PDA

View Full Version : MBB: Dork Polls 2019-20 Edition



dukelion
10-20-2019, 12:33 PM
2019-2020 KenPom is out........kenpom.com

Mich St. in a different tier than the rest.....Duke at 4 and UNC at 6.

bullettoothtony
10-20-2019, 01:14 PM
Apparently Michigan State just lost to Gonzaga in a scrimmage.

mgtr
10-21-2019, 10:20 AM
Apparently Michigan State just lost to Gonzaga in a scrimmage.

Wow, although in the past, Izzo teams have started slowly.

wobatus
10-21-2019, 11:09 AM
Wow, although in the past, Izzo teams have started slowly.

Apparently Gonzaga beat them in a scrimmage last year, too. The Zags played without Tillie, out with a knee injury, but they are still pretty good. Kispert started last year, and was efficient, even if not one of the top options on o. Petrusev was a good bench pieces last year and a top 100 RSCI guy. Timme and Watson were top 50 guys coming in as freshmen. Admon Gilder, grad transfer, was a good 3 shooter and 12-13 ppg guy at Texas A&M. Woolridge is another decent grad transfer from North Texas. Few has them at the stage where they basically just reload.

Izzo has a teachable moment here, probably. ;)

Native
11-06-2019, 11:50 AM
After last night, we’re 10th in AdjO and 3rd in AdjD. We also lead the nation in turnover percentage. Hopefully these numbers stay pat.

flyingdutchdevil
11-06-2019, 11:52 AM
After last night, we’re 10th in AdjO and 3rd in AdjD. We also lead the nation in turnover percentage. Hopefully these numbers stay pat.

That AdjD number should, given the identity of the team. That AdjO number is gonna come way down before it comes back up.

I'm expecting 20s and 30s in Dec/Jan.

JasonEvans
11-06-2019, 12:05 PM
Can someone explain to me how Duke and Kansas have different tempo ratings? I guess there is some adjustment for opponent in there but we have exactly 1 game of tempo evidence on Duke and Kansas... maybe I am not good enough at math or stats or something.

Also Duke just played the 10th best team in the land but Duke has the 22nd best schedule. I guess the home adjustment makes some of the teams who are ranked lower than Kansas a tougher opponent after 1 game.

-Jason "the lesson is to not look at statistical models after one game... it will just confuse you and has very very very limited value" Evans

MChambers
11-06-2019, 12:15 PM
Can someone explain to me how Duke and Kansas have different tempo ratings? I guess there is some adjustment for opponent in there but we have exactly 1 game of tempo evidence on Duke and Kansas... maybe I am not good enough at math or stats or something.

Also Duke just played the 10th best team in the land but Duke has the 22nd best schedule. I guess the home adjustment makes some of the teams who are ranked lower than Kansas a tougher opponent after 1 game.

-Jason "the lesson is to not look at statistical models after one game... it will just confuse you and has very very very limited value" Evans

Jason, KenPom doesn’t start at zero each season. Each team comes in with AdjO, AdjD, and tempo numbers based on last year and other stuff, to get technical.

JasonEvans
11-06-2019, 12:22 PM
Jason, KenPom doesn’t start at zero each season. Each team comes in with AdjO, AdjD, and tempo numbers based on last year and other stuff, to get technical.

I knew that Ken baked in some preseason guesses on O and D. I did not know he did that for tempo too. I suppose that makes sense.

MChambers
11-06-2019, 12:46 PM
I knew that Ken baked in some preseason guesses on O and D. I did not know he did that for tempo too. I suppose that makes sense.

Look at UVa. Haven't played yet, but ranked dead last (or first, in Tony Bennett's mind) in tempo, at #353.

Billy Dat
11-06-2019, 12:56 PM
I heard Gary Parrish note that today may be the only day in KenPom history when a team below .500 was ranked #1.

ChillinDuke
11-06-2019, 01:06 PM
That AdjD number should, given the identity of the team. That AdjO number is gonna come way down before it comes back up.

I'm expecting 20s and 30s in Dec/Jan.

FDD, when you say "the identity of the team", what do you mean? You've said this in a couple threads now that I've seen.

Should I take you to mean that based on our first game, you believe that the team will have a defensive mindset?

If so, you may end up being right. But I'm not sure how you're there already after only 40 mins of meaningful basketball.

- Chillin

robed deity
11-06-2019, 01:25 PM
FDD, when you say "the identity of the team", what do you mean? You've said this in a couple threads now that I've seen.

Should I take you to mean that based on our first game, you believe that the team will have a defensive mindset?

If so, you may end up being right. But I'm not sure how you're there already after only 40 mins of meaningful basketball.

- Chillin

He might be thinking "it better be" after seeing some of the early offensive numbers.

Troublemaker
11-06-2019, 04:50 PM
FDD, when you say "the identity of the team", what do you mean? You've said this in a couple threads now that I've seen.

Should I take you to mean that based on our first game, you believe that the team will have a defensive mindset?

If so, you may end up being right. But I'm not sure how you're there already after only 40 mins of meaningful basketball.

- Chillin

It's also what Coach K has said repeatedly in press conferences, though. In one instance, he even said (paraphrasing) that we are a very confident bunch on defense and he wants us to develop that kind of confidence on offense as well.

While normally I would be wary of taking preseason K quotes 100% seriously (e.g. last preseason's "5-out offense," multiple previous examples of preseason "we'll be deeper"), his preseason thoughts have seemed to mesh with what we've seen on the court so far. This team does appear to have a defensive identity and Coach K at least for now does appear to be going deeper into his bench than usual.

devildeac
11-06-2019, 04:53 PM
Look at UVa. Haven't played yet, but ranked dead last (or first, in Tony Bennett's mind) in tempo, at #353.

Well, they haven't scored yet...

:rolleyes:;)

Hingeknocker
11-14-2019, 05:45 PM
While it's too early in the season to take any one team's efficiency ratings too seriously, in the aggregate there are definitely trends to pick up on in how teams are different this year than in years past. Every year around this time, Ken Pomeroy will tweet nationwide FT%, 3PT%, etc. to show how those rates tend to establish themselves pretty early in a given season. While each team has only played 2 or 3 games by now, in the aggregate that means hundreds and hundreds of D1 games have been played already.

This year, what he's been harping on is overall offensive efficiency. The trend is down across the country, and it doesn't take a genius to theorize that the longer 3pt line is the culprit. My opinion/hope when the rule change was announced was that this would benefit teams with better talent overall, like Duke. I don't even think it's necessary that Duke in particular is proficient at shooting 3s to be helped by the rule change (although, it certainly won't hurt if Stanley, O'Connell, Hurt, Jones, White, Moore, Carey, etc. find themselves making a high % of their 3s). What I do think is that by making the offensive footprint bigger, more talented players all over the floor are going to have more opportunity to succeed against their less talented counterparts. Good for programs like Duke.

I'm interested to follow this trend this season. Pomeroy has noted that offensive efficiency and shooting percentages tend to increase throughout a season, but the point this year is that the starting point is much lower than previous years. He has noted in several tweets, if you follow him there, that 2019-20 will end up as the worst overall offensive efficiency season since the shot clock was reduced to 30. And, that this season already has more games in which a team failed to score 35 points (in 9 days!) than in any of the previous 4 full seasons. That last stat was the mind-blowing impetus for me to make this post.

Anyway, I'm very interested to follow this trend throughout the season, and I'm excited to test my hypothesis that better teams are helped by the rule change. If I'm right, I'd expect that the gap between the best teams in terms of their offensive and net rating will be greater than in years past, and upsets will be harder to come by. (Just don't tell Evansville that!)

Hartford Dukie
11-18-2019, 03:00 PM
Four ACC in top 7 and four in top 6 in Coaches

Louisville #2

uncheats #5

Virginia #7

no other ACC ranked though FSU is 26th.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

English
11-18-2019, 03:48 PM
Four ACC in top 7 and four in top 6 in Coaches

Louisville #2

uncheats #5

Virginia #7

no other ACC ranked though FSU is 26th.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

And to keep to the Dork Poll theme of the thread, four ACC teams in the top-7 of KenPom:
2. UofL
3. UVa
4. Duke
7. Unx
...
15. FSU
...
...
43. NCSt
44. VaTech
46. Notre Dame
51. Cuse

kAzE
11-18-2019, 04:11 PM
If the rankings of these early season polls proves somewhat accurate, it would appear that Duke has one of the easiest possible schedules in the conference. Of the top 5 teams in the ACC, Duke plays Virginia, Louisville, and Florida State just once each (which is fairly lucky considering we are playing 20 conferences games this season), with Virginia being the only road game of those 3. Duke cannot play against itself, and we have the home and home with UNC of course. All things considered, this is a relatively easy conference schedule.

Our non conference schedule is also is pretty easy. Aside from top 10 opponents Michigan State and Kansas, who we already played, there are only 2 possible teams we will be facing currently in the top 100 on KenPom: Georgetown (#69) and Texas (#26), and we will only face one of those teams if we reach the championship of the 2K classic event.

Pretty cupcake schedule this year, at first glance. But then again, Georgia St. (#147 currently) gave us a pretty good game in Cameron. We have a very young team, so an unexpected loss could happen. And also, I did caveat this in the first sentence of my post, but it's extremely early, and these rankings probably don't mean all that much yet.

Wahoo2000
11-18-2019, 05:14 PM
And to keep to the Dork Poll theme of the thread, four ACC teams in the top-7 of KenPom:
2. UofL
3. UVa
4. Duke
7. Unx
...
15. FSU
...
...
43. NCSt
44. VaTech
46. Notre Dame
51. Cuse

Man, I really expected the middle of the league to come a lot closer to the top this year. With UVa, Duke, and UNC losing soooooo much production, I really expected the lines between the "tiers" in the league to get a little blurry this season. Instead, it seems that the gap between the top teams (FSU notwithstanding, or heck, you can even throw them in with the other top 4) and the middle of the league has widened.

I'll also say that based on the dreaded eyeball test, I don't think ANY team in the league is very close to where Duke, UNC, and UVa were last season from a quality-of-play standpoint.

HereBeforeCoachK
11-18-2019, 05:15 PM
If the rankings of these early season polls proves somewhat accurate, it would appear that Duke has one of the easiest possible schedules in the conference. Of the top 5 teams in the ACC, Duke plays Virginia, Louisville, and Florida State just once each (which is fairly lucky considering we are playing 20 conferences games this season), with Virginia being the only road game of those 3. Duke cannot play against itself, and we have the home and home with UNC of course. All things considered, this is a relatively easy conference schedule.
.

I guess we finally got the Virginia treatment on the schedule......they seem to get lucky with that every year.

Troublemaker
11-19-2019, 01:04 PM
Man, I really expected the middle of the league to come a lot closer to the top this year. With UVa, Duke, and UNC losing soooooo much production, I really expected the lines between the "tiers" in the league to get a little blurry this season. Instead, it seems that the gap between the top teams (FSU notwithstanding, or heck, you can even throw them in with the other top 4) and the middle of the league has widened.

I'll also say that based on the dreaded eyeball test, I don't think ANY team in the league is very close to where Duke, UNC, and UVa were last season from a quality-of-play standpoint.

I think the top ACC teams will come back to the pack as the season progresses, as I am highly suspicious of some of those rankings. Starting with UVA, to be frank, as I don't think you guys are really a top-5 team. (I will add that a good case can be made that Duke won't be top-5 on a long-term basis either. Louisville at #2 also seems like a stretch, but we'll see). With UVA, I'm wondering if we'll see a repeat of 2017 when kenpom actually loved you guys through January before the team somewhat collapsed in February and March.

brevity
11-19-2019, 01:18 PM
(...Louisville at #2 also seems like a stretch, but we'll see).

Louisville gets tested in December with games against Michigan (at home), Texas Tech (neutral), and Kentucky (road). I would be very surprised if their January 18 game at Duke is still a 1 vs 2 matchup.

English
11-19-2019, 03:59 PM
I think the top ACC teams will come back to the pack as the season progresses, as I am highly suspicious of some of those rankings. Starting with UVA, to be frank, as I don't think you guys are really a top-5 team. (I will add that a good case can be made that Duke won't be top-5 on a long-term basis either. Louisville at #2 also seems like a stretch, but we'll see). With UVA, I'm wondering if we'll see a repeat of 2017 when kenpom actually loved you guys through January before the team somewhat collapsed in February and March.

Agreed, and I'm interested to see what happens to these rankings when last year's stats get flushed out of the calculus. That said, the consensus seems to be that college hoops is down across the board this year--certainly there aren't any/many teams to jump out as goliaths--so we'll see if the top ACC teams are just the best of this year's crop. I suspect, though, that this year will see more parity and upsets than most years when a few teams really separated themselves from the field. That's all just my hunch without any real basis in data to this point of the young season.

Troublemaker
11-26-2019, 07:47 PM
Heads up. Duke is currently #1 in both human polls and kenpom!

Might not last, depending on how we perform against SFA tonight.

Kedsy
11-26-2019, 10:25 PM
Heads up. Duke is currently #1 in both human polls and kenpom!

Might not last, depending on how we perform against SFA tonight.

You know what's crazy about Pomeroy right now? The #1 offense has an adjusted oRating of just 114.8.

I assume it has to do with the lengthened three-point line, but wow. In Pomeroy history, the lowest #1 adjO rating was 119.4 (Duke in 2006). The second lowest was 120.9 (Georgia in 2003).

uh_no
11-27-2019, 12:29 AM
You know what's crazy about Pomeroy right now? The #1 offense has an adjusted oRating of just 114.8.

I assume it has to do with the lengthened three-point line, but wow. In Pomeroy history, the lowest #1 adjO rating was 119.4 (Duke in 2006). The second lowest was 120.9 (Georgia in 2003).

It generally grows as the year goes on, and parameters in the algorithms can tweak the mean and spread a bit....though i think he tries to choose paramaters that keep the mean around 100 and the spread in either direction about 20.

Either way, it won't be "tuned in" until we have removed all the preseason data.

Kedsy
11-27-2019, 01:21 AM
It generally grows as the year goes on, and parameters in the algorithms can tweak the mean and spread a bit...though i think he tries to choose paramaters that keep the mean around 100 and the spread in either direction about 20.

Either way, it won't be "tuned in" until we have removed all the preseason data.

The numbers might be lower after we remove the preseason data.

JasonEvans
11-27-2019, 08:26 AM
Might not last, depending on how we perform against SFA tonight.

It is now clear to me that Troublemaker is a witch who can see into the future.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-27-2019, 08:43 AM
It is now clear to me that Troublemaker is a witch who can see into the future.

Troublemaker has picked their online persona carefully.

Wahoo2000
11-28-2019, 03:06 PM
Just logged onto KenPom today and noticed that the current first place team, MSU, is at 26.89 adjusted eff margin. And while I'm aware that the numbers still have a lot of preseason estimates/projections baked in, I honestly think those are only helping most of the teams at the top.

26.89, btw, as an END of season ranking, wouldn't crack the top 5 in MOST seasons, and averages falling somewhere around 8th nationally. This is really reinforcing (to me) the opinion that there just aren't ANY elite teams out there this year. In fact, based on the numbers, it looks like you'd have to go OUTSIDE the top 60 for the #1 team in the nation to be favored by double digits on a neutral site game (assuming an "average" number of possessions game, around 70-75). That seems crazy to me. Just an insane level of parity in college bball this year.

ElliottHoo
11-28-2019, 06:06 PM
The numbers might be lower after we remove the preseason data.

Last year, at season’s end, UVA was the #2 offensive team in the country. This year, with a ton of that #2-ness still baked in, UVA is currently ranked #82 in offense.

If you stripped out last season’s numbers, I don’t know that UVA would rate as an average offense in the MAC, much less the ACC.

uh_no
11-28-2019, 08:32 PM
Last year, at season’s end, UVA was the #2 offensive team in the country. This year, with a ton of that #2-ness still baked in, UVA is currently ranked #82 in offense.

If you stripped out last season’s numbers, I don’t know that UVA would rate as an average offense in the MAC, much less the ACC.

a single past years results don't have THAT much influence...

ElliottHoo
11-29-2019, 12:10 AM
UVA's averaging a whopping 0.91 points per possession so far this season, despite playing essentially average defensive teams so far (KenPom 98.7 OppD, #151). The median MAC offensive team so far this season is exactly 1.00 AdjO (mid-way between Akron and Miami-OH). Miami-OH, excluding non-D1 opponents, has averaged 1.05 points per possession while playing average OppD of about 1.00.

Obviously, all *those* numbers still have lots of last season baked in as well, but I think its quite probable I overstated how well UVA's offense is playing.

JasonEvans
12-04-2019, 10:27 AM
And we have a new #1 team in KenPom. After Duke's beatdown of Michigan State (at Breslin) the Spartans have moved out of the #1 spot and now find themselves as the #3 team in the land according to the advanced metrics of Mr. Pomeroy.

Louisville, who had a really impressive defensive performance against Michigan, is now the #3 offensive team and the #4 defensive team making them the overall #1 team in the country. KenPom's #2 is some team that managed to lose to the Six Million Dollar Man last week.

https://live.staticflickr.com/8526/8557986279_72205a58e4_b.jpg

MChambers
12-04-2019, 10:35 AM
UVA's averaging a whopping 0.91 points per possession so far this season, despite playing essentially average defensive teams so far (KenPom 98.7 OppD, #151). The median MAC offensive team so far this season is exactly 1.00 AdjO (mid-way between Akron and Miami-OH). Miami-OH, excluding non-D1 opponents, has averaged 1.05 points per possession while playing average OppD of about 1.00.

Obviously, all *those* numbers still have lots of last season baked in as well, but I think its quite probable I overstated how well UVA's offense is playing.

UVa's defense is #1 in T-Rank, best in the country by a huge margin, but the offense is #168.

devildeac
12-04-2019, 11:35 AM
UVa's defense is #1 in T-Rank, best in the country by a huge margin, but the offense is #168.

And they'll be delighted every time they bludgeon a foe by a score of something like 50-45. :eek:

English
12-04-2019, 11:42 AM
And they'll be delighted every time they bludgeon a foe by a score of something like 50-45. :eek:

To reinforce that, tonight's Over/Under in the UVa-Purdue matchup is a generous 103.5 (opened at 101.5). For the gambling uninitiated, that's LOW. Basically, Vegas thinks tonight's game is going to be something like Purdue 53-49 UVA (Purdue also favored by 2 at home).

Vegas cannot make this season's UVa Unders low enough.

arnie
12-07-2019, 07:33 AM
Recognize polls don’t matter, but may be difficult for Duke to move up from 10 very much. AP doesn’t like to move teams down if they don’t lose and not much happening this week. We should move ahead of the 3 loss Cheats after UVA annihilates them, but otherwise, no obvious upward movement.

And how is Kansas #2 with only one good win (#19 Dayton) and a close loss to the #10 team?

robed deity
12-09-2019, 12:55 PM
https://www.masseyratings.com/ranks?s=cb

Look who's number one in the composite.

jv001
12-09-2019, 04:48 PM
https://www.masseyratings.com/ranks?s=cb

Look who's number one in the composite.

Look who's number 26. I like both of those rankings but it's a long season. Duke can get better and I hope the cheats get worse.
GoDuke!

Kedsy
12-23-2019, 04:00 PM
I was perusing Pomeroy this afternoon, and I noticed the #1, #2, and #3 defenses in the country are all from the ACC (also, #9).

JasonEvans
01-05-2020, 07:49 PM
Much has been made of the fact that teams this year are much weaker than in past years. I have mentioned on the podcast a couple times that the top Kenpom team in 2019-20 would barely be a top 10 team in most other years. In each of the past 14 years, there has been at least 1 team that managed to have a Kenpom efficiency margin of +30 or greater. For a very long time it looked like no team would achieve that this year.

And then along came the post-SFA Duke team.

Following the walloping of Miami, Duke's EM has moved to 30.19. By comparison, last year's Duke team finished the season as the #4 team in Kenpom with a +30.62.

Obviously there is a lot of basketball yet to be played and if there is one dead-certain sure thing about the rankings it is that they will change, but at the moment Duke is quite clearly the best team in the land. Kansas (who we beat) is the #2 team in KenPom with a +27.41 and the #3 team is Michigan State (who we also beat) with a +25.98.

-Jason "in case you have not been paying attention, Duke has been really, really, really good the past few weeks" Evans

DoubleBlue
01-06-2020, 08:06 AM
Following the walloping of Miami, Duke's EM has moved to 30.19. By comparison, last year's Duke team finished the season as the #4 team in Kenpom with a +30.62.

I believe KenPom and the other rating systems are all relative to the field in that year. You could argue that for a large field of 350+ teams the average does not move much from year to year. However the current gap of nearly three numbers vs #2 Kansas at 27.33 is significant and does indicate a weak overall field, at least near the top. I find it hard to believe that this year's Duke team is as good as last year's.

uh_no
01-06-2020, 09:13 AM
I believe KenPom and the other rating systems are all relative to the field in that year. You could argue that for a large field of 350+ teams the average does not move much from year to year. However the current gap of nearly three numbers vs #2 Kansas at 27.33 is significant and does indicate a weak overall field, at least near the top. I find it hard to believe that this year's Duke team is as good as last year's.

this is correct. absolute KP numbers are hard to compare year to year.

That said, given the weaknesses of last years team, I think this team could give them a shot. Obvoiusly Tre is a YoY upgrade, and Carey is quiet, but he's the #1 player in the country (KP). Stanley and Cam is a stronger offensive weapon, though Cam was longer and more valuable on defense. Then add Hurt and depth? Clearly this team can shoot the 3 more consistently.

I'd give this team 4/10 over last years team, and that's comparing this team right now to our team at the end of last year. The depth is a HUGE benefit.

It definitely shows that we are more dominant than any other team in the country right now, and I can't see how that's arguable right now, and likely more dominant than last years team was at any point....though I think that says more about the other teams.

The undoing this year, though, might be the weakness in the ACC.

Billy Dat
01-06-2020, 09:30 AM
Duke's ascension up the Dork polls, combined with its road thumping of Miami, combined with Gonzaga's lackluster last two conference wins, has resulted in a slew of "Duke is the clear #1 team as of today" takes. Hopefully we can keep it going on Wednesday.

NBC College Basketball (Rob Dauster) power rankings
https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2020/01/06/college-basketball-top-25-power-rankings-gonzaga-kansas-ohio-state-louisville-gonzaga-duke/

CBS Eye on College Basketball Podcast - Matt Norlander has come around on Duke
https://www.cbssports.com/podcasts/eye-on-college-basketball/
Go to 23:30 of the 1/5/20 episode

Bilas Rankings
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/28409605/jay-bilas-college-basketball-rankings-2019-20-version-20

ESPN's John Gasaway
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/insider/story/_/id/28424492/why-duke-great-season-more-hot-takes-prove

jv001
01-06-2020, 09:34 AM
this is correct. absolute KP numbers are hard to compare year to year.

That said, given the weaknesses of last years team, I think this team could give them a shot. Obvoiusly Tre is a YoY upgrade, and Carey is quiet, but he's the #1 player in the country (KP). Stanley and Cam is a stronger offensive weapon, though Cam was longer and more valuable on defense. Then add Hurt and depth? Clearly this team can shoot the 3 more consistently.

I'd give this team 4/10 over last years team, and that's comparing this team right now to our team at the end of last year. The depth is a HUGE benefit.

It definitely shows that we are more dominant than any other team in the country right now, and I can't see how that's arguable right now, and likely more dominant than last years team was at any point...though I think that says more about the other teams.

The undoing this year, though, might be the weakness in the ACC.

Let Coach K coach this years team and let ole roy coach last years team and this team wins 8 of 10 and Zion and RJ wouldn't make the pros. :cool:
GoDuke!

uh_no
01-06-2020, 10:06 AM
Duke's ascension up the Dork polls, combined with its road thumping of Miami, combined with Gonzaga's lackluster last two conference wins, has resulted in a slew of "Duke is the clear #1 team as of today" takes. Hopefully we can keep it going on Wednesday.

NBC College Basketball (Rob Dauster) power rankings
https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2020/01/06/college-basketball-top-25-power-rankings-gonzaga-kansas-ohio-state-louisville-gonzaga-duke/

CBS Eye on College Basketball Podcast - Matt Norlander has come around on Duke
https://www.cbssports.com/podcasts/eye-on-college-basketball/
Go to 23:30 of the 1/5/20 episode

Bilas Rankings
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/28409605/jay-bilas-college-basketball-rankings-2019-20-version-20

ESPN's John Gasaway
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/insider/story/_/id/28424492/why-duke-great-season-more-hot-takes-prove

yet ESPN power rankings still has duke at 2....which is odd given their own descriptions slam gonzaga while pumping duke. what's the point of having a power ranking if you completely ignore what you write in the description?

jv001
01-06-2020, 10:16 AM
yet ESPN power rankings still has duke at 2...which is odd given their own descriptions slam gonzaga while pumping duke. what's the point of having a power ranking if you completely ignore what you write in the description?

Could mean they don't really mean what they say while pumping Duke. I will never have any confidence or have much positive to say about ESPN. They showed their true colors(ugly blue) during the academic fraud case against the cheats. Their silence on the issue let me know they are the uncheat network with Jay Bilas as chief spokesman. GoDuke!

ice-9
01-06-2020, 12:22 PM
I love the enthusiasm for our Duke team right now, but don't forget this is a team that lost to SF Austin in Cameron! That's like a 1 seed losing to a 16 seed most years.

Maybe that was just one bad game and we've improved in a fundamental way since then, but still...elite teams simply don't lose those kinds of games.

Troublemaker
01-06-2020, 01:26 PM
I love the enthusiasm for our Duke team right now, but don't forget this is a team that lost to SF Austin in Cameron! That's like a 1 seed losing to a 16 seed most years.

Maybe that was just one bad game and we've improved in a fundamental way since then, but still...elite teams simply don't lose those kinds of games.

They very rarely lose them, but it does happen.

No game is ever a 100% lock. Duke probably had something like a 99.5% chance at winning, but that 0.5% chance of losing still existed. And, unfortunately, we "won the lottery" that day in a sense in that the 0.5% chance happened to happen that day.

Hingeknocker
01-06-2020, 02:11 PM
They very rarely lose them, but it does happen.

No game is ever a 100% lock. Duke probably had something like a 99.5% chance at winning, but that 0.5% chance of losing still existed. And, unfortunately, we "won the lottery" that day in a sense in that the 0.5% chance happened to happen that day.

Not to mention, if that game were replayed today, the projections would give SFA a much, much higher chance of beating Duke than 0.5%. Obviously, the teams' performance in the original head-to-head matchup factor into each's ranking, but the fact is that SFA is a much better team than everyone thought back on 11/26.

And further to the point, SFA is much better than a 16 seed. Assuming they win their conference, they'll be a ~13 seed, and a dangerous one at that. Unfortunately for them, they won't sneak up on anybody with the Duke win on their resume.

uh_no
01-06-2020, 02:14 PM
Not to mention, if that game were replayed today, the projections would give SFA a much, much higher chance of beating Duke than 0.5%. Obviously, the teams' performance in the original head-to-head matchup factor into each's ranking, but the fact is that SFA is a much better team than everyone thought back on 11/26.

And further to the point, SFA is much better than a 16 seed. Assuming they win their conference, they'll be a ~13 seed, and a dangerous one at that. Unfortunately for them, they won't sneak up on anybody with the Duke win on their resume.

we have 96% over #90 wake at home, so probably 2-3%, which is the difference between 1 in 200 and 1 in 35.

ratamero
01-06-2020, 02:17 PM
I'm kinda amazed at how much the BPI loves Duke. Currently it predicts us going 18-2 in the ACC, with a 95.9% (!!!!) chance of at least a share of the regular season title. We also lead their field for the NCAA tournament with a 25.6% chance of winning the whole thing.

Troublemaker
01-06-2020, 02:31 PM
Not to mention, if that game were replayed today, the projections would give SFA a much, much higher chance of beating Duke than 0.5%. Obviously, the teams' performance in the original head-to-head matchup factor into each's ranking, but the fact is that SFA is a much better team than everyone thought back on 11/26.

And further to the point, SFA is much better than a 16 seed. Assuming they win their conference, they'll be a ~13 seed, and a dangerous one at that. Unfortunately for them, they won't sneak up on anybody with the Duke win on their resume.

Thanks, good points. I would just additionally add that even *if* the odds were still 0.5%, it's only in the context of sports where people would not take that number seriously.

If someone knew for a fact that tomorrow he had a 0.5% chance of getting struck by lightning if he left the house, guess who's calling in sick tomorrow? And maybe avoiding windows while at home? 0.5% is not 0%.

uh_no
01-06-2020, 02:32 PM
I'm kinda amazed at how much the BPI loves Duke. Currently it predicts us going 18-2 in the ACC, with a 95.9% (!!!!) chance of at least a share of the regular season title. We also lead their field for the NCAA tournament with a 25.6% chance of winning the whole thing.

the ACC is really bad. Also it turns out BPI is significantly worse as a predictor than KP (and 538, as it were, and sagarin, if I recall). They may have made adjustments in the time since, as this was a couple years ago, but this is the organization that trots out Joey Brackets as truth, so I'm skeptical.

If I recall, and I can't find my data, they tended to over state favorites, which would explain a 25% chance.

We can do a little experiment.

Duke would face #2 kansas in the title game. If they make it that far, they would have ~50% chance (+- a couple). Given the #3 and 4 teams, they would have maybe a 4 point advantage in the semis, which is a 66% chance.

So if they make the final 4, we're looking at 33%


If we look at the next teams, they might have an 8 point advantage, good for a 78% chance.

So if they make the elite 8, 25% chance to win it all.


Maybe they have a 12 point advantage of the teams through 20, so an 87% chance.

So if they make the sweet 16, 21% chance to win it all.

The next group is pretty tightly packed, so we'll give them a slightly higher 90% chance.

down to 19%

And it ought be 99% for the first game since we'll play some outlier conference winner...so we'll be generous and leave it at 19%.

In any case, I think 19% seems far more reasonable than 25%....in short, ESPN is vastly overstating our chance at this point and I think very little of their BPI. At one point I believe I referred to it as "eating glue" relative to the other dork polls out there, and my opinion is not significantly changed.

If I had all the time in the world, I would look at the % each ranking puts on each game, and correlate it with final margin to see who better fits the distribution, but I don't, but that's effectively what I did by hand one year for the tournament, and BPI was significantly worse.

Troublemaker
01-06-2020, 02:33 PM
I'm kinda amazed at how much the BPI loves Duke. Currently it predicts us going 18-2 in the ACC, with a 95.9% (!!!!) chance of at least a share of the regular season title. We also lead their field for the NCAA tournament with a 25.6% chance of winning the whole thing.

It probably helps that MSU is BPI's #2 team and Duke won easily on the road against them.

uh_no
01-06-2020, 02:34 PM
It probably helps that MSU is BPI's #2 team and Duke won easily on the road against them.

the fact that the computers tend to like them just shows how mediocre the country is on the whole this year.

ratamero
01-06-2020, 02:57 PM
Don't get me wrong, I trust the BPI as much as the next dork (i.e. not at all). Just brought the numbers here because I thought they were a bit absurd.

The Massey composite (https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm), on the other hand, has a very clear picture from aggregating a bunch of the dorkiest, most obscure rankings: Duke and Kansas are #1 and #2 and ranked on the top 5 in every ranking. Everyone else is in a different league - the next teams are Auburn and Mich St with an average rank over 7 and a huge variance on how they're seen.

Kedsy
01-06-2020, 04:18 PM
Vernon Carey is currently leading the nation in both win shares per 40 (.355, actually better than Zion's .335 last year) and PER (39.0, a bit less than Zion's 40.8). He is 10th in the country in box plus-minus (12.9, way under Zion's unreal 20.0).

Javin DeLaurier's fouls per 40 for the season has dipped to 5.9 per 40. Jordan Goldwire's oRating is 124.6 (3rd on the team). Justin Robinson's block% (19.1%) would lead the country if he played enough to qualify.

Duke is currently #4 in the country at offensive rebounding percentage, at 39.3%. Here's how that raw number compares to past Duke teams:



Year OR% NCAA
1999 44.34% 2
1990 40.89% 2
1988 40.53% 4
2010 40.33% 1
1998 39.67% 8
1992 39.54% 1
2020 39.30%
2004 39.20% 4
2018 38.56% 8
1996 38.27% 64
1991 37.99% 1
1994 37.96% 2
1987 37.55% 16
2000 37.39% 16
2009 37.38% 16
2005 37.22% 16
2003 37.06% 16
2001 37.03% 1
1995 36.94% n/a
1989 36.88% 4
1993 36.74% 32
2007 36.41% 64
1997 36.21% 32
2015 35.77% 1
2019 35.30% 8
2011 35.06% 16
2012 34.70% 64
2014 34.45% 64
2002 34.43% 16
2008 33.92% 32
2016 32.97% 16
2017 31.55% 32
2006 30.86% 16
2013 28.78% 8


I point this out every year, but Duke teams that rebound well offensively tend to do well in the NCAA tournament.

This year's defensive rebounding performance is by far the best raw number in Duke history (or at least since they started tracking offensive and defensive rebounds in 1987). We're tied for the 96th best DR% in the nation, after finishing tied for 234th last season:



Year DR% NCAA
2020 74.60%
2019 70.90% 8
2017 70.44% 32
2018 70.39% 8
2015 69.84% 1
2007 69.68% 64
2014 69.06% 64
1989 68.78% 4
2010 67.92% 1
2011 66.83% 16
2009 66.82% 16
2008 66.27% 32
2016 65.61% 16
2002 65.49% 16
2012 65.38% 64
2013 65.33% 8
2003 65.33% 16
1999 65.10% 2
1987 64.79% 16
1988 64.78% 4
1995 64.60% n/a
1998 64.60% 8
2001 63.83% 1
1991 63.74% 1
2005 63.23% 16
2004 62.87% 4
1992 62.83% 1
2000 62.32% 16
2006 62.29% 16
1993 61.51% 32
1994 61.36% 2
1996 60.72% 64
1990 60.31% 2
1997 59.13% 32


We're #16 in the country in block% and #29 in the country in steals%:



Year block% NCAA
2019 16.40% 8
2020 15.50%
2004 14.87% 4
2005 13.87% 16
1999 13.25% 2
2003 12.58% 16
1994 12.53% 2
2018 12.39% 8
1998 11.95% 8
2006 11.58% 16
2007 11.45% 64
2000 11.32% 16
2017 10.89% 32
2001 10.49% 1
2010 9.85% 1
2016 9.75% 16
2011 9.71% 16
1993 9.70% 32
2009 9.46% 16
1995 9.18% n/a
1997 9.14% 32
2015 9.04% 1
2013 9.01% 8
2012 8.98% 64
2008 8.76% 32
1996 8.63% 64
1989 8.08% 4
1991 8.07% 1
1992 8.00% 1
1987 7.47% 16
2014 7.44% 64
2002 7.25% 16
1990 7.03% 2
1988 7.03% 4




Year steals% NCAA
2001 13.70% 1
2004 13.05% 4
2006 12.96% 16
2002 12.91% 16
2000 12.85% 16
1998 12.82% 8
2020 12.60%
2019 12.40% 8
2005 12.35% 16
1997 12.04% 32
2009 12.03% 16
1999 11.87% 2
2003 11.79% 16
1991 11.74% 1
2008 11.68% 32
1990 11.39% 2
1988 11.27% 4
1989 11.23% 4
1993 11.16% 32
1987 11.09% 16
1992 11.01% 1
2007 10.92% 64
2015 10.77% 1
2014 10.56% 64
2018 10.45% 8
2011 10.35% 16
1994 10.17% 2
2010 9.99% 1
2013 9.44% 8
2016 9.13% 16
2012 9.00% 64
2017 8.78% 32
1996 8.63% 64
1995 8.01% n/a

Kedsy
01-06-2020, 04:56 PM
Duke is #6 in the nation in fewest opposing threes (as a percentage of total shots). Our opponents are only shooting threes on 27.33% of their shots. Here's the historical table of Duke teams since 1996:

DEFENSE



Year %three NCAA
2005 20.94% 16
2006 21.26% 16
1997 23.41% 32
2014 24.14% 64
2012 24.15% 64
2007 24.34% 64
2001 24.36% 1
2011 24.55% 16
2000 24.61% 16
2008 25.04% 32
1998 25.05% 8
2003 25.09% 16
2004 25.17% 4
2010 25.36% 1
1999 25.56% 2
2009 25.98% 16
2002 26.25% 16
2013 26.89% 8
1996 27.00% 64
2020 27.33%
2015 27.75% 1
2017 28.81% 32
2016 29.63% 16
2019 34.94% 8
2018 36.84% 8


We're also not taking so many threes on offense. Our % of threes taken is only 30.79%, the 309th most in the country. Here's the table for that since 1996:

OFFENSE



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 37.34% 8
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
1996 32.96% 64
2010 32.93% 1
1998 32.44% 8
2020 30.79%
1999 30.51% 2
2007 29.65% 64


Note that (with a couple exceptions), being low in the above table generally helps in the NCAA tournament.

Our three point shooting success percentage is #94 in the nation, at 35.25%. Our opponents are only shooting 29.14%, good for a tie for 39th lowest (best) in the country. Here are the historical tables, but it's worth noting that this year's teams are shooting from a further distance:

OFFENSE



Year 3pt% NCAA
1992 43.40% 1
1987 40.22% 16
2013 39.94% 8
1993 39.74% 32
1999 39.65% 2
2014 39.45% 64
1997 38.94% 32
1990 38.90% 2
2006 38.76% 16
2015 38.66% 1
2016 38.54% 16
2001 38.51% 1
2010 38.49% 1
1991 38.34% 1
2000 38.27% 16
1995 38.14% n/a
2007 38.08% 64
2005 38.01% 16
2017 37.83% 32
2008 37.75% 32
1996 37.56% 64
2011 37.40% 16
1988 37.25% 4
2018 37.18% 8
2012 37.08% 64
1998 36.94% 8
1989 36.52% 4
1994 36.52% 2
2004 36.43% 4
2003 36.31% 16
2002 36.27% 16
2020 35.25%
2009 34.86% 16
2019 30.79% 8


DEFENSE



Year 3pt% NCAA
2010 28.26% 1
1993 28.85% 32
2013 29.04% 8
2020 29.14%
2017 29.26% 32
1994 29.65% 2
2019 30.00% 8
1999 30.08% 2
2002 30.27% 16
2006 30.36% 16
1998 30.47% 8
2005 30.48% 16
2014 30.73% 64
2015 31.44% 1
2007 31.52% 64
2012 31.74% 64
1989 31.97% 4
2018 32.03% 8
2011 32.41% 16
2004 32.41% 4
2008 32.94% 32
1987 33.47% 16
1996 33.54% 64
1990 33.68% 2
2009 33.76% 16
2016 33.98% 16
1997 34.02% 32
2001 34.39% 1
2003 34.60% 16
1991 34.67% 1
1988 35.08% 4
2000 35.75% 16
1992 37.69% 1
1995 38.96% n/a

Kedsy
01-06-2020, 04:58 PM
Duke is #6 in the nation in fewest opposing threes (as a percentage of total shots). Our opponents are only shooting threes on 27.33% of their shots. Here's the historical table of Duke teams since 1996:

DEFENSE



Year %three NCAA
2005 20.94% 16
2006 21.26% 16
1997 23.41% 32
2014 24.14% 64
2012 24.15% 64
2007 24.34% 64
2001 24.36% 1
2011 24.55% 16
2000 24.61% 16
2008 25.04% 32
1998 25.05% 8
2003 25.09% 16
2004 25.17% 4
2010 25.36% 1
1999 25.56% 2
2009 25.98% 16
2002 26.25% 16
2013 26.89% 8
1996 27.00% 64
2020 27.33%
2015 27.75% 1
2017 28.81% 32
2016 29.63% 16
2019 34.94% 8
2018 36.84% 8


We're also not taking so many threes on offense. Our % of threes taken is only 30.79%, the 309th most in the country. Here's the table for that since 1996:

OFFENSE



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 37.34% 8
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
1996 32.96% 64
2010 32.93% 1
1998 32.44% 8
2020 30.79%
1999 30.51% 2
2007 29.65% 64


Note that (with a couple exceptions), being low in the above table generally helps in the NCAA tournament.

Our three point shooting success percentage is #94 in the nation, at 35.25%. Our opponents are only shooting 29.14%, good for a tie for 39th lowest (best) in the country. Here are the historical tables, but it's worth noting that this year's teams are shooting from a further distance:

OFFENSE



Year 3pt% NCAA
1992 43.40% 1
1987 40.22% 16
2013 39.94% 8
1993 39.74% 32
1999 39.65% 2
2014 39.45% 64
1997 38.94% 32
1990 38.90% 2
2006 38.76% 16
2015 38.66% 1
2016 38.54% 16
2001 38.51% 1
2010 38.49% 1
1991 38.34% 1
2000 38.27% 16
1995 38.14% n/a
2007 38.08% 64
2005 38.01% 16
2017 37.83% 32
2008 37.75% 32
1996 37.56% 64
2011 37.40% 16
1988 37.25% 4
2018 37.18% 8
2012 37.08% 64
1998 36.94% 8
1989 36.52% 4
1994 36.52% 2
2004 36.43% 4
2003 36.31% 16
2002 36.27% 16
2020 35.25%
2009 34.86% 16
2019 30.79% 8


DEFENSE



Year 3pt% NCAA
2010 28.26% 1
1993 28.85% 32
2013 29.04% 8
2020 29.14%
2017 29.26% 32
1994 29.65% 2
2019 30.00% 8
1999 30.08% 2
2002 30.27% 16
2006 30.36% 16
1998 30.47% 8
2005 30.48% 16
2014 30.73% 64
2015 31.44% 1
2007 31.52% 64
2012 31.74% 64
1989 31.97% 4
2018 32.03% 8
2011 32.41% 16
2004 32.41% 4
2008 32.94% 32
1987 33.47% 16
1996 33.54% 64
1990 33.68% 2
2009 33.76% 16
2016 33.98% 16
1997 34.02% 32
2001 34.39% 1
2003 34.60% 16
1991 34.67% 1
1988 35.08% 4
2000 35.75% 16
1992 37.69% 1
1995 38.96% n/a


It may be interesting to combine the above concepts. In other words, look to see if the percentage of threes taken affects the 3pt success percentage. So far this season, on offense Duke has taken fewer than 30% of its shots from three in seven (half) of our games. In those games, we've shot 40.8% from three (42 for 103). We've taken 30% or more of our shots from three also in seven games. In those games, we've shot 32.0% from three (56 for 175). Is it enough to draw an actual conclusion? Who knows. But I think it's interesting.

Our opponents have a reverse effect, and not nearly so big a spread. In the nine games they've taken fewer than 30% of their shots from three, they've shot 28.0% on their 3pt shots (33 for 118). In the five games they've taken 30% or more of their shots from three, they've shot 30.5% on those 3pt shots (32 for 105).

Kedsy
01-06-2020, 05:00 PM
Just to be thorough, here's how our two-point success percentages stack up historically:

OFFENSE



Year 2pt% NCAA
2019 58.01% 8
1989 57.55% 4
2002 57.43% 16
1999 56.51% 2
2018 56.01% 8
1992 55.94% 1
2015 55.93% 1
2001 54.99% 1
2020 54.24%
1993 54.14% 32
1991 54.12% 1
2006 54.06% 16
2017 53.56% 32
2000 53.22% 16
1998 52.50% 8
1994 52.50% 2
2004 52.47% 4
2011 52.45% 16
1988 52.08% 4
1995 51.88% n/a
2008 51.74% 32
2012 51.02% 64
2016 50.97% 16
1990 50.93% 2
2013 50.85% 8
2007 50.57% 64
1997 50.41% 32
2014 50.29% 64
1987 50.22% 16
2003 49.89% 16
2009 49.58% 16
2005 48.87% 16
1996 47.88% 64
2010 46.96% 1


DEFENSE



Year 2pt% NCAA
2005 41.30% 16
1999 42.24% 2
2011 43.14% 16
2004 43.49% 4
2000 43.66% 16
2001 43.93% 1
2010 44.13% 1
1989 44.60% 4
1997 44.66% 32
1998 44.71% 8
2019 45.00% 8
1994 45.02% 2
1995 45.41% n/a
2018 45.41% 8
2020 45.53%
2007 45.66% 64
2013 46.19% 8
2015 46.30% 1
2006 46.39% 16
2002 46.44% 16
2009 46.76% 16
1991 46.83% 1
2012 46.96% 64
2008 46.97% 32
1988 47.15% 4
1990 47.20% 2
1987 47.23% 16
1996 47.46% 64
2003 47.70% 16
1993 48.12% 32
2017 48.89% 32
2016 48.89% 16
1992 48.98% 1
2014 50.32% 64


Being good in both of the above tables looks good when the tournament rolls around, especially on offense.

Hingeknocker
01-06-2020, 05:47 PM
Kedsy, incredible stats, and thank you for providing the historical context.

One thing that immediately jumped out was the 3-point shooting frequency and prowess of the 2001 team. I realize eras of basketball change over time, but if you want my ideal basketball team that causes my eyes to glaze over with hearts like in an old cartoon, 2001 is the team.

jv001
01-06-2020, 06:08 PM
The defensive and offensive 2 point rankings look very good for the championship teams and don't look bad for the great teams that did not win it all.

GoDuke!

Troublemaker
01-07-2020, 11:30 AM
Much has been made of the fact that teams this year are much weaker than in past years. I have mentioned on the podcast a couple times that the top Kenpom team in 2019-20 would barely be a top 10 team in most other years. In each of the past 14 years, there has been at least 1 team that managed to have a Kenpom efficiency margin of +30 or greater. For a very long time it looked like no team would achieve that this year.

And then along came the post-SFA Duke team.

For this type of comparison, you have to compare college basketball on the same dates. For example, on Jan 6th 2019, there was only 1 team above 30 in adjEM as well: https://kenpom.com/archive.php?d=2019-01-06 (subscriber $$$ link)

As more and more teams round into form and play at or near their ceilings as the season progresses, there will be more teams that top the 30 mark in adjEM towards the end of the season. That's been the tendency with kenpom; teams have higher ratings as the season progresses.

So check back in March.


It probably helps that MSU is BPI's #2 team and Duke won easily on the road against them.


the fact that the computers tend to like them just shows how mediocre the country is on the whole this year.

Are you referring to MSU? Because I like them a lot. I think they're starting to round into form now (Izzo/MSU are notorious for starting slowly) and will be as good as anyone by March.

I'm hoping MSU will win the Big 10 regular season and tourney and earn a 1 seed in the Midwest. I do not want them as Duke's 2 seed if we get a 1 seed.

Billy Dat
01-07-2020, 12:21 PM
KenPom himself writes about whether or not Duke can run the table in the ACC regular season ($)
https://theathletic.com/1514043/2020/01/07/kenpom-duke-go-undefeated-in-acc-college-basketball/?source=dailyemail

He concludes that they probably won't, but right now Duke is the second most likely team in his projections to do it.

Liberty 18.3%
Duke 8.4
Vermont 7
San Diego State 6.4
Gonzaga 5
New Mexico State 4.2
Dayton 3.8

JasonEvans
01-07-2020, 04:43 PM
KenPom himself writes about whether or not Duke can run the table in the ACC regular season ($)
https://theathletic.com/1514043/2020/01/07/kenpom-duke-go-undefeated-in-acc-college-basketball/?source=dailyemail

He concludes that they probably won't, but right now Duke is the second most likely team in his projections to do it.

Liberty 18.3%
Duke 8.4
Vermont 7
San Diego State 6.4
Gonzaga 5
New Mexico State 4.2
Dayton 3.8

This is a great testament to the overall weakness of the ACC this year... sigh.

-Jason "it is also a testament to Duke getting Lou, FSU, and NCSt at home... our only road game against a likely NCAA tournament team from the ACC is @UVA" Evans

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
01-07-2020, 04:49 PM
KenPom himself writes about whether or not Duke can run the table in the ACC regular season ($)
https://theathletic.com/1514043/2020/01/07/kenpom-duke-go-undefeated-in-acc-college-basketball/?source=dailyemail

He concludes that they probably won't, but right now Duke is the second most likely team in his projections to do it.

Liberty 18.3%
Duke 8.4
Vermont 7
San Diego State 6.4
Gonzaga 5
New Mexico State 4.2
Dayton 3.8

I would give Liberty much less than an 18% chance to tun the table in the ACC.

/Yes, I know.

SkyBrickey
01-07-2020, 05:34 PM
The SFA game was a great lesson for this team. Maybe we won’t need another one. Having Vernon Carey really raises the floor for this team and mitigates a poor shooting night from 3.

JasonEvans
01-13-2020, 11:12 AM
So, the BPI, which is one of the predictive advanced rankings that the committee takes into the room as it decides on seedings, has Duke #1. It has been that way for a little while. But I think it is worth noting how wide Duke's margin is in this poll.

Duke has the #2 (to Gonzaga) offense in the BPI and the #2 (to Virginia) defense. BPI measures how many points above average a team is and it puts Duke at 18.6. Second place is Kansas at 15.4. So, the difference between us at #1 and the #2 team is 3.2 points. If you compare Kansas to a team 3.2 BPI points worse, you have to go all the way down to the #15 team in the BPI, Purdue. The difference between Duke and the second best team is like the gap between the second best team and a club that would just barely be expected to make the Sweet 16.

Put another way... this Duke team is really, really good.

jv001
01-13-2020, 11:28 AM
Looks like Baylor is getting lots of love. K-Pom has them at #3 and they do have some good wins on their resume. GoDuke!

DavidBenAkiva
01-13-2020, 11:35 AM
So, the BPI, which is one of the predictive advanced rankings that the committee takes into the room as it decides on seedings, has Duke #1. It has been that way for a little while. But I think it is worth noting how wide Duke's margin is in this poll.

Duke has the #2 (to Gonzaga) offense in the BPI and the #2 (to Virginia) defense. BPI measures how many points above average a team is and it puts Duke at 18.6. Second place is Kansas at 15.4. So, the difference between us at #1 and the #2 team is 3.2 points. If you compare Kansas to a team 3.2 BPI points worse, you have to go all the way down to the #15 team in the BPI, Purdue. The difference between Duke and the second best team is like the gap between the second best team and a club that would just barely be expected to make the Sweet 16.

Put another way... this Duke team is really, really good.

Another interesting nugget of this is that Duke's offense (9.6) is rated higher in BPI than its defense (9.1). I noticed that, over the weekend.

I also noticed that Duke's offensive adjusted efficiency ranking on KenPom (2) is now higher than the defensive adjusted efficiency ranking (4). Previously, Duke was a better defensive than offensive team. This switch happened on T-Rank recently, too.

The defense is still elite but the offense has caught up in a big way.

MChambers
01-13-2020, 11:39 AM
So, the BPI, which is one of the predictive advanced rankings that the committee takes into the room as it decides on seedings, has Duke #1. It has been that way for a little while. But I think it is worth noting how wide Duke's margin is in this poll.

Duke has the #2 (to Gonzaga) offense in the BPI and the #2 (to Virginia) defense. BPI measures how many points above average a team is and it puts Duke at 18.6. Second place is Kansas at 15.4. So, the difference between us at #1 and the #2 team is 3.2 points. If you compare Kansas to a team 3.2 BPI points worse, you have to go all the way down to the #15 team in the BPI, Purdue. The difference between Duke and the second best team is like the gap between the second best team and a club that would just barely be expected to make the Sweet 16.

Put another way... this Duke team is really, really good.

Put yet another way, the BPI is my favorite dork poll for this week.

Billy Dat
01-13-2020, 11:41 AM
Looks like Baylor is getting lots of love. K-Pom has them at #3 and they do have some good wins on their resume. GoDuke!

Yeah, I think they have the best resume in the country, especially coming off consecutive road wins against ranked conference teams.

I hope that our amazingly weak conference slate doesn't dull our edge, or give us a false sense of how good we really are. Hopefully we take care of business on the road on Tuesday and come home and win convincingly against Louisville.

I am tempted to say that we've fattened up on cupcakes, but no conference road win is ever easy. Still, the rest of the year features a lot of cupcakes, at least as of this juncture. Hopefully we take advantage and post a really gaudy regular season record.

robed deity
01-13-2020, 11:42 AM
Another interesting nugget of this is that Duke's offense (9.6) is rated higher in BPI than its defense (9.1). I noticed that, over the weekend.

I also noticed that Duke's offensive adjusted efficiency ranking on KenPom (2) is now higher than the defensive adjusted efficiency ranking (4). Previously, Duke was a better defensive than offensive team. This switch happened on T-Rank recently, too.

The defense is still elite but the offense has caught up in a big way.

Kenpom also really likes Duke a lot, but there's a smaller gap above Kansas.

However, the gap between Duke and #3 Baylor is the same as Baylor and.....no. 21 Michigan.

sagegrouse
01-13-2020, 11:55 AM
Looks like Baylor is getting lots of love. K-Pom has them at #3 and they do have some good wins on their resume. GoDuke!

Was Baylor expected to be a strong team this year? Look it up, Sage! Oh, I see -- Baylor was preseason AP #16 and Coaches #18.

COYS
01-13-2020, 12:02 PM
Another interesting nugget of this is that Duke's offense (9.6) is rated higher in BPI than its defense (9.1). I noticed that, over the weekend.

I also noticed that Duke's offensive adjusted efficiency ranking on KenPom (2) is now higher than the defensive adjusted efficiency ranking (4). Previously, Duke was a better defensive than offensive team. This switch happened on T-Rank recently, too.

The defense is still elite but the offense has caught up in a big way.

I think this is a good sign. Early in the season, it looked possible that Duke might not have a top 20 offense (which, outside of the 2007 season, is unheard of for Coach K). But we've really come alive on that end, even with Tre and Cassius missing a few games. We know we're capable of playing stifling D. But now we've shown we can match that with our O. Now that Duke's offense has emerged as elite, the "no dominant teams" narrative is looking more and more wrong.

arnie
01-13-2020, 12:03 PM
Was Baylor expected to be a strong team this year? Look it up, Sage! Oh, I see -- Baylor was preseason AP #16 and Coaches #18.

Seth Davis on the BB bandwagon - wonder if others will join and slide us to #3 in the don’t matter polls?

uh_no
01-13-2020, 12:21 PM
msu totally and understandably tanked. Duke offense up to number two.

Troublemaker
01-13-2020, 04:59 PM
Yeah, I think they have the best resume in the country, especially coming off consecutive road wins against ranked conference teams.

I hope that our amazingly weak conference slate doesn't dull our edge, or give us a false sense of how good we really are. Hopefully we take care of business on the road on Tuesday and come home and win convincingly against Louisville.

I am tempted to say that we've fattened up on cupcakes, but no conference road win is ever easy. Still, the rest of the year features a lot of cupcakes, at least as of this juncture. Hopefully we take advantage and post a really gaudy regular season record.

Hopefully Duke's recent blowout wins don't give us (the fans) a false sense of how good we really are. A 2-0 week would be fine, no matter the margins of victory. Obviously the game against Lville is huuuge -- just get the W, even if it's by 1 point.

Billy Dat
01-13-2020, 05:28 PM
Hopefully Duke's recent blowout wins don't give us (the fans) a false sense of how good we really are. A 2-0 week would be fine, no matter the margins of victory. Obviously the game against Lville is huuuge -- just get the W, even if it's by 1 point.

True, just get the W.

Nugget
01-16-2020, 07:25 PM
Not a "dork poll," but a dork article from one of ESPN.com's analytics guys arguing why Duke's current team (at #3 in the polls) is underrated. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/28495975/why-no-3-duke-fresh-loss-clemson-underrated

Among other highlights:

"Even after the Clemson loss, Duke remains No. 1 in these widely used predictive metrics: BPI, Sagarin, TeamRankings and Massey. (Duke fell slightly behind Kansas for No. 1 in KenPom on Thursday morning)."

"Duke is first in the nation with an adjusted net efficiency of 33.9, and Kansas is second at 32.5. Of Baylor, Butler and Gonzaga -- the three other No. 1 seeds in Joe Lunardi's latest version of Bracketology -- Gonzaga is the closest at 7.9 points per game behind Duke. While that stat would be impressive in most years, this year it is especially so. This season has the smallest standard deviation of adjusted net efficiency at this point in the campaign, going back to 2008. ... Translation: Duke's lead in adjusted scoring is more impressive considering the parity in what has been a wild year for college basketball."

"The numbers say this group is every bit as dominant as [Zion's team last year]. ... BPI ranks Duke as the best team by 2.1 points. The only team in BPI history (since 2008) that has had a bigger lead in BPI at this point in the season was the 2015 Kentucky team that started 38-0 and featured nine future NBA players."

"[Despite improving in 3 point accuracy from 327th in the country last year to 40th this year], Duke is not in the top 300 in terms of the percentage of shots it attempts from 3. This team should be shooting even more from outside, and when it does, watch out."

Kedsy
01-16-2020, 09:13 PM
"[Despite improving in 3 point accuracy from 327th in the country last year to 40th this year], Duke is not in the top 300 in terms of the percentage of shots it attempts from 3. This team should be shooting even more from outside, and when it does, watch out."

I've posted about this before, but I wonder if the bolded part is really true? The past couple games we've both taken and made a lot of threes, but for the season we've had 8 games in which we've taken fewer than 30% of our shots from three, and in those games we've hit 41.7% of our three-pointers; and we've had 9 games in which we've taken more than 30% of our shots from three, and in those games we've only hit 34.4% of our three-pointers. Maybe it's statistical noise, or maybe when we take fewer three-pointers, the ones we do take are better shots. It might be worth watching, anyway.

Gooch
01-16-2020, 09:29 PM
I've posted about this before, but I wonder if the bolded part is really true? The past couple games we've both taken and made a lot of threes, but for the season we've had 8 games in which we've taken fewer than 30% of our shots from three, and in those games we've hit 41.7% of our three-pointers; and we've had 9 games in which we've taken more than 30% of our shots from three, and in those games we've only hit 34.4% of our three-pointers. Maybe it's statistical noise, or maybe when we take fewer three-pointers, the ones we do take are better shots. It might be worth watching, anyway.

We need a Shane Battier-esque shot analysis to confirm Kedsy! FWIW I tend to agree—we’re making more threes because they are better shots.

Nugget
01-17-2020, 09:24 AM
We need a Shane Battier-esque shot analysis to confirm Kedsy! FWIW I tend to agree—we’re making more threes because they are better shots.

From a purely subjective eye-test, I'd tend to agree w you and Kedsy that from watching the games it doesn't appear that we are shooting too few threes - I've been pleased with this team's shot selection.

jv001
01-17-2020, 10:04 AM
From a purely subjective eye-test, I'd tend to agree w you and Kedsy that from watching the games it doesn't appear that we are shooting too few threes - I've been pleased with this team's shot selection.

I completely agree with you. Our shot selection has been very good this season. I think one reason is we don't have any player that's a stopper of the ball. At the beginning of the year, it looked like Wendell might be guilty of that but he's improved greatly in that part of his game. Sure there have been times the team has forced up a 3 with the shot clock winding down but that's mostly a result of the opponent playing good defense. I love the way this team plays on both ends of the court. Well, except in the Clemson game. Our defense wasn't that great.
GoDuke!

JasonEvans
01-17-2020, 12:31 PM
Duke is hitting 36.9% of our threes while taking 31% of our shots from deep. It is absolutely a fallacy to say that we will continue to hit at a 36.9% rate if we up that shot choice percentage to 35 or 40%. It might hold true, but it is fairly likely it will not.

JasonEvans
01-17-2020, 12:43 PM
Duke is hitting 36.9% of our threes while taking 31% of our shots from deep. It is absolutely a fallacy to say that we will continue to hit at a 36.9% rate if we up that shot choice percentage to 35 or 40%. It might hold true, but it is fairly likely it will not.

That said, if we could hit at a 35% rate while shooting 35-38% of our shots from deep, we should probably do that... but even that is far from a sure-thing.

uh_no
01-17-2020, 12:59 PM
Duke is hitting 36.9% of our threes while taking 31% of our shots from deep. It is absolutely a fallacy to say that we will continue to hit at a 36.9% rate if we up that shot choice percentage to 35 or 40%. It might hold true, but it is fairly likely it will not.

Especially since, at least to my eyes, one of the reasons we are hitting so well from 3 overall is that we don't really take many bad threes. almost all of them are in the flow of the offense, breakaways, kickouts, etc.

I also don't see us pass up these good shots when they are available.

So if we were to attempt to increase our 3PA, it seems we would necessarily be increasing the amount of "bad" shots we take from three, which would almost surely lower the overall percentage.

DoubleBlue
01-18-2020, 09:09 AM
Duke is back at #1 on KenPom this morning by a hair over Kansas (29.41 to 29.40) due to the secondary effects of previous games played and those teams' shifting rankings. Both are head and shoulders above the field, with #3 Baylor at 25.24, down through #10 Louisville at 22.74. Tonight will be a true test for Duke (vs. Louisville) to validate their lofty perch in this and most of the other analytical rankings.

subzero02
01-18-2020, 04:17 PM
Earlier today Kenpom tweeted this "...My home court advantage model says HCA is as low as it's ever been and home teams have won just 59.6% of conference games so far. The third lowest of all time!". The image below features Doug Gottlieb's reaction to this statement and also features Ken Pom's follow up slam of Gottlieb's inaccurate analysis. Ken is right... any college baskedball fan knows that Doug's analytical abilities are alarmingly unpolished.

10121