PDA

View Full Version : Misunderstanding Duke's Defense



Namtilal
01-11-2011, 01:05 AM
The buzz now is that we are doomed because of our interior defense. Two straight games we gave up big games to opposing big men. The Miami game was partially a farce due to the blazing start, and the MD game was competitive, although I regret that I was forced to miss it. However, we gave up 63 and 64 points in those two games!

It is to our benefit that people think we're weak. Our interior D isn't our strength, but our main goal seems to be containing guard play and keeping our bigs from foul trouble. The tradeoff is the risk of a big game from the opposing post players -- but if the result is 63.5 ppg, then the logic of that strategy is obvious.

Overall defensive efficiency is much more important than the stats of individual opposing players.

loran16
01-11-2011, 01:36 AM
The buzz now is that we are doomed because of our interior defense. Two straight games we gave up big games to opposing big men. The Miami game was partially a farce due to the blazing start, and the MD game was competitive, although I regret that I was forced to miss it. However, we gave up 63 and 64 points in those two games!

It is to our benefit that people think we're weak. Our interior D isn't our strength, but our main goal seems to be containing guard play and keeping our bigs from foul trouble. The tradeoff is the risk of a big game from the opposing post players -- but if the result is 63.5 ppg, then the logic of that strategy is obvious.

Overall defensive efficiency is much more important than the stats of individual opposing players.

Agreed on Defensive Efficiency, but points per game is NOT Defensive Efficiency. Duke gave up .853 points per possession against MD and .926 PPP against Miami, which are both excellent numbers.

However, the doubters do have one point:
As basketball prospectus wrote last week (http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1383): with Reggie Johnson in the game, Duke gave up 1.05 Points per possession, a number that would be below average for any team, nevertheless Duke.

So there is some evidence that a great big man can cause Duke some serious defensive woes. We've survived thus far - Johnson couldn't stay on the floor, allowing Duke to lead by enough to prevent his return from giving Miami a chance - but it can be a weakness.

DukieInBrasil
01-11-2011, 09:07 AM
The buzz now is that we are doomed because of our interior defense. Two straight games we gave up big games to opposing big men. The Miami game was partially a farce due to the blazing start, and the MD game was competitive, although I regret that I was forced to miss it. However, we gave up 63 and 64 points in those two games!

It is to our benefit that people think we're weak. Our interior D isn't our strength, but our main goal seems to be containing guard play and keeping our bigs from foul trouble. The tradeoff is the risk of a big game from the opposing post players -- but if the result is 63.5 ppg, then the logic of that strategy is obvious.

Overall defensive efficiency is much more important than the stats of individual opposing players.
Good synopsis of the situation. K has employed this strategy for a while and has worked well so far this year, too. Nobody would be griping about the D vs MD if a) Nolan shoots even 44% from the floor b) Ryan makes at least one of those 3s or c) we get slightly better shooting from the Plumlees (say 4-9 rather than 2-9). Nobody would even be talking about it at all if all of those things happened. What I'm getting at is that our offense was not particularly sharp vs. MD, but we won a tight game where our D did essentially what it was designed to do.

Chitowndevil
01-11-2011, 10:21 AM
kenpom.com (http://www.kenpom.com/team.php?team=Duke)

Duke has recently dropped to 5th in the nation in defensive efficiency (we were previously trading off 1st and 2nd with Ohio St). Our FG% defense is excellent from both 2 and 3 point range.

If there's a glaringly suspect area it's rebounding on both ends of the court. But I am always reluctant to blame that solely on the big men. We gave up 7 offensive rebounds to Maryland's guards (I'm including 2 by 6-6 Hakur Palsson). Miami outrebounded us 41-39; Reggie Johnson had 9 rebounds but their second leading rebounder was guard Durand Scott with 5 (oddly, they had 7 offensive rebounds credited to the team on the stat sheet, you won't see that often).

Now, you can argue that we'd be giving up less rebounds to everybody, including opposing guards, with a Brian Zoubek patrolling the paint. My point (duh) is that rebounding is a team effort. I think it's a mistake to use the "poor interior D" label at this point or to point fingers at the Plumlees or Ryan Kelley.

superdave
01-11-2011, 10:32 AM
Where is this buzz that we are doomed coming from? I have heard no one who I respect say we are doomed. And I can't say that I've even heard buzz except for a few consistent complainers on the DBR message boards.

I for one feel good about our defense, and think we're getting better as the season progresses. We have a chance to be great defensively, but most great teams arrive there in March, not January.

Do people forget the overall growth of the 2009-10 Duke team that led to a National Championship? I am starting to think (ok, I've thought for a long time) that people just really really need to be negative about Duke in spite of the fact that they love Duke (and Duke is consensus #1).

Super "doomed? really?" Dave

Neals384
01-11-2011, 11:15 AM
I thought our interior D could have been better against both Miami and MD. Our bigs have a tendency to come off their man to help out on drives even when no help is needed. Some examples from the MD game are discussed here (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?23793-MBB-Duke-71-Maryland-64-Post-Game-Thread&p=463214#post463214). Of Williams' 10 field goals, 8 were layups or dunks. Does anyone consider that good D?

I consider myself an "optimist" rather than a "doubter", because I expect our interior defense will be much better by the end of the year.

superdave
01-11-2011, 11:23 AM
I thought our interior D could have been better against both Miami and MD. Our bigs have a tendency to come off their man to help out on drives even when no help is needed. Some examples from the MD game are discussed here (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?23793-MBB-Duke-71-Maryland-64-Post-Game-Thread&p=463214#post463214). Of Williams' 10 field goals, 8 were layups or dunks. Does anyone consider that good D?

I consider myself an "optimist" rather than a "doubter", because I expect our interior defense will be much better by the end of the year.

Our bigs are supposed to rotate to help on the driver. Another player is supposed to rotate down to cover the big. When we do it right, it works. When we do it wrong, it does not work.

jimsumner
01-11-2011, 11:32 AM
Duke may not play another big man this season as good as Jordan Williams. He's that good.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-11-2011, 12:08 PM
Our bigs are supposed to rotate to help on the driver. Another player is supposed to rotate down to cover the big. When we do it right, it works. When we do it wrong, it does not work.
Starting last mid January, watching Zoubs and Lance Thomas play our defense was like watching a ballet. It was magnificent! Of course, it took 3 and 1/2 years of practice for them to rehearse this ballet for them to fully "get it". MP1, MP2 and Ryan Kelly aren't there yet. They'll get there. They'll get better. But it won't/can't get as good as last year, simply because last year was help and rotation to perfection and Zoubs was over 7 feet tall with a huge wing span. But the Plumlee's are alarmingly athletic so they have their own inherent advantages, and Kelly's basketball IQ serves us well and will get better. Give it time. The season is still young and last I looked, we were still undefeated! :cool:

TampaDuke
01-11-2011, 12:32 PM
There is room for improvement with the interior D, particularly with communication and the help defense rotating over. I suspect the staff is well aware of this and will work to improve it, which hopefully will alleviate some of the easy layups and dunks.

Over the years, I've been frustrated at times to see one of our big guys roll to help on a driver that seemed fairly-well contained (or at least destined for a contested shot) only to have the driver pass to the now open big guy for a layup or dunk. While frustrating at times, the staff has consistently taken the view that this is how they want the team to defend -- with a team-oriented approach. It's hard to argue with the results and this is an area that I've come to accept Coach K's philosphy. Same thing with our overplaying, in-your-face, man-to-man defense when the offensive player is well beyond the three point line and poses no immediate scoring threat (which seems to allow easy penetration and used to have me screaming at the TV before realizing that this type of D was exactly what the staff wanted and was critical to our style of play).

That said, this year's interior and helpside defense could certainly be improved through better communication and team work. The open layup or dunk is often the "fault" of the third defender not helping out in time. This is no doubt why Coach K is always emphasizing communication, particularly on the defensive end and why, earlier this year, he was stressing that point as one of the big keys to the season. I'm optimistic!

Indoor66
01-11-2011, 12:32 PM
Our bigs are supposed to rotate to help on the driver. Another player is supposed to rotate down to cover the big. When we do it right, it works. When we do it wrong, it does not work.

That is absolutely accurate and Profoundly stated. :cool:

mr. synellinden
01-11-2011, 12:49 PM
Duke may not play another big man this season as good as Jordan Williams. He's that good.

Off-thread topic, but ... and he was rated # 85 in the rivals top 150 for 2009.

superdave
01-11-2011, 01:07 PM
Starting last mid January, watching Zoubs and Lance Thomas play our defense was like watching a ballet. It was magnificent! Of course, it took 3 and 1/2 years of practice for them to rehearse this ballet for them to fully "get it". MP1, MP2 and Ryan Kelly aren't there yet. They'll get there. They'll get better. But it won't/can't get as good as last year, simply because last year was help and rotation to perfection and Zoubs was over 7 feet tall with a huge wing span. But the Plumlee's are alarmingly athletic so they have their own inherent advantages, and Kelly's basketball IQ serves us well and will get better. Give it time. The season is still young and last I looked, we were still undefeated! :cool:

To piggyback on your point, it took Zoubeard 3.5 years to learn how to avoid fouls and stay on the court for more than 15 minutes a night. It takes lots of reps unless you are the Albert Einstein of post defense.

superdave
01-11-2011, 01:08 PM
Off-thread topic, but ... and he was rated # 85 in the rivals top 150 for 2009.

Jordan Williams catches the ball well and has great touch around the basket. What I'm trying to say here is the man has good hands basketball-wise.

MChambers
01-11-2011, 01:54 PM
To piggyback on your point, it took Zoubeard 3.5 years to learn how to avoid fouls and stay on the court for more than 15 minutes a night. It takes lots of reps unless you are the Albert Einstein of post defense.

you mean Mr. Battier?

thenameisbond
01-11-2011, 03:49 PM
The buzz now is that we are doomed because of our interior defense. Two straight games we gave up big games to opposing big men. The Miami game was partially a farce due to the blazing start, and the MD game was competitive, although I regret that I was forced to miss it. However, we gave up 63 and 64 points in those two games!

It is to our benefit that people think we're weak. Our interior D isn't our strength, but our main goal seems to be containing guard play and keeping our bigs from foul trouble. The tradeoff is the risk of a big game from the opposing post players -- but if the result is 63.5 ppg, then the logic of that strategy is obvious.

Overall defensive efficiency is much more important than the stats of individual opposing players.

^this is the most important point