MBB: Duke 77, Miami 74 Post-Game Thread

[Lulu]

Saying stall ball doesn't work when it has worked in almost every game we've employed it in this year is silly... AND disgusting.

It's not disgusting. Give a team a big lead and it SHOULD be hard to lose. Not losing doesn't really prove anything. The question you'd have to ask is how many games came within reach for the other team, and then you'd have to ask the unknowable question of what would have happened otherwise. Saying it's disgusting is almost insulting and inflammatory language; but that's clearly coming from someone who thinks it's worth discussing.

[tele]

It's smart bball Aren't we undefeated this year in games that we ran clock at the end?

I agree. Although sometimes it's not pretty. I think there are unseen benefits too, in that you can rest your players, helps in 3 games in 3 days stretches, and you avoid any foul trouble and letting the refs take the game away from you. A win is win.

[devildownunder]

It's smart bball as evidenced by the fact that we won even though we executed it as poorly as possible offensively (3 shot clock violations!!!). There simply were not enough possessions left for Miami to catch up. We should be able to get a decent shot off in the last 10-seconds or get to the line. Play defense, don't foul, make your free throws and you win. We were not taking the air out at the end of the first half when we gave up a double digit lead. Basketball is a game of runs. why allow Miami an opportunity for another run? I actually think we have run clock well this year using our 3 scoring options up until today and we still won with Miami never having an opportuntity to tie or win. Aren't we undefeated this year in games that we ran clock at the end?

The only reason we won this game is because we actually started looking to score again.

We should be able to get a decent shot off in the last 10 seconds or get to the line? A decent shot like the 20-foot fadeaway, left-handed hook Jon had to throw up in a vain attempt to avoid yet another shot-clock violation?

Somebody please, please get K to stop doing this. The point has been made about what this does to keep teams mentally in the game as well, and that's just as valid as other criticisms. Teams KNOW we will abandon our offense and let them back into the game. Think what that does for their morale. Whereas, if we just kept on doing what we were doing to get the lead to begin with, we'd put them away.

[devildownunder]

It's not disgusting. Give a team a big lead and it SHOULD be hard to lose. Not losing doesn't really prove anything. The question you'd have to ask is how many games came within reach for the other team, and then you'd have to ask the unknowable question of what would have happened otherwise. Saying it's disgusting is almost insulting and inflammatory language; but that's clearly coming from someone who thinks it's worth discussing.

Exactly, this was a 4-6 possession game when we abandoned offense. Stall ball quickly erased that lead. We won because we decided to start trying to score again. Y'know, playing basketball.

[rsvman]

... Not losing doesn't really prove anything. ...

Except that you won the game. Certainly it proves THAT. How is it relevant whether the other team got within striking distance? At the end of the season, they really only count wins and losses.



And, just in case you forgot: "You play to WIN the game."

[devildownunder]

I agree. Although sometimes it's not pretty. I think there are unseen benefits too, in that you can rest your players, helps in 3 games in 3 days stretches, and you avoid any foul trouble and letting the refs take the game away from you. A win is win.

If you're so worried about foul trouble, rest and the refs, why not be passive the entire game, not just the last 8 minutes?

[bluesin]

1) Confusing the slow down game for a failure to execute seems to be pretty common. I know that changing the pace of the game can make it more difficult to execute, but this team has shown that they CAN execute in the slowdown quite a few times this season, since we've implemented it many times and have had a pretty damn good margin of victory. If you think the team can execute well in the half court because you've seen them do it then I see no reason to assume they can't do the same in the slow down game because you've seen that too (unless you turn the game off after the first 10 minutes of the second half as a regular practice). I'll defend the slow-down not only based on this game, but this team and this season, and it seems like a selective memory to say it hurts us when it's helped us win pretty handily a few times this season and even in this game resulted in a victory.

2) Against a streaky Miami team that can get out and score points in a hurry it seems like people would realize how the slowdown game affects them. It forces them to execute and be defensive minded for 30+ seconds and limits their ability to turn Duke over, rush out to get points and allows Duke to be better in transition -- especially if they convert. It's not like Duke was only playing the slowdown against themselves and the clock, the strategy does do things to how the other team plays as well. Now that didn't work well in this game like it has before, but again I'd say failure to execute is more to blame than an inherently flawed strategy.

3) I can understand being upset we didn't run the slowdown well this game, I'd TOTALLY agree with that, in fact I'd even say we went to it a little early. But that doesn't make it a bad idea as a strategy for this team. I'm sure if K realized we'd play like a bunch of freshmen out there in the slowdown (forgetting to start it soon enough, tossing around stupid passes, etc.) he would have never started the game-plan. Of course he didn't know that, in fact he had plenty of proof from pervious games that this Duke team runs the slowdown as a strength instead of a weakness.

4) I want NC state in the finals as well, I was at the last State game and I'd love to prove we can play defense against them better than we did (or at all ).

[CDu]

Exactly, this was a 4-6 possession game when we abandoned offense. Stall ball quickly erased that lead. We won because we decided to start trying to score again. Y'know, playing basketball.

Quickly erased? That's incorrect. It was a 2-3 possession game until the final seconds. The lead didn't get down to 5 until 1:24 to play. So we were in pretty good shape at that point (given how well we shoot free throws).

[Lulu]

It's smart bball as evidenced by the fact that we won even though we executed it as poorly as possible offensively (3 shot clock violations!!!). There simply were not enough possessions left for Miami to catch up.

And those 3 violations had nothing to do with stall ball?
This is my last post on this, because I can't keep repeating myself. Every time I see the argument that it works because we have a winning record in games where we held a large lead I just can't stop myself from responding though.

[devildownunder]

This is just wrong.

"Stall ball" works if it done correctly. We executed it poorly today, but we still got the win. I would counterargue that nobody knows what would have happened had we continued to play full on; perhaps we would have lost. You don't know, and neither do I.

A couple of seasons ago I kept a notebook detailing every possession from every game in which we executed "stall ball." We won every one of those games. Sure, the lead sunk in some of those games, but certainly not in all; in fact, if I recall correctly, the lead shrunk in about half of them, but stayed the same or even stretched out in others.

Successful stall ball depends on two things: 1) getting a reasonable shot near the end of the clock, and 2) getting defensive stops. We were not able to do the former, but we successfully did the latter for about 2:30 of game play, which was enough to ensure the win. The final three-point shot was meaningless; we were up six points with 4 seconds to play in the game. In other words, the lead was insurmountable. This despite the poorest execution of stall ball in a long time. So, what's the problem again?

We won because we abandoned that foolishness and started looking to score again, thank goodness. ETA: and also because we got some stops in the last few minutes.

[Andre Buckner Fan]

Stall ball insults the other team. We act as if the game is decided.

Any decent team will take motivation from that kind of an insult, and we're very lucky that Miami missed a few of their shots down the stretch.

But that being said...

KYLE SINGLER!!!!!!!!

[mike88]

People have strong feelings about this topic, and I am not sure that anything will change the minds of those who think slowing the game down is always a bad idea, but it really turns on what you think the alternative would have been. I saw a Miami team that was getting easier shots than we were, even before we slowed the game down. Played out over a larger number of possessions, I think they would have narrowed the lead in any case. Fortunately, they had some bad possessions and Scott committed some bad fouls; coupled with good defense/rebounding/free throw shooting on our part, we were able to keep it a two or more possession margin throughout.

[jipops]

Thanks for the detail. Up 12, won by 3. And only because we actually abandoned that foolishness and started looking to score again this time.

No, we never abandoned the stall ball. We finally found openings to the lane and started driving late in the clock. This resulted in Nolan's big spot up. It also helped that Miami started fouling.

I understand that the stall ball tactic can be difficult to watch. But the important thing here is that we still won. Is there any other aspect of the game you can focus on?

[CDu]

We won because we abandoned that foolishness and started looking to score again, thank goodness.

When did we "abandon that foolishness?"

From 64-50:

35-second violation
ran 29 seconds, made jumper
ran 21 seconds, missed jumper
2 seconds (Zoubek fouled on a defensive rebound)
35 seconds, violation
30 seconds, missed jumper
25 seconds, missed jumper
29 seconds, made jumper

then the fouling began.

So we went away from stalling on two possessions, and failed to score on both of them. Care to rethink your argument?

[mike88]

Stall ball insults the other team. We act as if the game is decided.

Any decent team will take motivation from that kind of an insult, and we're very lucky that Miami missed a few of their shots down the stretch.

But that being said...

KYLE SINGLER!!!!!!!!

No! Slowing the ball down shows respect for your opponent- it says (essentially) that you need to manipulate pace in order to have the best chance of winning. It has worked throughout the season, and it worked tonight- it just makes the game harder to watch for Duke fans!

[Lulu]

Except that you won the game. Certainly it proves THAT. How is it relevant whether the other team got within striking distance? At the end of the season, they really only count wins and losses.

And, just in case you forgot: "You play to WIN the game."

Alright, I lied. That last post wasn't my last. My argument would be the exact same as yours, apparently, because yes, "You play to WIN the game." Funny how that works.

It's relevant because of the liklihood that we will lose a critical game due to stall ball. I agree this is nothing more than a feeling from all of us on both sides; I just don't like the logic that is used to justify it at times, but I've repeated over and over already. Maybe I'd have to alter the above statement to "You play to maximize your chance of winning the game." We just completely disagree on how that's accomplished.

I DO AGREE that there can be a point where stall ball makes it impossible for the other team to win. So what we really disagree is how early we start to employ it in games that really don't seem to be decided quite yet. Up 18 with 3 minutes left, sure, no problem. I don't know where the line is but I know I really don't like where we have it.

The major point is that you cannot so completely give up the advantage you have on the other team, in the areas you are strong or are dominating at that current point in the game, and weaken yourself at such an early point that the other team has such an advantage then that they can actually come back. Considering what I think has been a bit of nerves or succumbing to pressure on Duke's part in tournaments the past few years this is not a position I like to be in.

[tele]

If you're so worried about foul trouble, rest and the refs, why not be passive the entire game, not just the last 8 minutes?

A good question, I'd say because at the end of the game, when you have the ball and a lead, you can hold the ball and the opponent doesn't realize their goose is cooked before it is too late. Plus you can sometimes score off of it with easy baskets because you are forcing the opposing team to defend for long stretches at the end of the game. Also some other team, who shall go nameless, did try and play that way the whole game long, and now we have the shot clock.

[Delaware]

Exactly, this was a 4-6 possession game when we abandoned offense. Stall ball quickly erased that lead. We won because we decided to start trying to score again. Y'know, playing basketball.

You keep saying this. I did not see any change. Miami simply started to have to press harder and foul BECAUSE we still had the lead and time was running out. Look at the game log and look at when we scored or turned if over after we got the ball on every possession and then explain to me how we "decided to start trying to score again"... its not correct. After the three straight shot clock violations, we ran the same set and scored after 30 seconds on a Nolan jumper.

[BlueintheFace]

When?

Well,

1) you could argue it worked well tonight, as it has EVERY time we have run it.

2) The better question is, when has Duke given away a lead this season in the last 4 minutes because we ran stall ball? Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think it has happened once.

[KyDevilinIL]

Somebody please, please get K to stop doing this.

I'm with you. Stallball is the very definition of playing not to lose, instead of playing to win. It often "works" in spite of itself (today is an example), and it's quite simply a gamble.

The main problem is that we consistently go to it way too early. I've never seen a team other than Duke just shut down its offense as early as the under-8 timeout. It's without question the most frustrating part of K's philosophy.

Meanwhile, we just don't look very good this weekend. Other than Kyle, I think the guys must feel the pressure of being the heavy favorite. We need to crank it back up soon.