
    ESPN made that change to their scoring system either last year or this year I believe. It was fairly recent.

  9. #169
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by kAzE View Post
    ESPN made that change to their scoring system either last year or this year I believe. It was fairly recent.
    This year, yes.

  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    It's possible sites like Synergy Sports Tech has info like this, but it costs money (I'm not sure how much, but my guess is it's significant) and I'm not willing to go that far to fuel my obsession.

    For what it's worth, in the Miami game, here's my breakdown based on what initiated the transition opportunity:

    live ball turnovers: 10 opportunities, 18 points (1.80 ppp);
    missed shots: 12 opportunities, 20 points (1.67 ppp);
    made shots (all in last minute of game): 3 opportunities, 3 points (1.00 ppp).

    So, at least in this game, turnovers (40%) were not a much higher percentage of transition offense, compared to missed shots (48%), though turnover-initiated opportunities were slightly better in efficiency.
    Interesting, for the live ball turnovers, there is not much we can do defensivesly, just have to cut the number of TOs down.
    The missed shots though, is a concern because they only grabbed 25 DREB for the entire game, so they are converting 48% of their defensive rebounds into fastbreak opportunities, I suspect that number is very high and shows our poor transition defense. Without looking up any stats I suspect the ncaa average is somewhere between 25-35%. And that's ignoring that some of the defensive rebounds were off missed FTs which are difficult to initiate a transition opportunity from, so the real number off a missed FG attempt were probably in the mid to high 50%s.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian View Post
    Interesting, for the live ball turnovers, there is not much we can do defensivesly, just have to cut the number of TOs down.
    The missed shots though, is a concern because they only grabbed 25 DREB for the entire game, so they are converting 48% of their defensive rebounds into fastbreak opportunities, I suspect that number is very high and shows our poor transition defense. Without looking up any stats I suspect the ncaa average is somewhere between 25-35%. And that's ignoring that some of the defensive rebounds were off missed FTs which are difficult to initiate a transition opportunity from, so the real number off a missed FG attempt were probably in the mid to high 50%s.
    Miami had 5 rebounds off of missed free throws (and none of those resulted in transition opportunities). Meaning they turned 12 of 20 defensive rebounds off of missed field goals into transition opportunities (60%). Though I suspect this season Miami is better at running off of missed shots than most teams.

  12. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Neals384 View Post
    Except that the second half was not mostly zone. There were two possessions of zone between the 15 and 14 minute mark, then all zone starting at 9:00. The rest was man.
    Thanks, Neals. So the rest of the 2nd half was all m2m? Do you know in which (if any) possessions we employed zone in the first half?

  13. #173
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Per Kedsy’s point, it doesn’t matter. Man-to-man and zone defenses were both very effective Monday. What wasn’t effective was our transition defense. And that was spurred more by turnovers.

    We happened to be in zone for the last 8 minutes, and our defense looked fabulous over that time. But it was largely because we stopped giving them easy transition baskets off turnovers.
    Understand your poiint, but I felt that "played zone entire 2nd half" was so far off it should be corrected.

  14. #174
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Actually, most fantasy football leagues do not count defensive or special teams touchdowns (pick six, returned kick, returned fumble, blocked kick) as points against the defense. If you have the Ravens D and they give up 21 points in the game due to 1 offensive TD plus 1 pick six and a returned kickoff, the Ravens D has only given up 9 points in the game (TD + 3 point after kicks) according to fantasy scoring.

    At least that is the way both Yahoo and ESPN score their leagues (I think).

    -Jason "you may now return to the truly excellent conversation about Duke's defense" Evans
    I believe you are right about defensive points (fumble recoveries, interceptions, and safeties), but not special teams TDs (so the points allowed in your example would be 15 for the offensive TD and the kickoff return plus the XP from the interception return). This makes sense since you actually have the Ravens D/ST not just the Ravens D so you are penalized for allowing special teams touchdowns but also get points for Ravens special teams touchdowns. This is at least true for Yahoo/ESPN, obviously some sites allow more customization or have different default rules for this. Curiously, in Yahoo a blocked punt returned for a TD counts against you but a blocked field goal returned for a TD does not (ESPN does not make this distinction and counts both against your defensive points allowed as far as I know).

    To bring this back on topic...this recent back and forth seems like a long, overly technical conversation of advanced metrics that boils down to "allowing transition opportunities makes your defense look bad and we have been allowing more of those than we would like" which I'm not sure we needed Kenpom or any other statistics service to tell us although I do really like them for other types of analysis.

  15. #175
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NC Raised, DC Resident
    Quote Originally Posted by Acymetric View Post
    I believe you are right about defensive points (fumble recoveries, interceptions, and safeties), but not special teams TDs (so the points allowed in your example would be 15 for the offensive TD and the kickoff return plus the XP from the interception return). This makes sense since you actually have the Ravens D/ST not just the Ravens D so you are penalized for allowing special teams touchdowns but also get points for Ravens special teams touchdowns. This is at least true for Yahoo/ESPN, obviously some sites allow more customization or have different default rules for this. Curiously, in Yahoo a blocked punt returned for a TD counts against you but a blocked field goal returned for a TD does not (ESPN does not make this distinction and counts both against your defensive points allowed as far as I know).

    To bring this back on topic...this recent back and forth seems like a long, overly technical conversation of advanced metrics that boils down to "allowing transition opportunities makes your defense look bad and we have been allowing more of those than we would like" which I'm not sure we needed Kenpom or any other statistics service to tell us although I do really like them for other types of analysis.
    You're absolutely right that the bolded is obvious, and we don't need someone with an expensive calculator to tell us that. I think the bigger point, that at least I choose to focus on, is that what we previously took to be abysmal defense all around may actually be a better-than-thought halfcourt defense in both M2M and zone, but a poor transition defense exacerbated by a tendency to have stretches of turnover-prone ball and/or suboptimal shot selection. The problems are different, the fixes are different, but from my view, it's easier to solve the latter than completely rebuild the entire defense from the ground up. YMMV.

  16. #176
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by English View Post
    You're absolutely right that the bolded is obvious, and we don't need someone with an expensive calculator to tell us that. I think the bigger point, that at least I choose to focus on, is that what we previously took to be abysmal defense all around may actually be a better-than-thought halfcourt defense in both M2M and zone, but a poor transition defense exacerbated by a tendency to have stretches of turnover-prone ball and/or suboptimal shot selection. The problems are different, the fixes are different, but from my view, it's easier to solve the latter than completely rebuild the entire defense from the ground up. YMMV.
    I would suggest that our half-court defense was previously bad too. We aren’t typically turnover-prone, so our defensive problems were still half-court problems. It has improved in the three most recent games. For instance, in spite of being awfully sloppy with the ball against Miami, we were still having a decent defensive night. Had we been playing halfcourt defense like earlier in the season, we lose that game.

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I would suggest that our half-court defense was previously bad too. We aren’t typically turnover-prone, so our defensive problems were still half-court problems. It has improved in the three most recent games. For instance, in spite of being awfully sloppy with the ball against Miami, we were still having a decent defensive night. Had we been playing halfcourt defense like earlier in the season, we lose that game.
    I agree with this. Against NC State, we put up an appalling 1.23 dRtg while only giving up 7 "fast break points" (we gave up 31 fast break points against Miami). Against BC, we had a dreadful 1.17 dRtg while allowing 0 (zero) fast break points. A couple other games were also bad without giving up a ton of fast break points.

    Our halfcourt D has improved a lot in the past three games, but we've also given up more transition opportunities than we did earlier in the season. I don't know if these are related (hard to see exactly how they would be), but if they're not then good overall defense should theoretically be attainable by sustaining the recent halfcourt D improvements while also cutting down on opposing transition opportunities.

  18. #178
    Duke defensive stats vs. Pitt (round 2):

    2-point%: .485
    3-point%: .250
    %threes: 32.7%
    eFG%: 44.9%

    TO%: 23.6%
    DR%: 76.7%
    FT Rate: 28.6%
    dRating: 0.85

    A/to: 0.47:1
    Asst Rate: 35.0%
    Block 14.3%: (21.2% of twos)

    Opposing fast break points: 2

    Efficiency difference: 11.0 (opposing two efficiency better than opposing three efficiency).

    This game was similar defensively to the first Pitt game. Low possession (at least for Duke), bad opposing three-point shooting, mediocre two-point defense by Duke, high-ish free throw rate (not nearly as high as the first Pitt game though), good job forcing turnovers. We did do a better job on the defensive boards this game than we did in the game in Pittsburgh.

    It's a shame we can't force turnovers against other ACC teams like we seem to be able to against the Panthers. It would really add a good dimension to our D. We also only gave up 2 fast break points tonight (last time we gave up 6 fb points to Pitt, but that constituted 11.5% of their overall points). I mean, it was Pitt, but it's good to see the improvement in this area.

  19. #179
    Duke defensive stats vs. Wake Forest (round 2):

    2-point%: .524
    3-point%: .250
    %threes: 32.3%
    eFG%: 47.6%

    TO%: 28.7%
    DR%: 66.0%
    FT Rate: 21.0%
    dRating: 0.96

    A/to: 0.52:1
    Asst Rate: 40.7%
    Block 3.2%: (4.8% of twos)

    Opposing fast break points: 13 (18.6% of WF's points)

    Efficiency difference: 14.9 (opposing two efficiency better than opposing three efficiency).

    This game was similar defensively to the Pitt games. We didn't give up that many three attempts, and they didn't make many of the ones they did take, but Wake did way too well on two-pointers. We only blocked two shots, our defensive rebounding was not so good, and we once again gave up a bunch of fast break points. What saved us was we forced a ton of turnovers, Duke's second-best TO% of the season, behind only the Evansville rout. Overall, a decent but not great defensive performance.

  20. #180
    I try not to pay too much attention to my emotion-laden analysis while watching a game, but man it seemed like a ton of Wake's ORebs came because they missed shots so badly that there were either long rebounds or our guys were just out of position, through no real fault of their own. Gotta box out, of course, but I'm much more willing to focus on the better on-ball defense that I saw and trust that the rebounding won't be like that again.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 617
    Last Post: 06-22-2017, 03:35 PM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-17-2015, 03:42 PM
  3. Dork Poll Tracking 2012-13
    By mr. synellinden in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 01-09-2013, 11:41 AM
  4. Dork Poll tracking (Pomeroy-Sagarin)
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 275
    Last Post: 02-24-2011, 04:23 PM

Posting Permissions

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