Charting Duke vs. Wake Forest

[Jumbo]

So, in the post-game thread, I mentioned that I really liked how K mixed and matched through the game, searching for something that worked. Another poster seemed surprised, stating that it seemed like we used our typical lineups. Well, it turns out that K used 21 different combinations, only seven of which were repeated. In fact, only one group played more than twice together.

The lineup that peformed best was the one that finished together: Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler. I've always liked that group, and I wish K had gone to it earlier, especially since it's been a staple throughout the season.

That said, this game was weird in a lot of ways from a plus/minus perspective. Some stuff made sense -- McClure clearly played well, and sure enough, he finished at a +7. Miles Plumlee made a nice contribution in his seven minutes and ended up +5. On the other hand, I think most people thought Nolan Smith played poorly, yet he ended up leading the team at +8. To be fair, that might be partly due to his finishing the game with those other guys and his minutes dropping a bit. But who knows? Also, G looked good out there, yet finished -9. Maybe we overlooked his seven turnovers too quickly. And Duke got outscored 7-0 with Singler out of the game. Anyway, there's a lot to chew on here, so on to the numbers ...

Individuals
Nolan Smith 36-28 (+8)
Dave McClure 45-38 (+7)
Kyle Singler 68-63 (+5)
Miles Plumlee 15-10 (+5)
Elliot Williams 4-4 (0)
Jon Scheyer 58-60 (-2)
Brian Zoubek 15-21 (-6)
Greg Paulus 27-35 (-8)
Gerald Henderson 50-59 (-9)
Lance Thomas 22-32 (-10)

Per 40 Minutes
Miles Plumlee +28.6
Nolan Smith +15.2
Dave McClure +11.2
Kyle Singler +5.4
Elliot Williams 0
Jon Scheyer -2.4
Gerald Henderson -12
Brian Zoubek -18.5
Greg Paulus -18.8
Lance Thomas -30.8

Lineups
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler 11-5 (+6)
Smith-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Zoubek 7-2 (+5)
Smith-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Thomas 5-2 (+3)
Scheyer-Williams-McClure-Singler-Plumlee 4-2 (+2)
Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Plumlee 4-2 (+2)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Thomas 2-0 (+2)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Plumlee (x2) 7-6 (+1)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler (x2) 5-4 (+1)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas 6-5 (+1)
Paulus-Smith-McClure-Singler-Thomas 3-2 (+1)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek (x2) 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Thomas 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Plumlee 0-0 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Thomas (x2) 0-1 (-1)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Zoubek 2-3 (-1)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Zoubek 0-2 (-2)
Paulus-Scheyer-Williams-McClure-Singler 0-2 (-2)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek (x2) 4-8 (-4)
Smith-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 0-4 (-4)
Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Thomas 0-5 (-5)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas (x3) 4-11 (-7)

[JDev]

Very surprised to see Nolan at +8 and G at -9. Seeing Miles at +5 in encouraging, even if he only played 7 minutes. I don't mean that in the sense that had he of played more, Duke would have won. I just mean that he can give some good minutes, and more options under the hoop. Zoo and Lance will have their good days, and their bad days, which tonight more or less was. Having another big guy is a good thing, even for limited minutes. A lot of different line-ups tonight.

[FireOgilvie]

This is always my favorite stat to look at after every game. I like to (roughly) keep track of plus/minus in my head during the game, and it's nice when the real thing coincides with my mental spreadsheet.

Something to think about from tonight's game...

Minutes; team points given up per minute (defense):

Nolan Smith 21; 1.33
Elliot Williams 3; 1.33
Miles Plumlee 7; 1.43
David McClure 25; 1.52
Brian Zoubek 13; 1.61
Kyle Singler 37; 1.70
Jon Scheyer 34; 1.76
Gerald Henderson 30; 1.97
Greg Paulus 17; 2.06
Lance Thomas 13; 2.46

Team points per minute (offense):

Miles Plumlee 7; 2.14
Kyle Singler 37; 1.84
David McClure 25; 1.80
Nolan Smith 21; 1.71
Jon Scheyer 34; 1.71
Lance Thomas 13; 1.69
Gerald Henderson 30; 1.67
Greg Paulus 17; 1.59
Elliot Williams 3; 1.33
Brian Zoubek 13; 1.15


I know these aren't perfect stats and that they only show a small sample size. Given that, I really think that every player has a major impact on defense. When one player isn't in position/makes a mistake on defense, everyone else has to adjust, which leads to giving up points. "You're only as strong as your weakest link."

I hate to say it, but I would like to see Lance Thomas as our last option behind Zoubek, McClure, and Plumlee (depending on who is hot, match-ups, etc.). I think he brings a lot of energy off the bench, but this and his offensive impact do not make up for his defensive deficiencies.

[FireOgilvie]

I was interested in expanding on my previous post, so I went ahead and looked at the entire season.

Team points given up per minute (defense):

Brian Zoubek 1.27 (50.8 pts/40 min)
Kyle Singler 1.45
Nolan Smith 1.46
Jon Scheyer 1.47
Gerald Henderson 1.52
David McClure 1.52
Elliot Williams 1.54
Martynas Pocius 1.55
Miles Plumlee 1.57
Greg Paulus 1.62
Lance Thomas 1.68 (67.2 pts/40 min)

Team average - 1.50 (60.0 pts/40 min)


Team points per minute (offense):

Brian Zoubek 2.14 (85.6 pts/40 min)
Nolan Smith 2.10
Kyle Singler 2.08
Jon Scheyer 2.07
Gerald Henderson 2.05
David McClure 1.94
Lance Thomas 1.89
Greg Paulus 1.88
Martynas Pocius 1.82
Elliot Williams 1.81
Miles Plumlee 1.67 (66.8 pts/40 min)

Team average - 1.99 (79.7 pts/40 minutes)

To calculate the "team points per minute (offense)", I took the total Duke points scored while an individual was in the game this year divided by his total minutes played this year. I did the same thing for "team points given up per minute (defense)" with the opponent's points. I used the numbers from Jumbo's cumulative plus/minus and then updated them to include today's game.

I think Brian Zoubek should be pretty happy about these numbers. It also shows what many people already knew regarding defense.

[jv001]

While we give up alot of size with this group it's really productive:
Singler, Henderson, Scheyer, McClure and Smith. To me the best rebounders on this team are: Kyle, Dave, Henderson, Zoubs and Jon. If we can just get alittle offense from Dave we can be so much better. I look for that to happen.
Go Duke!

[bird]

In the pregame thread, I stated that one of the things I was looking for was: "Whether K goes small/quick rather than large, as he has done in the past when he has had to make a choice (Zoubek versus McClure), relying more on ball denial and turnovers than pounding the boards. I'm thinking Georgetown this year, and 2001 after the Boozer injury and classic cases such as our defense of "Big Dog" and John Smith's role in the 1986-87 team."

http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13943&page=5

However, it looks like to me that given McClure's nose for the ball, that we don't actually give up much on the boards when we go small with him being the small.

Zoubek is effective when he has a clear matchup advantage. Otherwise, the small lineup seems to be establishing a clear superiority.

[Johnboy]

I watched the game with my neighbor, a Carolina fan who had not seen Duke play this year. He actually found himself rooting for Duke in the game, BTW.

When Smith was out for so long in the second half, I started wondering if there was something wrong with him. We noticed when he returned. When Smith got back in, the comeback really got cranked up. After the game, my neighbor said he thought Smith had been the key to the comeback for what he brought to the team - especially on defense. I noted McClure's defense and rebounding as well. I also really liked that +6 lineup at the time.

It's always nice to have one's opinion confirmed by stats (as far as they go). Would have liked a different outcome, but that's the way the ball bounces sometimes.

[sagegrouse]

I thought we looked lost on offense when Kyle was out of the game. Plus-minus confirms it -- no points.

sagegrouse

[Neals384]

When Singler got his 2nd half rest, McClure, Thomas and Zoubek were in the game together. To me, this is a terrible offensive combo, and the result confirmed it:

Smith-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 0-4 (-4)

I looked back at the rest of the season, and it turns out these three have always been paired with Paulus, not Smith, with ok results:

Paulus-Williams-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek (x2) 4-0 (+4)
Paulus-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek (x5) 19-13 (+6)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek (x5) 5-6 (-1)
Paulus-Pocius-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 2-3 (-1)

So this is the first time all year we have seen Smith-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek together. Hopefully the last, too.

Neal

[ACCBBallFan]

I agree with Jumbo about the effectiveness of that group with Singler and McClure, but only when Chas McFarland is sitting with four fouls.

It's encouraging to see Miles positive and Elliott breaking even which may bode well for future PT, but very disapppointing stats for Lance. Seems like K is going to Miles more lately. Is Lance injured slightly but able to play? or is Miles just playing better than him lately?

Not only does Duke need Zoubek he should have been in for that last play to obstruct the in bounder’s vision, and Kyle could stick with Johnson.

Turning point IMO strange as it is was Chas McFarland getting his fourth foul. Wake subs him out and then K has to sub out Z. McClure does a great job rebounding and defending but offense goes all to hell.

Other difference that surprised me was Wake's bench (Ish Smith and Weaver) outplayed Duke's bench (Paulus and Lance). I was predicting the reverse would be Duke's advantage for a one point win, as Wake's first 5 compares favorably with Duke's first 5.

Outstanding effort by Kyle and G but don't overlook the hustle play Jon made to retrieve his miss near end of game. No way he should get that ball.

Sure Duke's other guys did not play as well, but give Wake some credit. Duke deserves credit too for several Wake guys not playing as well, including Teague where Nolan and Jon deserve some credit.

Guys who underperformed include LD Williams for Wake with lots of company from Duke: Nolan and Greg, along with Zoubek and Lance, with Ish and Smith and Weaver far exceeding expectation.

Given all this, not too shabby to only lose by two on the road versus a legit F4 team.

Rating Players
80 Kyle Singler, F
72 James Johnson, F
62 Al-Farouq Aminu, F
60 Gerald Henderson, G-F
53 TOTALS-Duke
53 Jon Scheyer, G
50 Jeff Teague, G
49 TOTALS-Wake
45 Ishmael Smith, G
43 David Weaver, F-C
40 Chas McFarland, C
40 David McClure, F
28 Nolan Smith, G
25 Greg Paulus, G
25 L.D. Williams, G
16 Brian Zoubek, C
13 Lance Thomas, F
10 Gary Clark, G
09 Miles Plumlee, F
08 Harvey Hale, G
03 Elliot Williams, G
.

[CDu]

When Singler got his 2nd half rest, McClure, Thomas and Zoubek were in the game together. To me, this is a terrible offensive combo, and the result confirmed it:

Smith-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 0-4 (-4)

I looked back at the rest of the season, and it turns out these three have always been paired with Paulus, not Smith, with ok results:

Paulus-Williams-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek (x2) 4-0 (+4)
Paulus-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek (x5) 19-13 (+6)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek (x5) 5-6 (-1)
Paulus-Pocius-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 2-3 (-1)

So this is the first time all year we have seen Smith-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek together. Hopefully the last, too.

Neal


I think the lineup with Henderson and Smith makes sense if Smith is able to create off the dribble. Thomas and McClure are capable finishers off the drive-and-dish approach. Smith was just having a pretty bad game, and Henderson hadn't really taken off yet at that point.

Obviously, I'd prefer to not have our three worst scorers (in ACC play) on the court at the same time, but we still theoretically had two dangerous weapons on the court together in Henderson and Smith.

[Jumbo]

I agree with Jumbo about the effectiveness of that group with Singler and McClure, but only when Chas McFarland is sitting with four fouls.


Turning point IMO strange as it is was Chas McFarland getting his fourth foul. Wake subs him out and then K has to sub out Z. McClure does a great job rebounding and defending but offense goes all to hell.

Z wasn't playing much in the second half, regardless. He didn't even start the second half. I hardly see McFarland's foul as a turning point. And there's no reason we couldn't have gone to the Singler-McClure combo with McFarland in the game.


Other difference that surprised me was Wake's bench (Ish Smith and Weaver) outplayed Duke's bench (Paulus and Lance). I was predicting the reverse would be Duke's advantage for a one point win, as Wake's first 5 compares favorably with Duke's first 5.

Smith was very good, in particular, for Wake. But why are you ignoring McClure on Duke's side?



Rating Players
80 Kyle Singler, F
72 James Johnson, F
62 Al-Farouq Aminu, F
60 Gerald Henderson, G-F
53 TOTALS-Duke
53 Jon Scheyer, G
50 Jeff Teague, G
49 TOTALS-Wake
45 Ishmael Smith, G
43 David Weaver, F-C
40 Chas McFarland, C
40 David McClure, F
28 Nolan Smith, G
25 Greg Paulus, G
25 L.D. Williams, G
16 Brian Zoubek, C
13 Lance Thomas, F
10 Gary Clark, G
09 Miles Plumlee, F
08 Harvey Hale, G
03 Elliot Williams, G
.

I love ya, but those ratings still just don't make sense to me.

[CDu]

Z wasn't playing much in the second half, regardless. He didn't even start the second half. I hardly see McFarland's foul as a turning point. And there's no reason we couldn't have gone to the Singler-McClure combo with McFarland in the game.



Smith was very good, in particular, for Wake. But why are you ignoring McClure on Duke's side?

McClure did a very solid job on Teague when he was guarding him. I thought collectively the defense did a great job on Teague. That focus on him may have aided in Smith's effectiveness, although I remember 3 or 4 occasions in which Smith just blew by his defender. And it wasn't just a particular defender, as Paulus and Scheyer were guilty of this, as was Smith I believe. Smith's effectiveness in getting into the lane definitely played a part in our loss (along with our bad shooting and Wake's good interior defense).

[pfrduke]

McClure did a very solid job on Teague when he was guarding him. I thought collectively the defense did a great job on Teague. That focus on him may have aided in Smith's effectiveness, although I remember 3 or 4 occasions in which Smith just blew by his defender. And it wasn't just a particular defender, as Paulus and Scheyer were guilty of this, as was Smith I believe. Smith's effectiveness in getting into the lane definitely played a part in our loss (along with our bad shooting and Wake's good interior defense).

I obviously can't tell which situations you're recalling, but at least a couple of the Smith "blow-bys" came when we zoned up and left him all by his lonesome. Nolan over-recovered on those plays, and Smith went by him into the lane. Of course, he missed both of those jumpers, so it wasn't that bad.

[rsvman]

As much as I love Nolan Smith's energy, I kind of feel like he made a couple of key mistakes that cost us dearly last night.

The sloppy pass that led to an uncontested layup hurt. Dribbling the ball off the foot in heavy traffic hurt. And although he is a 90% season free-throw shooter (and had only missed 5 free throws all year), he somehow managed to miss 3 free-throws in the second half alone (or did he miss one and also miss the front end of a one-and-one?). Either way, it surprised me and we could've used those points.

He'll play better next game, I'm sure, but his handle worries me.

[pfrduke]

As much as I love Nolan Smith's energy, I kind of feel like he made a couple of key mistakes that cost us dearly last night.

The sloppy pass that led to an uncontested layup hurt. Dribbling the ball off the foot in heavy traffic hurt. And although he is a 90% season free-throw shooter (and had only missed 5 free throws all year), he somehow managed to miss 3 free-throws in the second half alone (or did he miss one and also miss the front end of a one-and-one?). Either way, it surprised me and we could've used those points.

He'll play better next game, I'm sure, but his handle worries me.

It was just two, but one was the front-end. He also hit three clutch ones when he got fouled on the three.

His turnovers and decision-making are still a problem, but he's a great defensive player. The difference in defense between him being on and off is big - when he's in, we give up 58.4 points/40; when he's out, that jumps to 70.6. Last night, when he was in, our defense gave up just 28 points in 38 possessions - when he was out, it was 42 in 38.

[rsvman]

Agree. Unfortunately, the front end of the one-and-one came with about 2 minutes left and us trailing by 4 points. Them's the breaks.

[Mudge]

I've never understood why they don't count the missed front-end of a 1-and-1 free throw as two misses... it takes away two possible points, most of the time, unless the shooting team gets the rebound (and even then, it's still two missed opportunities at an uncontested shot-- they count the front end miss, even if the shooting team gets the rebound)... I think this would be a truer reflection of a shooter's FT percentage.

[devildownunder]

I've never understood why they don't count the missed front-end of a 1-and-1 free throw as two misses... it takes away two possible points, most of the time, unless the shooting team gets the rebound (and even then, it's still two missed opportunities at an uncontested shot-- they count the front end miss, even if the shooting team gets the rebound)... I think this would be a truer reflection of a shooter's FT percentage.

that's like saying you should charge a team with a missed shot every time it turns the ball over, since obviously it would've registered a shot attempt on that possession if not for the turnover.

You can't charge someone a miss for a shot they never took. Making the front end of a 1-and-1 assures another free throw ATTEMPT, not a make.

[Mudge]

Individuals
Nolan Smith 36-28 (+8)
Dave McClure 45-38 (+7)
Kyle Singler 68-63 (+5)
Miles Plumlee 15-10 (+5)
Elliot Williams 4-4 (0)
Jon Scheyer 58-60 (-2)
Brian Zoubek 15-21 (-6)
Greg Paulus 27-35 (-8)
Gerald Henderson 50-59 (-9)
Lance Thomas 22-32 (-10)

Per 40 Minutes
Miles Plumlee +28.6
Nolan Smith +15.2
Dave McClure +11.2
Kyle Singler +5.4
Elliot Williams 0
Jon Scheyer -2.4
Gerald Henderson -12
Brian Zoubek -18.5
Greg Paulus -18.8
Lance Thomas -30.8

Lineups
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler 11-5 (+6)
Smith-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Zoubek 7-2 (+5)
Smith-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Thomas 5-2 (+3)
Scheyer-Williams-McClure-Singler-Plumlee 4-2 (+2)
Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Plumlee 4-2 (+2)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Thomas 2-0 (+2)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Plumlee (x2) 7-6 (+1)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler (x2) 5-4 (+1)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas 6-5 (+1)
Paulus-Smith-McClure-Singler-Thomas 3-2 (+1)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek (x2) 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Thomas 2-2 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Plumlee 0-0 (0)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Thomas (x2) 0-1 (-1)
Paulus-Scheyer-McClure-Singler-Zoubek 2-3 (-1)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Zoubek 0-2 (-2)
Paulus-Scheyer-Williams-McClure-Singler 0-2 (-2)
Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Zoubek (x2) 4-8 (-4)
Smith-Henderson-McClure-Thomas-Zoubek 0-4 (-4)
Scheyer-Henderson-McClure-Singler-Thomas 0-5 (-5)
Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler-Thomas (x3) 4-11 (-7)

Thomas continues to get his shot blocked down low quite often-- that one wild, out-of-control attempt where he almost fell down out of bounds, while getting blocked by Wake-- the foot work has to be seen in replay to be believed... since I posted, earlier this season, about Thomas' difficulties with getting shots off down low, things have not improved-- he still gets blocked by smaller guards, as well as same-size and bigger men.

Zoubek, too, while doing better than he ever has this year, somehow still plays almost totally below the rim-- this is amazing for a guy 7'1". I have a hard time remembering him dunking a ball this year... I do remember him being prevented from getting a shot off from the low block, when facing the basket one-on-one with a guard, in a league game recently (GT?). When faced with a similarly-sized, but unathletic, big man (like McFarland), he is not able to shoot over him (with any accuracy), and when faced with smaller men who are better jumpers, he cannot get shots off very well (still shoots hit-or-miss layups, rather than trying to power up for dunks); the only time he really seems able to (consistently) execute one-on-one low post offensive moves, is when he is matched up with a smaller, unathletic post player (i.e.- Neal from Maryland)... the odd thing is, when you see him play in person, he looks reasonably athletic, for a big man, and seems to run and jump fairly well-- but when you watch on TV, he looks like he just doesn't have any elevation-- a supposition that is borne out by the fact that we have Henderson (9.5" shorter) jumping center for us, I guess.

For my money, Duke needs two things (maybe three) to be there at the end of tournament: 1) Scheyer gets his shooting back on track; 2) Plumlee needs as much time as Duke can give him between now and the end of the season, to build his technique, footwork, and confidence in his offensive low-post game, so that Duke can field a post player with some athletic explosiveness, who can give us some low-post scoring in big games, at crunch time, late in the year... on his current trajectory, he's not going to get there with the amount of playing time he's currently getting/earning, but he has shown little flashes of capability that suggest he could get there, if he was force-fed playing time (and the ball down low)-- and Duke is not going to win a lot of games in the NCAA tournament against really good teams like Wake, UNC-CH, Uconn, etc., playing Zoubek or Thomas as our primary post player. (The third thing we probably need, in order to win a lot of games in the tourney, is Paulus making a high percentage of his long field-goal attempts, when he comes off the bench.)

Zoubek can be an excellent change-of-pace guy, who can defend guys like McFarland, and even score over guys like Neal, but he is not going to do anything offensively against guys like Thabeet or Monroe, and Plumlee is also better suited to trying to pressure out on the perimeter, as Coach K is wont to do with his big man (a` la Elton Brand), but which Zoubek is totally unsuited to (he invariably picks up 1-2 fouls per game, trying to do that, to no avail).

[Mudge]

that's like saying you should charge a team with a missed shot every time it turns the ball over, since obviously it would've registered a shot attempt on that possession if not for the turnover.

You can't charge someone a miss for a shot they never took. Making the front end of a 1-and-1 assures another free throw ATTEMPT, not a make.

Yep, exactly-- that's exactly how coaches think of turnovers-- missed opportunities to get a shot attempt.

You absolutely should be able to charge the player with two misses on a front-end miss-- there isn't any doubt that he would have had another attempt-- it is the very next thing that would have happened (in fact, the only next thing that can happen), if he had made the front end. Of course making the front end assures another attempt-- who ever said it "assured a make"? Certainly not I.

[devildownunder]

Yep, exactly-- that's exactly how coaches think of turnovers-- missed opportunities to get a shot attempt.

You absolutely should be able to charge the player with two misses on a front-end miss-- there isn't any doubt that he would have had another attempt-- it is the very next thing that would have happened (in fact, the only next thing that can happen), if he had made the front end. Of course making the front end assures another attempt-- who ever said it "assured a make"? Certainly not I.

Yes, that is how coaches think of turnovers, and they should. But statisticians are not interested in the same things as coaches, and for good reason. Statisticians are -- or should be -- interested only in documenting the games in ways that accurately depict what has happened. To charge someone, or a team in the case of a turnover, with a missed shot attempt when they never, in fact, attempted anything (for whatever reason) grossly distorts the shooting percentage and, therefore, renders the statistic useless. If I look up a player's or team's shooting percentage, I want it to tell me how likely they are, on average, to make a shot they attempt. The kind of information you are attempting to glean from those numbers would be something more akin to a type of offensive efficiency rating, which could then include actual possessions/potential possessions, for example, to measure the impact of turnovers, offensive rebounds and such.

But to do what you are suggesting would be to try to cram an offensive efficiency rating into the shooting percentage stat and that is not its purpose.

[devildownunder]

Yep, exactly-- that's exactly how coaches think of turnovers-- missed opportunities to get a shot attempt.

You absolutely should be able to charge the player with two misses on a front-end miss-- there isn't any doubt that he would have had another attempt-- it is the very next thing that would have happened (in fact, the only next thing that can happen), if he had made the front end. Of course making the front end assures another attempt-- who ever said it "assured a make"? Certainly not I.

Also, if you charge a player with a missed attempt on the second for missing the first, wouldn't the flip side of that have to be that he gets a made attempt on the 2nd if he makes the first (which would be absurd)? Otherwise, the stat is completely unfair, you are charging 2 misses for just one missed shot, but there is no corresponding situation in which you credit two makes for just one make.

Unfair to the player and, potentially more importantly, it completely distorts the stat.

[Mudge]

Yes, that is how coaches think of turnovers, and they should. But statisticians are not interested in the same things as coaches, and for good reason. Statisticians are -- or should be -- interested only in documenting the games in ways that accurately depict what has happened. To charge someone, or a team in the case of a turnover, with a missed shot attempt when they never, in fact, attempted anything (for whatever reason) grossly distorts the shooting percentage and, therefore, renders the statistic useless. If I look up a player's or team's shooting percentage, I want it to tell me how likely they are, on average, to make a shot they attempt. The kind of information you are attempting to glean from those numbers would be something more akin to a type of offensive efficiency rating, which could then include actual possessions/potential possessions, for example, to measure the impact of turnovers, offensive rebounds and such.

But to do what you are suggesting would be to try to cram an offensive efficiency rating into the shooting percentage stat and that is not its purpose.

Fair point-- as a fan who was extremely frustrated that Duke did not get any points from our 90% free throw shooter going to the line late in a close game that we were trailing, I was interested in what that miss cost us... I am interested in offensive efficiency, as much as the player's likelihood of making a given shot attempt. I like stats like the NBA sometimes provides, on a player's FT % late in the game and/or in the playoffs. I've always thought that Allen Iverson was overrated, because he was so profligate with his shooting--yes, he scored a lot, but he always needed a lot more shots to get his points (on a relative basis to someone like Shaq or Artis Gilmore).

[Mudge]

Also, if you charge a player with a missed attempt on the second for missing the first, wouldn't the flip side of that have to be that he gets a made attempt on the 2nd if he makes the first (which would be absurd)? Otherwise, the stat is completely unfair, you are charging 2 misses for just one missed shot, but there is no corresponding situation in which you credit two makes for just one make.

Unfair to the player and, potentially more importantly, it completely distorts the stat.

No, he only gets the second make, if he takes and makes it-- sort of like double jeopardy-- you have to make two shots to get two points, but you only have to miss the front end, to cost your team two points-- it ain't fair or symmetrical, but that's tough- neither is life fair, and that is the real effect on your team.

Having said that, I would be totally in favor of bringing back the experimental rule from a few years ago, that allows the fouled team to choose to take the ball out of bounds, rather than shoot FTs, if they want to.

[devildownunder]

Fair point-- as a fan who was extremely frustrated that Duke did not get any points from our 90% free throw shooter going to the line late in a close game that we were trailing, I was interested in what that miss cost us... I am interested in offensive efficiency, as much as the player's likelihood of making a given shot attempt. I like stats like the NBA sometimes provides, on a player's FT % late in the game and/or in the playoffs. I've always thought that Allen Iverson was overrated, because he was so profligate with his shooting--yes, he scored a lot, but he always needed a lot more shots to get his points (on a relative basis to someone like Shaq or Artis Gilmore).

And there are plenty of stats that focus on offensive efficiency. Points per shot, for instance, something Mr Iverson wouldn't fare especially well in if your perception of him is correct, although I suspect guards in general don't fare as well at this as big men. Not sure about that, though.

[pfrduke]

Thomas continues to get his shot blocked down low quite often-- that one wild, out-of-control attempt where he almost fell down out of bounds, while getting blocked by Wake-- the foot work has to be seen in replay to be believed... since I posted, earlier this season, about Thomas' difficulties with getting shots off down low, things have not improved-- he still gets blocked by smaller guards, as well as same-size and bigger men.

We've done this before. You were no more right then about Thomas' tendency to get blocked than you are now. The last time you said he got his shot blocked "all the time," it had been twice in the first 7 games. Since then, he's been blocked three times (in 13 games) - by Jeff Allen, Chris Singleton, and James Johnson. None of those three are smaller guards. The last two are in the top 5 in the conference in blocking shots, and Allen is top 15. On the season, he's been blocked on 5 of 66 shot attempts (7.6%), which is just barely more than Duke's season average for getting shots blocked (6.5%).

Yes, his footwork on the play last night where he got blocked by Johnson was very bad. Yes, he has underperformed in ACC play so far. But to take that one play and extrapolate it into "he gets blocked quite often" is not true, and is pure confirmation bias.

[devildownunder]

No, he only gets the second make, if he takes and makes it-- sort of like double jeopardy-- you have to make two shots to get two points, but you only have to miss the front end, to cost your team two points-- it ain't fair or symmetrical, but that's tough- neither is life fair, and that is the real effect on your team.

Having said that, I would be totally in favor of bringing back the experimental rule from a few years ago, that allows the fouled team to choose to take the ball out of bounds, rather than shoot FTs, if they want to.

A way to get that information, and not distort the FT percentage stat, is to just track %age on the front end of 1-and-1s, something that's been done for years.

No, life isn't fair but statistics should be -- at least in the sense that they should accurately reflect what happened. You don't change the way you record a stat when you want to glean a different type of information, you develop a new stat to suit your purposes, IMO.

[pfrduke]

I've never understood why they don't count the missed front-end of a 1-and-1 free throw as two misses... it takes away two possible points, most of the time, unless the shooting team gets the rebound (and even then, it's still two missed opportunities at an uncontested shot-- they count the front end miss, even if the shooting team gets the rebound)... I think this would be a truer reflection of a shooter's FT percentage.

No, the truest reflection of a shooter's FT percentage is how many he makes against how many attempts he takes. Giving a guy who misses the front end an 0-2 in the score book is not only silly, it's not what actually happened.