MBB: Duke 79, Pittsburgh 64 Post-Game Thread

[JBDuke]

Put your post-game thoughts here.

[Dukehk]

People expecting 30 points blowouts on the road in the ACC. Goodness me.

We dont even have our starting PG!

This game was done by the half time mark. Our defence and rebounding was excellent throughout, led by Zion and Ques.

Only negatives is that Jack White and AOC aren't stepping it up. Hopefully Jack finds his shot.

Thought Cam was really good too, especially on defence. His shot isnt there yet, but he is much more aggressive.

Goldwire with a really impressive little cameo to ignite us in the first half.

[Steven43]

I was happy to see the way Coach Capel was perturbed with his player taking a long desperation shot as the buzzer sounded. This was after Duke had purposely let the 24-second clock run out and gave Pitt the ball back with 1.6 seconds left. Good way to teach your guys how to respect their opponent and the situation, Coach Capel. I like it.

[DukeWarhead]

People expecting 30 points blowouts on the road in the ACC. Goodness me.

We dont even have our starting PG!

This game was done by the half time mark.
.

Even so, there’s no denying that the second half was not very good. Too many turnovers. 3 pt shooting not good, again. I don’t care if Tre is out or it’s on the road - it wasn’t a good half. I bet coach tells them that, too.

[dukelifer]

Not much to say other than Zion is better than everyone. Bolden had some nice minutes. RJ makes some bad decisions. Jack is now afraid to shoot. AOC is not having a good stretch. Cam is meh. Javin is struggling. Goldwire should never shoot. Yet the team won by 15- probably should have been 25. Onward and upward. The team has a lot to work on. They will be better with Tre running the show- but this was a team just looking to take care of business and get home. Pitt has much to work on- but their inside teardrops are pretty deadly.

[CameronDuke]

16-20 from the free throw line! I like it. RJ and Zion were RJ and Zion. The best college duo I've seen in quite some time. Bolden is improving on offense and defense each time out. Good job rebounding. We had several blocks and assists. Great passing and teamwork without Tre. 2-0 without Tre and an ACC road win. 16-2, 5-1. This team has set itself up for a pretty good run once Tre returns which I'm hoping is soon (maybe at Notre Dame). I felt horrible when Tre went down but Duke has now beaten Virginia and won at Pitt without him. Incredible.

Let's Go Duke!

[robed deity]

Seemed the zone slowed the game down, which I think helped Zion and RJ stay out of foul trouble. And that was pretty much game over.

[Mak P]

Cam does rush his shot a little too much, but I think he's underrated defensively

[CameronDuke]

Did anyone else think it looked like Coach K handed something to Coach Capel during their post game handshake/embrace?

[proelitedota]

Bolden is actually contributing at the same level if not higher than Cam right now. I actually want him on the court as much as possible nowadays.

[Dukehk]

Seemed the zone slowed the game down, which I think helped Zion and RJ stay out of foul trouble. And that was pretty much game over.

That was probably as much zone as we have played this season.

I guess it makes sense because pitt are terrible shooting the ball from range.

[robed deity]

I actually thought Reddish was excellent at the top of the zone.

[Rich]

That was probably as much zone as we have played this season.

I guess it makes sense because pitt are terrible shooting the ball from range.

Even when Tre comes back, being able to mix some zone into the defense now and then will befuddle some teams and protect against foul trouble. I expect it will play a critical part of an important game at some point.

[kako]

5 thoughts:

1. Avoided the trap game, but the focus in the 2nd half waned. They were lucky Pitt wasn't talented enough to take advantage.

2. Wish Duke could hit FTs like this when it matters. But that being said, seems like it's a mental thing, like a pack mentality. If they start to miss, they keep missing?

3. Was glad to see Goldwire get in, but he unfortunately he really didn't show much. I am really pulling for him, though. I like the idea of having an upperclassman ball-handler on each of K's teams. He may not start, but would be a valuable role player. I'd like to see Goldwire step in next year and average 15 mpg. He still has work to get there. Going on with this idea, then K would recruit another PG next year like Goldwire (~3 star guy).

4. Really liked Bolden's game today. 9 boards and 4 blocks - solid!

5. I put this last, because it's basically expected. Zion/RJ/Cam - freshmen lead the way again. Would have liked to see a better shooting game out of Reddish, but I'll take the win.

9F

[MaxAMillion]

Even so, there’s no denying that the second half was not very good. Too many turnovers. 3 pt shooting not good, again. I don’t care if Tre is out or it’s on the road - it wasn’t a good half. I bet coach tells them that, too.

There is nothing to say about the three point shooting. They are not good at it. In fact this might be one of the worst perimeter shooting Duke teams I can remember. K almost always has had a couple of guys who could shoot 3's. This year there is no one you can count on doing it.

[Dukehk]

Bolden is actually contributing at the same level if not higher than Cam right now. I actually want him on the court as much as possible nowadays.

He has really come along these last few games!

Waiting for him to go full Zoubek in the NCAA tourney..

[House G]

Bolden is actually contributing at the same level if not higher than Cam right now. I actually want him on the court as much as possible nowadays.

I agree. Although he can be a klutz at times, he seems to be trending in the right direction. He just acts more confident now that he is getting more minutes.

[Troublemaker]

Quite happy that I was wrong about this game being competitive.

As others pointed out, Coach K going to zone was a key. When the game was tied 11-11 at the under 16 timeout (so on pace for ~195 total points), that was the type of game that we could easily have lost. Up and down, foul trouble (eventually), tired legs (eventually), on the road. The zone slowed the game down (sorry you Degenerates that bet the over) and limited Pitt's drives and ability to draw fouls. Coach K was great, and generally, it's just nice to be able to competently switch between m2m and zone, something that the 2015 team could do as well. This won't be the last time that Duke's zone impacts a game.

Zion was a god as usual.

[Troublemaker]

I agree. Although he can be a klutz at times, he seems to be trending in the right direction. He just acts more confident now that he is getting more minutes.

In games like this when we task Marques to drop in pick-n-roll coverage (as opposed to hedge/switch), he looks very good on defense. And then, of course, when we went zone, he could just use his standing reach around the basket.

[dukeinal]

I may be mistaken but in the pre game handshakes with Capel everybody had something to say to him but John. Neither he nor Capel even looked at each other and the handshake was as brief as possible. Is there some history there or just one of those moments????

[Steven43]

3 pt shooting not good, again.
As far as this 3-point shooting problem goes, I’m sorry, but we’re just going to have to come to acceptance of it at a certain point. I’ve accepted that it isn’t going to get better. Yes, it worries the heck out of me, but I’ve chosen to trust in Kedsey’s analysis of how Duke can make up for it in other ways and still become champions — even as a woeful three-point and FT shooting team. It’s going to be one helluva rollercoaster ride.

[ndkjr70]

There was a moment in the first half where Goldwire fired an alley-oop to Javin and it wasn’t even close: my dad and I were howling with laughter. Who would have thought in the first half of an ACC road game we’d see those two trying to do that while 3 lottery picks were on the court behind them.

I love Jackrabbit’s enthusiasm but he’s a big disappointment for me this season. I saw raw undeveloped potential last year when he played, and it seems like not a single area of his game improved. He’s got time and the best coach on the planet in his corner, though.

Cam’s defense is flat out great. If he limits lazy fouls he’ll be enormous. I think his shot is getting close; commentator made a great observation that he isn’t necessarily getting himself square before shooting. He’ll get there.

Great win.

[Steven43]

He has really come along these last few games!

Waiting for him to go full Zoubek in the NCAA tourney..

Haha. That’s funny. Unfortunately, he needs to be a senior to go full Zoubek.

[Kedsy]

ADVANCED STATS

Possessions: 68.5 (first time this season that Duke's game pace has been slower than our opponent's average pace)

OFFENSE

oRtg: 1.15 (our adjusted oRtg was 1.26, really good without Tre)
eFG%: 48.5% (not so good)
3pt%: 30.4% (this is what we are from three)
2pt%: 50.0% (tied for Duke's 3rd worst this season: vs. Gonzaga 44.1%; vs. FSU 46.3%; vs. Tex Tech 50.0%)
%threes: 35.5%
FT rate: 30.8%
OR%: 41.0% (if it's over 40% we should be happy)
TO%: 19.0% (high, but considering we played without our PG, acceptable)
a/to: 1.15:1
%assisted: 53.6% (strong, considering no PG)
fast break pts: 8 (10.1% of our points, worst fast break performance of the season, by a lot)


DEFENSE

dRtg: 0.93 (adjusted that's still 0.93, decent but considering our best defender watched from the bench...)
eFG%: 44.3% (acceptable, not great)
3pt%: 20.0% (second straight super strong performance, but hard to say whether Duke was good or Pitt was bad)
2pt%: 50.0% (not great)
%threes: 28.3% (good, but Pitt's 258th in the country in this, so probably to be expected)
FT rate: 37.7% (this is probably too high, but considering Pitt is 9th in the country in this, with an average of 45.7%, it's not bad)
DR%: 67.6%
TO%: 20.4% (anything over 20% is cool with me)
a/to: 0.43:1 (12th straight game with our opponents having equal or more turnovers than assists)
%assisted: 27.3% (3rd straight very low number in this category)
fast break pts: 13 (20.3% of their points; only 2nd time our opponents have topped 20% in this all season (Auburn 25.0%))
block%: 13.2%; 18.4% of 2-point shots (back to looking like the 2nd best blocking team in the nation)
steal%: 13.1% (back to looking like the best stealing team in the nation, and without Tre, that's saying something)


I'll take 15-point road ACC wins any day you'll give one to me.

[Kedsy]

I may be mistaken but in the pre game handshakes with Capel everybody had something to say to him but John. Neither he nor Capel even looked at each other and the handshake was as brief as possible. Is there some history there or just one of those moments????

They hugged before the game.

And his name is "Jon," not "John."

[dukeinal]

They hugged before the game.

And his name is "Jon," not "John."


I didn't see that on the ESPN broadcast, could have easily missed it, thanks for the clarification.

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

Capel’s outburst was amusing, he got his money’s worth with that technical. Probably the most easily lip read swearing I’ve seen in awhile.

[gep]

Not much to say other than Zion is better than everyone. Bolden had some nice minutes. RJ makes some bad decisions. Jack is now afraid to shoot. AOC is not having a good stretch. Cam is meh. Javin is struggling. Goldwire should never shoot. Yet the team won by 15- probably should have been 25. Onward and upward. The team has a lot to work on. They will be better with Tre running the show- but this was a team just looking to take care of business and get home. Pitt has much to work on- but their inside teardrops are pretty deadly.

Yes... there were a few times that I yelled at the TV for Jack to shoot the 3... but, alas... passed off

And... what was that about with Grayson's "face poster" in the crowd... amazing...

[Steven43]

Yes... there were a few times that I yelled at the TV for Jack to shoot the 3... but, alas... passed off

And... what was that about with Grayson's "face poster" in the crowd... amazing...

It’s kind of tough when you go 0-10 from three in a home loss to an inferior team, especially when just making ONE of those shots would have won the game. And he was also feeling the pressure of justifying the DBR article about K potentially putting him in the starting lineup over Cam. You know he’d been checking that thread hourly leading up to the game. The pressure of living up to the expectations of a very small percentage of DBR posters was too much for the kid to take. He still hasn’t recovered as evidenced by the UVA and Pitt games.

[cptnflash]

Par.

BTW, par is a good score.

[wavedukefan70s]

We are long in that zone right now.works very well.i expected we would win.K taught capel almost everything he knows.he didnt teach him everything that K knows.cam is coming around it wont be long.

[SenatorClayDavis]

Remember when Auburn and FSU were quality wins?

To paraphrase Deputy Chief Dwayne T. Johnson, “We’re gonna need some more quality wins, I guess”

[luburch]

Capel’s outburst was amusing, he got his money’s worth with that technical. Probably the most easily lip read swearing I’ve seen in awhile.

I was cackling while watching that last night. You could clearly see what he was saying and the camera never moved away.

[wilson]

I was cackling while watching that last night. You could clearly see what he was saying and the camera never moved away.I got a good chuckle too...especially when he shifted to the “I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry” interlude before transitioning right back to his angry blue streak.
I mean, he did learn from the best...

[OldPhiKap]

I got a good chuckle too...especially when he shifted to the “I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry” interlude before transitioning right back to his angry blue streak.
I mean, he did learn from the best...

His dad was a pretty darn fiery coach, too. He knows the drill.

[Saratoga2]

It’s kind of tough when you go 0-10 from three in a home loss to an inferior team, especially when just making ONE of those shots would have won the game. And he was also feeling the pressure of justifying the DBR article about K potentially putting him in the starting lineup over Cam. You know he’d been checking that thread hourly leading up to the game. The pressure of living up to the expectations of a very small percentage of DBR posters was too much for the kid to take. He still hasn’t recovered as evidenced by the UVA and Pitt games.

Based on the Pitt game, when Tre comes back we start Tre, Zion, RJ, Cam and Marques. Jack is first off the bench with Javin who is definitely on the downswing getting a few minutes (before he fouls out) and AOC getting a few minutes. Goldwire is a placeholder for Tre but won't get into very competitive games.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

As far as this 3-point shooting problem goes, I’m sorry, but we’re just going to have to come to acceptance of it at a certain point. I’ve accepted that it isn’t going to get better. Yes, it worries the heck out of me, but I’ve chosen to trust in Kedsey’s analysis of how Duke can make up for it in other ways and still become champions — even as a woeful three-point and FT shooting team. It’s going to be one helluva rollercoaster ride.

You may be right, but I don't see how Duke can go far without improving it at least a little bit. This is not a 40% 3point shooting team, but can it become a 35-36% team? And I mean 36% or so going forward......what is Duke now, 31-32% maybe?

Certainly Jack will snap out of it at some point, and I think Cam and Zion will become a little more consistent, and maybe AOC will figure out how to stay on the court. If a couple of those things happen, and RJ stays where he is.....maybe they can hit enough. I would think at least RJ, Cam and Zion would be enough of a penetration threat to be able to get wide open looks.

[devildeac]

Capel’s outburst was amusing, he got his money’s worth with that technical. Probably the most easily lip read swearing I’ve seen in awhile.


I was cackling while watching that last night. You could clearly see what he was saying and the camera never moved away.


I got a good chuckle too...especially when he shifted to the “I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry” interlude before transitioning right back to his angry blue streak.
I mean, he did learn from the best...

My post from the In-Game thread:

"I *think* it took at least 6 BS and a couple MF to finally get the T."

:o

[flyingdutchdevil]

The Good:
-Zion's everything, minus FT shooting (let's just accept this as really bad)
-RJ's aggressiveness
-Bolden looking better and better and better

The Bad:
-White is looking very hesitant
-RJ liked to shot, a lot
-3pt shooting

The Ugly:
-Goldwire's shooting (at the rim, from 3, etc)

Overall, a nice road win.

[Billy Dat]

Solid road win in an intense atmosphere with the fans going nuts and Hova (and, according to the ESPN sideline reporter, the Rock) in attendance. Jigga at the Oakland Zoo to see Zion and the squad...a reminder that this is the most Beatle-esque Duke squad since ‘92.

Everyone can feel how they want, but I tend to optimism and saw more to like than dislike in this, our second no-Tre game.

-Zion was brilliant, even if their solid D in the second half slowed him down. RJ reverted back to some hero-ball tendencies in the first half but settled and, I thought, was a solid floor general.

-Our lack of 3 point shooting means our offense won’t be a thing of beauty, especially with RJ being an iso-dependent type weapon. I think Zion would be great in any kind of offense as he thrives in isolation, on the offensive glass, in transition, you name it. We’ll be better when Tre returns but I don’t forsee a big evolution. We are basically saying “try and stop these guys”.

-I thought Goldwire was very effective. K said he brought him in to move RJ off he ball to ignite his offense and we did push the lead out at that point. While he fumbled that one fast break, I thought he was competent in the first half of a close ACC road game. That is very positive. I didn’t think he’d play that well in that spot.

-Agree on Cam’s defense. He got beat once or twice in iso situations but he was getting his hands on a lot of balls, recovering nicely and generally causing havoc. I thought his shooting was effective, too. He continues to struggle as a ballhandler, which is odd but true.

-Agree with all the praise of Bolden, I trust him much more than Jav at this point. Sad to see Jav’s consecutive field goal streak end, but he missed a bunny...

-White feels like he’s just not catching breaks, so maybe his hot start is regressing to the mean as others have suggested in other threads. There are times when he has plays well defended and guys make crazy shots and you can see his frustration. He’s just got to keep grinding and shooting.

-Agree that the Zone seems to be a look that is here to stay, especially while Tre is out, to preserve stamina and fouls with a short bench. Agree with Troublemaker that being able to effectively switch between the two is a valuable weapon.

-K was definitely angry for most of the second half. No one asked him about it during the presser, but they did ask about Capel being his recruiting point man and it got K’s back up, “I am the point on recruiting, as is any head coach. No one guy does it all, it’s a group effort!” He was fired up! I also saw him give Capel something in the post game handshake line, no mention of that in the presser. As to the stoic pre-game embrace between Jon and Jeff, I also saw that but read it simply as “game face” type stuff.

[elvis14]

What a weird game. We started slow, pulled away nicely then played some sloppy, ugly ball as we cruised to a win.



Zion - he's just fantastic. We need to feed him the ball even more than we are (talking to you RJ). We need to be running plays where we set off the ball picks to get him open and make it easier to feed him the ball and just let him to go to work, he's just better than everyone else.
RJ - his usual solid, high volume self. Good on both ends, keeps the level of play high for the team all game long
Cam - good defense, meh offense. We need him to improve from 3. His defense is really good and that alone will get him the playing time and the opportunity to work through his struggles on offense.
Marques - solid game, would love to see him play like this every night. Very active.
Jack - if you scared, say you scared. He's lost his confidence with his shot. I do like that he's trying more things on offense than just jacking up 3's but I still want him to take the open 3's
Javin - WTF, seriously? How does a [redacted]. Regression [redacted]. [redacted]. At least he didn't foul out. Argh
Goldwire - glad to see him get some minutes. Would like him to learn to shoot and that air ball layup....[redacted]
AOC - up by 20+, we can't hit a 3 to save our lives and he does't play? As sloppy as that second half was, I have to think he would have done just fine or at the very least fit right in. I'm worried that K is going to crush this kid's spirit and we will lose him for the season.
Team - I really like that this team plays defense. So refreshing after last season. Pretty cool that we played some zone in the last 2 games and we were effective. To be able to play both man and zone well and thus be able to match up with teams as needed is a great weapon.
Capel - Come on Jeff, don't just BS around, tell us what you really thought of that call!! Wow, he straight up called a ref a MFer! Good comedy. I hope he grows this program into something solid.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

What a weird game. We started slow, pulled away nicely then played some sloppy, ugly ball as we cruised to a win.

AOC - up by 20+, we can't hit a 3 to save our lives and he does't play? As sloppy as that second half was, I have to think he would have done just fine or at the very least fit right in. I'm worried that K is going to crush this kid's spirit and we will lose him for the season.



Agree with this. There is nothing more critical for this team than figuring out at least a little something on the 3 pointers and the FTs. Goldwire is not the answer to any of that. AOC might be. I'ld like to see it tested. Without his 4-8 from deep two games ago, the team's shooting over those three games is probably sub 20%.

[jipops]

I really liked our defense and the zone seemed largely effective. I guess it should be with 5 guys standing 6-7 or taller on the floor. I really loved Cam's defense last night and his offense wasn't too bad. He continues to struggle handling the ball, he always seems to lose it on the drive.

This is never going to be a good perimeter shooting team this season. We just have to hope our guys can continue to get into the lane to break down the defense. I don't think anybody misses Tre more than Javin (maybe Jack too?). With his limited offensive skill set Javin doesn't have anyone to dish it to him alone under the basket for unguarded lay ins. And last night he seemed to be out of position for offensive boards most of the time so there were no opportunities for put backs. That pretty much erases him from being a factor. It will be interesting to see if Javin's role is diminished once Tre comes back.

Zion is ridiculous. I have to make sure I fully appreciate what I'm watching this season. I don't think we will ever see anything like him again.

[Indoor66]

Get rid of these players. They are obviously inadequate for our entitled fans.

[sagegrouse]

It’s kind of tough when you go 0-10 from three in a home loss to an inferior team, especially when just making ONE of those shots would have won the game. And he was also feeling the pressure of justifying the DBR article about K potentially putting him in the starting lineup over Cam. You know he’d been checking that thread hourly leading up to the game. The pressure of living up to the expectations of a very small percentage of DBR posters was too much for the kid to take. He still hasn’t recovered as evidenced by the UVA and Pitt games.

You mean DBR posts influence real-world events? That's scary!

Maybe the only other time was a real positive -- posters here noticed that the team performed much better (plus-minus) with Brian Zoubek on the floor, and finally Coach K reached the same point.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Just updated some quick stats....without Alex's 4-8 against Cuse from deep, Duke is under 22% from distance during the last three games.....with high volume.

[84Duke]

How many games did it take Javin to hit 19 consecutive field goals? I though Zion might break the record before the end of this one game. He hit his first 10.

[Channing]

Remember when Auburn and FSU were quality wins?

To paraphrase Deputy Chief Dwayne T. Johnson, “We’re gonna need some more quality wins, I guess”

Was that when TT was a quality win as well?

[hallcity]

If Zion doesn’t score 50 in a game this season, we’re not doing it right. It’s not like I want some effort to help him score 50. I just think that unless you hold him back, it’s going to happen in the normal course of a game. He’s that good.

[azzefkram]

A very underwhelming second half but a win on the road in ACC play is fine by me. Great play from Zion, RJ and Marques. Cam was a terror on the top of that zone and a general pest on D. His ball handling is a lot weaker than I expected, but his shot looks a bit better. The 0-10 seems stuck in Jack's mind as he looks very reluctant to shoot the 3. Some somewhat positive minute from Goldwire. AOC does not appear ready for ACC play. Javin is scuffling in a big way.

Tre's absence is felt in every aspect of the game.

[Sir Stealth]

Bolden looked downright spry out there. He's been an elite shotblocker even during games where he's looked more lumbering, but the Bolden last night is a true weapon matching his pedigree coming out of high school - beating smaller players to 50/50 balls, sprinting down the court, finishing with smooth confidence. If the game is slowing down for him and he moves with that kind of athleticism to go with his massive length, that will really help.

I'm not worried about Javin and especially not about Jack. I disagree that Jack looks afraid to shoot - he still looks like he knows what he's doing out there even during his lesser games. Perhaps a little bit frustrated, but he'll swing back up. Javin probably just needs to calm down a little bit, but we have seen him perform at a high level and fit in well.

Zion never seems to have a 3 rattle in. It either rips perfectly through the net or is nowhere close. He shouldn't fall in love with it, but that suggests to me that there's somehow still a lot of upside there with a good stroke that will get more consistent as he continues to practice it (although the poor FT shooting is a less positive indicator). Amazing player.

[MChambers]

Was that when TT was a quality win as well?

And IU, too. Not a good day for our SOS.

[SavDukeGrad]

Read something interesting in a post game article. When asked about Zion after the game, Capel said he was just impossible to stop. He said the only other time he had felt that way about another college player was when he coached at Oklahoma and they played Texas with Kevin Durant. He said they were both almost impossible to defend.

[NSDukeFan]

Agree with this. There is nothing more critical for this team than figuring out at least a little something on the 3 pointers and the FTs. Goldwire is not the answer to any of that. AOC might be. I'ld like to see it tested. Without his 4-8 from deep two games ago, the team's shooting over those three games is probably sub 20%.

I would love for the team to shoot better from 3-point territory and on FTs. But as far as what’s critical, I would think getting Zion the ball in good scoring areas, getting R.J. good driving lanes, reintegrating Tre with his teammates and solidifying roles, getting Cam comfortable handling the ball, continuing to win the turnover battle, controlling pace, developing both man-to-man and zone defences, would be some example of things that might be at least as critical as figuring out something on 3s and FTs. We beat the top team in the country a different way.

[UrinalCake]

I really liked our defense and the zone seemed largely effective.

Throughout Tre's absence we've talked about whether other players would have a chance to step up (such as Goldwire or maybe Alex) making us better off in the long run. What I never expected was that our defense could learn a new wrinkle. I'm really curious to see whether we will continue to employ the zone in spurts after Tre returns. I wouldn't expect to, he's such a great disrupter when matched up on the ball handler, and he doesn't have the same length as the other wings to be as effective in a zone. Also the zone makes us susceptible to the corner threes which K hates to give up. But I do have to say that it has worked well the past two games so maybe we'll keep it in our back pocket.

[FerryFor50]

Read something interesting in a post game article. When asked about Zion after the game, Capel said he was just impossible to stop. He said the only other time he had felt that way about another college player was when he coached at Oklahoma and they played Texas with Kevin Durant. He said they were both almost impossible to defend.

That's interesting, because Capel also coached Blake Griffin. I don't recall Blake ever having a bad game in college in his sophomore year.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/blake-griffin-1.html

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I would love for the team to shoot better from 3-point territory and on FTs. But as far as what’s critical, I would think getting Zion the ball in good scoring areas, getting R.J. good driving lanes, reintegrating Tre with his teammates and solidifying roles, getting Cam comfortable handling the ball, continuing to win the turnover battle, controlling pace, developing both man-to-man and zone defences, would be some example of things that might be at least as critical as figuring out something on 3s and FTs. We beat the top team in the country a different way.

I understand all that....I just don't think a team can win six straight while being a terrible 3 point team....especially with high volume.....and that's kind of where Duke is....especially the last three games. I think this team has so many other superlatives that a Natty is possible with merely mediocre 3 point shooting......and I'm hopeful Duke can get there. And I don't know if RJ can be part of that. He seems to have no muscle memory on this threes.....left, right, short, long, long but banked in, left, right....etc.

[Steven43]

-K was definitely angry for most of the second half. No one asked him about it during the presser, but they did ask about Capel being his recruiting point man and it got K’s back up, “I am the point on recruiting, as is any head coach. No one guy does it all, it’s a group effort!” He was fired up!
Coach K took the words right out of my mouth — he was, is, and will always be BY FAR the main factor in Duke’s recruiting, as long as he is head coach. There is no close secondary factor. However, If anything has to be chosen as secondary — however distant it may be — to Coach K, it is Duke University and the unparalleled success achieved on the basketball court over the past four decades.

[devildeac]

If Zion doesn’t score 50 in a game this season, we’re not doing it right. It’s not like I want some effort to help him score 50. I just think that unless you hold him back, it’s going to happen in the normal course of a game. He’s that good.

If he does, one of our posters *might* need to change his screen name. ;)

[SorryForHot]

I love the confidence Bolden has shown the past few games. Would really love to see that screen and slash more. I wish he had more consistent hands on offense. Cam is coming along. White is really struggling on offense but his defense is still there. Javin has disappeared. Bench has to start giving quality minutes or that's going to spell trouble down the road.

[tbyers11]

That's interesting, because Capel also coached Blake Griffin. I don't recall Blake ever having a bad game in college in his sophomore year.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/blake-griffin-1.html

But Capel never had to figure how to stop Griffin. Which was the question he was asked :D

[Turk]

That's interesting, because Capel also coached Blake Griffin. I don't recall Blake ever having a bad game in college in his sophomore year.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/blake-griffin-1.html

Yeah, but it was easy for Capel to stop Blake. All he had to do was pull him from the game, just like Deano was able to hold MJ under 15 points a game.

[SavDukeGrad]

That's interesting, because Capel also coached Blake Griffin. I don't recall Blake ever having a bad game in college in his sophomore year.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/blake-griffin-1.html

You're right - I didn't think about Blake Griffin. But I found the article again and sorry if I didn't remember it exactly. He said the last time he watched an opposing freshman score as easily as Williamson, it was Kevin Durant.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25829098/zion-williamson-duke-blue-devils-unfazed-jay-z

[UrinalCake]

Is it just me or does Jay Z look like he's aged about 20 years in the past two years?

8982

8983

[COYS]

I loved that Coach K made an adjustment and went to zone early in the first half, which is part of how Duke stretched out the lead and more or less put the game away by half time. Going into the game, I agree with Troublemaker who mentioned that the path to a Pitt victory was a slow start by Duke in the first half and then foul trouble/fatigue in the second. The 33-12 run to close out the first half put to bed any worries that Pitt would keep it close. It also meant that when foul trouble did start to catch up with us in the second half, it wasn't too much of a big deal. If we go by win-probability, the game was 99% of the way in the bag for Duke shortly after we pushed the lead to 20+ at the start of the second half. So while the second half wasn't great, we had already done a lot of hard work in the first half. I'm not too upset with the team coasting at times for the rest of the game.

The second half was largely "meh," but I think some of that really WAS attributable to fatigue, although it seemed to be more mental fatigue than physical fatigue. Our decision-making on a few fast breaks was suspect. We threw some ill-advised oops when simpler passes would have sufficed. But we also managed to tighten it up a few times and stretch the lead back out to 20+ on more than one occasion in the second half.

Also, I'd like to highlight Zion's shot selection. Bart Torvik (http://barttorvik.com/box.php?muid=DukePittsburgh1-22&year=2019) provides free box scores that include shooting percentages from at the rim, mid-range, and three point range. Zion's shot chart was basically a model of perfectly efficient distribution. He was 10-10 at the rim, 0-0 from mid-range, and 1-3 from three. One could argue that he should cut out the three point shot altogether, but he needs to shoot from there JUST enough to keep defenses honest. I thought he was perfectly balanced last night. His athleticism and agility are off the charts. His touch around the rim is great. But his basketball IQ is also incredible. He's getting better and better and seems to learn how to maximize his skills more and more every single game. And of course, he also poured in 7 boards and 7 assists to just 2 turnovers. The guy is an absolute monster.

[FerryFor50]

But Capel never had to figure how to stop Griffin. Which was the question he was asked :D


Yeah, but it was easy for Capel to stop Blake. All he had to do was pull him from the game, just like Deano was able to hold MJ under 15 points a game.


You're right - I didn't think about Blake Griffin. But I found the article again and sorry if I didn't remember it exactly. He said the last time he watched an opposing freshman score as easily as Williamson, it was Kevin Durant.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...-unfazed-jay-z

Oh yeah. I overlooked "opposing." :-D

[FerryFor50]

If he does, one of our posters *might* need to change his screen name. ;)

I vehemently disagree. :cool:

[Steven43]

Is it just me or does Jay Z look like he's aged about 20 years in the past two years?

8982

8983

Love Lebron sporting the vanity eyeglasses that he doesn’t need in order to see better: “Hey, I was recruited by Yale, Duke, Stanford and Harvard you know? Could’ve gone to any of ‘em had I wanted to do so. Just look at these glasses.”

And yes, Jay Z looked a little rough last night, but he’s never been exactly a looker. That photo with K and Bron Bron is touched up and done with very forgiving lighting. It’s a professional photograph. Last night was live and unfiltered. Huge difference.

[NSDukeFan]

I understand all that...I just don't think a team can win six straight while being a terrible 3 point team...especially with high volume....and that's kind of where Duke is...especially the last three games. I think this team has so many other superlatives that a Natty is possible with merely mediocre 3 point shooting...and I'm hopeful Duke can get there. And I don't know if RJ can be part of that. He seems to have no muscle memory on this threes....left, right, short, long, long but banked in, left, right...etc.

That’s fair. I agree that sometime in 6 games , a team would likely have to shoot well from 3 and/or the foul line.

[freshmanjs]

I understand all that...I just don't think a team can win six straight while being a terrible 3 point team...especially with high volume....and that's kind of where Duke is...especially the last three games. I think this team has so many other superlatives that a Natty is possible with merely mediocre 3 point shooting...and I'm hopeful Duke can get there. And I don't know if RJ can be part of that. He seems to have no muscle memory on this threes....left, right, short, long, long but banked in, left, right...etc.


That’s fair. I agree that sometime in 6 games , a team would likely have to shoot well from 3 and/or the foul line.

Of course, it's always good to shoot well. However, I think there is some benefit to having a team that knows they can win without shooting 3s. It eliminates the common tournament problem where a team panics when the outside shots are not falling. This team will enter the tournament as an excellent team with upside if they happen to shoot well vs. the more common Duke situation of a team with downside if the shots don't fall in a particular game. Maybe it will be a fun change. Let's see...

[FerryFor50]

I understand all that...I just don't think a team can win six straight while being a terrible 3 point team...especially with high volume...and that's kind of where Duke is...especially the last three games. I think this team has so many other superlatives that a Natty is possible with merely mediocre 3 point shooting...and I'm hopeful Duke can get there. And I don't know if RJ can be part of that. He seems to have no muscle memory on this threes...left, right, short, long, long but banked in, left, right...etc.

Duke shoots 31% from 3 this season so far:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2019.html

I personally think they'll improve on that once Jack breaks out of his funk and Cam starts hitting shots more like we'd expect him to.

But generally, you're right. Schools that have won the title shoot 35% or better from 3. The worst shooting team to win a title in the last 15 years is UNC, shooting just 32.7% from 3.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2016.html

And Louisville lost in the final four to Kentucky in 2011 shooting just 31%:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/louisville/2012.html

However, none of those title teams had a pair of scorers that could get into the paint at will like Zion and RJ can. But I'd rather they get better at shooting to help even things out a bit.

[ChillinDuke]

I would love for the team to shoot better from 3-point territory and on FTs. But as far as what’s critical, I would think getting Zion the ball in good scoring areas, getting R.J. good driving lanes, reintegrating Tre with his teammates and solidifying roles, getting Cam comfortable handling the ball, continuing to win the turnover battle, controlling pace, developing both man-to-man and zone defences, would be some example of things that might be at least as critical as figuring out something on 3s and FTs. We beat the top team in the country a different way.

Is that all?

:D

- Chillin

[Steven43]

I vehemently disagree. :cool:

ZionandFerryFor50

[Steven43]

Of course, it's always good to shoot well. However, I think there is some benefit to having a team that knows they can win without shooting 3s. It eliminates the common tournament problem where a team panics when the outside shots are not falling. This team will enter the tournament as an excellent team with upside if they happen to shoot well vs. the more common Duke situation of a team with downside if the shots don't fall in a particular game. Maybe it will be a fun change. Let's see...

Just so I understand, you’re saying it’s almost better to NOT be a good 3-point shooting team? I’m not sure that’s what you trying to say, but hopefully you’re right.

[CDu]

Just so I understand, you’re saying it’s almost better to NOT be a good 3-point shooting team? I’m not sure that’s what you trying to say, but hopefully you’re right.

Yeah, the idea being that if you aren't reliant on making 3s at all to be great, then you aren't susceptible to struggling if the 3s aren't falling. It would certainly be feasible that we'd be less volatile than a team reliant on hot shooting from 3. Hard to say which way it would pan out of course.

[Steven43]

I would love for the team to shoot better from 3-point territory and on FTs. But as far as what’s critical, I would think getting Zion the ball in good scoring areas, getting R.J. good driving lanes, reintegrating Tre with his teammates and solidifying roles, getting Cam comfortable handling the ball, continuing to win the turnover battle, controlling pace, developing both man-to-man and zone defences, would be some example of things that might be at least as critical as figuring out something on 3s and FTs. We beat the top team in the country a different way.

I think the least realistic thing on your wish list is Cam becoming comfortable handling the ball. That’s not going to happen this season. He’s going to need to work on it obsessively on his own time when the NCAA tournament is over. Right now as a Duke student as well as a member of a basketball team that keeps him extremely busy, he just doesn’t have the several hours a day he’s going to need to devote to ballhandling drills.

[NSDukeFan]

I think the least realistic thing on your wish list is Cam becoming comfortable handling the ball. That’s not going to happen this season. He’s going to need to work on it obsessively on his own time when the NCAA tournament is over. Right now as a Duke student as well as a member of a basketball team that keeps him extremely busy, he just doesn’t have the several hours a day he’s going to need to devote to ballhandling drills.

That might be true. My impression has been that Cam has good ballhandling skills, but might not have had success yet because of the strength and speed of the opposition vs. high school/AAU, and his own confidence. Maybe he just needs to get a bit more confident with this level for his ball skills to show?

[sagegrouse]

Duke shoots 31% from 3 this season so far:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2019.html

I personally think they'll improve on that once Jack breaks out of his funk and Cam starts hitting shots more like we'd expect him to.

But generally, you're right. Schools that have won the title shoot 35% or better from 3. The worst shooting team to win a title in the last 15 years is UNC, shooting just 32.7% from 3.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2016.html

And Louisville lost in the final four to Kentucky in 2011 shooting just 31%:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/louisville/2012.html

However, none of those title teams had a pair of scorers that could get into the paint at will like Zion and RJ can. But I'd rather they get better at shooting to help even things out a bit.

And echoing CDu's Phase IV post, if Duke's shooting is average, the team is almost unstoppable.

[Kedsy]

Just updated some quick stats...without Alex's 4-8 against Cuse from deep, Duke is under 22% from distance during the last three games...with high volume.

FWIW, we had very high volume against Syracuse, pretty low volume against Virginia, and about average against Pitt.

As I said in another thread, three-pointers are one way to get "easy" offense. There are many other ways. Against Pitt, the only one we employed particularly well was offensive rebounding -- we usually do much better at two-point shooting, getting to the free throw line, taking care of the ball, and (especially) fast breaks -- but we still won by 15, on the road, against KenPom's #66 team in the country. So I wouldn't get all bent out of shape about our three-point shooting.

[UrinalCake]

I’ve blocked out most of my memories of that 2017 CHeat team, but what I do recall is that they shot poorly from three all season, both in volume and in percentage, but then got hot during the tournament. Particularly, Berry started shooting way better than he had all season. Winslow did the same in 2015. In theory, this could happen to us as well. And we don’t need to shoot well for six whole games. We can make it through the first weekend shooting 0% from three, we’ll have that much of a talent edge. The second weekend we probably need to shoot 25-30% or so depending on the matchup. As others have stated, we just beat Virginia despite shooting horribly from three. So if we are fortunate to make the final 4 and then just have two good games (like we had against FSU and Kentucky) then you can book us for banner #6.

Now obviously we’d prefer not to bank on having an anomalous game where we shoot better than expected. Based on past history, we’re going to have to hit some threes to win a title. I guess I’m just not too worried about it - yet. K believes in this system, he’s allowed the team to continue shooting a high volume of threes because the five out system depends on it, so I’ll trust the faith that he seems to have that our percentages will come up.

[UrinalCake]

I think the least realistic thing on your wish list is Cam becoming comfortable handling the ball. That’s not going to happen this season. He’s going to need to work on it obsessively on his own time when the NCAA tournament is over.

Around this time two years ago we all watched Tatum dribble the ball off his foot on the last possession of a home game against NC State, followed by Dennis Smith dunking on our faces to close out a huge upset that probably cost us a #1 seed. Many Duke fans were furious at Tatum, who had struggled that whole game, and called him a ball hog and lots of other bad names. But there was plenty of time for him to improve, to the extent that by the tournament he was arguably the best player in the country. Cam has time too, he already looks more comfortable and in control IMO so I think the shots will start to fall and the turnovers will be reduced.

[NYBri]

In terms of the 3 pt. shooting everyone is referring to, this team seems different than any other K team I can remember. It's really rare, at least lately, that we have the combination of an insane ability to drive and score (Zion and RJ) coupled with swarming defense (when Tre is playing). Not to mention the killer transition game.

As long as we don't waste too many trips by throwing up 3 pt. bricks, those afore mentioned traits can overcome a 3 pt. weakness.

It sure is fun to watch and I don't find myself screaming, "NO!" when I see us drive into a crowded lane nearly as much as I have in the past.

Don't get me wrong, it sure is nice to have JJ bomb away from all over the place, but when we have nothing but UberDrivers, I don't miss it as much. :cool:

[jv001]

Around this time two years ago we all watched Tatum dribble the ball off his foot on the last possession of a home game against NC State, followed by Dennis Smith dunking on our faces to close out a huge upset that probably cost us a #1 seed. Many Duke fans were furious at Tatum, who had struggled that whole game, and called him a ball hog and lots of other bad names. But there was plenty of time for him to improve, to the extent that by the tournament he was arguably the best player in the country. Cam has time too, he already looks more comfortable and in control IMO so I think the shots will start to fall and the turnovers will be reduced.

I think Cam has shown improvement with his ball handling but still has room for more improvement. It looks like he's just not strong with the ball. As for his shooting, he seems to be in a hurry to get his shot off and not getting squared up. Unless he corrects that, we may not see Cam at his best on 3s. One other worry is how Javin has regressed. We need him to be more consistent, well except his consistent fouling. He's just not a strong big man. I'm just happy to win another road game and we did it with our best defender out of the lineup. GoDuke!

[BoiseDevil]

Throughout Tre's absence we've talked about whether other players would have a chance to step up (such as Goldwire or maybe Alex) making us better off in the long run. What I never expected was that our defense could learn a new wrinkle. I'm really curious to see whether we will continue to employ the zone in spurts after Tre returns. I wouldn't expect to, he's such a great disrupter when matched up on the ball handler, and he doesn't have the same length as the other wings to be as effective in a zone. Also the zone makes us susceptible to the corner threes which K hates to give up. But I do have to say that it has worked well the past two games so maybe we'll keep it in our back pocket.

I vote we keep the zone so we can improve it. With Cam and RJ at the top, it is very disruptive. I feel we’ll run up against a team late in the season, where the zone will slow the opponents momentum enough to help us win a close game.

The only argument I can think of that would convince me to change my position is if K says our M2M D will never reach its zenith unless all practice time is spent on it. Then, I’ll stand down but With this team I don’t think that’s the case. I think having the zone as a change of pace tool makes us less upset-prone.

This team lost close games twice already, but they have demonstrated their versatility in many wins, and I think the zone will be a factor in a future close win or two (with or without Tre - when he’s back, I’d go zone twice a game to give him a bit of rest)

[ChillinDuke]

I’ve blocked out most of my memories of that 2017 CHeat team, but what I do recall is that they shot poorly from three all season, both in volume and in percentage, but then got hot during the tournament. Particularly, Berry started shooting way better than he had all season. Winslow did the same in 2015. In theory, this could happen to us as well. And we don’t need to shoot well for six whole games. We can make it through the first weekend shooting 0% from three, we’ll have that much of a talent edge. The second weekend we probably need to shoot 25-30% or so depending on the matchup. As others have stated, we just beat Virginia despite shooting horribly from three. So if we are fortunate to make the final 4 and then just have two good games (like we had against FSU and Kentucky) then you can book us for banner #6.

Now obviously we’d prefer not to bank on having an anomalous game where we shoot better than expected. Based on past history, we’re going to have to hit some threes to win a title. I guess I’m just not too worried about it - yet. K believes in this system, he’s allowed the team to continue shooting a high volume of threes because the five out system depends on it, so I’ll trust the faith that he seems to have that our percentages will come up.

Agree with this entire post. And will emphasize the bolded and add to it.

The 3pt shot is a requirement in the modern era of basketball. Period. What I think K believes is that you have to shoot threes. Not because the eFG% is better, not because the percentages will (may) come up. But because it keeps the middle of the court open. Only one or two made threes seems to be enough to get defenders up in a shooters grill. I'm not sure why this is the case - but it strikes me (eye test) as true.

What I'm trying to say is, consider Trevon Duval. That guy realistically could not shoot. But K kept telling him to pull the trigger. And defenses seemed to, at least somewhat, defend his shot. If I were coaching, my gameplan would have involved totally and completely sagging off Duval in all scenarios. Yet I don't remember that being the case last year, really at all.

Again, I'm not sure why this occurs (if my eyes are right). Maybe it's defensive tendencies are ingrained. Maybe players are afraid of getting yelled at for allowing an open three. Maybe players generally forget that not all players (guards) can shoot. I have no idea. But it seems that K tells his guys to shoot and that defenses, generally speaking, honor the shots which frees up the inside for driving, cutting, offensive rebounds, and finishing. Regardless of who it is shooting.

- Chillin

[BoiseDevil]

Coach K took the words right out of my mouth — he was, is, and will always be BY FAR the main factor in Duke’s recruiting, as long as he is head coach. There is no close secondary factor. However, If anything has to be chosen as secondary — however distant it may be — to Coach K, it is Duke University and the unparalleled success achieved on the basketball court over the past four decades.

Take Scottie Pippen away from Jordan and he might be the best player ever to win 3 rings, not 6.

K is the best college coach ever, but with Capel on his staff he’s had one of his best recruiting runs (hello late 90’s teams).

It’s possible for K to be the best recruiter ever and Capel the best at maximizing K’s recruiting results. Our current freshman class is sick and if it was K and only K, MAYBE next year’s class would also include Stewart and Antoine? I’m with you that K is the flour, oil and the water, but in my mind Capel brought some hi-rising yeast to the recipe.

[OldPhiKap]

Roy is the gluten of the ACC.

[uh_no]

Roy is the gluten of the ACC.

yes, but that precludes tasty beverage....

[Saratoga2]

That might be true. My impression has been that Cam has good ballhandling skills, but might not have had success yet because of the strength and speed of the opposition vs. high school/AAU, and his own confidence. Maybe he just needs to get a bit more confident with this level for his ball skills to show?

When Cam drives inside he often loses the ball or gets stuffed. Both RJ and Zion are masters of getting in and finishing. Maybe Cam need s to leave the inside moves off his list until he develops a better capability.

[BandAlum83]

Bolden looked downright spry out there. He's been an elite shotblocker even during games where he's looked more lumbering, but the Bolden last night is a true weapon matching his pedigree coming out of high school - beating smaller players to 50/50 balls, sprinting down the court, finishing with smooth confidence. If the game is slowing down for him and he moves with that kind of athleticism to go with his massive length, that will really help.

I'm not worried about Javin and especially not about Jack. I disagree that Jack looks afraid to shoot - he still looks like he knows what he's doing out there even during his lesser games. Perhaps a little bit frustrated, but he'll swing back up. Javin probably just needs to calm down a little bit, but we have seen him perform at a high level and fit in well.

Zion never seems to have a 3 rattle in. It either rips perfectly through the net or is nowhere close. He shouldn't fall in love with it, but that suggests to me that there's somehow still a lot of upside there with a good stroke that will get more consistent as he continues to practice it (although the poor FT shooting is a less positive indicator). Amazing player.

Zioin has had some really good FT shooting games:

Gonzaga 6-6
Texas Tech 9-10
A few others like 3-4, 1-1, 10-14, 5-7, 4-5.

That's 80% over 7 games!

But, 9-18 across his last 2 games. So in a way, it seems similar to his 3 pt shooting, either good or bad. It tells me he will get there.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Agree with this entire post. And will emphasize the bolded and add to it.

The 3pt shot is a requirement in the modern era of basketball. Period. What I think K believes is that you have to shoot threes. Not because the eFG% is better, not because the percentages will (may) come up. But because it keeps the middle of the court open. Only one or two made threes seems to be enough to get defenders up in a shooters grill. I'm not sure why this is the case - but it strikes me (eye test) as true.

What I'm trying to say is, consider Trevon Duval. That guy realistically could not shoot. But K kept telling him to pull the trigger. And defenses seemed to, at least somewhat, defend his shot. If I were coaching, my gameplan would have involved totally and completely sagging off Duval in all scenarios. Yet I don't remember that being the case last year, really at all.

Again, I'm not sure why this occurs (if my eyes are right). Maybe it's defensive tendencies are ingrained. Maybe players are afraid of getting yelled at for allowing an open three. Maybe players generally forget that not all players (guards) can shoot. I have no idea. But it seems that K tells his guys to shoot and that defenses, generally speaking, honor the shots which frees up the inside for driving, cutting, offensive rebounds, and finishing. Regardless of who it is shooting.

- Chillin

Agree with your post and Urinal's as well....the three is a requirement, period. More for some teams than others, but necessary for all to some degree. Looking back at 2015, that team did survive some tense games because Winslow (and in one game, Matt Jones) shot much better than they would've been expected to....and then Grayson and Tyus hit some in the Finals. No way you win six in a row without needing them at some point.

And some people may say all you have to win is 4 tough ones, but to me, the tournament gets serious in round two...so at least 5 potentially difficult tests need to be passed.

[Troublemaker]

As far as this 3-point shooting problem goes, I’m sorry, but we’re just going to have to come to acceptance of it at a certain point. I’ve accepted that it isn’t going to get better. Yes, it worries the heck out of me, but I’ve chosen to trust in Kedsey’s analysis of how Duke can make up for it in other ways and still become champions — even as a woeful three-point and FT shooting team. It’s going to be one helluva rollercoaster ride.

Steven, not sure if you saw my post a few days ago, but I conceded that I'm almost certainly going to lose our bet on the 3-pt shooting already (https://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?41358-The-History-of-The-Pie&p=1118617#post1118617).

Now, with that said, it still wouldn't surprise me to see the team shoot 34-35% from three from this point forward.



-Our lack of 3 point shooting means our offense won’t be a thing of beauty, especially with RJ being an iso-dependent type weapon. I think Zion would be great in any kind of offense as he thrives in isolation, on the offensive glass, in transition, you name it. We’ll be better when Tre returns but I don’t forsee a big evolution. We are basically saying “try and stop these guys”.

I dunno. Every time ESPN shows a graphic of Duke's stats with and without Tre (which I can't recall off the top of my head), it's a pretty compelling difference. (As long as ESPN's sample contains all possessions for the season when Tre is on or off the court.)

I also still think we'll eventually see the 4 frosh + Jack lineup more often. Imagine a switch 1-to-5 defense where the "weak link" isn't Marques but Jack, for example. But to evolve in the fashion, we'll need Tre back, hopefully very soon.


Remember when Auburn and FSU were quality wins?

To paraphrase Deputy Chief Dwayne T. Johnson, “We’re gonna need some more quality wins, I guess”

Was that when TT was a quality win as well?

Not quite the thread for this, but all 3 of those wins are still Q1 wins for Duke and are likely to remain so.

[devilsadvocate85]

Agree with this entire post. And will emphasize the bolded and add to it.

The 3pt shot is a requirement in the modern era of basketball. Period. What I think K believes is that you have to shoot threes. Not because the eFG% is better, not because the percentages will (may) come up. But because it keeps the middle of the court open. Only one or two made threes seems to be enough to get defenders up in a shooters grill. I'm not sure why this is the case - but it strikes me (eye test) as true.

What I'm trying to say is, consider Trevon Duval. That guy realistically could not shoot. But K kept telling him to pull the trigger. And defenses seemed to, at least somewhat, defend his shot. If I were coaching, my gameplan would have involved totally and completely sagging off Duval in all scenarios. Yet I don't remember that being the case last year, really at all.

Again, I'm not sure why this occurs (if my eyes are right). Maybe it's defensive tendencies are ingrained. Maybe players are afraid of getting yelled at for allowing an open three. Maybe players generally forget that not all players (guards) can shoot. I have no idea. But it seems that K tells his guys to shoot and that defenses, generally speaking, honor the shots which frees up the inside for driving, cutting, offensive rebounds, and finishing. Regardless of who it is shooting.

- Chillin

I think there is another benefit to shooting 3’s. Missed 3’s tend to create long rebounds which usually become 50/50 plays. Duke’s length and athleticism are well suited to that kind of game.

[BandAlum83]

I would love for the team to shoot better from 3-point territory and on FTs. But as far as what’s critical, I would think getting Zion the ball in good scoring areas, getting R.J. good driving lanes, reintegrating Tre with his teammates and solidifying roles, getting Cam comfortable handling the ball, continuing to win the turnover battle, controlling pace, developing both man-to-man and zone defences, would be some example of things that might be at least as critical as figuring out something on 3s and FTs. We beat the top team in the country a different way.

I really think people need to put FTs in perspective. Let me help:

We are currently at 67.6% from the FT line. As a team, if we were at 72% it would mean roughly 1 additional FT made per game. Big deal!

For me, the FT vulnerability is that we don't have a go-to ball handler for the end-game situations where we need to hold on to a lead and the opponent fouls on every play.

We don't have that 80% or 85% shooter to get the ball to who can be automatic down the stretch. That's really our vulnerability.

Solution? Put the game away early so that it doesn't become a foul-a-thin down the stretch!

[Phredd3]

I think there is another benefit to shooting 3’s. Missed 3’s tend to create long rebounds which usually become 50/50 plays. Duke’s length and athleticism are well suited to that kind of game.

Actually, I disagree with this. We are also an aggressive offensive rebounding team, which means we often have players clustered around the hoop, and a long board goes very much against us. In the UVa game, several quick three attempts led to run-outs the wrong way. Those shots came close to costing us the game, IMO. I do think we need to keep shooting threes to keep the court open, as discussed up thread. But given that we don't convert much, I'm not sure we need quite the volume.

[COYS]

I dunno. Every time ESPN shows a graphic of Duke's stats with and without Tre (which I can't recall off the top of my head), it's a pretty compelling difference. (As long as ESPN's sample contains all possessions for the season when Tre is on or off the court.)

I also still think we'll eventually see the 4 frosh + Jack lineup more often. Imagine a switch 1-to-5 defense where the "weak link" isn't Marques but Jack, for example. But to evolve in the fashion, we'll need Tre back, hopefully very soon.

To add to this, Tre gets the team easy buckets in a variety of ways. He forces steals at a high rate with his fantastic on ball pressure (which also makes it easier for our other guys to jump the passing lanes and get steals, too), which lead to easy buckets in transition. He can push the tempo even after a made basket which can lead to easy scores. He's an excellent passer in the half-court. And he's been a master at getting our guys the ball where they feel most comfortable. All of those different areas really add up. Even if we still run a lot of motion to get Zion and RJ isolated on helpless defenders, Tre can STILL improve our offense.

[Kedsy]

Just so I understand, you’re saying it’s almost better to NOT be a good 3-point shooting team? I’m not sure that’s what you trying to say, but hopefully you’re right.

The table below is the percentage of threes (out of total FG attempts) Duke teams have taken since 1997 (approximately the time Coach K apparently decided to go "all in" on the three-point shot). If you look at the bottom of the table, it's apparent that Duke teams that rely less on the three appear to have more tournament success than teams that are heavily reliant on the three (with one big exception on both ends). If so, it may be that we are currently taking a few too many threes right now, especially considering how less-than-good we are at shooting them.



Year %three NCAA
2001 41.78% 1
2005 39.84% 16
2016 39.84% 16
2014 39.65% 64
2008 39.16% 32
2012 38.59% 64
2017 38.34% 32
2002 37.57% 16
2019 37.00%
1997 36.84% 32
2018 36.32% 8
2011 35.27% 16
2006 35.16% 16
2009 35.04% 16
2000 34.16% 16
2003 33.92% 16
2004 33.41% 4
2015 33.41% 1
2013 33.25% 8
2010 32.93% 1
1998 32.44% 8
1999 30.51% 2
2007 29.65% 64



the three is a requirement, period.


But generally, you're right. Schools that have won the title shoot 35% or better from 3. The worst shooting team to win a title in the last 15 years is UNC, shooting just 32.7% from 3.

As far as three-point shooting being a "requirement" to succeed in the tournament, I say bunk. There are no requirements.

I couldn't find any UNC title team that shot just 32.7% (per sports-reference.com, UNC shot 35.5% from three in 2017), but going back 25 years, there were more national champions who shot under 35% from three (2013 Louisville shot 33.3% from three; 2011 UConn shot 32.9%; 2003 Syracuse shot 34.4%; 1999 UConn shot 34.4%; and 1995 UCLA shot 34.1%) as there were champions who shot over 40% from three (2018 Villanova (40.1%); 2007 Florida (40.9%); 2005 UNC (40.3%); and 2004 UConn (40.2%)).

The fact that we're using only 15 (or 25) datapoints should be the first red flag that this analysis is a little bit silly. But putting that aside, Duke currently takes an average of 24.8 three-pointers per game. At that quantity, the difference between shooting Duke's current 31.2% and the 35% that you say is required for champion-hood is a grand total of one (1) made three per game. And I'm not sneering at 3 points -- in a close game against a strong opponent, three points can be a huge difference -- but to make up the difference you'd only have to make two more two-point baskets than normal (taking free throws out of the equation for the moment). This year's team is currently Duke's best two-point shooting team in history (or at least since the three-point shot began in 1987), at 58.8%. We shoot 42.2 twos per game, and at that quantity we'd make three more twos than, for example, the 2017 UNC team, more than wiping out the three point advantage they had on made threes.

Also, it's worth noting that since they invented the three-point shot in 1987, six of the worst ten Duke teams in three-point shooting pct have made the Elite Eight or better.

(It may also be worth noting that none of them have been as bad as this year's team -- the worst three-point shooting team in Duke history shot 34.9% in 2009 -- but again, the difference between this year's team and, for example, the 2004 Final Four team that shot 36.4% from three is 1.2 made threes a game and this year's team's two-point percentage advantage gives them an additional 2.7 made twos per game, more than making up the difference.) <-- all these calculations are assuming Duke's current pace, so while the numbers may change slightly, the analysis should be pace-independent

[BandAlum83]

Is it just me or does Jay Z look like he's aged about 20 years in the past two years?

8982

8983

It's just lighting...

8984

[UrinalCake]

Chillin and HereBeforeCoachK - not sure if you've had a chance to watch the Earn Everything series, but at the very beginning of the first episode there's a scene where K is breaking down the offense to the team. This is the very first practice for the team, prior to the Canada games. He states very clearly that everybody on the team must be capable of knocking down an open three, that the entire offensive system depends on it. And he even looks directly at Bolden when he says this, as if to emphasize that ALL five players must present an outside threat in order to create the spacing necessary for the system to work.

I really think that he feels like if we stick with this system, the shooting numbers will come up. And I think he's okay with shooting a low percentage for now as long as it continues to open up the driving lanes. We shall see...

[BandAlum83]

Steven, not sure if you saw my post a few days ago, but I conceded that I'm almost certainly going to lose our bet on the 3-pt shooting already (https://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?41358-The-History-of-The-Pie&p=1118617#post1118617).

Now, with that said, it still wouldn't surprise me to see the team shoot 34-35% from three from this point forward.



I dunno. Every time ESPN shows a graphic of Duke's stats with and without Tre (which I can't recall off the top of my head), it's a pretty compelling difference. (As long as ESPN's sample contains all possessions for the season when Tre is on or off the court.)

I also still think we'll eventually see the 4 frosh + Jack lineup more often. Imagine a switch 1-to-5 defense where the "weak link" isn't Marques but Jack, for example. But to evolve in the fashion, we'll need Tre back, hopefully very soon.




Not quite the thread for this, but all 3 of those wins are still Q1 wins for Duke and are likely to remain so.

Not to blaspheme, or anything, but wouldn't a potential weak link in that scenario be Tre? With Tre, we can easily switch 2-5, but switching Tre to a 5 would result in easy post-up baskets, wouldn't it?

Maybe I am misunderstanding the strategy and execution, but I thought that even with the death lineup we wouldn't switch 1-5.

[rsvman]

Chillin and HereBeforeCoachK - not sure if you've had a chance to watch the Earn Everything series, but at the very beginning of the first episode there's a scene where K is breaking down the offense to the team. This is the very first practice for the team, prior to the Canada games. He states very clearly that everybody on the team must be capable of knocking down an open three, that the entire offensive system depends on it. And he even looks directly at Bolden when he says this, as if to emphasize that ALL five players must present an outside threat in order to create the spacing necessary for the system to work.

I really think that he feels like if we stick with this system, the shooting numbers will come up. And I think he's okay with shooting a low percentage for now as long as it continues to open up the driving lanes. We shall see...

I've seen video of Bolden knocking down threes in practice.

When he jacked one up last night, though, it didn't look even remotely like he could shoot the three-ball. But he can!

[devildeac]

I've seen video of Bolden knocking down threes in practice.

When he jacked one up last night, though, it didn't look even remotely like he could shoot the three-ball. But he can!

I don't see him credited with a 3 point try in the espn box score from last PM. Did I/they miss it?

[fraggler]

I don't see him credited with a 3 point try in the espn box score from last PM. Did I/they miss it?

It was a step inside as the shot clock expired.

[BandAlum83]

I don't see him credited with a 3 point try in the espn box score from last PM. Did I/they miss it?

IIRC, end of shot clock, foot on the line.

[killerleft]

Around this time two years ago we all watched Tatum dribble the ball off his foot on the last possession of a home game against NC State, followed by Dennis Smith dunking on our faces to close out a huge upset that probably cost us a #1 seed. Many Duke fans were furious at Tatum, who had struggled that whole game, and called him a ball hog and lots of other bad names. But there was plenty of time for him to improve, to the extent that by the tournament he was arguably the best player in the country. Cam has time too, he already looks more comfortable and in control IMO so I think the shots will start to fall and the turnovers will be reduced.

I like this! Cam certainly has time to become another potent weapon for us. His defensive intensity shows how hard he works out there. Let's give the guy a break. The race he's running may put him at peak efficiency come tournament time.

[jimsumner]

I like this! Cam certainly has time to become another potent weapon for us. His defensive intensity shows how hard he works out there. Let's give the guy a break. The race he's running may put him at peak efficiency come tournament time.

Justise Winslow is another recent freshmen who struggled in the middle of the season before turning it around down the stretch.

Winslow had three points in 38 minutes on January 17, against Louisville, for example.

[FerryFor50]

As far as three-point shooting being a "requirement" to succeed in the tournament, I say bunk. There are no requirements.

I couldn't find any UNC title team that shot just 32.7% (per sports-reference.com, UNC shot 35.5% from three in 2017), but going back 25 years, there were more national champions who shot under 35% from three (2013 Louisville shot 33.3% from three; 2011 UConn shot 32.9%; 2003 Syracuse shot 34.4%; 1999 UConn shot 34.4%; and 1995 UCLA shot 34.1%) as there were champions who shot over 40% from three (2018 Villanova (40.1%); 2007 Florida (40.9%); 2005 UNC (40.3%); and 2004 UConn (40.2%)).

The fact that we're using only 15 (or 25) datapoints should be the first red flag that this analysis is a little bit silly. But putting that aside, Duke currently takes an average of 24.8 three-pointers per game. At that quantity, the difference between shooting Duke's current 31.2% and the 35% that you say is required for champion-hood is a grand total of one (1) made three per game. And I'm not sneering at 3 points -- in a close game against a strong opponent, three points can be a huge difference -- but to make up the difference you'd only have to make two more two-point baskets than normal (taking free throws out of the equation for the moment). This year's team is currently Duke's best two-point shooting team in history (or at least since the three-point shot began in 1987), at 58.8%. We shoot 42.2 twos per game, and at that quantity we'd make three more twos than, for example, the 2017 UNC team, more than wiping out the three point advantage they had on made threes.

Also, it's worth noting that since they invented the three-point shot in 1987, six of the worst ten Duke teams in three-point shooting pct have made the Elite Eight or better.

(It may also be worth noting that none of them have been as bad as this year's team -- the worst three-point shooting team in Duke history shot 34.9% in 2009 -- but again, the difference between this year's team and, for example, the 2004 Final Four team that shot 36.4% from three is 1.2 made threes a game and this year's team's two-point percentage advantage gives them an additional 2.7 made twos per game, more than making up the difference.) <-- all these calculations are assuming Duke's current pace, so while the numbers may change slightly, the analysis should be pace-independent

I never said it was a requirement; I actually went into the post research with the idea that teams could win a natty without shooting well from 3. When I looked at the numbers, I got convinced otherwise. Teams that shoot 32% from 3 don't win. And the UNC team I referred to was 2016; I made a mistake, but that UNC team was runner up to Nova, which won on... a last second three.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2016.html

As for "15 years being silly," it was more of, I didn't want to dig through 25-30 years of stats when 15 years changed my mind already. Plus, the game has changed considerably in the past 15 years, where teams are valuing the three point shot more.

But my point still stands; if you shoot below 35%, you tend not to win the national title. (Also, to be fair, we can't count 2013 L'ville, since they had to vacate. :D)

Here's the list of champions since 1987 with their 3 pt shooting % and number of attempts, as per sports reference. Percentages higher than 35% are in bold. Only SIX out of 32 (less than 20%) teams ever won without shooting at least 35% from three.

1987 Indiana - 50.8% (256 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/indiana/1987.html
1988 Kansas - 33.5% (233 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/1988.html
1989 Michigan - 46.8% (419 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan/1989.html
1990 UNLV - 37.7% (690 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/nevada-las-vegas/1990.html
1991 Duke - 38.3% (459 PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1991.html
1992 Duke - 43.4% (394 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1992.html
1993 North Carolina - 37.2% (452 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/1993.html
1994 Arkansas - 38.7% (777 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arkansas/1994.html
1995 UCLA - 34.1% (346 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/ucla/1995.html
1996 Kentucky - 39.7% (670 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1996.html
1997 Arizona - 37% (600 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arizona/1997.html
1998 Kentucky - 36.7% (681 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1998.html
1999 Connecticut - 34.4% (506 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/1999.html
2000 Michigan State - 37.8% (669 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan-state/2000.html
2001 Duke - 38.5% (1057 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2001.html
2002 Maryland - 37.4% (580 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/maryland/2002.html
2003 Syracuse - 34.4.% (540 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2003.html
2004 Connecticut - 40.2% (619 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2004.html
2005 North Carolina - 40.3% (687 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2005.html
2006 Florida - 39.2% (738 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2006.html
2007 Florida - 40.9% (727 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2007.html
2008 Kansas - 39.7% (683 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/2008.html
2009 North Carolina - 38.7% (682 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2009.html
2010 Duke - 38.5% (782 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2010.html
2011 Connecticut - 32.9% (711 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2011.html
2012 Kentucky - 37.8% (595 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/2012.html
2013 Louisville - 33.3% (691 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/louisville/2013.html
2014 Connecticut - 38.7% (741 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2014.html
2015 Duke - 38.7% (732 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html
2016 Villanova - 36.2% (959 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2016.html
2017 North Carolina - 35.5% (798 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2017.html
2018 Villanova - 40.1% (1158 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2018.html

Another nugget to pull from that data is how 3 point attempts for championship teams have trended upwards since 1987, because coaches have realized that to win, you need to stretch the floor and open up spaces. You could argue Coach K was a pioneer in that, as his 2001 title team show 1057 threes - more than any of the title teams other than 2018's Villanova.

8985

Like I said, I started out a skeptic of the idea that teams can't win without good three point shooting. The data says otherwise; most champs have average to great 3pt shooting. 32.1% would be the lowest shooting % of any NCAA champion team ever. Can this Duke team win without great three point shooting? Sure, because, as I mentioned, they have two players capable of getting to the rim at will. But what happens when Zion gets into foul trouble in one of the NCAA tournament games?

[BandAlum83]

I never said it was a requirement; I actually went into the post research with the idea that teams could win a natty without shooting well from 3. When I looked at the numbers, I got convinced otherwise. Teams that shoot 32% from 3 don't win. And the UNC team I referred to was 2016; I made a mistake, but that UNC team was runner up to Nova, which won on... a last second three.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2016.html

As for "15 years being silly," it was more of, I didn't want to dig through 25-30 years of stats when 15 years changed my mind already. Plus, the game has changed considerably in the past 15 years, where teams are valuing the three point shot more.

But my point still stands; if you shoot below 35%, you tend not to win the national title. (Also, to be fair, we can't count 2013 L'ville, since they had to vacate. :D)

Here's the list of champions since 1987 with their 3 pt shooting % and number of attempts, as per sports reference. Percentages higher than 35% are in bold. Only SIX out of 32 (less than 20%) teams ever won without shooting at least 35% from three.

1987 Indiana - 50.8% (256 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/indiana/1987.html
1988 Kansas - 33.5% (233 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/1988.html
1989 Michigan - 46.8% (419 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan/1989.html
1990 UNLV - 37.7% (690 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/nevada-las-vegas/1990.html
1991 Duke - 38.3% (459 PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1991.html
1992 Duke - 43.4% (394 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1992.html
1993 North Carolina - 37.2% (452 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/1993.html
1994 Arkansas - 38.7% (777 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arkansas/1994.html
1995 UCLA - 34.1% (346 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/ucla/1995.html
1996 Kentucky - 39.7% (670 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1996.html
1997 Arizona - 37% (600 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arizona/1997.html
1998 Kentucky - 36.7% (681 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1998.html
1999 Connecticut - 34.4% (506 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/1999.html
2000 Michigan State - 37.8% (669 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan-state/2000.html
2001 Duke - 38.5% (1057 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2001.html
2002 Maryland - 37.4% (580 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/maryland/2002.html
2003 Syracuse - 34.4.% (540 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2003.html
2004 Connecticut - 40.2% (619 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2004.html
2005 North Carolina - 40.3% (687 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2005.html
2006 Florida - 39.2% (738 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2006.html
2007 Florida - 40.9% (727 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2007.html
2008 Kansas - 39.7% (683 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/2008.html
2009 North Carolina - 38.7% (682 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2009.html
2010 Duke - 38.5% (782 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2010.html
2011 Connecticut - 32.9% (711 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2011.html
2012 Kentucky - 37.8% (595 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/2012.html
2013 Louisville - 33.3% (691 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/louisville/2013.html
2014 Connecticut - 38.7% (741 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2014.html
2015 Duke - 38.7% (732 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html
2016 Villanova - 36.2% (959 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2016.html
2017 North Carolina - 35.5% (798 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2017.html
2018 Villanova - 40.1% (1158 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2018.html

Another nugget to pull from that data is how 3 point attempts for championship teams have trended upwards since 1987, because coaches have realized that to win, you need to stretch the floor and open up spaces. You could argue Coach K was a pioneer in that, as his 2001 title team show 1057 threes - more than any of the title teams other than 2018's Villanova.

8985

Like I said, I started out a skeptic of the idea that teams can't win without good three point shooting. The data says otherwise; most champs have average to great 3pt shooting. 32.1% would be the lowest shooting % of any NCAA champion team ever. Can this Duke team win without great three point shooting? Sure, because, as I mentioned, they have two players capable of getting to the rim at will. But what happens when Zion gets into foul trouble in one of the NCAA tournament games?


But.....what if you looked at team stats for only eFG%

What happens then?

[FerryFor50]

But....what if you looked at team stats for only eFG%

What happens then?

lol

Go for it. My eyes are crossed now. :p

[BandAlum83]

lol

Go for it. My eyes are crossed now. :p

I don't really know where the data resides, but I do think it's a legit question!

[CDu]

lol

Go for it. My eyes are crossed now. :p

I'm pretty sure that any analysis of past champs based on eFG% and/or TS% would say we are doing ok there. We are in the top quartile in both eFG% and TS%. And when you consider our offensive rebounding prowess, that helps offset some of the minor inefficiencies on our shooting attempts.

Perhaps just as importantly though, we're in the top-10 in both defensive eFG% and defensive TS%. That's especially impressive when you consider we are also #1 in the country in steal percentage. So think about that for a minute: we're nationally elite at both forcing turnovers AND at making teams score inefficiently on their shooting attempts. That makes life a lot easier on the offensive end when you can control a game so well on the other end.

[FerryFor50]

I don't really know where the data resides, but I do think it's a legit question!

I see individual player eFG% as well as team's per-game eFG% on sports reference, but I didn't see anything that showed the total average eFG% for a team over a season.

[CDu]

I see individual player eFG% as well as team's per-game eFG% on sports reference, but I didn't see anything that showed the total average eFG% for a team over a season.

Here is where it is provided for this season:

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/seasons/2019-advanced-school-stats.html

[FerryFor50]

I'm pretty sure that any analysis of past champs based on eFG% and/or TS% would say we are doing ok there. We are in the top quartile in both eFG% and TS%. And when you consider our offensive rebounding prowess, that helps offset some of the minor inefficiencies on our shooting attempts.

Perhaps just as importantly though, we're in the top-10 in both defensive eFG% and defensive TS%. That's especially impressive when you consider we are also #1 in the country in steal percentage. So think about that for a minute: we're nationally elite at both forcing turnovers AND at making teams score inefficiently on their shooting attempts. That makes life a lot easier on the offensive end when you can control a game so well on the other end.

No doubt. And this year's Duke team is by far one of the best defensive Duke teams I've seen - especially in the past 10 years. Those turnovers, rebounds/outlets and blocked shots turn into some easy transition baskets. And it might be enough to win the title. I'm just saying that, historically, the data says that teams have to be at least adequate from 3 to win it all. Duke certainly can get there, but so far, they're not.

[FerryFor50]

Here is where it is provided for this season:

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/seasons/2019-advanced-school-stats.html

Nice. So Duke is at 54.3% eFG% on the season.

Compared to some of the lower % three point shooting teams that won the title:

2013 Louisville - 50.3% eFG%
2011 UConn - 48.2% eFG%
2003 Syracuse - 51.9% eFG%

So, Duke's definitely better in that regard.

[CDu]

No doubt. And this year's Duke team is by far one of the best defensive Duke teams I've seen - especially in the past 10 years. Those turnovers, rebounds/outlets and blocked shots turn into some easy transition baskets. And it might be enough to win the title. I'm just saying that, historically, the data says that teams have to be at least adequate from 3 to win it all. Duke certainly can get there, but so far, they're not.

In 2011, UConn won it shooting 32.9% from 3. In 2013, Louisville won it shooting 33.3% from 3. I'm not sure that two percentage points difference from where we are now is enough sway my opinion on our chances.

UConn and Louisville won it in large part because of what they did defensively and on the offensive boards. I would posit that our model of championship team would look more like those two teams' model than the other championship teams.

[FerryFor50]

In 2011, UConn won it shooting 32.9% from 3. In 2013, Louisville won it shooting 33.3% from 3. I'm not sure that two percentage points difference from where we are now is enough sway my opinion on our chances.

UConn and Louisville won it in large part because of what they did defensively and on the offensive boards. I would posit that our model of championship team would look more like those two teams' model than the other championship teams.

As I said... I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm just saying that the data says it's not as likely.

[CDu]

As I said... I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm just saying that the data says it's not as likely.

I think the challenge with this team is that we've never really seen a team like this. Perhaps the closest conceptually is the 2012 Kentucky team. But we've got a situation where we have the unquestioned best player in the country and arguably the second best player in the country AND two other top freshmen AND a junior top-15 big man. We're such a huge talent outlier that it's really hard to peg where this team will end up. Especially because we'd usually expect a team this inexperienced to get better as the season progresses and they get more comfortable together and with the level of competition. I mean, I think we can pretty clearly say that Reddish and (to a much lesser degree) Barrett can play better than they have so far. And we've only lost a game this calendar year because we were missing two starters and the opposition had a flukishly great 3pt shooting day that day. We have wins over two top-10s (one of those without our PG) and four top-20s in what should be the "still figuring things out" phase of the season.

We're a pretty huge outlier defensively as well, which is the type of thing that looking only at one metric will miss. Being so elite at both forcing turnovers and creating missed shots is really impressive. That kind of raises our floor, and can be seen in our team game scores being so consistently high. It's harder to lose games when your defense is so consistently great and you generate so many 2pt baskets and offensive rebounds. Even if we are a terrible 3pt shooting team.

Would I expect us to win the title? No. But I wouldn't expect any particular team to win the title. I think our chances are better than any other team in the country though, and that's all we can really ask. And I think we will still get even better, which is scary.

[Kedsy]

I never said it was a requirement; I actually went into the post research with the idea that teams could win a natty without shooting well from 3. When I looked at the numbers, I got convinced otherwise. Teams that shoot 32% from 3 don't win. And the UNC team I referred to was 2016; I made a mistake, but that UNC team was runner up to Nova, which won on... a last second three.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2016.html

As for "15 years being silly," it was more of, I didn't want to dig through 25-30 years of stats when 15 years changed my mind already. Plus, the game has changed considerably in the past 15 years, where teams are valuing the three point shot more.

But my point still stands; if you shoot below 35%, you tend not to win the national title. (Also, to be fair, we can't count 2013 L'ville, since they had to vacate. :D)

Here's the list of champions since 1987 with their 3 pt shooting % and number of attempts, as per sports reference. Percentages higher than 35% are in bold. Only SIX out of 32 (less than 20%) teams ever won without shooting at least 35% from three.

1987 Indiana - 50.8% (256 3PA)
1988 Kansas - 33.5% (233 3PA)
[B]1989 Michigan - 46.8% (419 3PA)
[B]1990 UNLV - 37.7% (690 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/nevada-las-vegas/1990.html
1991 Duke - 38.3% (459 PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1991.html
1992 Duke - 43.4% (394 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1992.html
1993 North Carolina - 37.2% (452 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/1993.html
1994 Arkansas - 38.7% (777 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arkansas/1994.html
1995 UCLA - 34.1% (346 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/ucla/1995.html
1996 Kentucky - 39.7% (670 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1996.html
1997 Arizona - 37% (600 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arizona/1997.html
1998 Kentucky - 36.7% (681 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1998.html
1999 Connecticut - 34.4% (506 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/1999.html
2000 Michigan State - 37.8% (669 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan-state/2000.html
2001 Duke - 38.5% (1057 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2001.html
2002 Maryland - 37.4% (580 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/maryland/2002.html
2003 Syracuse - 34.4.% (540 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2003.html
2004 Connecticut - 40.2% (619 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2004.html
2005 North Carolina - 40.3% (687 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2005.html
2006 Florida - 39.2% (738 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2006.html
2007 Florida - 40.9% (727 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2007.html
2008 Kansas - 39.7% (683 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/2008.html
2009 North Carolina - 38.7% (682 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2009.html
2010 Duke - 38.5% (782 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2010.html
2011 Connecticut - 32.9% (711 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2011.html
2012 Kentucky - 37.8% (595 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/2012.html
2013 Louisville - 33.3% (691 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/louisville/2013.html
2014 Connecticut - 38.7% (741 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2014.html
2015 Duke - 38.7% (732 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html
2016 Villanova - 36.2% (959 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2016.html
2017 North Carolina - 35.5% (798 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2017.html
2018 Villanova - 40.1% (1158 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2018.html

Another nugget to pull from that data is how 3 point attempts for championship teams have trended upwards since 1987, because coaches have realized that to win, you need to stretch the floor and open up spaces.

8985

Like I said, I started out a skeptic of the idea that teams can't win without good three point shooting. The data says otherwise; most champs have average to great 3pt shooting. 32.1% would be the lowest shooting % of any NCAA champion team ever.

I quoted you and HereBeforeCoachK (who said, "the three is a requirement, period"). But I also feel like you're splitting hairs (you said, "Schools that have won the title shoot 35% or better from 3," which to me sounds a bit like a requirement).

But forget that. Even with 32 datapoints, there's not a lot you can glean from your data, other than good teams usually shoot well. The fact that even with the small sample, 19% of champions shot less than 35% means it's nowhere near necessary.

Plus, the fact remains that the difference between Duke's 31% and 35% is still just one made three a game. And this year's Duke team shoots 58.8% on two-point shots, something only one champion out of the 32 you mention has topped (last year's Villanova team shot 59.0% from two), so the additional two-point makes we get should more than compensate for that one errant three.

I've adopted your table to show 2pt%/3pt%:

1987 Indiana - 51.3%/50.8% (256 3PA)
1988 Kansas - 54.3%/33.5% (233 3PA)
1989 Michigan - 58.7%/46.8% (419 3PA)
1990 UNLV - 55.3%/37.7% (690 3PA)
1991 Duke - 54.1%/38.3% (459 PA)
1992 Duke - 55.9%/43.4% (394 3PA)
1993 North Carolina - 53.8%/37.2% (452 3PA)
1994 Arkansas - 53.8%/38.7% (777 3PA)
1995 UCLA - 54.7%/34.1% (346 3PA)
1996 Kentucky - 52.0%/39.7% (670 3PA)
1997 Arizona - 48.4%/37% (600 3PA)
1998 Kentucky - 52.7%/36.7% (681 3PA)
1999 Connecticut - 50.6%/34.4% (506 3PA)
2000 Michigan State - 51.7%/37.8% (669 3PA)
2001 Duke - 55.0%/38.5% (1057 3PA)
2002 Maryland - 51.9%/37.4% (580 3PA)
2003 Syracuse - 51.9%/34.4.% (540 3PA)
2004 Connecticut - 50.7%/40.2% (619 3PA)
2005 North Carolina - 54.1%/40.3% (687 3PA)
2006 Florida - 55.9%/39.2% (738 3PA)
2007 Florida - 58.7%/40.9% (727 3PA)
2008 Kansas - 55.5%/39.7% (683 3PA)
2009 North Carolina - 51.5%/38.7% (682 3PA)
2010 Duke - 47.0%/38.5% (782 3PA)
2011 Connecticut - 47.7%/32.9% (711 3PA)
2012 Kentucky - 52.7%/37.8% (595 3PA)
2013 Louisville - 50.8%/33.3% (691 3PA)
2014 Connecticut - 48.1%/38.7% (741 3PA)
2015 Duke - 55.9%/38.7% (732 3PA)
2016 Villanova - 57.4%/36.2% (959 3PA)
2017 North Carolina - 51.4%/35.5% (798 3PA)
2018 Villanova - 59.0%/40.1% (1158 3PA)

Note that only four teams out of the 32 shot under 50% on two-point shots. That didn't stop the 2010 Duke team from claiming the title.

By the way, did you know that 8 of the last 10 champions have had offensive rebounding percentages better than 30%? And yet Villanova has won two of the last three titles without meeting that threshold (29.1% in 2018 and 28.0% in 2016). How'd that happen?

There is no single stat that determines who wins the NCAA tournament. Offense and defense both consist of myriad interlocking components and it's the team that has the best combination that is the best team. And even then, the best team hardly ever wins the NCAA tournament. Picking one stat (like 3pt shooting%) and saying it means a particular team can't win the title is a fool's errand.

[Troublemaker]

I really think people need to put FTs in perspective. Let me help:

We are currently at 67.6% from the FT line. As a team, if we were at 72% it would mean roughly 1 additional FT made per game. Big deal!

For me, the FT vulnerability is that we don't have a go-to ball handler for the end-game situations where we need to hold on to a lead and the opponent fouls on every play.

We don't have that 80% or 85% shooter to get the ball to who can be automatic down the stretch. That's really our vulnerability.

Solution? Put the game away early so that it doesn't become a foul-a-thin down the stretch!

Agreed, it's really only the 3-pt shooting that's even a blip on my concern radar. Especially because I think we DO have end of game FT shooting options.

Tre was a career 80% FT shooter in high school, for example: https://www.mnbasketballhub.com/roster_players/22057757

https://i.imgur.com/az17tD1.png

So, his percentage on a measly 24 FT attempts at Duke doesn't mean anything to me. Tre plus Jack plus Cam would be good end-of-game options when protecting a lead. Not great like the tandem of Tyus and Quin were, but good enough.

As for non-end-of-game situations? PLEASE send Duke to the line. Duke's team FT pct of 67.6% would produce an offensive efficiency of ~135. While I wish we could punish teams even more than that by being a 75% FT shooting team, it's not as if going to the line is inefficient offense for Duke.

[Kedsy]

But...what if you looked at team stats for only eFG%

What happens then?

sports-reference only goes back to 1993:

1993 North Carolina - 54.1%
1994 Arkansas - 55.2%
1995 UCLA - 54.1%
1996 Kentucky - 54.1%
1997 Arizona - 50.2%
1998 Kentucky - 53.4%
1999 Connecticut - 50.8%
2000 Michigan State - 53.3%
2001 Duke - 56.1%
2002 Maryland - 53.0%
2003 Syracuse - 51.9%
2004 Connecticut - 53.2%
2005 North Carolina - 56.0%
2006 Florida - 56.9%
2007 Florida - 59.6%
2008 Kansas - 56.7%
2009 North Carolina - 53.3%
2010 Duke - 50.5%
2011 Connecticut - 48.2%
2012 Kentucky - 53.8%
2013 Louisville - 50.6%
2014 Connecticut - 51.5%
2015 Duke - 56.6%
2016 Villanova - 56.1%
2017 North Carolina - 51.9%
2018 Villanova - 59.5%

Duke's current eFG% is 54.3%. That would be 10th among the 26 champions listed here. Again, ably shooting the three might be desirable; it's not necessary.

[Troublemaker]

Not to blaspheme, or anything, but wouldn't a potential weak link in that scenario be Tre? With Tre, we can easily switch 2-5, but switching Tre to a 5 would result in easy post-up baskets, wouldn't it?

Maybe I am misunderstanding the strategy and execution, but I thought that even with the death lineup we wouldn't switch 1-5.

It depends on how good a scorer the opposing center is. For example, if UVA has to focus on giving Jack Salt postups instead of running their regular offense (or instead of having their guards beat Marques off the dribble), that might be a win for Duke. Plus, Duke doesn't have to sit around and watch Salt post up. They can attack him by having someone come over to try to strip him.

The NBA teams that switch 1 thru 5 usually don't pay a price for it in my experience. Teams can also perform a triple switch or a "scram" switch to get the small guard off the big man. I'll try to find examples of those.

[Troublemaker]

The NBA teams that switch 1 thru 5 usually don't pay a price for it in my experience. Teams can also perform a triple switch or a "scram" switch to get the small guard off the big man. I'll try to find examples of those.

Video on "scram" switch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-U5Lxj8o6Y

Video on triple switch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyS0MdHyZZQ

[COYS]

It depends on how good a scorer the opposing center is. For example, if UVA has to focus on giving Jack Salt postups instead of running their regular offense (or instead of having their guards beat Marques off the dribble), that might be a win for Duke. Plus, Duke doesn't have to sit around and watch Salt post up. They can attack him by having someone come over to try to strip him.

The NBA teams that switch 1 thru 5 usually don't pay a price for it in my experience. Teams can also perform a triple switch or a "scram" switch to get the small guard off the big man. I'll try to find examples of those.

An additional point is that a lot has to go right for even a good post player to get the ball. The guards still have to make a good entry pass. I think I’d actually rather Tre be switched onto a center in the post while Zion/Javin/Marques/RJ/Cam/Jack deny the entry pass with their length than for the post to be empty on a switch which would provide driving lanes for opposing guards against Marques and Javin. The 2008 team was masterful at denying entry passes and was an excellent defensive team despite often playing freshman Singler or sophomore Thomas at the 5.

[Steven43]

sports-reference only goes back to 1993:

1993 North Carolina - 54.1%
1994 Arkansas - 55.2%
1995 UCLA - 54.1%
1996 Kentucky - 54.1%
1997 Arizona - 50.2%
1998 Kentucky - 53.4%
1999 Connecticut - 50.8%
2000 Michigan State - 53.3%
2001 Duke - 56.1%
2002 Maryland - 53.0%
2003 Syracuse - 51.9%
2004 Connecticut - 53.2%
2005 North Carolina - 56.0%
2006 Florida - 56.9%
2007 Florida - 59.6%
2008 Kansas - 56.7%
2009 North Carolina - 53.3%
2010 Duke - 50.5%
2011 Connecticut - 48.2%
2012 Kentucky - 53.8%
2013 Louisville - 50.6%
2014 Connecticut - 51.5%
2015 Duke - 56.6%
2016 Villanova - 56.1%
2017 North Carolina - 51.9%
2018 Villanova - 59.5%

Duke's current eFG% is 54.3%. That would be 10th among the 26 champions listed here. Again, ably shooting the three might be desirable; it's not necessary.
How would you factor in the dramatic increase in just the past few years in the percentage of 3-point shots taken? This has created a sea change of sorts in the way college basketball games are played. Would that not therefore cause the statistics prior to the last couple of seasons to be fairly irrelevant in regards to our subject matter? This is not a statement on my part; it’s just a question.

[Duke79UNLV77]

An additional point is that a lot has to go right for even a good post player to get the ball. The guards still have to make a good entry pass. I think I’d actually rather Tre be switched onto a center in the post while Zion/Javin/Marques/RJ/Cam/Jack deny the entry pass with their length than for the post to be empty on a switch which would provide driving lanes for opposing guards against Marques and Javin. The 2008 team was masterful at denying entry passes and was an excellent defensive team despite often playing freshman Singler or sophomore Thomas at the 5.

Especially when Zion can just block the shot from anywhere on the court whenever he chooses to do so anyway.

[-jk]

How would you factor in the dramatic increase in just the past few years in the percentage of 3-point shots taken? This has created a sea change of sorts in the way college basketball games are played. Would that not therefore cause the statistics prior to the last couple of seasons to be fairly irrelevant in regards to our subject matter? This is not a statement on my part; it’s just a question.

eFG% doesn't care.

But I'd like to get a bit better from the 3 and the FT line...

-jk

[devildeac]

Especially when Zion can just block the shot from anywhere on the court whenever he chooses to do so anyway.

Or he does this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWk_C9OGg7w

[Indoor66]

I never said it was a requirement; I actually went into the post research with the idea that teams could win a natty without shooting well from 3. When I looked at the numbers, I got convinced otherwise. Teams that shoot 32% from 3 don't win. And the UNC team I referred to was 2016; I made a mistake, but that UNC team was runner up to Nova, which won on... a last second three.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2016.html

As for "15 years being silly," it was more of, I didn't want to dig through 25-30 years of stats when 15 years changed my mind already. Plus, the game has changed considerably in the past 15 years, where teams are valuing the three point shot more.

But my point still stands; if you shoot below 35%, you tend not to win the national title. (Also, to be fair, we can't count 2013 L'ville, since they had to vacate. :D)

Here's the list of champions since 1987 with their 3 pt shooting % and number of attempts, as per sports reference. Percentages higher than 35% are in bold. Only SIX out of 32 (less than 20%) teams ever won without shooting at least 35% from three.

1987 Indiana - 50.8% (256 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/indiana/1987.html
1988 Kansas - 33.5% (233 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/1988.html
1989 Michigan - 46.8% (419 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan/1989.html
1990 UNLV - 37.7% (690 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/nevada-las-vegas/1990.html
1991 Duke - 38.3% (459 PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1991.html
1992 Duke - 43.4% (394 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/1992.html
1993 North Carolina - 37.2% (452 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/1993.html
1994 Arkansas - 38.7% (777 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arkansas/1994.html
1995 UCLA - 34.1% (346 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/ucla/1995.html
1996 Kentucky - 39.7% (670 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1996.html
1997 Arizona - 37% (600 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/arizona/1997.html
1998 Kentucky - 36.7% (681 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/1998.html
1999 Connecticut - 34.4% (506 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/1999.html
2000 Michigan State - 37.8% (669 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/michigan-state/2000.html
2001 Duke - 38.5% (1057 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2001.html
2002 Maryland - 37.4% (580 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/maryland/2002.html
2003 Syracuse - 34.4.% (540 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2003.html
2004 Connecticut - 40.2% (619 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2004.html
2005 North Carolina - 40.3% (687 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2005.html
2006 Florida - 39.2% (738 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2006.html
2007 Florida - 40.9% (727 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida/2007.html
2008 Kansas - 39.7% (683 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kansas/2008.html
2009 North Carolina - 38.7% (682 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2009.html
2010 Duke - 38.5% (782 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2010.html
2011 Connecticut - 32.9% (711 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2011.html
2012 Kentucky - 37.8% (595 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/kentucky/2012.html
2013 Louisville - 33.3% (691 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/louisville/2013.html
2014 Connecticut - 38.7% (741 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/2014.html
2015 Duke - 38.7% (732 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2015.html
2016 Villanova - 36.2% (959 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2016.html
2017 North Carolina - 35.5% (798 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina/2017.html
2018 Villanova - 40.1% (1158 3PA) https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/villanova/2018.html

Another nugget to pull from that data is how 3 point attempts for championship teams have trended upwards since 1987, because coaches have realized that to win, you need to stretch the floor and open up spaces. You could argue Coach K was a pioneer in that, as his 2001 title team show 1057 threes - more than any of the title teams other than 2018's Villanova.

8985

Like I said, I started out a skeptic of the idea that teams can't win without good three point shooting. The data says otherwise; most champs have average to great 3pt shooting. 32.1% would be the lowest shooting % of any NCAA champion team ever. Can this Duke team win without great three point shooting? Sure, because, as I mentioned, they have two players capable of getting to the rim at will. But what happens when Zion gets into foul trouble in one of the NCAA tournament games?

Are you Retired?

[CDu]

How would you factor in the dramatic increase in just the past few years in the percentage of 3-point shots taken? This has created a sea change of sorts in the way college basketball games are played. Would that not therefore cause the statistics prior to the last couple of seasons to be fairly irrelevant in regards to our subject matter? This is not a statement on my part; it’s just a question.

Even if you restrict to just this decade, our eFG% would be fourth out of 10. It is only if you look only at the last 5 years does it dicier, where we would be 4th of 5. But, frankly, that is too small a sample to glean anything meaningful. Especially since the worst eFG% was in 2017 and the 2016 winner only barely won over another lower-eFG% team.

[BandAlum83]

Agreed, it's really only the 3-pt shooting that's even a blip on my concern radar. Especially because I think we DO have end of game FT shooting options.

Tre was a career 80% FT shooter in high school, for example: https://www.mnbasketballhub.com/roster_players/22057757

https://i.imgur.com/az17tD1.png

So, his percentage on a measly 24 FT attempts at Duke doesn't mean anything to me. Tre plus Jack plus Cam would be good end-of-game options when protecting a lead. Not great like the tandem of Tyus and Quin were, but good enough.

As for non-end-of-game situations? PLEASE send Duke to the line. Duke's team FT pct of 67.6% would produce an offensive efficiency of ~135. While I wish we could punish teams even more than that by being a 75% FT shooting team, it's not as if going to the line is inefficient offense for Duke.

Actually 142!

Kudos and credit to Kedsy for teaching me the formula!

So agreed, please put us on the line and hack away! Pile up the fouls, foul out your players and get us to incredible offensive efficiency! Actually, do it early and often and you won't be close enough to try a foul-a-thon in the closing minute(s). You'll be too far behind!

[Pghdukie]

I firmly believe that basketball, NBA and college, have revolutionized in the same way the NFL offenses have changed. In hoops, it was " get the ball inside". In football, it was 3yds and a cloud of dust.
Now a guard drives to thru the lane and instead of a layup or foul - it's a kick out for a 3. In football - now you pass, pass, and more pass.
Both games are so much faster than in past years.
In summation, stats from years ago can be misleading.

Just my 02 cents worth.

[BandAlum83]

Thanks to all who answered, provided video evidence and explained how switching 1-5 with Tre in the game is a viable option for our death lineup!

I can't spork any of you, lol

[Steven43]

Actually 142!

Kudos and credit to Kedsy for teaching me the formula!

So agreed, please put us on the line and hack away! Pile up the fouls, foul out your players and get us to incredible offensive efficiency! Actually, do it early and often and you won't be close enough to try a foul-a-thon in the closing minute(s). You'll be too far behind!
Sounds good to me. Feeling better and better.

[BandAlum83]

I firmly believe that basketball, NBA and college, have revolutionized in the same way the NFL offenses have changed. In hoops, it was " get the ball inside". In football, it was 3yds and a cloud of dust.
Now a guard drives to thru the lane and instead of a layup or foul - it's a kick out for a 3. In football - now you pass, pass, and more pass.
Both games are so much faster than in past years.
In summation, stats from years ago can be misleading.

Just my 02 cents worth.

And the 91 and 92 teams may very well be years ago?

I know 1986 is...just look at those shorts!

[Devilwin]

Are you Retired?

Lol!!!

[Kedsy]

How would you factor in the dramatic increase in just the past few years in the percentage of 3-point shots taken? This has created a sea change of sorts in the way college basketball games are played. Would that not therefore cause the statistics prior to the last couple of seasons to be fairly irrelevant in regards to our subject matter? This is not a statement on my part; it’s just a question.

Well, as others have said, it shouldn't matter. But I can think of one reason why it might.

As you say, the percentage of three-point shots taken has been on the rise. But the percentage of three-point shots made has been fairly constant. Assuming the percentage of two-point shots made is also fairly constant (I don't have those numbers historically except for Duke), that would mean eFG% in general has been going up. In which case a 54.3% eFG% (which is what Duke has so far this season) would be less remarkable (compared to other current NCAA teams) than it used to be.

So I looked at the last 10 seasons to see where a 54.3% eFG% would be ranked nationally:

2010: 18th
2011: 10th
2012: 11th
2013: 15th
2014: 22nd
2015: 29th
2016: 26th
2017: 40th
2018: 51st
2019 (so far): 63rd

Which I suppose means Duke will be more likely to face an offense with an eFG% as good or better than Duke's than a team with a 54.3% eFG% was ten years ago. But the good news is that Duke's defensive eFG% (43.6%, 8th in the country) will hopefully be good enough to make up for that.

Another piece of good news is our eFG% with Tre Jones is much better than without. Adding all games before Syracuse (though in those games I didn't distinguish between when Tre played or not) plus the first 6 minutes of the Syracuse game, our aggregate eFG% was 55.6%, which would be 31st in the country. In the game minutes since Tre got hurt, our eFG% has been 47.4% (which is pretty bad, the equivalent of 310th in the country), though I can't tell how much of that was because Tre was out and how much was because of the defenses of the three teams we played.

[bluesin]

I respect a lot of the work with stats here, but it seems like some of the issues people are seeing with 3 and FT shooting and how that might affect our chances of winning could be pretty effectively examined under the 4-Factors (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/factors.html).

KenPom (http://kenpom.com/stats.php) already breaks this out in the team pages (that link is to the overview for subscribers) but, to me, it seems like only slight improvements for 3 point shooting and FT% wouldn't move the needle much, slight being the difference between where we are now and the 35% 3 & 70/75% free-throw, because they're smaller components of success. Improving our defensive rebounding would be a much better place to hope for improvement.

Considering how well we do the other things on defense I think giving up defensive rebounds hurts us more by resetting some of the valuable defensive work we just did. Improving that even 3-5% would move us up to a top 120-50 team. It seems more likely to me a team can be coached during the season to put their head on a swivel and locate the ball or man to box out when the other team shoots more realistically than they can be coached at 3 point shooting.

I'm not saying either is super likely, or that such an improvement is possible, but if I was going to coach the team (god forbid) I'd focus on that and keep telling my guys to shot open shots in the offense. I don't really see too many people shooting a lot on this team that feel like sub 34% 3 point shooters, maybe Zion but even then if he was 13-37 instead of 10-37 we'd be talking about how he's so good and a 35% 3 point shooter as well. RJ is only 3 made threes away from 34% on the season (he's taken 117) and Jack is only 2 away (from 69 taken). Cam is already there, as is Alex, and Tre has only taken 28 all year before he got hurt. Are we really worried that over 18 games we're 8 total made threes form being over 34% not counting Tre? (And if Tre had made 2 more? 35%)

Just in case anyone is curious this discussion made me locate an old bleacher report article (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2199338-why-nba-teams-will-keep-shooting-more-3-pointers-in-2014-15). I think it's a pretty good read in general but a lot of it seems relevant to the discussion even if it is pro game centric:
Shooting 48.8 percent from inside the arc means the average two-point attempt yields just 0.976 points. To break even, the necessary three-point percentage is only 32.53 percent.


And one of my favorite parts:
In Lowe's article, Alex Rucker, the Toronto Raptors director of analytics, reveals a problem, though:
When you ask coaches what’s better between a 28 percent 3-point shot and a 42 percent midrange shot, they’ll say the 42 percent shot. And that’s objectively false. It’s wrong. If LeBron James just jacked a 3 on every single possession, that’d be an exceptionally good offense. That’s a conversation we’ve had with our coaching staff, and let’s just say they don’t support that approach.




So maybe Zion shouldn't shoot threes because I'm pretty sure the break even point for a 74.7% :eek: 2 point shooter is out of his grasp at the moment :cool: (I think he'd have to roughly be a 55% 3 point shooter for it to make sense). But, he is at 27% for the year, so if he's faced with a 40% jumper, I'd rather he just take the 3. RJ is only 52%, Tre is only at 49% Cam is at 39.5% so I don't think their season 3% is necessarily bad relative to some of the shots they've been taking. And if they keep taking them and improve that can only help open up the floor for more high % 2 point shots - I think we can all agree on that.

[FerryFor50]

And if they keep taking them and improve that can only help open up the floor for more high % 2 point shots - I think we can all agree on that.

That's my chief concern with their sub-par 3pt shooting, more than it being an offensive weapon. That they'll run into a draw where a team will have good length and pack in the middle, dare Duke to shoot 3s and keep them out of transition. We already saw Syracuse successfully do that (barely, and without Cam/Tre). But I think that's the blueprint to beating Duke this year.

[bluesin]

That's my chief concern with their sub-par 3pt shooting, more than it being an offensive weapon. That they'll run into a draw where a team will have good length and pack in the middle, dare Duke to shoot 3s and keep them out of transition. We already saw Syracuse successfully do that (barely, and without Cam/Tre). But I think that's the blueprint to beating Duke this year.

That's a valid fear I have shared at times this season, but then I tell myself that if we shoot 20% from 3 (14% without Alex) and are missing our two best perimeter defenders against a team that gets all their scoring pretty much from the 1-3 spots and we still almost win then that's probably an OK fear to have. I'm not saying it can't hurt us, but I always fear a perfect storm of injury and fired up opposition when we play so I've learned to live with it I guess. Also, the last three games we haven't shot the 3 well but we have played 3 top 25 (KenPom) teams in terms of 3 defense so I'll worry about it more if it's a problem after Tre gets back if we can't get better looks and knock a few more down - especially against teams who aren't 1, 13 or 23 in preventing 3 point buckets (btw GT is 7th in 3 defense according to KP so I wouldn't let the next game get you down if we miss some). And, at least we seem pretty good against the 3 so far defensively (14th) so one of our strengths helps negate a weakness to some extent.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Improving that even 3-5% would move us up to a top 120-50 team. It seems more likely to me a team can be coached during the season to put their head on a swivel and locate the ball or man to box out when the other team shoots more realistically than they can be coached at 3 point shooting.
.

I agree with your premise (that players can become better 3 point shooters over just a few weeks) - but I don't think that premise is behind what could help Duke in 3 pointers. We don't need Cam to be better than he is, we just need him to be who he is. We don't need Jack to better, we need him just to be the old Jack, the Jack who is a good 3 point shooter. We need AOC to improve his 3 pointers in the next 6 weeks, we just need him to get more shots.

RJ won't improve on 3 this season IMO...Zion probably will...but the way to get 5% more accuracy for the team is simply for the guys to shoot like they can already shoot, and AOC to figure out how to play more minutes and get more shots.

I hope I have explained this nuance well....

[freshmanjs]

I agree with your premise (that players can become better 3 point shooters over just a few weeks) - but I don't think that premise is behind what could help Duke in 3 pointers. We don't need Cam to be better than he is, we just need him to be who he is. We don't need Jack to better, we need him just to be the old Jack, the Jack who is a good 3 point shooter. We need AOC to improve his 3 pointers in the next 6 weeks, we just need him to get more shots.

RJ won't improve on 3 this season IMO...Zion probably will...but the way to get 5% more accuracy for the team is simply for the guys to shoot like they can already shoot, and AOC to figure out how to play more minutes and get more shots.

I hope I have explained this nuance well...

Not sure what the basis is for saying players are better than their stats. Just because a player did better for a stretch of time doesn't make that stretch a more valid representation than the whole season of stats.

[bluesin]

I agree with your premise (that players can become better 3 point shooters over just a few weeks) - but I don't think that premise is behind what could help Duke in 3 pointers. We don't need Cam to be better than he is, we just need him to be who he is. We don't need Jack to better, we need him just to be the old Jack, the Jack who is a good 3 point shooter. We need AOC to improve his 3 pointers in the next 6 weeks, we just need him to get more shots.

RJ won't improve on 3 this season IMO...Zion probably will...but the way to get 5% more accuracy for the team is simply for the guys to shoot like they can already shoot, and AOC to figure out how to play more minutes and get more shots.

I hope I have explained this nuance well...

I don't really know what any of that has to do with improving our defensive rebounding 3-5% over where it is now. And I don't think I said players can improve their 3 point shooting over a few weeks, in fact I'm pretty sure all I said was I think our current 3 point shooting is fine and we don't need to improve it necessarily but we are only a few baskets over the course of a whole season from being at a number most people would be comfortable with. I'd be happy with it improving of course.

[uh_no]

Not sure what the basis is for saying players are better than their stats. Just because a player did better for a stretch of time doesn't make that stretch a more valid representation than the whole season of stats.

it's half a season, and even a season's worth of stats demonstrates pretty big variability. I can't find the link, but players year to year shooting stats vary enough to indicate that even a year's worth of data is not enough to draw really strong conclusions. Half of a player's freshman year certainly isn't.

[DukeMT]

I agree with your premise (that players can become better 3 point shooters over just a few weeks) - but I don't think that premise is behind what could help Duke in 3 pointers. We don't need Cam to be better than he is, we just need him to be who he is. We don't need Jack to better, we need him just to be the old Jack, the Jack who is a good 3 point shooter. We need AOC to improve his 3 pointers in the next 6 weeks, we just need him to get more shots.

RJ won't improve on 3 this season IMO...Zion probably will...but the way to get 5% more accuracy for the team is simply for the guys to shoot like they can already shoot, and AOC to figure out how to play more minutes and get more shots.

I hope I have explained this nuance well...


I 100% agree with this. I have thought all along that we are a better shooting team than our percentages show. IMO, I see a lot of 3 point attempts that are off balance, shoulders not squared, feet not set. These are low percentage shots, especially behind the arc. Jack does the best job of being squared with his feet set. He is just simply in a slump, and I have complete confidence that he will come out of this. The adjustment of taking shots that are balanced and squared (I am not implying set shots that are not in rhythm) will help tremendously, and I am sure that message is being conveyed by the coaching staff. I will not be surprised if we have some games in the near future in which we shoot a very high percentage. Throughout this recent stretch of poor shooting, I tell myself over and over again during a game that this can't continue. Maybe I am overly optimistic, but slumps do not last forever, and we have way to much talent to expect it to last for the rest of the season. MULTIPLE shots during this stretch have been half way down, multiple shots have rimed out. A few of those per game go down, and we probably aren't even having this discussion. When those shots actually DO go down, I expect to see some more Kentucky type performances. I will also go out a on limb and say that when we start shooting more consistently from the 3 point line, as good as it already is, our 2 point % will increase as well. We are blessed to have some incredible finishers around the rim, but they have had to do an awful amount of work to get some of those buckets. The Virginia game is a prime example. What Zion and RJ did with the packline is unheard of. They are just superior athletes. When we relax the packing it in by shooting more consistently, we will not have to work so hard to score in the paint.

[freshmanjs]

it's half a season, and even a season's worth of stats demonstrates pretty big variability. I can't find the link, but players year to year shooting stats vary enough to indicate that even a year's worth of data is not enough to draw really strong conclusions. Half of a player's freshman year certainly isn't.

Sure, I agree. But the suggestion was to use an even smaller sample set as a more accurate representation.

[dukelifer]

it's half a season, and even a season's worth of stats demonstrates pretty big variability. I can't find the link, but players year to year shooting stats vary enough to indicate that even a year's worth of data is not enough to draw really strong conclusions. Half of a player's freshman year certainly isn't.

Unless you are James Harden, some shooting is also about getting the ball at the right time. Tre may help shooting as the season continues.

[uh_no]

Sure, I agree. But the suggestion was to use an even smaller sample set as a more accurate representation.

I certainly agree in jack's case. I found this fun kenpom quip:

https://kenpom.com/blog/the-small-sample-size-oath/

I, (state your name), understand that the player stats are based on extremely limited information in mid-November. I understand that Erik Murphy (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=9900) is not the best college basketball player of all time and that Adreian Payne (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=11178) is not going to grab anything close to 43% of opponents’ missed shots nor 0% of his own team’s misses for a full season. Additionally, I understand that some of the numbers displayed on these pages are utterly meaningless at this point, like Rahlir Hollis-Jefferson’s (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=9469) free throw rate or anything on Jordan Vandenberg’s (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=10181) line. I will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the responsible use of advanced stats for individuals in mid-November.


In reality, Jack is probably better than 1-18, and worse than whatever he shot before that.

[freshmanjs]

In reality, Jack is probably better than 1-18, and worse than whatever he shot before that.[/FONT][/COLOR]

Which makes his overall stats for the season a pretty good guess about what he is this year (the best guess we have right now).

[uh_no]

Which makes his overall stats for the season a pretty good guess about what he is this year (the best guess we have right now).

not really. That's like playing two scratchoff cards, winning the jackpot one time, nothing the next, and assuming the expected value per card is half the jackpot. The sample size is still too small and the variance too high to draw any conclusion without a yuuuuge margin of error.

[robed deity]

Which makes his overall stats for the season a pretty good guess about what he is this year (the best guess we have right now).

White did have several decent looks against Syracuse that didn't fall (although not really in great rhythm against that zone) but the last 2 games without Tre, it SEEMS that he's getting his shots while a half step less open. So he's passed some up, and missed the ones he's taken. He also doesn't have a very quick release. I think he'll get more open looks and hit more when Trey comes back. Luke Maye is having a similar issue down the road, I think.

[freshmanjs]

not really. That's like playing two scratchoff cards, winning the jackpot one time, nothing the next, and assuming the expected value per card is half the jackpot. The sample size is still too small and the variance too high to draw any conclusion without a yuuuuge margin of error.

You are arguing that a smaller sample size is more valid than a larger one because the larger one isn't even larger? Interesting. And it's not like that at all. Saying Marshall Plumlee is a 100% 3 point shooter is like that. We have a reasonable sample of Jack's shooting this year. It is absolutely not giving us 0 information.

[uh_no]

You are arguing that a smaller sample size is more valid than a larger one because the larger one isn't even larger? Interesting.

i don't recall saying anything of the sort.

We have two segments of jacks year.....one is about as poor as it can be, and one is about as good as it can be. We have mountains of historical data that indicate that the best almost anyone is gonna do shooting the three is mid 40s%, and I'm fairly confident you can't do worse than 0% (but hey, maybe I just need a larger sample size).

It's nothing novel to claim with high probability that Jack's intrinsic three point ability falls between these two extremes.

So you can win the jackpot and nothing on two scratchoffs, you CAN say that the expected value of a card likely falls between those two values, which is all I said and almost assuredly true. That has nothing to do with sample size and everything to do with the range of possible outcomes. You can roll a die as many times as you like and never get a 7. Jack could take a million three point shots and very very likely, based on mountains of historical data, probably wouldn't shoot above mid 40's.

I can make a very high probability guess that 0 < jack's 3pt% < 45 with no samples.

[CDu]

You are arguing that a smaller sample size is more valid than a larger one because the larger one isn't even larger? Interesting. And it's not like that at all. Saying Marshall Plumlee is a 100% 3 point shooter is like that. We have a reasonable sample of Jack's shooting this year. It is absolutely not giving us 0 information.

Yep. The more accurate statement would have been “it is like playing 69 scratch-off cards...”. Only even that is inaccurate, because you need a MUCH larger sample size to feel confident when it is an extremely low probability event (which winning the jackpot is and 3pt shooting isn’t).

[freshmanjs]

I certainly agree in jack's case. I found this fun kenpom quip:

https://kenpom.com/blog/the-small-sample-size-oath/

I, (state your name), understand that the player stats are based on extremely limited information in mid-November. I understand that Erik Murphy (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=9900) is not the best college basketball player of all time and that Adreian Payne (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=11178) is not going to grab anything close to 43% of opponents’ missed shots nor 0% of his own team’s misses for a full season. Additionally, I understand that some of the numbers displayed on these pages are utterly meaningless at this point, like Rahlir Hollis-Jefferson’s (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=9469) free throw rate or anything on Jordan Vandenberg’s (http://kenpom.com/player.php?p=10181) line. I will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the responsible use of advanced stats for individuals in mid-November.


In reality, Jack is probably better than 1-18, and worse than whatever he shot before that.


i don't recall saying anything of the sort.

We have two segments of jacks year....one is about as poor as it can be, and one is about as good as it can be. We have mountains of historical data that indicate that the best almost anyone is gonna do shooting the three is mid 40s%, and I'm fairly confident you can't do worse than 0% (but hey, maybe I just need a larger sample size).

It's nothing novel to claim with high probability that Jack's intrinsic three point ability falls between these two extremes.

So you can win the jackpot and nothing on two scratchoffs, you CAN say that the expected value of a card likely falls between those two values, which is all I said and almost assuredly true. That has nothing to do with sample size and everything to do with the range of possible outcomes. You can roll a die as many times as you like and never get a 7. Jack could take a million three point shots and very very likely, based on mountains of historical data, probably wouldn't shoot above mid 40's.

I can make a very high probability guess that 0 < jack's 3pt% < 45 with no samples.

You said exactly that as quoted above.

The rest of this is all obviously true and not a point of debate.

However, we do have more information than 0-45. We have a sample of 83 shots for Jack across 3 years. That sample is not worthless in informing how good he is. Would you say we no absolutely nothing about whether Zion is a good scorer because there have been too few games?

[uh_no]

You said exactly that as quoted above.

I was agreeing with you......

I also believe that 80 whatever shots is not nearly enough. Luke shot 32% on 170 shots one year and 44% on 200 the next. Though I can't find the article, there is a kenpom post where he talks about year to year variance.

So no, 80 shots is not enough.

https://www.random.org/coins/?num=80&cur=60-usd.0025c-ct

I simulated flipping 80 coins. I got 31 heads. Clearly this coin is rigged. Such a deviation from the mean will occur about once out of every 16 trials for a random event. Given that it's been demonstrated that "hot hand" is something which is a real effect in three point shooting, you would expect an even higher standard deviation....lets say 1 out of 10....and that's for something as extreme as a 12 point deviation from the mean. For a 5 point deviation over 80 trials? it's something like 1/3.

so there's something like a 1/3 chance jack is a better than 37% or worse than 27% free throw shooter.

That's why 80 samples is not enough.

[freshmanjs]

I was agreeing with you...

I also believe that 80 whatever shots is not nearly enough. Luke shot 32% on 170 shots one year and 44% on 200 the next. Though I can't find the article, there is a kenpom post where he talks about year to year variance.

So no, 80 shots is not enough.

https://www.random.org/coins/?num=80&cur=60-usd.0025c-ct

I simulated flipping 80 coins. I got 31 heads. Clearly this coin is rigged. Such a deviation from the mean will occur about once out of every 16 trials for a random event. Given that it's been demonstrated that "hot hand" is something which is a real effect in three point shooting, you would expect an even higher standard deviation...lets say 1 out of 10...and that's for something as extreme as a 12 point deviation from the mean. For a 5 point deviation over 80 trials? it's something like 1/3.

so there's something like a 1/3 chance jack is a better than 37% or worse than 27% free throw shooter.

That's why 80 samples is not enough.

Enough for what? I'm saying that we have more than 0 information. You are using a lot of words in multiple posts to say that small sample sizes have a lot of noise. You've made an extreme argument that a sample size of 2 can be very misleading. Obviously true and agreed. That does NOT imply that we have zero useful information in this case. I'm certainly not arguing that with more trials, his % wouldn't go up or down. I'm sure it would. I don't think we have any basis at all to think that up is more likely than down.

[CDu]

Enough for what? I'm saying that we have more than 0 information. You are using a lot of words in multiple posts to say that small sample sizes have a lot of noise. You've made an extreme argument that a sample size of 2 can be very misleading. Obviously true and agreed. That does NOT imply that we have zero useful information in this case. I'm certainly not arguing that with more trials, his % wouldn't go up or down. I'm sure it would. I don't think we have any basis at all to think that up is more likely than down.

I would posit with 90% confidence that White is somewhere between a 23% 3pt shooter and 41.3% 3pt shooter based on the evidence that White has given us this year.

[uh_no]

I would posit with 90% confidence that White is somewhere between a 23% 3pt shooter and 41.3% 3pt shooter based on the evidence that White has given us this year.

sounds publishable to me!

[BandAlum83]

I would posit with 90% confidence that White is somewhere between a 23% 3pt shooter and 41.3% 3pt shooter based on the evidence that White has given us this year.

I would posit that EVERY attempted 3pt shot Jack takes will either increase or decrease his percentage. I believe that whether his percentage will go up or down will be a function of whether or not the attempt is successfully completed. I won't confirm that a make will raise his percentage or that a miss will lower his percentage until I have more data.

I'll even go out on a limb and state that would be the case for every Duke player.

I won't say that for every player on every team, however. I have not looked at other team's data. I'm not sure if there is enough data to make that assertion anyway.

[CDu]

I would posit that EVERY attempted 3pt shot Jack takes will either increase or decrease his percentage. I believe that whether his percentage will go up or down will be a function of whether or not the attempt is successfully completed. I won't confirm that a make will raise his percentage or that a miss will lower his percentage until I have more data.

I'll even go out on a limb and state that would be the case for every Duke player.

I won't say that for every player on every team, however. I have not looked at other team's data. I'm not sure if there is enough data to make that assertion anyway.

That would be a bad decision, as Brennan Besser is 0-4 on the season. So if he misses his next shot, it will neither increase nor decrease his percentage. ;)

[BandAlum83]

That would be a bad decision, as Brennan Besser is 0-4 on the season. So if he misses his next shot, it will neither increase nor decrease his percentage. ;)

What's colder than cold? Ice Cold!

What's less than zero? Absolute zero!

[uh_no]

I would posit that EVERY attempted 3pt shot Jack takes will either increase or decrease his percentage. I believe that whether his percentage will go up or down will be a function of whether or not the attempt is successfully completed. I won't confirm that a make will raise his percentage or that a miss will lower his percentage until I have more data.

I'll even go out on a limb and state that would be the case for every Duke player.

I won't say that for every player on every team, however. I have not looked at other team's data. I'm not sure if there is enough data to make that assertion anyway.

excuse me...a couple of the plumlee brothers would like a word.

[BandAlum83]

excuse me...a couple of the plumlee brothers would like a word.

See, there you go. That limb was mighty precarious!