PDA

View Full Version : Phase V -- The ACC Tournament



sagegrouse
03-10-2013, 11:41 PM
Wow! What a journey! From start of practice through Saturday’s thorough drubbing of UNC, the Blue Devils have had huge wins and a few disappointing losses. Let’s remember the early-season wins against Kentucky, Minnesota, VCU, Louisville, Ohio State and Temple that propelled Duke to a #1 AP ranking. And Duke had significant conference wins against Miami when Ryan returned, State, and twice against the Tar Heels. We won’t dwell on the disappointments.

Our expectations have changed over the season. Phase 0 and I spoke confidently of a three-forward starting lineup of Mason, Ryan and either Alex or Amile. Phase II talked of Marshall’s return and insertion in the rotation. Neither happened, but Duke has had a heckuva season anyway.

We have covered about 20 separate topics in the five prior Phase Reports. About ten or so have been put to rest:


How valuable is our experience? (OMG!)
Who will provide leadership? (Tyler and the seniors.)
Can we shoot effectively from outside? (How’s 41.6 percent, third among 300+ Div. 1 teams?)
Will Duke at times (Hah!) be forced to use a three-guard lineup? (How often have we had three forwards on the court? Less than two minutes per game?)
Do we have an effective point guard? (Meet Mr. Cook.)
Will there be a freshman star? (Meet Mr. Sulaimon.)
Did Duke peak in November and December? (Apparently not.)
Can we win on the road? (Road games have ended, thankfully and on a high note.)
Will we get points off the bench? (Not likely.)
Is free-throw shooting a weak link? (Overall percentage of 72.7 percent is second in the ACC. Mason has improved, and the other shooters are over 80 percent.)
Will there be minutes for the bottom of the rotation? (Only when Ryan was out.)


But big questions remain, and in Phase V we will turn our attention to these:

1. Health. Ya’ gotta like the trend. Ryan’s back and as good as ever; Seth has seemingly gotten stronger and better through the season; Marshall is available now if needed. But the improving past is not necessarily prologue. The tough ACC Tournament can take a toll. We hope that the injury bug stays away for the rest of the season. Haven’t we had our full share?

2. Defensive Pressure. Our expectation for the season was that the availability of Alex and Amile and the introduction of a strong defender like Rasheed would add length and skill and cure the deficiencies from last year. Well,… the defense, while inconsistent, appears to be better overall and at times very good. It is occurring, it seems, because the individual players are better and more focused on defense rather than because we have different players.

This season, for example, Duke has shot, as noted, 41.6 percent from beyond the arc; the opponents, 28.8 percent. Duke has as assist-to-turnover ratio 1.37 – two times that of the opponents, who are at 0.64.

The defense has not been consistent through the course of a game, with Duke seeming to bring the defensive pressure in the second half. This could be unfortunate in games where the shots aren’t falling for the Devils. Saturday at Carolina showed what Duke can do on defense from the start of the game.

3. Rebounding. Good rebounding team or not-so-good rebounding team, the stats usually show the Devils trailing on the boards – year-in and year-out, so it seems. In any event, holding our own on the offensive and defensive boards is crucial and a key indicator.

4. Whither Rasheed? Our freshman star averaged 4.3 points per game the last four games but 18.3 the four games before that. We have seen an earlier slump and a roaring recovery. Will he return to the starting lineup if we play the large and powerful Terrapins, or will Tyler remain the starter? And will we see a return to Sulaimon’s powerful offensive game? This is important for the ACC Tournament and the NCAA’s to follow.

5. Rotation. With Ryan in the lineup, Josh’s minutes have held up (and he has played well), while Amile’s and Alex’s have plummeted. With a potential of three games in three days we will need quality minutes from Josh, Amile and Alex – will we get them?

6. Mason as a Preternatural Force. We liked the performance of Mason against UNC, taking advantage of a smaller team and being the focal point of the offense in the second half. Can he play at the same level this week?

Now we turn to the possible matchups in the ACC’s. The most likely quarterfinal opponent, going by the record, is Maryland, which should be favored over Wake Forest. The Terps are the most powerful team in the conference with Len, Cleare, and Mitchell. They are also inconsistent on offense and prone to turnovers. (“It’s what we do,” said Mark Turgeon at halftime of the recent Duke game.) Here are the questions:

7. Can our defensive pressure stymie the Terps, produce turnovers, and keep their point total at 60 or below?

8. Will Mason and Ryan be effective on offense against the tall and bulky Maryland team?

9. Will our shooters be effective against the tall Terrapin guards?

Positive answers will mean victory.

Wake, the other potential quarterfinal opponent, is a young but skilled team that doesn’t have the size and strength of Maryland.

10. Will Duke be effective in unleashing an offensive juggernaut, both inside and outside, against the smaller Deacons?

11. Can the defense control the talented Deacons, especially Travis McKie, C.J. Harris, and Devin Thomas?

The semifinals may bring yet another game against the Tar Heels.

12. Can Duke play at the same high level so soon after the blowout win on Saturday or will the quick turn-around favor the embarrassed Tar Heels?

13. Will the Tar Heels change their approach and go back to a larger lineup against the more powerful Blue Devils?

We don’t discount the possibility of an upset on Friday of a discouraged UNC team and the appearance of either Florida State or Clemson in the semifinals. Florida State brings tenacious defense, a limited offense, and an exceedingly crafty Michael Snaer.

14. Duke pounded FSU in Tallahassee. Will a hot-shooting Duke team do the same again or will this be a slog-it-out affair decided at the end?

Clemson is another tenacious defensive team with limited offense.

15. Will Clemson be the classic trap game, taking the Devils all the way to the wire?

It is tough at the beginning of the week to speculate on the finals opponent from the other bracket (not to mention the insult to the weauxf gods by even thinking two games ahead). So we will just look at the questions the Miami Hurricanes face.

16. Can BC or Georgia Tech spring an upset on a suddenly vulnerable Miami team? If Miami is flat, a hot-shooting Eagles team or a tenacious Yellow jacket squad could beat them.

17. Are State and Virginia up to the task of upsetting the Canes? Both teams have limped to the finish line, State losing to FSU and Virginia coming back from 17 points against the Terps and winning in overtime. Both teams have the talent to win but will be underdogs against the strong and experience Miami team. It could be an evenly matched semifinal.

That’s my take on the season so far and the ACC Tournament. Now we would like to hear from you –

sagegrouse

Kedsy
03-11-2013, 12:54 AM
Nice writeup, Sage. And thanks for putting health first. :D

I think you've hit all the high points. Hopefully the more games (and practices) Ryan gets with the team, the better and more consistent our defense will become. D is key in the T (both ACCT and NCAAT). Defensive rebounding will continue to be an issue, but if Ryan, Quinn, Rasheed, and Tyler focus on it, we can probably manage our weakest area reasonably well. And as you say, we could use another "roaring recovery" from Rasheed.

The only issue I would amplify is that in both the ACCT and the NCAAT we'll be playing multiple games on short rest. So far this season on short rest, Seth has shot 3 for 9 against VCU, 3 for 11 against Louisville, 1 for 6 against Ohio State, 3 for 10 against Elon, and 2 for 8 against Miami. In our possible future, the ACCT semi-final and final, the 2nd round NCAAT, the Elite Eight (if we're fortunate enough to be playing in it), and the NCAA championship game (ditto) will all be played on short rest. Hopefully Seth's injury will be healed enough so that he'll be able to play to his usual standards in those games.

BigWayne
03-11-2013, 01:46 AM
Nice writeup, Sage. And thanks for putting health first. :D

I think you've hit all the high points. Hopefully the more games (and practices) Ryan gets with the team, the better and more consistent our defense will become. D is key in the T (both ACCT and NCAAT). Defensive rebounding will continue to be an issue, but if Ryan, Quinn, Rasheed, and Tyler focus on it, we can probably manage our weakest area reasonably well. And as you say, we could use another "roaring recovery" from Rasheed.

The only issue I would amplify is that in both the ACCT and the NCAAT we'll be playing multiple games on short rest. So far this season on short rest, Seth has shot 3 for 9 against VCU, 3 for 11 against Louisville, 1 for 6 against Ohio State, 3 for 10 against Elon, and 2 for 8 against Miami. In our possible future, the ACCT semi-final and final, the 2nd round NCAAT, the Elite Eight (if we're fortunate enough to be playing in it), and the NCAA championship game (ditto) will all be played on short rest. Hopefully Seth's injury will be healed enough so that he'll be able to play to his usual standards in those games.
You can easily go through the stats for this year and find examples of games where Seth had poor shooting on ample rest (1st Miami game for example) and good shooting on short rest games also. ACC tourney is tough on the whole team with hopefully 3 games in 3 days, but the other team has the same problem or worse. NCAAT is only two games a week like most of the conference season. Yes the 2nd game each week is only two days later, but you don't have to travel for it and you don't have to go to class. I'm sure Seth and the Duke staff will be able to handle it.

Troublemaker
03-11-2013, 08:08 AM
About "Whither Rasheed", it's a concern of mine.

Austin hit the wall pretty much the exact same time last season, never having another good game past 2/25. Rasheed's last good game was 2/24 (and actually was probably his best game of the season).

Austin: http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/6617/type/college/austin-rivers

Rasheed: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/gamelog/_/id/61585/rasheed-sulaimon

Do I think Sheed recovers when Austin did not?

Yes, yes I do. Things just have a way of working themselves out for this team this year. We could've lost Seth for the season but we didn't. We could've had problems re-integrating Ryan (or his injury could've been slightly worse and rendered him out for the season), but that didn't happen.

Sometimes the karma's with you. Sometimes it's not.

weezie
03-11-2013, 09:27 AM
No! No whither Rasheed stuff! He's showing some great flashes out on the court. The game is so fast when he's out there. Stay positive Rasheed!
We've had so many more guys involved in the games all season, up and down. It's all got to be good.

camion
03-11-2013, 09:34 AM
I think point number 1, health, really is the number 1 question. Can Seth and Ryan handle three games in three days. That's gonna be tough for a player that can't really even practice and another just getting in game shape from injury.

Ichabod Drain
03-11-2013, 10:03 AM
I think point number 1, health, really is the number 1 question. Can Seth and Ryan handle three games in three days. That's gonna be tough for a player that can't really even practice and another just getting in game shape from injury.

If we do make it to the finals of the ACC tournament it would actually be three games in less than two days if I'm not mistaken. Thats a lot of game time for those two.

loran16
03-11-2013, 10:44 AM
No Phase IV recap? Ah well.

I'd add a 7th: Can the D Return to how good it was with Kelly?

One of the more underrated stories was how bad our D got when Kelly was injured. Duke's D had improved drastically from last year into a top 10 unit in Pomeroy, which is why until Kelly's injury Duke was basically statistically equivalent to the #1 and #2 Pomeroy teams. Up through Clemson only 3 teams had put up Offensive Efficiencies over 100 (Average), Kentucky, OSU, and Santa Clara (Yes, Santa Clara). Only 3 other teams had O Efficiencies over 90 (Temple, louisville, and Minnesota), and a 90 OEfficiency is BAD (That's .9 points per possession which would put you 316th out of 347 D1 teams if you did that all year). That's elite - 9 games holding opponents under 90 Offensive efficiency.

Without Kelly, the D declined - Only one opponent was held under 90 O Efficiency (GTech), and 6 scored over 100, including 3 over 110 (Amazingly we won one of those games, the home game vs NC State). That's not so good. And our D declined in Pomeroy to barely top 25, and would've been worse except Pomeroy was still including the earlier games.

With Kelly, the D Efficiency of opponents has been as follows:
Against Miami: 110.6 (Bad)
Against VaTech: 96 (Worse than without Kelly at VT somehow)
Against Carolina: 87 (Elite, their 4th lowest production rate this season)

That game on Saturday was the first sign that the old D was back. The question is whether it can return fully. Kelly's impact on the O is obvious and it's clear that his re-insertion to the lineup has bolstered the O instantly. His impact on the D may take more time to be felt - and hopefully not too much more.

MCFinARL
03-11-2013, 11:46 AM
No! No whither Rasheed stuff! He's showing some great flashes out on the court. The game is so fast when he's out there. Stay positive Rasheed!
We've had so many more guys involved in the games all season, up and down. It's all got to be good.

Agreed. On Saturday, Rasheed played fewer minutes with Tyler starting, which according to K had to do with defensive matchups--and Tyler, for sure, did a great job on Bullock. Though Rasheed scored only one point in his 15 minutes, he only took two shots--and given the way the rest of the offense was clicking, that may have been all he needed to take. Meantime he grabbed 3 rebounds and had two beautiful assists. With Kelly back, and more offensive production expected from the 4, there may be some adjustments for Sulaimon to make in figuring out when to shoot and when to pass. But I don't think there is any reason to worry that he won't be able to play well going forward. (Any more than there is reason to worry about any of the things we worry about on this board.)

CDu
03-11-2013, 11:53 AM
I'm in the camp that believes we've already secured a #1 seed in the tournament, and that our #1 seed will either be in the East or South. So from that perspective, there isn't much that concerns me regarding the results this weekend (except of course that it is awesome to win championships!). My main concerns are:

- staying healthy (most notably Cook and the senior 3)
- getting Sulaimon back on track

As long as we stay healthy, I like our chances. But it'd be really nice to see Sulaimon bounce back to being an impact player again as we enter the tournaments. With the quick turnaround between games, it could be tougher on Curry. So getting an additional perimeter shooting threat would be a nice icing on what is already a pretty tasty cake.

MCFinARL
03-11-2013, 11:57 AM
I'm in the camp that believes we've already secured a #1 seed in the tournament, and that our #1 seed will either be in the East or South. So from that perspective, there isn't much that concerns me regarding the results this weekend (except of course that it is awesome to win championships!). My main concerns are:

- staying healthy (most notably Cook and the senior 3)
- getting Sulaimon back on track

As long as we stay healthy, I like our chances. But it'd be really nice to see Sulaimon bounce back to being an impact player again as we enter the tournaments. With the quick turnaround between games, it could be tougher on Curry. So getting an additional perimeter shooting threat would be a nice icing on what is already a pretty tasty cake.

I wonder if the need to rest Curry more might mean that we see more minutes with Cook, Sulaimon, and Thornton on the court and if that might also allow some slightly easier defensive assignments for Sulaimon, giving him potentially more energy to focus on offense. Just a thought.

sagegrouse
03-11-2013, 11:58 AM
No Phase IV recap? Ah well.

.

I gave Phase IV short shrift while looking at the entire regular season. Here's my take on the Phase IV questions:


Weathering the Road? Well, not exactly, with losses at Maryland and Virginia. But a win in Chapel Hill overcomes a lot of negatives elsewhere.

Health for the Healthy (not RK)? So far so good. No additional injuries and Seth continues to get stronger.

Reintegration (of Ryan Kelly)? A total blessing IMHO. There were no significant hitches, except that, as you pointed out, our defense against Miami was subpar.

Power Forward (pre RK's return)? This was a good news situation. Josh, Amile and Alex became very productive players in this phase of the season. It's great to have Ryan back, however, but it's good to have capable rotation players when Ryan or Mason sit.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Cook? I.e., can Cook play with consistency? No problem in shooting; his worst game of the past seven was 6-16/ 2-6 ay Maryland. He has 24 assists and 15 turnovers over the period, with subpar games against Maryland. (Of course, you don't get an assist if your teammate misses an open shot.) I think Quinn Cook has played extremely well, and the recent games bear me out. Go, Quinn!

Mason Plumlee, NPOY? Can he play at the highest level for the remainder of the ACC season? It seems to me that MP2 has played well with Ryan in the lineup, although he didn't put up big numbers against Miami. His UNC performance was a revelation. Generally, the trend is positive for Mason, but he has struggled on both ends of the court in some games.

Read and React? Hard to say without reviewing the games in more detail, but one thing is certain. Every future opponent will be preparing schemes to press Duke in end-game situations. We were awful against Miami and unimpressive against UNC. Of course, Duke will be working on this as well. I can't remember the game, but there was clearly a problem earlier with Mason taking the ball out when Ryan was not available.

Hitting the Defensive Glass? Duke continues to be below par here. I think there are compensating advantages in on-the-ball defense that produces fewer and worse shots, but the rebouond numbers don't lie. Opponents in Phase IV got one-third or more of the available offensive rebounds in four of the seven games. Only Maryland wa a loss, however, as Duke did poorly in a win against Miami and against UNC. What is also interesting is that the correlation with losses is for total rebounds not defensive rebound percentage. We got schooled by Maryland on the boards, 40 to 20, and by Virginia, 36 to 25. Miami was also poor rebounding but, thanks to our man Ryan, more than offset by fabulous shooting. This is a work in process.



My take -- others weigh in, please.

sagegrouse

Kedsy
03-11-2013, 12:07 PM
You can easily go through the stats for this year and find examples of games where Seth had poor shooting on ample rest (1st Miami game for example) and good shooting on short rest games also.

Yes, Seth had a few poor shooting games that weren't on short rest (Davidson, Miami, first UNC game), but I didn't see any good shooting by Seth in any game fewer than 3 days after the previous game. Which such games do you mean?

loran16
03-11-2013, 12:17 PM
Agreed. On Saturday, Rasheed played fewer minutes with Tyler starting, which according to K had to do with defensive matchups--and Tyler, for sure, did a great job on Bullock. Though Rasheed scored only one point in his 15 minutes, he only took two shots--and given the way the rest of the offense was clicking, that may have been all he needed to take. Meantime he grabbed 3 rebounds and had two beautiful assists. With Kelly back, and more offensive production expected from the 4, there may be some adjustments for Sulaimon to make in figuring out when to shoot and when to pass. But I don't think there is any reason to worry that he won't be able to play well going forward. (Any more than there is reason to worry about any of the things we worry about on this board.)

I love Sheed and I want him starting. That said, despite my dislike of TT's play, he did a MARVELOUS job staying on Bullock all game. He deserves another start, especially if we're playing UNC again.

EDIT:


What is also interesting is that the correlation with losses is for total rebounds not defensive rebound percentage. We got schooled by Maryland on the boards, 40 to 20, and by Virginia, 36 to 25. Miami was also poor rebounding but, thanks to our man Ryan, more than offset by fabulous shooting. This is a work in process.

There's a reason for this. The games where you're outrebounded by large numbers are generally the ones where you MISS A LOT OF SHOTS and thus give opponents more chances for easy (Defensive boards).

Duke wasn't a good rebounding team WITH Kelly. It's going to be our flaw going forward this year. The rest of the D needs to be better to compensate. They can be.

CDu
03-11-2013, 12:19 PM
Yes, Seth had a few poor shooting games that weren't on short rest (Davidson, Miami, first UNC game), but I didn't see any good shooting by Seth in any game fewer than 3 days after the previous game. Which such games do you mean?

That's kind of a tough bar to set. We haven't had many games with less than 3 days rest this year (note: by less than 3 days, I assume you mean that a game is either 1 or 2 calendar days from the previous game - it may well be that some of the 3-day-rest games are actually closer to 2 days worth of rest). The only one we've had this calendar year was the Miami game. And as we saw in Coral Gables on full rest, Curry struggles with Miami's bigger guards.

Furthermore, two of the other games on short rest (vs VCU, vs Louisville) came against physical, defensive-minded teams. So I don't know that it's fair to blame those performances on the leg (at the very least not entirely).

So, basically, there's one game (vs Elon) in which Curry was on short rest against a team that doesn't play very good defense. I think it's just as reasonable to say that he simply had an off-night rather than that the leg prevented him from playing well.

It's certainly possible that the leg was the reason Curry has struggled on short rest. It's also possible that it was just unfortunate timing that 3 of the 4 short-rest matchups were against good-to-very good defensive teams.

Saratoga2
03-11-2013, 12:19 PM
When you watch teams like Michigan and IU battle it out, you see as many as 12 players from Michigan and a lot from IU get into the game as it was fast paced and hard fought. Duke has not played a lot of guys and will be up against it with Seth dealing with multiple games and Ryan also not totally in playing shape.

Will we try to play just a 7 man rotation or will we use additional subs?
1. Will Rasheed start or sub?
2. Will Tyler avoid foul trouble or be limited due to it?
3. Josh is clearly our first big man sub, but can he match up well against big and quick forwards?
4. Are Amile and Alex thought to be viable subs? (I think so, especially Amile, but what do the coaches think?)
5. Can Marshall give any effective minutes?

I am in favor of using a 9 player rotation in the tourney.

CDu
03-11-2013, 12:21 PM
When you watch teams like Michigan and IU battle it out, you see as many as 12 players from Michigan and a lot from IU get into the game as it was fast paced and hard fought. Duke has not played a lot of guys and will be up against it with Seth dealing with multiple games and Ryan also not totally in playing shape.

Will we try to play just a 7 man rotation or will we use additional subs?
1. Will Rasheed start or sub?
2. Will Tyler avoid foul trouble or be limited due to it?
3. Josh is clearly our first big man sub, but can he match up well against big and quick forwards?
4. Are Amile and Alex thought to be viable subs? (I think so, especially Amile, but what do the coaches think?)
5. Can Marshall give any effective minutes?

I am in favor of using a 9 player rotation in the tourney.

Don't hold your breath on that happening. This has been discussed a LOT on this board over the years, and all evidence has pointed to Coach K shortening the rotation rather than lengthening it.

loran16
03-11-2013, 12:28 PM
Don't hold your breath on that happening. This has been discussed a LOT on this board over the years, and all evidence has pointed to Coach K shortening the rotation rather than lengthening it.

Yep. The rotation is right now:

ALWAYS STARTING
Mason
Ryan
Curry
Cook

POSSIBLE STARTERS
Sheed
TT

FIRST OFF BENCH:
Josh

OTHER BENCH:
Amile.

8 Men. I'd bet Amile is limited in minutes as we go further on. It's what K does.

davekay1971
03-11-2013, 12:32 PM
Don't hold your breath on that happening. This has been discussed a LOT on this board over the years, and all evidence has pointed to Coach K shortening the rotation rather than lengthening it.

I always think that depth is less of a problem in the tourney. Although the 2nd game of any weekend is only 2 days after the first, there is a 5 day rest between end of conference tournament and round 1, then usually a 5 day rest between round 2 and round 3. The guys get a lot of rest and recovery time prior to the first and third rounds of the tournament (oh, fine, yes the NCAA would call it then 2nd and 4th round, but that's because they're evil and won't admit that the Dayton games are play-in games).

K has historically shortened his bench during the tournament, probably on the notion that fatigue isn't enough of a factor to warrant not having his best options on the court as much as possible in a win-or-go-home format. I think he's right. Games where fatigue really is a huge factor either in that game or in the next game (Arkansas 1990, for example) are kind of few and far between.

Kedsy
03-11-2013, 12:33 PM
It's certainly possible that the leg was the reason Curry has struggled on short rest. It's also possible that it was just unfortunate timing that 3 of the 4 short-rest matchups were against good-to-very good defensive teams.

Absolutely it's possible it's just a fluke owing to specific opponents and a small sample size. Seth also seems to shoot poorly when he gets overly amped up possibly due to wanting to prove something to people in the crowd (e.g., Davidson, first UNC game, previous years @Va Tech), and whatever plays into that may have had at least a little influence in the big games against VCU, Louisville, Ohio State, and Miami. Or it could be certain defenders (e.g., Durand Scott, Aaron Craft) give him trouble -- I don't remember who defended him for VCU, Louisville, or Elon.

So I hope you're right. He's been so marvelous playing as well as he has with the injury and I'd hate for the remaining schedule to ruin the last leg (so to speak) of his college career.

Indoor66
03-11-2013, 12:40 PM
There is a simple concept on this "who should play":

Ya gotta dance with who brung ya.

sagegrouse
03-11-2013, 05:58 PM
No! No whither Rasheed stuff! He's showing some great flashes out on the court. The game is so fast when he's out there. Stay positive Rasheed!
We've had so many more guys involved in the games all season, up and down. It's all got to be good.

Just trying to show off my limited vocabulary. I suppose "whither Rasheed" means where is Sulaimon going: (a) to the starting lineup against Md or Wake or (b) to the leading scorers list. I am looking for a big tournament from Rasheed.

I expect he will have plenty of offensive chances. I hope Rasheed starts Friday and lights it up big time. But as the NBA has shown (and I really think it's applicable), starters score more than subs, even on a per-minute basis. So it makes sense for him to be out there at the tipoff.

sagegrouse
'JJ and Mike D.'s double-digits off the bench is pretty amazing'

cptnflash
03-11-2013, 10:12 PM
I'm in the camp that believes we've already secured a #1 seed in the tournament, and that our #1 seed will either be in the East or South. So from that perspective, there isn't much that concerns me regarding the results this weekend (except of course that it is awesome to win championships!). My main concerns are:

- staying healthy (most notably Cook and the senior 3)
- getting Sulaimon back on track

As long as we stay healthy, I like our chances. But it'd be really nice to see Sulaimon bounce back to being an impact player again as we enter the tournaments. With the quick turnaround between games, it could be tougher on Curry. So getting an additional perimeter shooting threat would be a nice icing on what is already a pretty tasty cake.

I generally agree, although I'm not 100% confident that we're a #1 seed if we lose on Friday. But with Kansas and Florida both losing over the weekend, we're certainly looking good. I continue to think Indiana and Gonzaga are locks, and I think either Louisville or Georgetown probably gets one unless both flame out very early in the Big East tourney, but I don't see who is going to unseat us for the other spot. And thanks to Gonzaga, no one is going to get exiled out west, so the geography works out pretty nicely this year.

My #1 concern for this weekend is health, and given the comments from Coach K in recent press conferences, I think it's pretty clear that he feels the same way. He's not going all out to win in Greensboro, that's for sure.

My second concern following health is actually Mason. He was exactly who we need him to be against UNC, but one data point doesn't quite make a line. I want to see him continue redeveloping the "mental muscle memory" of playing aggressively, now that he has his running mate back. Frankly, in the ACCT I'd rather lose with aggressive Mason than win with passive Mason, because only aggressive Mason can lead us to Atlanta.

DukieInBrasil
03-11-2013, 11:03 PM
My #1 concern for this weekend is health, and given the comments from Coach K in recent press conferences, I think it's pretty clear that he feels the same way. He's not going all out to win in Greensboro, that's for sure.

My second concern following health is actually Mason. He was exactly who we need him to be against UNC, but one data point doesn't quite make a line. I want to see him continue redeveloping the "mental muscle memory" of playing aggressively, now that he has his running mate back. Frankly, in the ACCT I'd rather lose with aggressive Mason than win with passive Mason, because only aggressive Mason can lead us to Atlanta.

I'd rather win with the players who show up. College kids are not exactly models of consistency. Mason has had some excellent games this year, both with and without Ryan Kelly, and he has not played poorly in any of the games since Ryan came back.
Sometimes we'll get the world-beating Mason, sometimes not. This team has shown however that it can win whether UNC-style Mason shows up or the more mundane VT-style Mason does. We don't really don't have a good analog for a poor game from Mason with Ryan in the lineup, so ;-)

Bob Green
03-12-2013, 12:07 PM
My desires for this weekend are simplistic: win the ACC Tournament by winning the rubber match against Maryland in the quarterfinals, sweeping Carolina in the semifinals and winning the rubber match against Miami in the finals. How do we get there? Well for starters, solid point guard play from Quinn Cook will be instrumental to ensuring consistency as we play three games in three days. I believe some Duke fans overlook Cook's contributions at times. A healthy Cook is a tangible difference between Duke 2012 and Duke 2013 and a nice segue to:




1. Health. Ya’ gotta like the trend. Ryan’s back and as good as ever; Seth has seemingly gotten stronger and better through the season; Marshall is available now if needed. But the improving past is not necessarily prologue. The tough ACC Tournament can take a toll. We hope that the injury bug stays away for the rest of the season. Haven’t we had our full share?

We are a different team with Ryan Kelly on the court (the same is true for Seth Curry) so every Duke fan worldwide needs to bow down to the Health Gods and pledge eternal allegiance...okay, I'm probably getting carried away, but a healthy Duke is a national title contender while an unhealthy Duke is not. We need Kelly and Curry healthy and playing for nine straight games! Enough said. Health is always first and health must always be addressed first (or you can do like me and figure out a clever way to address it first and second).

Cook is healthy. Kelly is healthy. Curry is healthy. It needs to stay that way.




4. Whither Rasheed? Our freshman star averaged 4.3 points per game the last four games but 18.3 the four games before that. We have seen an earlier slump and a roaring recovery. Will he return to the starting lineup if we play the large and powerful Terrapins, or will Tyler remain the starter? And will we see a return to Sulaimon’s powerful offensive game? This is important for the ACC Tournament and the NCAA’s to follow.

Tyler Thornton and Rasheed Sulaimon bring different skills onto the court. Thornton provides tough experience, leadership and solid off ball defense, while Sulaimon is much more talented offensively and a better on ball defender. This isn't an either or situation. For Duke to be successful in the ACC Tournament and the NCAA Tournament to follow, the team needs both players being productive.




6. Mason as a Preternatural Force. We liked the performance of Mason against UNC, taking advantage of a smaller team and being the focal point of the offense in the second half. Can he play at the same level this week?

I hope Mason Plumlee is chomping at the bit to get another chance at Alex Len! If Mason is the player we need him to be, he will be Maryland's biggest fan on Thursday. Mason needs to stride onto the court with confidence Friday night and demonstrate to Alex Len who is 1st Team All ACC and who is not.




That's my take on the season so far and the ACC Tournament. Now we would like to hear from you -

sagegrouse

Great job, Gary! These phase posts consistently produce solid discussion on the team and are my favorite in season threads.

Listen to Quants
03-12-2013, 02:14 PM
Nice writeup, Sage. And thanks for putting health first. :D

I think you've hit all the high points. Hopefully the more games (and practices) Ryan gets with the team, the better and more consistent our defense will become. D is key in the T (both ACCT and NCAAT). Defensive rebounding will continue to be an issue, but if Ryan, Quinn, Rasheed, and Tyler focus on it, we can probably manage our weakest area reasonably well. And as you say, we could use another "roaring recovery" from Rasheed.

The only issue I would amplify is that in both the ACCT and the NCAAT we'll be playing multiple games on short rest. So far this season on short rest, Seth has shot 3 for 9 against VCU, 3 for 11 against Louisville, 1 for 6 against Ohio State, 3 for 10 against Elon, and 2 for 8 against Miami. In our possible future, the ACCT semi-final and final, the 2nd round NCAAT, the Elite Eight (if we're fortunate enough to be playing in it), and the NCAA championship game (ditto) will all be played on short rest. Hopefully Seth's injury will be healed enough so that he'll be able to play to his usual standards in those games.

Do you think of the NCAAs as short-rest? It may well be, but I'm not sure. The team has about 48 hours and NO travel so it is a sort of long 48 hours. That might not help a damaged leg much but staying off it for 48 hours might. Psychologically, the absence of travel might help. VCU, Louisville and Elon games were with 1 day rest so that may indeed indicate a problem in the ACCT. Was the Ohio State game on short rest? The DBR schedule doesn't show that.

Sage, thanks for the thread and the excellent start thereof.

CDu
03-12-2013, 02:18 PM
Do you think of the NCAAs as short-rest? It may well be, but I'm not sure. The team has about 48 hours and NO travel so it is a sort of long 48 hours. That might not help a damaged leg much but staying off it for 48 hours might. Psychologically, the absence of travel might help. VCU, Louisville and Elon games were with 1 day rest so that may indeed indicate a problem in the ACCT. Was the Ohio State game on short rest? The DBR schedule doesn't show that.

Sage, thanks for the thread and the excellent start thereof.

In addition, there is a 4-5 day break in between a weekend game and a Thursday/Friday game the next week. Compared to the regular season, I'd say the NCAA tournament provides very good rest (especially when you consider the lack of travel between the short breaks.

Of course, the ACC tournament (and pretty much any conference tournament) is a brutal schedule. Hopefully, either Curry's leg is healed or his teammates will be able to pick him up on Saturday (if we're so fortunate) and Sunday (ditto).

Kedsy
03-12-2013, 04:47 PM
Do you think of the NCAAs as short-rest? It may well be, but I'm not sure. The team has about 48 hours and NO travel so it is a sort of long 48 hours. That might not help a damaged leg much but staying off it for 48 hours might. Psychologically, the absence of travel might help. VCU, Louisville and Elon games were with 1 day rest so that may indeed indicate a problem in the ACCT. Was the Ohio State game on short rest? The DBR schedule doesn't show that.

Sage, thanks for the thread and the excellent start thereof.

I don't think the NCAA tournament is short rest for an uninjured player. But if Seth really has a problem on short rest (and that's hard to say with any precision due to the miniscule sample size) it's probably due to his leg needing time to heal between games and in that context I think playing a game on Friday night followed by another Sunday afternoon is quite short.

As far as Ohio State goes, I included it because I believe it came about 48 hours after a longish plane trip after three games in three days and so there wasn't much time for Seth's leg to heal. Or it may have been Aaron Craft.

Listen to Quants
03-12-2013, 07:00 PM
I don't think the NCAA tournament is short rest for an uninjured player. But if Seth really has a problem on short rest (and that's hard to say with any precision due to the miniscule sample size) it's probably due to his leg needing time to heal between games and in that context I think playing a game on Friday night followed by another Sunday afternoon is quite short.

As far as Ohio State goes, I included it because I believe it came about 48 hours after a longish plane trip after three games in three days and so there wasn't much time for Seth's leg to heal. Or it may have been Aaron Craft.

I'm also worried about Seth's leg. I imagine every Duke fan is. I have a small hope that Duke wins easily Friday and Saturday and Seth plays < 20 min each (given K, small chance of this, though). It would be wonderful to see Seth even stronger for the NCAAs than at any point this year.

NSDukeFan
03-12-2013, 07:20 PM
I'm also worried about Seth's leg. I imagine every Duke fan is. I have a small hope that Duke wins easily Friday and Saturday and Seth plays < 20 min each (given K, small chance of this, though). It would be wonderful to see Seth even stronger for the NCAAs than at any point this year.

I believe it would be unfair to the rest of the field if Curry was any stronger than he was first half of the Carolina game.

BD80
03-12-2013, 11:53 PM
Nice writeup, Sage. And thanks for putting health first. :D

I think you've hit all the high points. Hopefully the more games (and practices) Ryan gets with the team, the better and more consistent our defense will become. D is key in the T (both ACCT and NCAAT). Defensive rebounding will continue to be an issue, but if Ryan, Quinn, Rasheed, and Tyler focus on it, we can probably manage our weakest area reasonably well. And as you say, we could use another "roaring recovery" from Rasheed.

The only issue I would amplify is that in both the ACCT and the NCAAT we'll be playing multiple games on short rest. So far this season on short rest, Seth has shot 3 for 9 against VCU, 3 for 11 against Louisville, 1 for 6 against Ohio State, 3 for 10 against Elon, and 2 for 8 against Miami. In our possible future, the ACCT semi-final and final, the 2nd round NCAAT, the Elite Eight (if we're fortunate enough to be playing in it), and the NCAA championship game (ditto) will all be played on short rest. Hopefully Seth's injury will be healed enough so that he'll be able to play to his usual standards in those games.

I agree about Seth. I too think he wears down, evidence can be found even in his recent brilliant game against unc, starts 7-7, and winds up 8-13. A three game three day tourney might really wear on him. I think Coach K will try to limit his minutes Friday, and maybe somewhat on Saturday.

This ties in to Sheed. To give Seth more rest, Sheed needs to bounce back. His recent slide is nothing new, it happens to freshmen all the time, particularly at schools (unlike unc) where the players have to attend classes and complete schoolwork and take tests. A first round game can be just the medicine for Sheed to recapture his old confidence and attack on offense and defense. I am certain that the staff realizes Sheed's importance in making a deep tourney run, and has a plan to try to help him bounce back.

Kedsy
03-13-2013, 11:47 AM
I agree about Seth. I too think he wears down, evidence can be found even in his recent brilliant game against unc, starts 7-7, and winds up 8-13. A three game three day tourney might really wear on him. I think Coach K will try to limit his minutes Friday, and maybe somewhat on Saturday.

This ties in to Sheed. To give Seth more rest, Sheed needs to bounce back. His recent slide is nothing new, it happens to freshmen all the time, particularly at schools (unlike unc) where the players have to attend classes and complete schoolwork and take tests. A first round game can be just the medicine for Sheed to recapture his old confidence and attack on offense and defense. I am certain that the staff realizes Sheed's importance in making a deep tourney run, and has a plan to try to help him bounce back.

That's a good point about the Carolina game. Those first seven makes all came in the first 10 minutes of the game (six makes for 13 points in the first eight minutes). On the DukeBluePlanet video after the game, Seth said, "I felt good for the first eight minutes then I got kind of tired."

I agree with you about Rasheed, too. He averages 20+ points against Maryland, our most likely opponent, so hopefully a good first round game can propel him out of his slump.

loran16
03-13-2013, 01:06 PM
I agree about Seth. I too think he wears down, evidence can be found even in his recent brilliant game against unc, starts 7-7, and winds up 8-13. A three game three day tourney might really wear on him. I think Coach K will try to limit his minutes Friday, and maybe somewhat on Saturday.

Alternatively, Seth didn't wear down, but rather couldn't maintain a 100% shooting percentage? This is pretty much just regression.

Kedsy
03-13-2013, 01:07 PM
Alternatively, Seth didn't wear down, but rather couldn't maintain a 100% shooting percentage? This is pretty much just regression.

Except Seth actually said he wore down. Doesn't that count for something?

OldPhiKap
03-13-2013, 01:32 PM
I think the quick turn-arounds (assuming we advance) will be tough for Seth, Ryan, and the Sheed. Will be interesting to see how they pace and hold up.

loran16
03-13-2013, 01:37 PM
Except Seth actually said he wore down. Doesn't that count for something?

Sure a little. Doesn't mean it was the cause of the shooting change. Or that a shooting change is good evidence of the other.

Kedsy
03-13-2013, 02:17 PM
Sure a little. Doesn't mean it was the cause of the shooting change.

Doesn't mean it wasn't, either. In general tired legs make a lot of players' shots a bit short.

Monmouth77
03-13-2013, 03:13 PM
Just a quick thought here having read (1) the updated version of the EPSN "Giant Killers" analysis, which continues to list Duke as a vulnerable giant (though less vulnerable than they earlier assessed) and (2) KenPom's log5 for the ACC Tournament.

The primary metric the Giant Killer guys use to say Duke is vulnerable to upset (and which tracks through Pomeroy's number crunching as well) is that our offensive rebounding is relatively weak-- we pull down 29% of available offensive rebounds.

But in some sense that is a feature -- not a bug -- of this year's offensive attack.

Unlike in 2010, when our offensive rebounding was spectacular, and we used two stay-at-home bigs to rebound out to three primary shooters, this year we have four primary 3pt shooters who shoot measurably better than Scheyer-Singler-Smith: all of them shoot better than 38% with Kelly shooting an absurd 53% and Cook and Curry both shooting around 43% at this point in the season. Duke as a team averaged 38.5% in 2010-- good for 25th in the Division I. This year we shoot 41.6% which is currently 4th place (and as close to 1st place (42.2%) as 5th place (41.0%).

My point is that -- relative to 2010, when we were not considered a "vulnerable" giant -- we have traded great offensive rebounding for more even more efficient shooting.

So how does this make Duke more "vulnerable"? I suspect the theory behind the numbers is something along the lines of "live and die by the three" and predicts that a disciplined David to our Goliath will pull down a bevvy of misses if we go cold.

But I think this kind of statistical generalizing probably does not account for the fact that one of the guys who is hitting all those threes is 6'11" and would ordinarily be doing the rebounding that is "missing." It also does not account for the fact that the 6'11" guy is creating opportunities for a 6'10" guy who is capable of dominating in the post.

So it's hard to compare us to past Goliaths with the same alleged weakness.

I also think that any metric that "proves" Duke's vulnerability by reference to flaws in its offensive attack this year is not worth a whole lot.

If Duke goes down early in either Tournament this year, it will be because we couldn't stop dribble penetration or defend the pick and roll (or because someone like Derrick Williams goes Bootsy on us).

Reilly
03-13-2013, 05:25 PM
Is there some sort of offensive efficiency stat -- or points per possession stat -- that could test what you are saying (I take what you are saying as "we rebound worse, but we shoot better, so we're just as good offensively").

2010: 77 ppg, 76% FTs, 38.5% 3-pointers, 39 rebs/game
2013: 78.5 ppg, 72% FTs, 41% 3-pointers, 33.9 rebs/game

As of now, we're scoring more than 2010 (average may go down with 9 tough games left!).

We shoot better on 3-pointers than 2010.

We get fewer rebounds per game than 2010.

What is our points-per-possession for the two years?

vick
03-13-2013, 05:40 PM
Is there some sort of offensive efficiency stat -- or points per possession stat -- that could test what you are saying (I take what you are saying as "we rebound worse, but we shoot better, so we're just as good offensively").

2010: 77 ppg, 76% FTs, 38.5% 3-pointers, 39 rebs/game
2013: 78.5 ppg, 72% FTs, 41% 3-pointers, 33.9 rebs/game

As of now, we're scoring more than 2010 (average may go down with 9 tough games left!).

We shoot better on 3-pointers than 2010.

We get fewer rebounds per game than 2010.

What is our points-per-possession for the two years?

I'm not positive this is what you are looking for, but I think this is the relevant points-per-possession stat (I used the same possessions=FGA+(0.475*FTA)-ORB+TOV formula Kenpom uses, but his figures are adjusted for competition):



Year FGA FTA ORB TOV PTS Poss Pts/Poss
2010 2375 899 582 440 3081 2660 1.158
2013 1772 675 301 337 2431 2129 1.142


So this year's offense is slightly less efficient, by about a point in an ordinary-paced game.

Monmouth77
03-13-2013, 06:40 PM
I'm not positive this is what you are looking for, but I think this is the relevant points-per-possession stat (I used the same possessions=FGA+(0.475*FTA)-ORB+TOV formula Kenpom uses, but his figures are adjusted for competition):



Year FGA FTA ORB TOV PTS Poss Pts/Poss
2010 2375 899 582 440 3081 2660 1.158
2013 1772 675 301 337 2431 2129 1.142


So this year's offense is slightly less efficient, by about a point in an ordinary-paced game.

The 2010/2013 offensive efficiency comparison is really interesting, but I guess I was trying to grasp at something slightly different and more directed to the offensive rebounding "flaw," and how it might lead to an upset.

On the one hand, we are more efficient per possession than our offensive rebounding woes in isolation might suggest because more of the first shots go in (which is what those stats above roughly show-- in 9 fewer games we have roughly 825 fewer FT/FG attempts and a ton fewer ORBs but only 650 fewer points).

But the Giant Killer guys seem to think that offensive rebounding stats mean something significant beyond their contribution to overall offensive efficiency-- which is presumably why they single out that stat instead of just looking at tempo adjusted efficiency as a whole.

I am thinking that, whereas a lot of teams who don't get offensive rebounds-- say Michigan last year, which pulled down 28.3% of available offensive rebounds -- are vulnerable to upset (lost to 13 seed Ohio last year) those teams have other flaws that Duke doesn't have. For example, they shot 35% from 3 and lacked a real post presence.

I mean, maybe it is as simple as saying that 2012 Michigan was the 22nd most efficient offense (according to KenPom) and we are currently the 3rd most efficient.

But I was trying to reason through it by observation.

Seems like offensive rebounding doesn't tell you that much without looking at a team as a whole, even if it has been an historically good rule of thumb when looking for upsets.

CDu
03-13-2013, 06:55 PM
The 2010/2013 offensive efficiency comparison is really interesting, but I guess I was trying to grasp at something slightly different and more directed to the offensive rebounding "flaw," and how it might lead to an upset.

On the one hand, we are more efficient per possession than our offensive rebounding woes in isolation might suggest because more of the first shots go in (which is what those stats above roughly show-- in 9 fewer games we have roughly 825 fewer FT/FG attempts and a ton fewer ORBs but only 650 fewer points).

But the Giant Killer guys seem to think that offensive rebounding stats mean something significant beyond their contribution to overall offensive efficiency-- which is presumably why they single out that stat instead of just looking at tempo adjusted efficiency as a whole.

I am thinking that, whereas a lot of teams who don't get offensive rebounds-- say Michigan last year, which pulled down 28.3% of available offensive rebounds -- are vulnerable to upset (lost to 13 seed Ohio last year) those teams have other flaws that Duke doesn't have. For example, they shot 35% from 3 and lacked a real post presence.

I mean, maybe it is as simple as saying that 2012 Michigan was the 22nd most efficient offense (according to KenPom) and we are currently the 3rd most efficient.

But I was trying to reason through it by observation.

Seems like offensive rebounding doesn't tell you that much without looking at a team as a whole, even if it has been an historically good rule of thumb when looking for upsets.

I think perhaps what you're trying to get at is the variability of scoring. A team that shoots a lot of 3s and doesn't rebound well could be more likely to experience peaks and valleys than a similarly good team that shoots fewer 3s and gets a lot of offensive rebounds. And as such, if they're more likely than most of their peers to have a "valley" game, they're more likely to be upset.

The idea being that the margin of victory for a #1 seed is such that, if they are a good offensive rebounding team, they can withstand a poor shooting night. But if you go cold, don't go inside, and can't rebound, you could be in danger.

Of course, the big difference is that, while we don't rebound well, we do two things very well offensively: most notably shoot the three well, but also score in the post.

vick
03-13-2013, 08:11 PM
I think perhaps what you're trying to get at is the variability of scoring. A team that shoots a lot of 3s and doesn't rebound well could be more likely to experience peaks and valleys than a similarly good team that shoots fewer 3s and gets a lot of offensive rebounds. And as such, if they're more likely than most of their peers to have a "valley" game, they're more likely to be upset.

The idea being that the margin of victory for a #1 seed is such that, if they are a good offensive rebounding team, they can withstand a poor shooting night. But if you go cold, don't go inside, and can't rebound, you could be in danger.

Of course, the big difference is that, while we don't rebound well, we do two things very well offensively: most notably shoot the three well, but also score in the post.

Ah, variability. I can see how that could theoretically be the case, but from what I can tell, it isn't the case for us this year vs. 2010. To test, I took the offensive efficiency for each game from Kenpom's game plan, and divided by that team's average defensive efficiency (so to control for schedule difficulty)--in other words, how well the team did vs. the opponent's defense*. For 2010, we averaged 122.9% of the opponents' average with a 12.5% standard deviation. For 2013 to date, we've averaged 119.6% of the opponents' defensive efficiency with a 12.7% standard deviation. I also looked at how many games were more than two standard deviations below the mean, and it was one for both seasons--UVa in 2010 (in a victory, oddly enough), and Miami this year. So no noticeable difference that I can see there either. This is what the distribution looks like visually:

3264

Those look pretty similar to me. By the way, the almost-off-the-charts-good performance in 2010 was the Final Four game against West Virginia, where we had an efficiency of 143.4 (!!!) against a team with a defensive efficiency of 89.4.

So while I have some concerns about the offense--I mean, we're worse than 2010, if not by a whole lot--at least from what I can quickly tell, variability isn't one of them.


* This isn't exactly right because Kenpom rankings weight later games more, but I'm comfortable with it for this purpose.

archand1
03-13-2013, 09:22 PM
I think perhaps what you're trying to get at is the variability of scoring. A team that shoots a lot of 3s and doesn't rebound well could be more likely to experience peaks and valleys than a similarly good team that shoots fewer 3s and gets a lot of offensive rebounds. And as such, if they're more likely than most of their peers to have a "valley" game, they're more likely to be upset.

The idea being that the margin of victory for a #1 seed is such that, if they are a good offensive rebounding team, they can withstand a poor shooting night. But if you go cold, don't go inside, and can't rebound, you could be in danger.

Of course, the big difference is that, while we don't rebound well, we do two things very well offensively: most notably shoot the three well, but also score in the post.

I think a more important measure is defensive rebounding...those are the most important. If we did elect to crash the boards on offense, we risk giving up easy transition buckets. Also, the 3 guards we run on the perimeter along with Kelly being the stretch 4 are what really makes our offense click. If we keep Kelly inside to help pull down offensive boards, we lose that spacing which benefits Mason so much. I believe if we didn't have Mason to rely on, we would definitely be more likely to get upset on a cold shooting night. I think the UNC game proves we do have balance with Kelly on the floor. Just my opinion.

Newton_14
03-13-2013, 09:27 PM
Sure a little. Doesn't mean it was the cause of the shooting change. Or that a shooting change is good evidence of the other.


Doesn't mean it wasn't, either. In general tired legs make a lot of players' shots a bit short.

Here is the thing with Seth's situation. (and he absolutely wore down against UNC) in these games where he gives out, it isn't the shin starting to hurt in most cases, but rather it is lack of stamina from not practicing. I think that is the bigger factor. Now there are times when the leg starts hurting in games, as at times you see him starting to limp, or favor it, or rub it. I have noticed that in several games.

The UNC game seemed to be moreso the stamina issue than a case of leg starting to hurt. In the first NC State game it was the opposite. In the 2nd game he starting limping in the 2nd half long before he went down with the ankle issue. He was still finding a way to fill it up that day though.

As for the ACC Tourney, contrary to other opinions, K is absolutely going all out to win this tournament. This year is no different than any other season. K puts this tourney at the top of his wish list and he will prepare the team as well as he possibly can to leave Greensboro Sunday evening with a trophy in hand and nets around his neck.

I like our chances to win it provided Seth and Ryan can hold up physically, Mason and Quinn bring their A games, and Rasheed bounces back from his current slump. I am not worried at all about Josh and Tyler as I am confident both will play their roles well. Amile, Alex, and Marshall just need to be ready to be called on in short stints if needed. I think we will see Amile and Murphy on Friday for brief spells, but come Saturday and Sunday K will go with the Top 7 throughout unless injury or foul trouble force his hand.

3 games in 3 days in the ACC Tournament environment against conference foes is taxing on the body. Good news is, the factors are the same for all of the Top 4 teams and worse on teams 5 thru 12, so it evens out. Should Miami make it to Sunday Reggie Johnson may actually collapse.

Miami is struggling at the moment and have not handled success well, but will still be a contender. NC State will likely be dangerous, and UNC could get hot enough from 3 to cause problems. Duke just needs to be the Duke of Atlantis. That level of play will get it done imo. I predict we leave there with the title. Our guys are good. Just need good health and good execution.

Listen to Quants
03-14-2013, 02:14 PM
Ah, variability. I can see how that could theoretically be the case, but from what I can tell, it isn't the case for us this year vs. 2010. To test, I took the offensive efficiency for each game from Kenpom's game plan, and divided by that team's average defensive efficiency (so to control for schedule difficulty)--in other words, how well the team did vs. the opponent's defense*. For 2010, we averaged 122.9% of the opponents' average with a 12.5% standard deviation. For 2013 to date, we've averaged 119.6% of the opponents' defensive efficiency with a 12.7% standard deviation. I also looked at how many games were more than two standard deviations below the mean, and it was one for both seasons--UVa in 2010 (in a victory, oddly enough), and Miami this year. So no noticeable difference that I can see there either. This is what the distribution looks like visually:

3264

Those look pretty similar to me. By the way, the almost-off-the-charts-good performance in 2010 was the Final Four game against West Virginia, where we had an efficiency of 143.4 (!!!) against a team with a defensive efficiency of 89.4.

So while I have some concerns about the offense--I mean, we're worse than 2010, if not by a whole lot--at least from what I can quickly tell, variability isn't one of them.


* This isn't exactly right because Kenpom rankings weight later games more, but I'm comfortable with it for this purpose.

Lovely. This is what ESPN *should* do if they were interested in vulnerability-of-favorites. High variance is the obvious key. Now, all ESPN has to do is steal this, assign some intern to run the numbers for the top, say, 100 KenPom teams and publish the high variance teams. To quibble, I would simply add the KenPom numbers for defense and offense in any one game and compute the variance across all games played in order to get a good guess at which team is really the most variable.

CDu
03-14-2013, 02:21 PM
Ah, variability. I can see how that could theoretically be the case, but from what I can tell, it isn't the case for us this year vs. 2010. To test, I took the offensive efficiency for each game from Kenpom's game plan, and divided by that team's average defensive efficiency (so to control for schedule difficulty)--in other words, how well the team did vs. the opponent's defense*. For 2010, we averaged 122.9% of the opponents' average with a 12.5% standard deviation. For 2013 to date, we've averaged 119.6% of the opponents' defensive efficiency with a 12.7% standard deviation. I also looked at how many games were more than two standard deviations below the mean, and it was one for both seasons--UVa in 2010 (in a victory, oddly enough), and Miami this year. So no noticeable difference that I can see there either. This is what the distribution looks like visually:

3264

Those look pretty similar to me. By the way, the almost-off-the-charts-good performance in 2010 was the Final Four game against West Virginia, where we had an efficiency of 143.4 (!!!) against a team with a defensive efficiency of 89.4.

So while I have some concerns about the offense--I mean, we're worse than 2010, if not by a whole lot--at least from what I can quickly tell, variability isn't one of them.


* This isn't exactly right because Kenpom rankings weight later games more, but I'm comfortable with it for this purpose.

Oh sure. I didn't mean to suggest that the 2013 team has more variability in scoring. I was just suggesting the theoretical basis for which the writers could have made their argument. The idea being that, for a #1 to lose to a #16, it'd need to be on a bad offensive day for the #1. And a team that doesn't get offensive rebounds well is more likely to be hurt by a bad shooting night than a similar team that does get offensive rebounds.

In our case, though, we have so many very good 3 point shooters AND we have such a good post scorer that our first-shot efficiency is much higher than normal. Whereas the 2010 team was pretty good on 3s, but made up the difference by getting tons of offensive rebounds (and thus more 3 attempts).

CDu
03-14-2013, 02:24 PM
I think a more important measure is defensive rebounding...those are the most important. If we did elect to crash the boards on offense, we risk giving up easy transition buckets. Also, the 3 guards we run on the perimeter along with Kelly being the stretch 4 are what really makes our offense click. If we keep Kelly inside to help pull down offensive boards, we lose that spacing which benefits Mason so much. I believe if we didn't have Mason to rely on, we would definitely be more likely to get upset on a cold shooting night. I think the UNC game proves we do have balance with Kelly on the floor. Just my opinion.

I think in general the bolded statement is true. However, against a 16 seed (who typically are undersized and not usually great offensive rebounding teams) defensive rebounding prowess is less of a concern. More specifically, I think a #16 seed will make a poor defensive rebounding team look a bit better than they really are, just by virtue of the size difference (and potentially the #16's willingness to forego offensive rebounds to prevent fast breaks).

BlueDevilBrowns
03-15-2013, 11:01 PM
We have covered about 20 separate topics in the five prior Phase Reports. About ten or so have been put to rest:



But big questions remain, and in Phase V we will turn our attention to these:



7. Can our defensive pressure stymie the Terps, produce turnovers, and keep their point total at 60 or below?

8. Will Mason and Ryan be effective on offense against the tall and bulky Maryland team?

9. Will our shooters be effective against the tall Terrapin guards?

Positive answers will mean victory.


That’s my take on the season so far and the ACC Tournament. Now we would like to hear from you –

sagegrouse

Hmmm... Well, I think we have the answers now:

7. NO.
8. Somewhat and definitely NO.
9. NO(unless we're down 3 possessions with 2 minutes left).


Can we start Phase VI now?:(