okafor as ewing

[niveklaen]

https://okafortheory.wordpress.com/

saw this link on another forum and was curious what the resident stat gurus thought of the premise/data/analysis

[MChambers]

https://okafortheory.wordpress.com/

saw this link on another forum and was curious what the resident stat gurus thought of the premise/data/analysis
It's an interesting article, especially the PPP data. Wonder if it's adjusted for oppponent strength? Does make me think Marshall should get more time and Okafor should be more aggressive on the defense.

Of course, if Okafor becomes the second coming of Zoubek and sets screens and grabs offensive rebounds, can you imagine the howling?

[sagegrouse]

It's an interesting article, especially the PPP data. Wonder if it's adjusted for oppponent strength? Does make me think Marshall should get more time and Okafor should be more aggressive on the defense.

Of course, if Okafor becomes the second coming of Zoubek and sets screens and grabs offensive rebounds, can you imagine the howling?

Observation #1. There are substantial periods when the Duke players are just standing around while the guards are trying to get the ball to Okafor. Is this the "motionless offense?" That's a coaching problem.

Observation #2. The "Field Marshall" is a real force on defense, marred only by a tendency to foul.

[meowmix911]

It's a nice theory but there's too much of reading into analytics on this. In my opinion the Notre Dame game was a complete outlier (our best performance of the season, and honestly maybe the decade), and our 1A performance was clearly the road win at Clemson, in which Okafor didn't play.

There's no doubt his defense (particularly) as a help defender has looked really lost at times, but if I were a coach it would be really difficult to read into this data and come up with the conclusion of feeding Okafor less minutes...



Observation #1. There are substantial periods when the Duke players are just standing around while the guards are trying to get the ball to Okafor. Is this the "motionless offense?" That's a coaching problem.

Observation #2. The "Field Marshall" is a real force on defense, marred only by a tendency to foul.

[bluedev_92]

It's an interesting article, especially the PPP data. Wonder if it's adjusted for oppponent strength? Does make me think Marshall should get more time and Okafor should be more aggressive on the defense.

Of course, if Okafor becomes the second coming of Zoubek and sets screens and grabs offensive rebounds, can you imagine the howling?

Interesting. Not a guru either, and it is a relatively small sample size, but does seem to match up relatively well with the general impressions I've had watching our games during these situations.

[bedeviled]

It's a nice theory but there's too much of reading into analytics on this. In my opinion the Notre Dame game was a complete outlier (our best performance of the season, and honestly maybe the decade), and our 1A performance was clearly the road win at Clemson, in which Okafor didn't playI didn't come up with anything, but for those wanting to play with the data given, here it is typed up in the same organization as the pic:


Opponent
Dposs
Oposs
DPts
Opts
DPPP
OPPP
DEffMarg
2Dposs
2Oposs
2DPts
2Opts
2DPPP
2OPPP
2DEffMarg


BC
48
46
63
51
1.3125
1.108696
0.203804
17
19
22
11
1.294118
0.578947
0.71517


Wake
58
55
57
51
0.982759
0.927273
0.055486
14
17
16
14
1.142857
0.823529
0.319328


NCSU
66
65
66
78
1
1.2
-0.2
6
6
9
9
1.5
1.5
0


Miami
61
60
53
74
0.868852
1.233333
-0.36448
14
14
21
16
1.5
1.142857
0.357143


UL
50
50
58
39
1.16
0.78
0.38
10
9
5
13
0.5
1.444444
-0.94444


Pitt
44
43
59
45
1.340909
1.046512
0.294397
18
20
20
20
1.111111
1
0.111111


ND
60
60
61
68
1.016667
1.133333
-0.11667
9
8
12
9
1.333333
1.125
0.208333


UVA
52
51
62
51
1.192308
1
0.192308
6
9
7
12
1.166667
1.333333
-0.16667


GT
53
53
58
48
1.09434
0.90566
0.188679
11
13
14
18
1.272727
1.384615
-0.11189


ND
36
36
51
36
1.416667
1
0.416667
24
25
39
24
1.625
0.96
0.665


FSU
45
44
47
54
1.044444
1.227273
-0.18283
16
19
26
16
1.625
0.842105
0.782895


Cuse
62
58
70
66
1.129032
1.137931
-0.0089
7
11
10
6
1.428571
0.545455
0.883117


UNC
77
75
82
83
1.064935
1.106667
-0.04173
6
8
10
7
1.666667
0.875
0.791667


Clem
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66
66
78
56
1.181818
0.848485
0.333333


VT
56
49
77
71
1.375
1.44898
-0.07398
9
17
14
15
1.555556
0.882353
0.673203

[Li_Duke]

As a statistician, I suppose I count as a stat guru, but I certainly don't consider myself a basketball stat guru. :)

The reasoning is sound, but the data is lacking (small number of Plumlee possessions) and the analysis isn't thorough. The author makes an assumption that each possession is identical in regards to strength of opponents. When Okafor is in the game, he is usually facing the opposing teams starters. When Plumlee is in the game, he is usually facing the opposing teams reserves while still flanked by our starters (since we lack depth). A quick glance at the numbers of possessions given to Okafor and Plumlee for each opponent shows that Okafor plays a greater proportion of possessions against stronger opponents.

Finally, Okafor plays over 3x more minutes than Plumlee, saying Plumlee is more effective in the game than Okafor because of efficiency margins is equivalent to saying that a relief pitcher is more effective than a starting pitcher because of ERA. The relief has the ability to play all out in the short time they are in. You can't effectively reason that a coach should give the starter fewer minutes and the relief more minutes as while the starter's ERA may very well go down, the relief's may go way up.

The Ewing theory can only be tested when the player is absent for many games. Carmelo Anthony in New York - valid Ewing theory. Vince Carter in Toronto - valid Ewing theory. Josh Smith in Detroit - valid Ewing theory. Okafor at Duke - not valid Ewing theory.

[Troublemaker]

That's an excellent article if the stats are true (and if sample sizes are significant). Before doing deep analysis, let's get some independent support for these stats being correct.

Using Neals' stickied +/- thread, here are Jahlil's +/- numbers for ACC games:

+12(BC) +6(Wake) -12(NCSU) -21(Miami) +19(Louisville) +14(Pitt) -7(ND1) +11(UVA) +10(GaTech) +15(ND2) -7(FSU) +4(Syracuse) -1(UNC) +6(VaTech)

= +49

The table in the article has Duke scoring 864 points and giving up 815 points when Jah has been on the court in ACC games.

864 - 815 = 49

Thus, I think the stats in that article are reliable after doing this spot-check.

[FerryFor50]

Interesting theory, but a few points of quibble.

1) Okafor is a freshman and still learning to gel with his teammates on offense and defense. Ewing was an NBA vet and all star by the time they made it to the finals.

2) Okafor is by far Duke's best player on offense. Most of the issues on offense stem from the opposing team doubling Okafor constantly. So, by that measure, the only good reason to sit Okafor is to eliminate double teams (and maybe mask his FT shooting). If we had a 4 with a reliable mid range shot, we'd probably not be having this discussion.

3) I'd rather have Okafor on the floor any day. It's great to have a low post presence to open up our 3 point shooters

[UrinalCake]

According to this article from 2009, the OK Thunder are a statistically worse team when Kevin Durant is on the floor. Numbers don't tell the whole story.

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=truehoop&id=7047&src=desktop

[Kedsy]

It's a well-written article. The question is cause or effect. There have been a couple games where Duke made its "big run" with Jahlil on the bench. I can't remember which games exactly, but I do remember thinking about it at the time and also several comments in the post-game threads pointing out/half-joking that we did so much better without Jahlil than we did with him. And of course we had the beatdown of Clemson while he was hurt. My guess is those incidences may have been what inspired the author(s) to write the article. My guess is also that those three (I think three, anyway) games account for the vast majority of the difference between our possessions with Jahlil and without.

So, did we do so well when Jahlil was on the bench because he wasn't in the game, or did the coincidence of our doing well a few times while he was on the bench simply make it look that way? My guess is the latter, but I don't know that you can statistically prove it considering the low number of Marshall possessions.

Having said all that, it may also be that when Jahlil is off the court, the rest of our players play harder, with more intensity, and therefore better. They don't sit back and watch Jahlil; they don't relax, thinking that Jahlil will bail them out. They don't give up on a "why bother" cut because Jahlil would be getting the ball anyway. If that's the case, then it's conceivable that we really have been a better team without Jahlil but that the improvement would be unsustainable because if Jahlil was gone for good or reduced his role that much, the other players wouldn't be able to consistently maintain the high level of effort they expend now in the limited time he's been off the court.

[FerryFor50]

It's a well-written article. The question is cause or effect. There have been a couple games where Duke made its "big run" with Jahlil on the bench. I can't remember which games exactly, but I do remember thinking about it at the time and also several comments in the post-game threads pointing out/half-joking that we did so much better without Jahlil than we did with him. And of course we had the beatdown of Clemson while he was hurt. My guess is those incidences may have been what inspired the author(s) to write the article. My guess is also that those three (I think three, anyway) games account for the vast majority of the difference between our possessions with Jahlil and without.

So, did we do so well when Jahlil was on the bench because he wasn't in the game, or did the coincidence of our doing well a few times while he was on the bench simply make it look that way? My guess is the latter, but I don't know that you can statistically prove it considering the low number of Marshall possessions.

Having said all that, it may also be that when Jahlil is off the court, the rest of our players play harder, with more intensity, and therefore better. They don't sit back and watch Jahlil; they don't relax, thinking that Jahlil will bail them out. They don't give up on a "why bother" cut because Jahlil would be getting the ball anyway. If that's the case, then it's conceivable that we really have been a better team without Jahlil but that the improvement would be unsustainable because if Jahlil was gone for good or reduced his role that much, the other players wouldn't be able to consistently maintain the high level of effort they expend now in the limited time he's been off the court.

Agree with all of this. Kind of supports "strategic benching" of Okafor. Let him get some rest and have the other guys keep an intensity level/game involvement.

Right now, Okafor is averaging 31 mpg. Maybe 26-28 mpg might be better. Or maybe we're all over-analyzing this. :)

[Matches]

I suspect those results simply would not be sustainable were Okafor to miss a significant amount of time. Opponents would adjust to Jah-less lineups in a way that eventually would render them less effective.

To use a Duke-related example, the 2001 team went on a tear as soon as Boozer was injured, playing at a level far higher than it had before his injury. But if he doesn't come back in the later rounds of the NCAAT, there's no way we win.

The Knicks never won anything *without* Ewing either.

[MChambers]

It's a well-written article. The question is cause or effect. There have been a couple games where Duke made its "big run" with Jahlil on the bench. I can't remember which games exactly, but I do remember thinking about it at the time and also several comments in the post-game threads pointing out/half-joking that we did so much better without Jahlil than we did with him. And of course we had the beatdown of Clemson while he was hurt. My guess is those incidences may have been what inspired the author(s) to write the article. My guess is also that those three (I think three, anyway) games account for the vast majority of the difference between our possessions with Jahlil and without.
Notre Dame at Duke is one example. Even the win against MSU involved pulling away while Okafor was on the bench. I'm not trying to make a point. Just giving a couple of examples that come to mind.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

I also get the feeling that Okafor's presence tends to neutralize Jefferson. But, maybe that's just me.
Love, Ima

[jv001]

It's a well-written article. The question is cause or effect. There have been a couple games where Duke made its "big run" with Jahlil on the bench. I can't remember which games exactly, but I do remember thinking about it at the time and also several comments in the post-game threads pointing out/half-joking that we did so much better without Jahlil than we did with him. And of course we had the beatdown of Clemson while he was hurt. My guess is those incidences may have been what inspired the author(s) to write the article. My guess is also that those three (I think three, anyway) games account for the vast majority of the difference between our possessions with Jahlil and without.

So, did we do so well when Jahlil was on the bench because he wasn't in the game, or did the coincidence of our doing well a few times while he was on the bench simply make it look that way? My guess is the latter, but I don't know that you can statistically prove it considering the low number of Marshall possessions.

Having said all that, it may also be that when Jahlil is off the court, the rest of our players play harder, with more intensity, and therefore better. They don't sit back and watch Jahlil; they don't relax, thinking that Jahlil will bail them out. They don't give up on a "why bother" cut because Jahlil would be getting the ball anyway. If that's the case, then it's conceivable that we really have been a better team without Jahlil but that the improvement would be unsustainable because if Jahlil was gone for good or reduced his role that much, the other players wouldn't be able to consistently maintain the high level of effort they expend now in the limited time he's been off the court.

I think Kedsy is on to something regarding the other players play harder when Jahlil goes to the bench. Many times in our inside outside offense, players have a tendency to stand around and watch. The guards do a good job of getting to a space for an outlet pass from Jahlil but we don't do as much cutting to the basket as we should. As for defense, Marshall is a better defender because he's had 3 years to learn Coach K's defense. Jahlil on the other hand is fresh out of high school and never played a defense like Duke's D. I agree with other posters that that a few more minutes out of MPIII might be a good thing. This would let Jahlil be more aggressive on defense. Which is where we need the most improvement. The rest might even help Jah's FT problems as well. Some readers of this article might think the author is saying it's a coaching problem. But not this reader. GoDuke!

[azzefkram]

I think a little more MPIII and a little less Jah might be a good thing. Our team D improves pretty significantly with MPIII in, especially if Justise is focused. Our O takes a hit but not as much as expected since our guys tend to focus on getting a good shot as opposed to just getting Jah a good shot. Jah could/should be a bit fresher. Not worried as much about MPIII fouls since he'd only be playing a bit more and if he fouled out it we are basically where we are now.

[DukieInKansas]

The true test of whether Okafor is Ewing rests in one main category - Technical Fouls. ;)

[lotusland]

I think a little more MPIII and a little less Jah might be a good thing. Our team D improves pretty significantly with MPIII in, especially if Justise is focused. Our O takes a hit but not as much as expected since our guys tend to focus on getting a good shot as opposed to just getting Jah a good shot. Jah could/should be a bit fresher. Not worried as much about MPIII fouls since he'd only be playing a bit more and if he fouled out it we are basically where we are now.

I think the author of that article should imagine that he is a college coach in need of a center with 1 scholarship available and and MP3 and Jah are senior transfer candidates who want to play for him. Hmmm which one to take...?

[jv001]

I think the author of that article should imagine that he is a college coach in need of a center with 1 scholarship available and and MP3 and Jah are senior transfer candidates who want to play for him. Hmmm which one to take...?

But we're blessed to have both and I think many teams would love to have MPIII on their squad. Improving our defense is important to our success in both the ACCT and NCAAT. So, if that means more minutes for MPIII, I hope it happens. GoDuke!

[Seattle Hoo]

That was a great read, although the writer buries his REAL hypothesis at the end of the piece, while the lead-in is more of an attention-getter than his actual point. His actual point is that Okafor should be used differently and should learn to play a different way than as a post-up offender/matador defender, that he would help the team better if he were put in motion more, playing more like most other NCAA 5s, and had less of an inflated sense of his own importance to the team such that he would not play with such an apparent fear of fouling on defense. I think he has a great point. From what he says about the NBA, it sounds like Jahlil himself could benefit from learning to play that way, in terms of NBA readiness and, possibly, $$$. Maybe he would be better off staying at Duke another year while K teaches him to be more of a motion 5 and to play actual defense.

But, personally, I think the guy is crazy and that Okafor should keep playing EXACTLY the way he does now and K should leave him on the floor for 40 minutes. Especially in the ACC Tournament Final.

[yancem]

I also get the feeling that Okafor's presence tends to neutralize Jefferson. But, maybe that's just me.
Love, Ima

Actually, I think Jefferson has been neutralizing Jefferson as of late. I'm not sure what has been the cause of this (maybe it does have to do with Okafor but that wasn't the case the first half of the season). How many times in the last few games have we seen Jefferson turn down a close in shot to either make a difficult interior pass to Okafor/Winslow/MP3 or back the ball out of the paint? In the first half of the season he was attacking on the offense and even willing to put up the occasional 10-12 footer. Recently he seems to be passing up open dunks. His minutes have also gone down over the same period but I don't know if that is a cause or effect. If Jefferson would be more aggressive, it would help Okafor making it harder to double team him.

[nocilla]

Another point to consider is the opposing team. I would think that the primary defensive scheme would be designed to stop/slow Okafor. So when Okafor is not on the floor it changes things and maybe the team is now playing a scheme that wasn't worked on as much in the pre-game. Maybe they don't really know what to focus their defense on or they relax a little because the primary target is not in the game.

[wilko]

I also get the feeling that Okafor's presence tends to neutralize Jefferson. But, maybe that's just me.
Love, Ima

Not sure about "neutralize" it depends on the opponent.
I tend to think of Winslows rise as impacting Amile. IF Amile had MP3's mass it might be a different story.

[wilko]

Actually, I think Jefferson has been neutralizing Jefferson as of late. I'm not sure what has been the cause of this (maybe it does have to do with Okafor but that wasn't the case the first half of the season). How many times in the last few games have we seen Jefferson turn down a close in shot to either make a difficult interior pass to Okafor/Winslow/MP3 or back the ball out of the paint? In the first half of the season he was attacking on the offense and even willing to put up the occasional 10-12 footer. Recently he seems to be passing up open dunks. His minutes have also gone down over the same period but I don't know if that is a cause or effect. If Jefferson would be more aggressive, it would help Okafor making it harder to double team him.

I've wondered about this as well. He seems to be channeling his inner Casey Sanders lately.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Actually, I think Jefferson has been neutralizing Jefferson as of late. I'm not sure what has been the cause of this (maybe it does have to do with Okafor but that wasn't the case the first half of the season). How many times in the last few games have we seen Jefferson turn down a close in shot to either make a difficult interior pass to Okafor/Winslow/MP3 or back the ball out of the paint? In the first half of the season he was attacking on the offense and even willing to put up the occasional 10-12 footer. Recently he seems to be passing up open dunks. His minutes have also gone down over the same period but I don't know if that is a cause or effect. If Jefferson would be more aggressive, it would help Okafor making it harder to double team him.

This is spot on. Amile is often aggressive when he gets the ball in the paint, whether it be on an offensive rebound or a pick and roll. However, in the second half of ACC play, Amile just doesn't look to score. At all. At least once per game, Amile gets the ball in great scoring position and can't capitalize. He is clearly overthinking right now. His D is really good, but he has become a liability on offense. Which, IMO, isn't a bad thing, considering that we're #1 in the nation offensively.

Ideally, I'd like to see Amile in the game as much as possible because his defensive value is better than anyone else's and he provides decent help whenever Tyus, Cook, Winslow, or Matt gets beaten on the drive. And, Amile, please try to score when you're within 4 feet of the basket.

[FerryFor50]

This is spot on. Amile is often aggressive when he gets the ball in the paint, whether it be on an offensive rebound or a pick and roll. However, in the second half of ACC play, Amile just doesn't look to score. At all. At least once per game, Amile gets the ball in great scoring position and can't capitalize. He is clearly overthinking right now. His D is really good, but he has become a liability on offense. Which, IMO, isn't a bad thing, considering that we're #1 in the nation offensively.

Ideally, I'd like to see Amile in the game as much as possible because his defensive value is better than anyone else's and he provides decent help whenever Tyus, Cook, Winslow, or Matt gets beaten on the drive. And, Amile, please try to score when you're within 4 feet of the basket.

I've mentioned Amile's offensive aggressiveness a few times, too. I recall early in the year, he really looked for his offense. Even took some mid-range jumpers. Then, he just stopped. I wonder if the coaches told him to chill on offense...

[flyingdutchdevil]

I've mentioned Amile's offensive aggressiveness a few times, too. I recall early in the year, he really looked for his offense. Even took some mid-range jumpers. Then, he just stopped. I wonder if the coaches told him to chill on offense...

Chilling on the mid-range makes a lot of sense. It was a bad shot. But chilling on all offense? That doesn't seem very Coach K-like. I've been very impressed with Amile's ability to hit a shot within 4-6 feet (including Amile's patented reverse lay-up). Amile must have his confidence shot. Don't know why, don't really want to speculate, but he's clearly not the same on offense.

[ArtVandelay]

So, did we do so well when Jahlil was on the bench because he wasn't in the game, or did the coincidence of our doing well a few times while he was on the bench simply make it look that way? My guess is the latter, but I don't know that you can statistically prove it considering the low number of Marshall possessions.

Having said all that, it may also be that when Jahlil is off the court, the rest of our players play harder, with more intensity, and therefore better. They don't sit back and watch Jahlil; they don't relax, thinking that Jahlil will bail them out. They don't give up on a "why bother" cut because Jahlil would be getting the ball anyway. If that's the case, then it's conceivable that we really have been a better team without Jahlil but that the improvement would be unsustainable because if Jahlil was gone for good or reduced his role that much, the other players wouldn't be able to consistently maintain the high level of effort they expend now in the limited time he's been off the court.

I took his point to be that the theory of causation here is that low-post scoring is inherently less efficient than others ways of scoring. I hadn't heard of this before, and it is very interesting, although I'd be curious whether it applies equally in the college game since his data appears to be based on NBA play. So it doesn't have to do so much with guys playing harder when Jah is out, but that we are employing a less efficient offensive strategy when he is in by relying on him to be a low-post scorer rather than a "motion" center. If true, it would seem this theory has little to do with Jah the man/beast (as the author seems to recognize that Jah is better scoring in the post than anyone) so much as low post offense in general. I don't follow the NBA closely enough to be able to opine on these bigger picture issues, although it's surely true that the "back to the basket" C is a rare breed these days. I just had no idea that might be an intentional tactical thing. What seems fishy to me here is that if this is true, why wouldn't Coach K or other coaches who are presumably in the upper echelon of basketball minds have recognized this and adjusted their schemes accordingly?

The other aspect of this is obviously Jah's suspect defense, and I'm not sure that what you wrote pertains to effort on the defensive end. I don't see why our guys would not try as hard on D with Jah out of the game.

[Kedsy]

Another point to consider is the opposing team. I would think that the primary defensive scheme would be designed to stop/slow Okafor. So when Okafor is not on the floor it changes things and maybe the team is now playing a scheme that wasn't worked on as much in the pre-game. Maybe they don't really know what to focus their defense on or they relax a little because the primary target is not in the game.

This is a really good point. Clemson's Coach Brownell said pretty much the exact same thing -- that they'd game-planned assuming Jahlil would play, and when he didn't it messed them up a little bit.

[tux]

It would be interesting to take the Clemson game out of the analysis and see what the numbers look like.

Okafor's main issues IMO are FT shooting, turnovers, and a refusal to protect the rim on defense. The latter is the most problematic to me; in the VT game, he literally would just hold his position and watch guys make layups instead of challenging shots. It only makes sense for Duke to pressure out past the 3-point line IF they have someone erasing mistakes on the back end. Instead, Okafor is very very passive most of the time.

On offense, when Okafor is out of the game, Duke tends to use Marshall to set high picks for the guards, opening up driving lanes and making the perimeter guys more aggressive.

Finally, opponents are game-planning for Okafor, packing in their defenses in order to bring consistent double teams, etc. As such, our opponent's defense is probably less focused with Okafor on the bench.

One obvious (and minor) adjustment would be to use Marshall a little more in the 2nd half of games. The pattern of late has been to rest Okafor a little in the 1st half, and then more or less tighten the rotation to 5-6 players in the 2nd half. I.e., give Jah a little more rest and tell him to be a little more aggressive protecting the rim on defense.

[mike88]

One obvious (and minor) adjustment would be to use Marshall a little more in the 2nd half of games. The pattern of late has been to rest Okafor a little in the 1st half, and then more or less tighten the rotation to 5-6 players in the 2nd half. I.e., give Jah a little more rest and tell him to be a little more aggressive protecting the rim on defense.

I agree and made the same general point in the VT post-game thread. If Marshall could give us 4-6 more minutes (ideally in the second half) then perhaps Jah could play a little more aggressively earlier in the game. One problem is that (to my eye) Marshall plays better with Justise, Matt, Quinn, Tyus, so in order to get him more time, Amile needs to play more along with Jah (so that we balance the minutes a little better) Grayson giving us 10-12 minutes also helps in that regard.

[yancem]

Another point to consider is the opposing team. I would think that the primary defensive scheme would be designed to stop/slow Okafor. So when Okafor is not on the floor it changes things and maybe the team is now playing a scheme that wasn't worked on as much in the pre-game. Maybe they don't really know what to focus their defense on or they relax a little because the primary target is not in the game.

Isn't this basically what Bownell said after Clemson played us in Cameron. They had thought that Okafor was going to play and they game planned against him. Since he didn't play, they had to make adjustments which they didn't do very well.

I would imagine that when Okafor is in the game, Duke's other players relax a little bit knowing he can score just about any time he wants to. Conversely, the opposing team is probably hyper focused when he's in the game for the same reason. The opposite is also true, when he is out of the game. Duke's players become more focused while the opponent relaxes a little. Seems like K needs to try to push his players to realize that when Okafor is on the court, the goal for everyone should be to attack and extend the pressure to get/build a lead, to take advantage of the defense's focus on him. He should also take advantage of the letting up of focus by the opponent by sitting Okafor a little more and playing MP3 a little more. This would keep Okafor more well rested and hopefully get him to be a little more aggressive defensively.

[bedeviled]

It would be interesting to take the Clemson game out of the analysis and see what the numbers look likeThe Clemson Efficiency Margin is actually worse than the one provided for all ACC games together. Upthread, I provided I table in case you want to try playing with the data. But, the number were unassailable with the basic manipulations I tried.

[yancem]

Chilling on the mid-range makes a lot of sense. It was a bad shot. But chilling on all offense? That doesn't seem very Coach K-like. I've been very impressed with Amile's ability to hit a shot within 4-6 feet (including Amile's patented reverse lay-up). Amile must have his confidence shot. Don't know why, don't really want to speculate, but he's clearly not the same on offense.

Actually, I'm not sure that chilling on the mid-range shots makes a lot of sense. Granted it isn't a high percentage shot form him and I wouldn't want him taking a bunch of them but we have some very good offensive rebounders and if he can make even 1 or 2, it would force the defense to adjust and make double teaming Okafor more difficult. I think his complete hesitation to shoot is more of a detriment to the offense then a couple of missed mid-range shots. Right now, teams aren't even guarding him more than 3-5 feet from the basket.

Supposedly, he was capable of hitting the mid-range shot when he was in high school and I remember seeing a video update of his workouts this past summer and he drilled a bunch. It must be a confidence issue more than an ability issue. I say shoot it and tell Okafor and Winslow to crash the boards.

[stickdog]

It's a nice theory but there's too much of reading into analytics on this. In my opinion the Notre Dame game was a complete outlier (our best performance of the season, and honestly maybe the decade), and our 1A performance was clearly the road win at Clemson, in which Okafor didn't play.

Yeah, the data would be more accurate if we removed all the great performance outliers in which Okafor did not play.

[subzero02]

Actually, I'm not sure that chilling on the mid-range shots makes a lot of sense. Granted it isn't a high percentage shot form him and I wouldn't want him taking a bunch of them but we have some very good offensive rebounders and if he can make even 1 or 2, it would force the defense to adjust and make double teaming Okafor more difficult. I think his complete hesitation to shoot is more of a detriment to the offense then a couple of missed mid-range shots. Right now, teams aren't even guarding him more than 3-5 feet from the basket.

Supposedly, he was capable of hitting the mid-range shot when he was in high school and I remember seeing a video update of his workouts this past summer and he drilled a bunch. It must be a confidence issue more than an ability issue. I say shoot it and tell Okafor and Winslow to crash the boards.

1 or 2 midrange jumpers per game from Amile would be awesome. I'd settle for him catching the ball, facing the basket and making a strong move to the hoop. He's quick enough to score from that position especially if the defense isn't expecting it.

[stickdog]

As a statistician, I suppose I count as a stat guru, but I certainly don't consider myself a basketball stat guru. :)

The reasoning is sound, but the data is lacking (small number of Plumlee possessions) and the analysis isn't thorough. The author makes an assumption that each possession is identical in regards to strength of opponents. When Okafor is in the game, he is usually facing the opposing teams starters. When Plumlee is in the game, he is usually facing the opposing teams reserves while still flanked by our starters (since we lack depth). A quick glance at the numbers of possessions given to Okafor and Plumlee for each opponent shows that Okafor plays a greater proportion of possessions against stronger opponents.

Finally, Okafor plays over 3x more minutes than Plumlee, saying Plumlee is more effective in the game than Okafor because of efficiency margins is equivalent to saying that a relief pitcher is more effective than a starting pitcher because of ERA. The relief has the ability to play all out in the short time they are in. You can't effectively reason that a coach should give the starter fewer minutes and the relief more minutes as while the starter's ERA may very well go down, the relief's may go way up.

The Ewing theory can only be tested when the player is absent for many games. Carmelo Anthony in New York - valid Ewing theory. Vince Carter in Toronto - valid Ewing theory. Josh Smith in Detroit - valid Ewing theory. Okafor at Duke - not valid Ewing theory.

IMHO, you are missing the larger point, which is that Duke is just a barely an above average ACC team during the minutes Okafor has been on the court in ACC play through its first 14 ACC games in which Okafor has played. How can you explain that away? Are you suggesting that Duke is vastly overrated because of lucky play and lucky opponent substitutions when Okafor is off the court?

[subzero02]

Yeah, the data would be more accurate if we removed all the great performance outliers in which Okafor did not play.

As someone else pointed out, we averaged fewer points per possession in the Clemson game than we did in the other time periods without Okafor on the court. Our PPP in the Clemson game was 1.182... Our overall PPP without Okafor is 1.300... The PPP without Okafor in all games but the Clemson game is 1.347.

[ramdevil]

I am the only person who saw this thread title and thought "How is Okafor like Daniel Ewing?"

[flyingdutchdevil]

I am the only person who saw this thread title and thought "How is Okafor like Daniel Ewing?"

Possibly. There is no doubt in my mind it was a comparison to Sir Patrick.

[Troublemaker]

I took his point to be that the theory of causation here is that low-post scoring is inherently less efficient than others ways of scoring. I hadn't heard of this before, and it is very interesting, although I'd be curious whether it applies equally in the college game

I think it's the same in college. The following table (from Synergy via Luke Winn) shows the players who have received the most post-up opportunities per game over the past four seasons (i.e. the players who are regarded by their own team as good at posting up). You can see that Okafor and Jared Sullinger are both a shade less than 1 ppp, same as the top guys in the NBA like Aldridge and Al Jefferson.

http://www.si.com/sites/default/files/2015/02/05/duke.gif



why wouldn't Coach K or other coaches who are presumably in the upper echelon of basketball minds have recognized this and adjusted their schemes accordingly?

I think many have. Coach K, in particular -- until this season, until the article linked in this thread, actually -- has never been accused of posting up a player too much. But because Coach K had gone so long without having an elite post scorer like Jah, Coach is sort of like the guy just out of prison having his first meal; that meal's not going to be calorically sound.

I think if you believe in the stats cited in the article, it would make sense to tone it down a notch with the Okafor postups, lowering it from the current level of the most postups given to a major conference player in the past four years.

[Troublemaker]

One obvious (and minor) adjustment would be to use Marshall a little more in the 2nd half of games. The pattern of late has been to rest Okafor a little in the 1st half, and then more or less tighten the rotation to 5-6 players in the 2nd half. I.e., give Jah a little more rest and tell him to be a little more aggressive protecting the rim on defense.

I agree with this. Even if Jah is receiving too many postups, it hasn't stopped Duke from being the #1 offense in the country. The bigger takeaway from the article is that Jah should try to give better effort in protecting the rim and worry less about fouls. Duke is not a diminished team without him on the court (and it's actually to the contrary, if you believe the article), so let's put that 7'6" wingspan to good use. (If possible. Maybe he just has poor instincts right now for defense.)

[Ian]

I think in general all freshmen big men have poor defensive instincts. They either foul too much, or if they are afraid of fouling stop defending altogether. It's because they don't have the experience to know what one can and cannot get away with from the refs, and can therefore play defense riding along the line of legality and bother the offensive player just enough without going over the line and get called for fouls.

Okafor is probably being told by the coaching staff to avoid fouls and the only way he knows how is to back off completely.

[oakvillebluedevil]

Chopping the data a little more, one trend that pops is that it appears this is getting worse in past few games (granted, sample size starts getting tricky here).

Gap is much worse in last 5 ACC games (Non-okafor efficiency margin has been ~0.56 PPP better than efficiency margin with Okafor) vs. first 10 ('only' a .17 efficiency margin gap).

Most of the delta between first 10 and last 5 came from defense getting worse (~.36 PPP of the ~.39 EM delta in first 10 vs. last 5 driven by opp. PPP).

Just getting data out - obviously need to think through causation more. If trend of getting worse is significant, people could either be getting smarter (e.g., pulling Okafor out on screen and rolls more) or there could be a fatigue element.

Have a quick and dirty excel file, but can't get attached for some reason (new to the data sharing element at DBR - I'm more of a reader than poster). Is excel shareable?

[lotusland]

IMHO, you are missing the larger point, which is that Duke is just a barely an above average ACC team during the minutes Okafor has been on the court in ACC play through its first 14 ACC games in which Okafor has played. How can you explain that away? Are you suggesting that Duke is vastly overrated because of lucky play and lucky opponent substitutions when Okafor is off the court?

Okafor is on the court most of the time yet somehow Duke trails only VA in the ACC race and we beat UVA in Chartlottesville with Jah playing major minutes. Duke is the #4 ranked team in the country with Jah playing major minutes. I'm not a stats guy. They make my eyes glaze over but think if the answer is absurd then the metric is probably flawed.

[Neals384]

Well, let's look at +/- data. For the 14 conference games (not counting Clemson - anything that happened there does not count against Oak), Duke is +4.3 per 40 minutes with Oak in the game, and +12.6 per 40 with him on the bench. Sounds like a pretty dramatic confirmation of point made in the linked article. However, almost all of that difference came in the three losses. In 11 conference wins (not counting Clemson), Duke is +10.0 per 40 with Oak in the game and +11.3 per 40 with Oak on the bench. In the three losses, Duke is -10.7 per 40 with Oak in the game and +20.5 with him on the bench. But he sat for only 15 min total in the three games, so that's a pretty small sample size.

By the way, Oak is averaging 32:49 per game in conference, quite high for a post player. He played 33 min vs. Miami, 35 1/2 at Notre Dame and almost 36 vs. State. This for a guy that some said was out of shape when the season began.

[DukieInKansas]

The true test of whether Okafor is Ewing rests in one main category - Technical Fouls. ;)

Obviously, in my mind, there is only one Ewing - and his name is not Patrick. :o

[DukieInKansas]

I am the only person who saw this thread title and thought "How is Okafor like Daniel Ewing?"

No, you weren't.

[gcashwell]

I've wondered about this as well. He seems to be channeling his inner Casey Sanders lately.

It's been since Sulaimon got kicked. Were they buddies or something?

[Edouble]

I think the author of that article should imagine that he is a college coach in need of a center with 1 scholarship available and and MP3 and Jah are senior transfer candidates who want to play for him. Hmmm which one to take...?

Let the "Jahlil is transferring" rumors begin!!!

(Well, he is transferring... to the NBA)

[Greg_Newton]

Okafor is on the court most of the time yet somehow Duke trails only VA in the ACC race and we beat UVA in Chartlottesville with Jah playing major minutes. Duke is the #4 ranked team in the country with Jah playing major minutes. I'm not a stats guy. They make my eyes glaze over but think if the answer is absurd then the metric is probably flawed.

...these are not complicated stats.

With Okafor on the floor, Duke is the #6 team in the ACC. That's a fact. The reason we have been is good as we have been this year is because of what has happened when we off the floor. Again, that's not an opinion or some tricky manipulation of advanced stats, that's just what basic math tells us.

I get that it's a counterintuitive conclusion, but I think it's a fascinating one. It's bizarre to me how defensive some have gotten about it.

[FireOgilvie]

It would be interesting to take the Clemson game out of the analysis and see what the numbers look like.

Okafor's main issues IMO are FT shooting, turnovers, and a refusal to protect the rim on defense. The latter is the most problematic to me; in the VT game, he literally would just hold his position and watch guys make layups instead of challenging shots. It only makes sense for Duke to pressure out past the 3-point line IF they have someone erasing mistakes on the back end. Instead, Okafor is very very passive most of the time.

On offense, when Okafor is out of the game, Duke tends to use Marshall to set high picks for the guards, opening up driving lanes and making the perimeter guys more aggressive.

Finally, opponents are game-planning for Okafor, packing in their defenses in order to bring consistent double teams, etc. As such, our opponent's defense is probably less focused with Okafor on the bench.

One obvious (and minor) adjustment would be to use Marshall a little more in the 2nd half of games. The pattern of late has been to rest Okafor a little in the 1st half, and then more or less tighten the rotation to 5-6 players in the 2nd half. I.e., give Jah a little more rest and tell him to be a little more aggressive protecting the rim on defense.

Tux hit the nail on the head, IMO. There's way too much "Jah Watching" on offense. Guys just stand there and the motion offense kind of dies. We stop pushing the ball up the court and we're not aggressive. Winslow, Tyus, and Cook are at their best when the motion offense is flowing and we either draw a defender away and get open 3s or drive to the basket. In the UNC game, Okafor's last points in regulation came with 9:52 to play. We pushed the ball like crazy and scored 29 points in 9:52. Our offense was great, but our defense suffered because we were repeatedly giving up open layups; I believe they said it was the statistically worst interior defense in any ACC game in 3 seasons. He was clearly the problem there. Marshall was +0 against UNC, but +3 in the one lineup without Okafor (3:43), and -3 in the lineup that played 3:46 with Okafor, who was -1 overall.

However, with an aggressive mindset, Okafor could potentially be an extremely impressive defensive center. He has a ridiculous wingspan/reach, even though he's a little bit slow to block shots. The problem is that he's basically always coasted on defense so that he could maximize his minutes, even in HS. But by doing that, he's never developed the skill of defending hard while not committing fouls. He has no idea how to do this. Instead, as Tux mentioned, he sometimes will actively avoid contesting shots when it's not his man; he literally slows down or moves away from the hoop so he's not in a position to pick up a foul (or be anywhere near the ball so as to be blamed). If you haven't noticed this, you could go back and see him do it repeatedly against VT or UNC. You almost never see Marshall or a Kentucky big man do that, but he gets away with it because it's been decided that we need to play him 35 min a game no matter what - hence the stats showing we are worse when he is in the game. Okafor's other "freshman habit" that drives me crazy is when he jogs back on defense with what seem to be blinders on, completely disrupting our defensive positioning, and the other team goes right by him or passes to the open/cutting guy for a layup. It seems to happen at least once a game.

As others have said, I'd rather have him play aggressively on defense and risk fouling out than coasting for 35 min. If we could average 25 really good minutes out of him in ACC play, he'd probably still be at least +15 every game, but in a shorter amount of time. Marshall would play all out like he always does for the other 15. His +/- per 40 min is 7.4 pts better than Okafor's, so I'm not too worried about giving him some extra minutes. Also, it would allow our other guys to get into a flow on offense because Marshall's sole job is to create openings for the other 4 guys. I don't recall Okafor setting too many screens.

[jv001]

Tux hit the nail on the head, IMO. There's way too much "Jah Watching" on offense. Guys just stand there and the motion offense kind of dies. We stop pushing the ball up the court and we're not aggressive. Winslow, Tyus, and Cook are at their best when the motion offense is flowing and we either draw a defender away and get open 3s or drive to the basket. In the UNC game, Okafor's last points in regulation came with 9:52 to play. We pushed the ball like crazy and scored 29 points in 9:52. Our offense was great, but our defense suffered because we were repeatedly giving up open layups; I believe they said it was the statistically worst interior defense in any ACC game in 3 seasons. He was clearly the problem there. Marshall was +0 against UNC, but +3 in the one lineup without Okafor (3:43), and -3 in the lineup that played 3:46 with Okafor, who was -1 overall.

However, with an aggressive mindset, Okafor could potentially be an extremely impressive defensive center. He has a ridiculous wingspan/reach, even though he's a little bit slow to block shots. The problem is that he's basically always coasted on defense so that he could maximize his minutes, even in HS. But by doing that, he's never developed the skill of defending hard while not committing fouls. He has no idea how to do this. Instead, as Tux mentioned, he sometimes will actively avoid contesting shots when it's not his man; he literally slows down or moves away from the hoop so he's not in a position to pick up a foul (or be anywhere near the ball so as to be blamed). If you haven't noticed this, you could go back and see him do it repeatedly against VT or UNC. You almost never see Marshall or a Kentucky big man do that, but he gets away with it because it's been decided that we need to play him 35 min a game no matter what - hence the stats showing we are worse when he is in the game. Okafor's other "freshman habit" that drives me crazy is when he jogs back on defense with what seem to be blinders on, completely disrupting our defensive positioning, and the other team goes right by him or passes to the open/cutting guy for a layup. It seems to happen at least once a game.

As others have said, I'd rather have him play aggressively on defense and risk fouling out than coasting for 35 min. If we could average 25 really good minutes out of him in ACC play, he'd probably still be at least +15 every game, but in a shorter amount of time. Marshall would play all out like he always does for the other 15. His +/- per 40 min is 7.4 pts better than Okafor's, so I'm not too worried about giving him some extra minutes. Also, it would allow our other guys to get into a flow on offense because Marshall's sole job is to create openings for the other 4 guys. I don't recall Okafor setting too many screens.

Some mighty fine points in this post. The most important point is how Jahlil sometimes jogs back on defense. I believe it was the uncheat game that he jogged back down court and looked like a pulling guard for one of the cheats. He completely blocked out the Duke defender and uncheat get's a layup. On offense he get's back down the court quickly because he knows Tyus or Quinn will get him the ball for a dunk. I wish one of the coaches would sit down with him and show him how Battier blocked shots and did not foul. If he could channel a little of Shane, he would be a good defender. He has the mobility and the length to be a great defender. We need for the big guy to play better defense. GoDuke!

[lotusland]

...these are not complicated stats.

With Okafor on the floor, Duke is the #6 team in the ACC. That's a fact. The reason we have been is good as we have been this year is because of what has happened when we off the floor. Again, that's not an opinion or some tricky manipulation of advanced stats, that's just what basic math tells us.

I get that it's a counterintuitive conclusion, but I think it's a fascinating one. It's bizarre to me how defensive some have gotten about it. Number

So when Jah starts today and plays 30 + minutes it will be because coach K is too dim to understand your obvious "facts"? Are you really saying we're better without Okafor? Pull your head out of your stats and think about that one before you answer.

[freshmanjs]

Number

So when Jah starts today and plays 30 + minutes it will be because coach K is too dim to understand your obvious "facts"? Are you really saying we're better without Okafor? Pull your head out of your stats and think about that one before you answer.

no, the discussion is much more nuanced and interesting than that. the point is that for this team, with Jah playing most of the time and with the various factors that it has faced, the performance has been better when he's on the bench. that is absolutely not the same as saying the team would be better without him. nor is it the same as saying Coach K is dim. equating those things lowers the quality of the discourse.

[Troublemaker]

The author of the article has written an excellent follow-up piece containing responses to some criticisms and expanded data (the Jah / No-Jah splits across all games Duke has played and also against good teams, defined as ACC + top 100 teams): https://okafortheory.wordpress.com/2015/02/27/more-robust-okafor-theorizing/

[lotusland]

no, the discussion is much more nuanced and interesting than that. the point is that for this team, with Jah playing most of the time and with the various factors that it has faced, the performance has been better when he's on the bench. that is absolutely not the same as saying the team would be better without him. nor is it the same as saying Coach K is dim. equating those things lowers the quality of the discourse.

You said Duke is above average only because of the small fraction of time Okafor spent on the bench. I think that is absurd. I think the premise is absurd. The Knicks were perenial contenders during Ewing's prime years. They never won it all during the Bird, Magic, Jordan and Bad Boys years but the suggestion that they would have done better without Ewing is ridiculous. Put those players on any team and give their coach the option of playing or sitting Ewing and Ewing plays in 100% of the time.

Statistics can be like committees. Relying on them exclusively can lead to absurd conclusions. I think we might be better if Okafor played closer to 30 minutes than 37 minutes because he could play harder on defense. I'm not buying that his game on offense should be more like Marshal's or that he should focus on setting screens and offensive rebounding instead of post ups. I've seen enough Duke teams running that offense.


In his follow up comments the author includes this gem:


Are you really stupid enough to believe Duke would be better without Okafor this season?

Nope, not that stupid. Duke has 8 eligible scholarship players, and 2 of them are centers. Without Okafor, Duke would have 1 center on its roster this season, who happens to be somewhat foul-prone, and would go at most 7-deep. That’s rough. Without Okafor, Duke would’ve struggled mightily this season.

So his main reason he thinks Duke is not better without Okafor is because without him they would be left without a backup fora foul prone MP3. I'm not one who thinks Coach K is infallible but I do think he is way more credible than this dude.

[freshmanjs]

You said Duke is above average only because of the small fraction of time Okafor spent on the bench. I think that is absurd. I think the premise is absurd.

I said no such thing. That is completely false.



The Knicks were perenial contenders during Ewing's prime years. They never won it all during the Bird, Magic, Jordan and Bad Boys years but the suggestion that they would have done better without Ewing is ridiculous.

No one made that suggestion or anything like it


Statistics can be like committees. Relying on them exclusively can lead to absurd conclusions. I think we might be better if Okafor played closer to 30 minutes than 37 minutes because he could play harder on defense. I'm not buying that his game on offense should be more like Marshal's or that he should focus on setting screens and offensive rebounding instead of post ups. I've seen enough Duke teams running that offense.

No one is suggesting that his game should be more like Marshall's or that he should focus on screens. No one here is relying on these statistics to reach absurd conclusions like those. I have no idea why you are asserting that people are doing that. They are not.

[brlftz]

i think a more interesting track for the discussion would be whether this illustrates our failure to come up with an effective way of dealing with double teams. okafor is unstoppable 1x1, but teams have had way more success than i like taking him out of the game by double teaming without paying a price elsewhere.

[Troublemaker]

i think a more interesting track for the discussion would be whether this illustrates our failure to come up with an effective way of dealing with double teams.

I would argue that the smallball lineup with Winslow at the 4 has been the solution. As we've started to see that lineup more and more, Duke's offensive ranking has steadily risen to the point where we're back at #1.

I think it's true we haven't found a consistent solution for double-teams when Amile is in the game. Maybe it's too difficult to play great offense if your PF can't shoot at least some from midrange. Or maybe Coach K is just better at coaching 4-around-1 offense than he is at coaching double-post offense. Either way, I'm glad we found something with the smallball lineup.

[bedeviled]

No analysis here.
But, here's a text copy of the full season data (provided in the Okafor Theory author's second article) if you want to look only at games vs elite big men, correlate number of possessions to efficiencies (to assess tiredness or being in the flow), compare the data to our 3FG rate, or have some other idea to better understand the phenomenon.

Sorry for taking up so much space with the table, but it's easier for users to cut-and-paste than if I put it into a 'code' box. Data is organized as in the Okafor Theory article


Top100
Date
Opponent
Dposs
Oposs
DPts
Opts
DPPP
OPPP
DEffMarg
2Dposs
2Oposs
2DPts
2Opts
2DPPP
2OPPP
2DEffMarg



14-Nov
Presb
40
40
64
29
1.60000
0.72500
0.87500
27
27
49
15
1.81481
0.55556
1.25926



15-Nov
Fairfield
48
45
66
43
1.37500
0.95556
0.41944
26
28
43
16
1.65385
0.57143
1.08242


Yes
18-Nov
MichSt
51
48
61
52
1.19608
1.08333
0.11275
15
18
20
19
1.33333
1.05556
0.27778


Yes
21-Nov
Temple
50
49
54
35
1.08000
0.71429
0.36571
20
22
20
19
1.00000
0.86364
0.13636


Yes
22-Nov
Stanford
58
57
59
42
1.01724
0.73684
0.28040
6
8
11
17
1.83333
2.12500
-0.29167



26-Nov
Furman
43
44
63
32
1.46512
0.72727
0.73784
21
21
30
22
1.42857
1.04762
0.38095



30-Nov
Army
42
40
53
37
1.26190
0.92500
0.33690
30
31
40
36
1.33333
1.16129
0.17204


Yes
3-Dec
Wisc
42
38
54
45
1.28571
1.18421
0.10150
19
23
26
25
1.36842
1.08696
0.28146



15-Dec
Elon
54
54
59
49
1.09259
0.90741
0.18519
17
18
16
13
0.94118
0.72222
0.21895


Yes
18-Dec
Uconn
56
54
60
45
1.07143
0.83333
0.23810
11
11
6
11
0.54545
1.00000
-0.45455


Yes
29-Dec
Toldeo
53
55
72
52
1.35849
0.94545
0.41304
16
15
14
17
0.87500
1.13333
-0.25833


Yes
31-Dec
Wofford
51
50
65
46
1.27451
0.92000
0.35451
14
13
19
9
1.35714
0.69231
0.66484


Yes
3-Jan
BC
48
46
63
51
1.31250
1.10870
0.20380
17
19
22
11
1.29412
0.57895
0.71517


Yes
7-Jan
Wake
58
55
57
51
0.98276
0.92727
0.05549
14
17
16
14
1.14286
0.82353
0.31933


Yes
11-Jan
NCSU
66
65
66
78
1.00000
1.20000
-0.20000
6
6
9
9
1.50000
1.50000
0.00000


Yes
13-Jan
Miami
61
60
53
74
0.86885
1.23333
-0.36448
14
14
21
16
1.50000
1.14286
0.35714


Yes
17-Jan
UL
50
50
58
39
1.16000
0.78000
0.38000
10
9
5
13
0.50000
1.44444
-0.94444


Yes
19-Jan
Pitt
44
43
59
45
1.34091
1.04651
0.29440
18
20
20
20
1.11111
1.00000
0.11111


Yes
25-Jan
St.John's
63
64
77
65
1.22222
1.01563
0.20660
3
4
0
3
0.00000
0.75000
-0.75000


Yes
28-Jan
ND
60
60
61
68
1.01667
1.13333
-0.11667
9
8
12
9
1.33333
1.12500
0.20833


Yes
31-Jan
UVA
52
51
62
51
1.19231
1.00000
0.19231
6
9
7
12
1.16667
1.33333
-0.16667


Yes
4-Feb
GT
53
53
58
48
1.09434
0.90566
0.18868
11
13
14
18
1.27273
1.38462
-0.11189


Yes
7-Feb
ND
36
36
51
36
1.41667
1.00000
0.41667
24
25
39
24
1.62500
0.96000
0.66500


Yes
9-Feb
FSU
45
44
47
54
1.04444
1.22727
-0.18283
16
19
26
16
1.62500
0.84211
0.78289


Yes
14-Feb
Cuse
62
58
70
66
1.12903
1.13793
-0.00890
7
11
10
6
1.42857
0.54545
0.88312


Yes
18-Feb
UNC
77
75
82
83
1.06494
1.10667
-0.04173
6
8
10
7
1.66667
0.87500
0.79167


Yes
21-Feb
Clem
0
0
0
0
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
66
66
78
56
1.18182
0.84848
0.33333


Yes
25-Feb
VT
56
49
77
71
1.37500
1.44898
-0.07398
9
17
14
15
1.55556
0.88235
0.67320


Yes
28-Feb
Cuse
















Yes
4-Mar
Wake
















Yes
7-Mar
UNC





































Total
1419
1383
1671
1387
1.17759
1.00289
0.17470
458
500
597
468
1.30349
0.93600
0.36749

[BobbyFan]

I hadn't heard of this before, and it is very interesting, although I'd be curious whether it applies equally in the college game since his data appears to be based on NBA play. So it doesn't have to do so much with guys playing harder when Jah is out, but that we are employing a less efficient offensive strategy when he is in by relying on him to be a low-post scorer rather than a "motion" center. If true, it would seem this theory has little to do with Jah the man/beast (as the author seems to recognize that Jah is better scoring in the post than anyone) so much as low post offense in general. I don't follow the NBA closely enough to be able to opine on these bigger picture issues, although it's surely true that the "back to the basket" C is a rare breed these days. I just had no idea that might be an intentional tactical thing.

In 2001, the NBA's illegal defense rules were eliminated. Until that point, they significantly limited defensive positioning off the ball, including that of weakside defenders. It's not a coincidence that the impact of big men with a post game has since declined.

While he's expected to be the #1 pick in this year's draft, Okafor would have had even greater potential had he entered the NBA in the 90s.

[lotusland]

no one made that suggestion or anything like it

No one is suggesting that his game should be more like Marshall's or that he should focus on screens. No one here is relying on these statistics to reach absurd conclusions like those. I have no idea why you are asserting that people are doing that. They are not.


However, there is an abundance of evidence that establishes the fact that Jahlil Okafor hurts Duke basketball when he’s on the court, so much so that The Ewing Theory could be appropriately renamed The Okafor Theory....

Many people who have watched Duke play all season, however, have noticed that Duke seems to play better without Okafor sometimes.

Well, there is evidence to suggest that it’s not just sometimes. It’s almost all of the time.


Nothing absurd about those statements? We disagree.

[davekay1971]

One thing about the title of the thread - it relates to Bill Simmons's much hyped and asinine "Ewing Theory". The idea that a hall of fame center actually hurt the Knicks has always defied logic, unless one were to make the argument that the Knicks committed too much salary to him, and could have done better with a lower budget center and more money for other talent.

But that's all NBA garbage anyway. This is college hoops. Did anyone see Ewing play at Georgetown? Has anyone ever tried to insinuate that the "Ewing Theory" applied to the Patrick Ewing who scared the crap out of opponents for four years when he was a Hoya? He was a beast, the heart and soul of that team, and he was a lucky James Worthy interception and a once-in-a-century Villanova performance away from 3 titles in his four years at Geogetown.

Tell you what, I'd take college Patrick Ewing on Duke's roster any day of the week. Barring him, I'm just as thrilled to have Okafor. The kid's an amazing center and we're lucky to have him.

[mo.st.dukie]

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/7047/the-kevin-durant-conundrum

"Sometimes +/- can punish players simply for being on bad teams, but this is more than that. Mavericks' statistical expert Wayne Winston's in-depth lineup data shows that every one of Durant's key teammates -- Russell Westbrook, Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, Nick Collison -- gets better, in many cases far better, results playing with less heralded teammates Thabo Sefolosha or Kyle Weaver while Durant sits.

In fact, almost nobody on the Thunder has a +/- rating as poor as Durant's. Winston rates Durant's performance "in the lowest 10% of all NBA players."

Knowing that just about any NBA general manager would trade his own children for a prospect of Durant's caliber, I asked Winston if he'd advise his team to accept if the Mavericks were (in some alternate universe) offered Durant for free. "I'd say probably not," he replied. "I would not sign the guy. It's simply not inevitable that he'll make mid-career strides. Some guys do. But many don't, and he'd have to improve a lot to help a team."

And when I relayed Winston's comment to one of the NBA's most respected talent evaluators, his response was simply: "He's crazy."

Over the next few years, one of them will be proved wrong."




Winston was a professor at Indiana and hired as the Mavericks statistical expert. He was fired by the Mavs in 2009. Obviously the people who actually know basketball were correct while the guy who was all about the stats was very wrong.

I think people want to try to use numbers because it's easy to do, it's easy to collect the numbers especially nowadays, and it makes them come across as intelligent, a very easy way to get attention. It's certainly much easier to collect numbers than it is to spend hours upon hours collecting and breaking down game film and really evaluating talent which is really where you see the impact of players. Most of the people collecting and analyzing numbers probably wouldn't even know how to breakdown game film. They are probably very smart people and doing good things in the world but that doesn't mean they understand basketball or how to properly apply their knowledge of statistics to basketball and what's actually occurring on the court.

[mo.st.dukie]

These are human beings we are talking about, they aren't numbers you can plug into a formula. For instance, we are dealing with a lot of injuries right now. The coaching staff and players are working very hard and doing everything they can to work around and through those injuries both during the week and during games even if everything isn't ideal or looks perfect. You can't take that and plug it into a formula and expect to gain any real understanding or meaning.

[Kedsy]

I think people want to try to use numbers because it's easy to do, it's easy to collect the numbers especially nowadays, and it makes them come across as intelligent, a very easy way to get attention.

I think people want to use numbers because they generally provide a more complete, more accurate picture than simply using your eyes and opinions.


It's certainly much easier to collect numbers than it is to spend hours upon hours collecting and breaking down game film and really evaluating talent which is really where you see the impact of players. Most of the people collecting and analyzing numbers probably wouldn't even know how to breakdown game film.

Is it possible that most of the people breaking down film wouldn't even know how to collect and analyze the numerical data?


They are probably very smart people and doing good things in the world but that doesn't mean they understand basketball or how to properly apply their knowledge of statistics to basketball and what's actually occurring on the court.

Why do you think these things are mutually exclusive? Don't you think it's possible to understand both the analytics and the game of basketball.

The fact is that people with your apparent view are becoming more and more the minority in the big-time sporting world. To counter your six-year-old article about one guy who wasn't impressed by rookie Kevin Durant, I give you a much more recent, much more interesting article: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/moneyball-advanced-statistics-charles-barkley-sports-media-daryl-morey-al-leiter-rob-neyer-nba-mlb-nfl-nhl/.

You appear to be on Barkley's side, but the following quote seems apropos to me:


When Charles Barkley sank his teeth into analytics this month on Inside the NBA, you could almost hear the whole Internet groan. “I’ve always believed analytics were crap,” he said, later adding, “They’re just some crap that some people who are really smart made up to try to get in the game ’cause they had no talent.”

It was a familiar script to Fox Sports’s Rob Neyer: “Ten years ago, even five years ago, if the whole Barkley thing would have occurred, we could have said, ‘Charles Barkley is wrong about this. How ridiculous is it that someone on national TV is saying this?’ But how many times do we have to write that story?”

People wrote it anyway. Barkley’s rant was “unintelligible” and “wholly useless” (SB Nation); his target — ostensibly Rockets GM Daryl Morey and his apostles in the media — was a “straw man” (ProBasketballTalk); and Barkley himself was a “doofus” (Deadspin).

Barkley wasn’t just wrong about advanced statistics. Speaking weeks before the ninth-annual Sloan Sports Analytics Conference (which kicks off tomorrow), he seemed to be fighting a rearguard action. “The war’s over,” CBSSports.com’s Matt Moore declared. “The nerds make the decisions whether Barkley likes it or not.” Keith Olbermann concurred: “Most of the dinosaurs like Chuck don’t even realize the war is over … ”

[Henderson]

I don't suppose we could get the thread re-titled, could we? When associated with Jah, "ewing" sounds like the noise of a bleating sheep. Or maybe even worse.

And no offense to the fine name of Ewing and all who have held it. It's just the title, "okafor as ewing" that gets me.

I'll go back to my Cap'n Crunch now.

[lotusland]

I think people want to use numbers because they generally provide a more complete, more accurate picture than simply using your eyes and opinions.



Is it possible that most of the people breaking down film wouldn't even know how to collect and analyze the numerical data?



Why do you think these things are mutually exclusive? Don't you think it's possible to understand both the analytics and the game of basketball.

The fact is that people with your apparent view are becoming more and more the minority in the big-time sporting world. To counter your six-year-old article about one guy who wasn't impressed by rookie Kevin Durant, I give you a much more recent, much more interesting article: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/moneyball-advanced-statistics-charles-barkley-sports-media-daryl-morey-al-leiter-rob-neyer-nba-mlb-nfl-nhl/.

You appear to be on Barkley's side, but the following quote seems apropos to me:

Stats can be useful but they can lead you to ridiculous conclusions if you can't apply the eye test. For instance this thread is about some misguided statistical analysis that led some poor rube to his "Oakafor Theory". Sorry to re-paste the opening paragraph but it really is astounding:


The Okafor Theory

Okafor has been heavily hyped for years as the next great American center. The eye test checks out – Okafor has a more polished and impressive offensive post game than any college freshman, perhaps in history. His basic stats are impressive: during his freshman season at Duke, he’s scoring over 18 points and grabbing over 9 rebounds per game, while shooting over 66% from the field. These are the kinds of raw stats that impress voters for national awards and accolades, and Okafor is regularly lavished with praise for his ridiculous offensive repertoire. Many people who have watched Duke play all season, however, have noticed that Duke seems to play better without Okafor sometimes.

Well, there is evidence to suggest that it’s not just sometimes. It’s almost all of the time.

[darthur]

Winston was a professor at Indiana and hired as the Mavericks statistical expert. He was fired by the Mavs in 2009. Obviously the people who actually know basketball were correct while the guy who was all about the stats was very wrong.

I think people want to try to use numbers because it's easy to do, it's easy to collect the numbers especially nowadays, and it makes them come across as intelligent, a very easy way to get attention. It's certainly much easier to collect numbers than it is to spend hours upon hours collecting and breaking down game film and really evaluating talent which is really where you see the impact of players. Most of the people collecting and analyzing numbers probably wouldn't even know how to breakdown game film. They are probably very smart people and doing good things in the world but that doesn't mean they understand basketball or how to properly apply their knowledge of statistics to basketball and what's actually occurring on the court.

It's a good example but I disagree with your conclusions, and so did the Mavs. They fired the one analyst, but definitely did not give up on advanced stats. See here:

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12331388/the-great-analytics-rankings

In Durant's first two years, he was famous for having one of the worst +/- scores on his team. During those years, the Sonics/Thunder went on to have their two lowest winning totals in history. Durant got signed and the team went from 31 wins to 20. By comparison, when LeBron was signed, the Cavs went from 17 wins to 35. Two years later, Durant jumped up to the highest +/- on the team, and the Thunder won 50 games that year.

In your example, the analyst was very, very wrong to see those +/- numbers in the first two years and conclude that Durant was a bad prospect. However, the numbers do seem to suggest that something was very wrong with the team. Perhaps the coaching change in the middle of year 2 fixed it, perhaps the talented new draftees fixed it, or perhaps it was something else. Figuring that out is the hard part.

But if anything, I see that as pretty good evidence that when your best player has the worst +/-, there is room for improvement.

[Kedsy]

Stats can be useful but they can lead you to ridiculous conclusions if you can't apply the eye test.

I sort of agree, but my personal belief is the main value of the eye test is to lead you to more fully examine the issues in a particular situation. I think the real problem is statistics can often be misused. If stats are used in an improper context, without the full battery of additional stats necessary to fully understand the complexities involved, they can lead to improper conclusions. But if you have complete knowledge and have the full set of statistics necessary to explain every nuance (which I understand in most situations is really difficult, if not practically impossible), then the eye test probably doesn't add that much.