Our Defense vs. Maryland (Cameron) and a few extra numbers too

[tommy]

Thankfully, Duke was able to maintain the defensive intensity that we showed against UNC and hopefully start to really move past some of the lackadaisical efforts we've had this year and the see-sawing we've recently experienced in terms of focus and effort at that end. And unlike UNC, our defensive execution in this game was excellent. Though Maryland was missing Howard, and other than Stoglin does not appear to me to be a particularly talented team offensively, nevertheless holding them to 55 points is impressive.

Not only that, but we held them to 37% shooting and only allowed them offensive rebounds on 21% of the possible/available boards. That FG% number is a full 9% below what the cumulative of 46% has been since I started charting our defense in the Western Michigan game (12 games I believe) and the offensive rebounding/given up number is a whopping 16 percentage points below the cumulative number of 37%. Wow.

Anyone who can fog a mirror could tell that the defensive star of the game was Miles Plumlee. We got stops on 95% of the plays he was involved in. That is amazing. Of course everyone knows about the 22 boards, 13 of which were on the defensive end. He also was partially responsible for only one basket all day. His overall defensive rating of 66.9 is by far the best of any player in any game this year, and was almost 17 points better than the team as a whole. That is unheard of. For reference, the next best Defensive Rating number for this game (of the top 7 guys) was Austin, at 82. This is an extremely welcome turnaround from some of Miles's recent performances, and if he can keep it up, it'll bring this team to another level entirely.

Ryan Kelly did a nice job of denial in the post, but nevertheless gave up some hoops and didn't end up with overall good numbers. Of the perimeter guys, we of course had trouble with stopping dribble penetration (I counted 4 times that Seth was beaten into the lane off the dribble, 3 times for Tyler being the biggest offenders) but we got some good help defense from the bigs and therefore didn't give up a lot of easy shots. Even Andre Dawkins did better on this count, as I noted twice that he did a nice job staying in front and only once being beaten in this manner.

Overall a very good defensive performance, one whose most important element was the focus and intensity that we brought. That's two in a row where we brought it in that way, and in this one we coupled it with execution.

The stop % numbers are below.

By the way, if you're interested in Defensive Rating numbers, individual stop %'s, the offensive rebounds surrendered numbers, and many others, not only for this game but cumulatively as well, they are available at dukehoopblog.com. (actually the cumulatives and the Maryland numbers are not up yet, but Maryland should be up later today or tomorrow, and the cumulatives to follow soon, with analysis of each player's performance on a number of defensive metrics.)





Stops
Hoops
Stop%


Curry
31
20
61%


Rivers
38
25
60%


Dawkins
16
13
55%


Mason
31
20
61%


Thornton
16
12
57%


Kelly
13
10
57%


Miles
28
18
61%


Cook
12
5
71%


Gbinije
1
0
100%


Hairston
4
1
80%


TEAM
38
25
60%




























And here are the updated cumulative stop % numbers




Stops
Hoops
Stop%


Curry
341
311
52.3%


Rivers
396
350
53.1%


Dawkins
240
242
49.8%


Mason
329
310
51.5%


Thornton
233
196
54.3%


Kelly
295
261
53.1%


Miles
220
204
51.9%


Cook
163
144
53.1%


Gbinije
32
41
43.8%


Hairston
83
68
55.0%


TEAM
468
421
52.6%

[-jk]

What I saw and like most v. Maryland was the ability to completely shut down Stoglin by steering him into double teams over and over, leading him to take bad shots and make bad passes. Probably the best team defense I've seen this year.

I hope we can keep it up this time!

-jk

[loldevilz]

This team is starting to play with swagger. We may lose a close game in the tournament but I'd be very surprised to see this team get blown out or dominated in the tournament. Miles, Mason, Rivers, and Curry are unflappable.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Sheesh... I hope swagger, confidence [and execution] do more for us than avoid getting blown out in the tourneys... would like to think it gives us a great chance to play well into March... or April!

[hustleplays]

What I saw and like most v. Maryland was the ability to completely shut down Stoglin by steering him into double teams over and over, leading him to take bad shots and make bad passes. Probably the best team defense I've seen this year.

I hope we can keep it up this time!

-jk

In his PG Presser, Coach said that Tyler was the "toughest kid on the team" and that he is "a Duke basketball player." [!] Ordinarily, this would be a rather strange, obvious thing to say, I mean, aren't all the guys on the team "Duke basketball players"? No, not in Coach K's world. A Duke basketball player is totally tough, never backs down, doesn't take time off, doesn't succumb to the normal human reasons for not being able to play one's best, plays relentless D -- not just some of the time, plays like a Champion, has Heart -- a steely, refuse-to-lose mentality.

Coach didn't say it, but I imagine that Austin also qualifies as "a Duke basketball player" and Miles played like one against Maryland. The entire team seemed to play more like Duke basketball players, as a team, than they have previously. Here's hoping that they can consistently live up to Coach K's highest accolade: A Duke Basketball Player.

[gam7]

Our kenpom defensive efficiency ranking jumped 15-20 spots based on the Maryland game alone.

[Kedsy]

Our kenpom defensive efficiency ranking jumped 15-20 spots based on the Maryland game alone.

Which is one reason we probably shouldn't fixate so heavily on our kenpom defensive efficiency ranking.

[duke09hms]

Which is one reason we probably shouldn't fixate so heavily on our kenpom defensive efficiency ranking.

I'd amend this to say - we shouldn't use our current KenPom defense ranking as a heavy predictor for postseason success.

Our defense for most of the year has been poor, and our KenPom ranking has accurately reflected that. Because he places more weight on recent games, a CONSISTENT string of games with solid defense could easily boost our defense back to typical Duke levels.

Heavy emphasis on consistent. Let's come out focused against NC State.

[toooskies]

Which is one reason we probably shouldn't fixate so heavily on our kenpom defensive efficiency ranking.

The ranking itself, not so much. But that's because the closer you get to the middle of the pack, the more teams there are out there that are similar to you. The absolute difference between the 1st and the 10th team is 6.2 points per possession, which is the same difference between 20th and 80th teams.

So, yeah, we can climb up those rankings pretty quickly (just as we fell pretty quickly from the preseason) if we string together some solid defensive games. But doing that doesn't mean we're getting leaps and bounds better. Leaving ranks there distorts the simpler truth that Duke's defense has averaged roughly what a lot of other teams have done on defense this year, and the teams at the top are a lot better.

[nocilla]

The ranking itself, not so much. But that's because the closer you get to the middle of the pack, the more teams there are out there that are similar to you. The absolute difference between the 1st and the 10th team is 6.2 points per possession, which is the same difference between 20th and 80th teams.


Man, if we give up 6.2 points per possession it will certainly be hard for our offense to keep up. :p

[Kedsy]

The ranking itself, not so much. But that's because the closer you get to the middle of the pack, the more teams there are out there that are similar to you. The absolute difference between the 1st and the 10th team is 6.2 points per possession, which is the same difference between 20th and 80th teams.

So, yeah, we can climb up those rankings pretty quickly (just as we fell pretty quickly from the preseason) if we string together some solid defensive games. But doing that doesn't mean we're getting leaps and bounds better. Leaving ranks there distorts the simpler truth that Duke's defense has averaged roughly what a lot of other teams have done on defense this year, and the teams at the top are a lot better.

It may be worth noting that our current defensive efficiency number in Pomeroy is 95.6 and the average defensive efficiency of the four final four teams on this date last year was 95.0. Going into their conference tournaments, the four teams averaged 95.7. Going into the NCAA tournament, the four teams averaged 95.2. After the tournament was over, the four teams averaged 93.2.

So, while I'd feel more comfortable if our defense was better, it seems a defensive efficiency number around ours is not a bar to NCAAT success.

[Indoor66]

It may be worth noting that our current defensive efficiency number in Pomeroy is 95.6 and the average defensive efficiency of the four final four teams on this date last year was 95.0. Going into their conference tournaments, the four teams averaged 95.7. Going into the NCAA tournament, the four teams averaged 95.2. After the tournament was over, the four teams averaged 93.2.

So, while I'd feel more comfortable if our defense was better, it seems a defensive efficiency number around ours is not a bar to NCAAT success.

Or maybe it means that these numbers have limited significance because they are based on such a small sample size - no matter how late in the season

[Kedsy]

Or maybe it means that these numbers have limited significance because they are based on such a small sample size - no matter how late in the season

Well, that's sort of what I said in my earlier post, that we shouldn't fixate so heavily on our kenpom defensive efficiency number.

[RoyalBlue08]

It may be worth noting that our current defensive efficiency number in Pomeroy is 95.6 and the average defensive efficiency of the four final four teams on this date last year was 95.0. Going into their conference tournaments, the four teams averaged 95.7. Going into the NCAA tournament, the four teams averaged 95.2. After the tournament was over, the four teams averaged 93.2.

So, while I'd feel more comfortable if our defense was better, it seems a defensive efficiency number around ours is not a bar to NCAAT success.

The point I take from this is that the teams in the final four last year did not have outstanding seasons, they had outstanding tournaments. And I think this is probably the lesson that will always be the hardest for college basketball fans to accept. The NCAA tournament has a great deal of variance to it. There is little if any way to predict what is going to happen. The talking heads on TV like to say things like "Any one of these ten teams might make a run and win a title" but that just isn't accurate. How many of those same people had UConn in one of their 10 teams before the Big East tournament. Fact of the matter is, any one of 30+ teams this season can win it all. And when you only play it once, the odds of the best team winning (realistically somewhere around 10%?) and the 30th best team (I don't know, 1%?) don't seem like that much to me.

[Jderf]

The point I take from this is that the teams in the final four last year did not have outstanding seasons, they had outstanding tournaments. And I think this is probably the lesson that will always be the hardest for college basketball fans to accept. The NCAA tournament has a great deal of variance to it. There is little if any way to predict what is going to happen. The talking heads on TV like to say things like "Any one of these ten teams might make a run and win a title" but that just isn't accurate. How many of those same people had UConn in one of their 10 teams before the Big East tournament. Fact of the matter is, any one of 30+ teams this season can win it all. And when you only play it once, the odds of the best team winning (realistically somewhere around 10%?) and the 30th best team (I don't know, 1%?) don't seem like that much to me.

Yup. Pretty much a tried and true fact: This ain't tennis, so don't go betting against the field.

[Kedsy]

The point I take from this is that the teams in the final four last year did not have outstanding seasons, they had outstanding tournaments. And I think this is probably the lesson that will always be the hardest for college basketball fans to accept. The NCAA tournament has a great deal of variance to it. There is little if any way to predict what is going to happen. The talking heads on TV like to say things like "Any one of these ten teams might make a run and win a title" but that just isn't accurate. How many of those same people had UConn in one of their 10 teams before the Big East tournament. Fact of the matter is, any one of 30+ teams this season can win it all. And when you only play it once, the odds of the best team winning (realistically somewhere around 10%?) and the 30th best team (I don't know, 1%?) don't seem like that much to me.

Agreed. And that's only one thing among many that the talking heads lay down as gospel when they're anything but. At the beginning of this season they were saying the top four teams -- which at the time were UNC, Ohio State, Kentucky, & UConn -- were so far ahead of everyone else that it was difficult to envision anybody else making the Final Four. Now three of those teams are ranked 6, 8, and not. And we haven't even gotten to the tournament yet.

Of course, the issue is not restricted to the talking heads, either. A whole lot of people on this board make a whole lot of definitive can/can't or will/won't statements with little to no basis, when the truth is we have almost no inkling of what's actually going to happen.

[NSDukeFan]

The point I take from this is that the teams in the final four last year did not have outstanding seasons, they had outstanding tournaments. And I think this is probably the lesson that will always be the hardest for college basketball fans to accept. The NCAA tournament has a great deal of variance to it. There is little if any way to predict what is going to happen. The talking heads on TV like to say things like "Any one of these ten teams might make a run and win a title" but that just isn't accurate. How many of those same people had UConn in one of their 10 teams before the Big East tournament. Fact of the matter is, any one of 30+ teams this season can win it all. And when you only play it once, the odds of the best team winning (realistically somewhere around 10%?) and the 30th best team (I don't know, 1%?) don't seem like that much to me.

I don't feel like looking it up right now, but my recollection is that before last year, the NCAA champion had been ranked in the top 10 in both offense and defense for a few years running, according to KenPom. I can't remember if those rankings were from before or after the tournament. Last year's tournament was such an aberration, but upsets obviously happen in the one and done format. I certainly am not ready to crown UK yet, and am not sure why I have been reading a bunch about how they are likely champions, when I am not sure they have a better resume than Syracuse. Based on past tournaments, I don't know that an underclassmen loaded UK would be fantastic at facing Syracuse's zone with little preparation in that hypothetical matchup that is very unlikely to occur.

[tommy]

The point I take from this is that the teams in the final four last year did not have outstanding seasons, they had outstanding tournaments. And I think this is probably the lesson that will always be the hardest for college basketball fans to accept.

Don't limit yourself to last year. In 2010, Duke had a very good regular season, but they weren't the best team in the country. But there is no question that in that NCAA tournament we were clearly the best team, meaning we played at another level than did everyone else. And we STILL almost got beaten by Baylor and again narrowly escaped Butler.

[MChambers]

Don't limit yourself to last year. In 2010, Duke had a very good regular season, but they weren't the best team in the country. But there is no question that in that NCAA tournament we were clearly the best team, meaning we played at another level than did everyone else. And we STILL almost got beaten by Baylor and again narrowly escaped Butler.
I'm pretty sure Duke was #2 in Pomeroy before the 2010 tournament started.

[MChambers]

I don't feel like looking it up right now, but my recollection is that before last year, the NCAA champion had been ranked in the top 10 in both offense and defense for a few years running, according to KenPom. I can't remember if those rankings were from before or after the tournament. Last year's tournament was such an aberration, but upsets obviously happen in the one and done format. I certainly am not ready to crown UK yet, and am not sure why I have been reading a bunch about how they are likely champions, when I am not sure they have a better resume than Syracuse. Based on past tournaments, I don't know that an underclassmen loaded UK would be fantastic at facing Syracuse's zone with little preparation in that hypothetical matchup that is very unlikely to occur.
We shouldn't put too much on last year's tournament. I have the same recollection. Historically, defensive rating going into the tournament has been a very good predictor.

[Duvall]

Don't limit yourself to last year. In 2010, Duke had a very good regular season, but they weren't the best team in the country.

Perhaps, but we shouldn't be surprised that the second-best team in the country won a single-elimination tournament.

[airowe]

Perhaps, but we shouldn't be surprised that the second-best team in the country won a single-elimination tournament.

Was Connecticut the 2nd best team in the country last season?

[Kedsy]

I don't feel like looking it up right now, but my recollection is that before last year, the NCAA champion had been ranked in the top 10 in both offense and defense for a few years running, according to KenPom. I can't remember if those rankings were from before or after the tournament.

The numbers available on Pomeroy's site are post-tournament. I only have numbers back to 2009, but here are the defensive efficiency numbers for the final four teams in 2009 and 2010 (I already provided 2011 in an earlier post):

DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY

2010
-----
Going into last weekend of regular season:
Duke -- 6
Butler -- 24
West Virginia -- 32
Michigan State -- 43

Going into NCAAT:
Duke -- 4
Butler -- 15
West Virginia -- 24
Michigan State -- 27

After NCAAT:
Duke -- 4
Butler -- 5
West Virginia -- 22
Michigan State -- 30

2009
-----
Going into last weekend of regular season:
UNC -- 21
Michigan State -- 11
UConn -- 3
Villanova -- 25

Going into NCAAT:
UNC -- 35
Michigan State -- 10
UConn -- 4
Villanova -- 29

After NCAAT:
UNC -- 16
Michigan State -- 10
UConn -- 3
Villanova -- 15

So, I won't say a high ranking in defensive efficiency would hurt a team that wishes to make the Final Four, but it's certainly neither necessary nor sufficient.

[COYS]

I'm pretty sure Duke was #2 in Pomeroy before the 2010 tournament started.

Duke was actually number 1 in KenPom prior to the tourney in 2010 and actually had been for a few weeks when we climbed above Kansas. KenPom predicted that we would win the whole shebang. http://basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1019