2018-19 Duke Women's BB

[CamrnCrz1974]

Capture.jpg

After 24 games, Duke is 11-13, with a record of 3-9 in ACC contests.

THE NUMBERS
If you look at the above picture from ACC games, you will see that overall, we are outscored 15.67 to 12.83 in the first quarters and 15.75 to 14.83 in the third quarters of conference games (12 ACC games to date). In the second quarters, we outscore ACC opponents by a score of 16.42 to 14.67. And in the fourth quarters, we are about even with the opposition, with ACC opponents barely outscoring Duke, 16.67 to 16.58 (the overtime statistics are only from one game - the double overtime loss to Boston College).

WHAT ELSE DO THE NUMBERS SHOW?

• Duke is coming out of the locker room flat offensively, when it comes to scoring -- both at the beginning of the game and after halftime.
• We average 13.83 points in the first and third quarters and collectively score 27.67 points per game in those two periods (which, over the course of four quarters, would be an average 55.33 points per game).
• By contrast, opponents average 15.71 points in the first and third quarters and collectively score 31.42 points in those two periods (which, over the course of four quarters, would be an average of 62.83 points per game).
• In just looking at the first and third quarters of ACC games, Duke is down 31.42 to 27.66 -- 3.76 points.
• In 24 total games to date, Duke averages 64.2 ppg while surrendering 62.9 ppg to opponents -- a scoring differential of 1.3 ppg, in Duke's favor. But in 12 ACC games to date, Duke averages 62.7 ppg while yielding 64.9 ppg to opponents -- a deficit of 2.2 points per game.

NOTE: The NCAA rankings do not include last night’s game against Virginia Tech where Duke allowed the Hokies to score 64 points, shoot 37.9 percent from the floor, and shoot 30.8 percent from three.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

• For a squad that has difficulty manufacturing points (the 64.2 ppg for the season would be the second lowest in school history, only to the 54.8 ppg of the 1977-78 squad), having a deficit of 2.84 points after the first quarter plus a deficit of nearly 0.92 points after the third quarter (and a total deficit of 3.76 points in the two quarters coming out of the locker room) in ACC contests incredibly difficult to overcome.
  
• Overall, the defense is okay, surrendering 62.9 ppg in 24 games to date with opponents shooting 38.4 percent from the floor and 29.9 percent from three (for 12 ACC games to date, opponents score 64.9 ppg while shooting 39.5 percent from the floor and 29.6 percent from three).
  
• I hesitate to call the defense great (or even very good), by Duke standards, as Duke has only surrendered more than 62.9 points per contest twice in the last 20 years (64.3 ppg in 2001-02 and 63.7 ppg in 2013-14) and the 38.4 percent shooting by opponents would be the worst percentage in the last 20 years (the only other Duke team in the last 20 years to allow opponents was the 2001-02 squad, whose opponents shot 38.1 percent overall from the floor). And in terms of national statistics for this season, Duke's defense does not rank in the top 50 in terms of opponents' ppg (Duke ranks 135th), opponents' overall field goal percentage (Duke ranks 106th), or opponents' three-point percentage (Duke ranks 104th).
  
• Factoring in not having Kyra Lambert (for the season) and Mikayla Boykin (only able to play 8 games), Duke only averages 12.4 assists per game this year (13.0 apg in conference play). This means that Duke has to design its offense to maximize efficiency -- crisper passing, lots of screens to get the most open looks possible, having players get to the free throw line, as much as possible. And Duke is simply not doing this -- as an example, in 12 conference games, opponents have been to the line 23 more times and made 20 more free throws, which accounts for a deficit of 1.67 ppg (and not helped by Duke shooting 65.2 percent from the line as a team).

SUMMARY
Basically, Duke's defense is not great or good (by Duke's standards or nationally), but it should be "good enough" to win games. Unfortunately, that has not been the case, because the offense is a smidgen below where the defense is. And with the margin for error being so incredibly small, Duke has to do a much better job coming out of the locker room (to start the game and after halftime) to avoid falling into an insurmountable hole, as the offense this year likely will not be able to make up the deficit.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Which IPA?

You've had it in a flight. Went to Morgan's, one of their house brews. Not sure who makes theirs for them. It tasted delicious paired with ignorance of basketball results.

[devildeac]

You've had it in a flight. Went to Morgan's, one of their house brews. Not sure who makes theirs for them. It tasted delicious paired with ignorance of basketball results.

IIRC, a brewery in eastern VA makes it for them. I'll try to research it, hoping it wasn't in the "missing" ~18 months of posts from Ymm, Beer that you brought to our attention recently.

[CamrnCrz1974]

I'm quite content if Coach P is packing up her office the day after our tourney exit. She is not the future of Duke Women's Basketball, and the sooner we start focusing on that future the better. Duke can afford to eat the last year of her contract more than it can to afford another year of mediocre basketball.

Joanne P. McCallie has two years remaining on her contract; the extension announced in August 2017 keeps her under contract through the end of the 2020-21 season. Assuming the extension (which added two years to her then-current deal) was at the same rate of pay, her estimated annual compensation is approximately $900,000 or so. That means a buyout of the remaining two years would be $1.8 million.

In addition, Duke would have to pay a new women's basketball coach to take over for Coach P. Conservatively (given's Duke WBB status as a former national power), put that figure at $600,000 per year. This would mean that for 2019-20 and 2020-21, Duke would be paying $1.5 million per year for salaries of WBB head coaches and $3 million total for the two remaining years. This is just for the salaries of head coaches -- not assistant coaches, not staff, not basketball-related operations expenses, etc.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Joanne P. McCallie has two years remaining on her contract;

Ugh!!!

the extension announced in August 2017 keeps her under contract through the end of the 2020-21 season. Assuming the extension (which added two years to her then-current deal) was at the same rate of pay, her estimated annual compensation is approximately $900,000 or so. That means a buyout of the remaining two years would be $1.8 million.

Still worth more than now two years of mediocre basketball. Like I said, she is not the future of DWBB. Even more reason to go ahead and pull the plug now. Duke can afford it.

[CamrnCrz1974]

Joanne P. McCallie has two years remaining on her contract; the extension announced in August 2017 keeps her under contract through the end of the 2020-21 season. Assuming the extension (which added two years to her then-current deal) was at the same rate of pay, her estimated annual compensation is approximately $900,000 or so. That means a buyout of the remaining two years would be $1.8 million.

In addition, Duke would have to pay a new women's basketball coach to take over for Coach P. Conservatively (given's Duke WBB status as a former national power), put that figure at $600,000 per year. This would mean that for 2019-20 and 2020-21, Duke would be paying $1.5 million per year for salaries of WBB head coaches and $3 million total for the two remaining years. This is just for the salaries of head coaches -- not assistant coaches, not staff, not basketball-related operations expenses, etc.

As a supplement to my previous post, here is a little backstory and data.

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2015)
Total Expenses (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $91,174,723
Total Revenues (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $91,688,202
Total Expenses (Women's Teams): $18,611,140
Total Revenues (Women's Teams): $15,897,197
Total Expenses (Women’s Basketball): $5,511,458
Total Revenues (Women’s Basketball): $3,194,313

Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses (2015): +$513,479
Total Revenues for Women’s Sports minus Total Expenses for Women’s Sports (2015): -$2,713,943
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2015): -$2,317,145
(Source: Equity in Athletics Team Information (2015))

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018)
Total Expenses (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $108,585,925
Total Revenues (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $108,585,925
Total Expenses (Women's Teams): $24,539,320
Total Revenues (Women's Teams): $19,732,911
Total Expenses (Women’s Basketball): $6,940,064
Total Revenues (Women’s Basketball): $3,810,612

Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses (2018): $0
Total Revenues for Women’s Sports minus Total Expenses for Women’s Sports (2018): -$4,806,409
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2018): -$3,129,452
(Source: Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018))

***It should be noted that Duke added women's softball for 2018, meaning there were 11 women's sports for 2015 and 12 women's sports for 2018. For 2018, women's softball expenses were $1,344,166, with revenues of $807,718. If we just compare the 11 sports that were in existence in both 2015 and 2018, this is the result:

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018)
Total Expenses (Men’s and Women’s Teams, not including softball): $107,241,759
Total Revenues (Men’s and Women’s Teams, not including softball): $107,778,207
Total Expenses (11 Women's Teams, not including softball): $23,195,154
Total Revenues (11 Women's Teams, not including softball): $18,925,193
Total Expenses (Women’s Basketball): $6,940,064
Total Revenues (Women’s Basketball): $3,810,612

Grand Total Revenue (not including softball) minus Grand Total Expenses (not including softball)(2018): +$536,648
Total Revenues for 11 Women’s Sports (not including softball) minus Total Expenses for 11 Women’s Sports (not including softball) (2018): -$4,269,961
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2018): -$3,129,452
(Source: Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018))


In other words...

• For 2015, women's basketball was an incredibly large percentage of expenses for all 11 women's sports at Duke (29.61 percent), did not bring in a corresponding percentage of revenue (20.09 percent), and represented the overwhelming majority of the deficit when examining total revenues minus total expenses (85.38 percent).
  
• For 2018, women's basketball represents an incredibly large percentage of expenses for women's sports at Duke (over 28 percent, for all 12 women's sports; nearly 30 percent without softball), does not bring in a corresponding percentage of revenue (19.3 percent, for all 12 women's sports; 20.13 percent without softball), and still represents the majority of the deficit when examining total revenues minus total expenses (65.11 percent, for all 12 women's sports; 73.29 percent without including softball).

Given all of the expenses for athletics at Duke, the lack of a large net margin/income (in terms of Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses), the percentage of expenses for women's sports that is spent for women's basketball, and the overwhelming percentage of the deficit of women's sports attributable to women's basketball, I cannot see Duke Athletics spending an additional $600,000 per year for each of the next two years for a new WBB head coach while still paying approximately $900,000 or so for each of the next two years to Coach P, per her contract.

If my math is off, please feel free to let me know (and to show me where the data/information is incorrect so that any errors may be fixed).

[CameronBornAndBred]

As a supplement to my previous post, here is a little backstory and data.

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2015)
Total Expenses (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $91,174,723
Total Revenues (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $91,688,202
Total Expenses (Women's Teams): $18,611,140
Total Revenues (Women's Teams): $15,897,197
Total Expenses (Women’s Basketball): $5,511,458
Total Revenues (Women’s Basketball): $3,194,313

Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses (2015): +$513,479
Total Revenues for Women’s Sports minus Total Expenses for Women’s Sports (2015): -$2,713,943
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2015): -$2,317,145
(Source: Equity in Athletics Team Information (2015))

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018)
Total Expenses (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $108,585,925
Total Revenues (Men’s and Women’s Teams): $108,585,925
Total Expenses (Women's Teams): $24,539,320
Total Revenues (Women's Teams): $19,732,911
Total Expenses (Women’s Basketball): $6,940,064
Total Revenues (Women’s Basketball): $3,810,612

Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses (2018): $0
Total Revenues for Women’s Sports minus Total Expenses for Women’s Sports (2018): -$4,806,409
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2018): -$3,129,452
(Source: Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018))

***It should be noted that Duke added women's softball for 2018, meaning there were 11 women's sports for 2015 and 12 women's sports for 2018. For 2018, women's softball expenses were $1,344,166, with revenues of $807,718. If we just compare the 11 sports that were in existence in both 2015 and 2018, this is the result:

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018)
Total Expenses (Men’s and Women’s Teams, not including softball): $107,241,759
Total Revenues (Men’s and Women’s Teams, not including softball): $107,778,207
Total Expenses (11 Women's Teams, not including softball): $23,195,154
Total Revenues (11 Women's Teams, not including softball): $18,925,193
Total Expenses (Women’s Basketball): $6,940,064
Total Revenues (Women’s Basketball): $3,810,612

Grand Total Revenue (not including softball) minus Grand Total Expenses (not including softball)(2018): +$536,648
Total Revenues for 11 Women’s Sports (not including softball) minus Total Expenses for 11 Women’s Sports (not including softball) (2018): -$4,269,961
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2018): -$3,129,452
(Source: Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018))


In other words...

• For 2015, women's basketball was an incredibly large percentage of expenses for all 11 women's sports at Duke (29.61 percent), did not bring in a corresponding percentage of revenue (20.09 percent), and represented the overwhelming majority of the deficit when examining total revenues minus total expenses (85.38 percent).
  
• For 2018, women's basketball represents an incredibly large percentage of expenses for women's sports at Duke (over 28 percent, for all 12 women's sports; nearly 30 percent without softball), does not bring in a corresponding percentage of revenue (19.3 percent, for all 12 women's sports; 20.13 percent without softball), and still represents the majority of the deficit when examining total revenues minus total expenses (65.11 percent, for all 12 women's sports; 73.29 percent without including softball).

Given all of the expenses for athletics at Duke, the lack of a large net margin/income (in terms of Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses), the percentage of expenses for women's sports that is spent for women's basketball, and the overwhelming percentage of the deficit of women's sports attributable to women's basketball, I cannot see Duke Athletics spending an additional $600,000 per year for each of the next two years for a new WBB head coach while still paying approximately $900,000 or so for each of the next two years to Coach P, per her contract.

If my math is off, please feel free to let me know (and to show me where the data/information is incorrect so that any errors may be fixed).

As I've stated, I love your depth and research, but in this case I don't equate those numbers with the lost value of the program. I see it more affordable to take a monetary loss, right the ship of a program taking on water, and gain back fans than I see it to retain this coach.

[uh_no]

Joanne P. McCallie has two years remaining on her contract; the extension announced in August 2017 keeps her under contract through the end of the 2020-21 season. Assuming the extension (which added two years to her then-current deal) was at the same rate of pay, her estimated annual compensation is approximately $900,000 or so. That means a buyout of the remaining two years would be $1.8 million.

In addition, Duke would have to pay a new women's basketball coach to take over for Coach P. Conservatively (given's Duke WBB status as a former national power), put that figure at $600,000 per year. This would mean that for 2019-20 and 2020-21, Duke would be paying $1.5 million per year for salaries of WBB head coaches and $3 million total for the two remaining years. This is just for the salaries of head coaches -- not assistant coaches, not staff, not basketball-related operations expenses, etc.

is a marginal 600k per year worth it to put butts in seats?

Maybe a new coach will schedule teams like uconn and baylor who bring crowds instead of ducking them.

i'd imagine a sellout of a game like that probably brings at least 100k of marginal income, when you include tickets and concessions.

I don't think first round acc exits and ncaa misses were what Dr. White was hoping for when he offered that extension.

[CamrnCrz1974]

As I've stated, I love your depth and research, but in this case I don't equate those numbers with the lost value of the program. I see it more affordable to take a monetary loss, right the ship of a program taking on water, and gain back fans than I see it to retain this coach.

CameronBornAndBred, I completely agree with you. The information I provided gave the raw numbers, in terms of revenue and expenses.

But those numbers cannot necessarily measure the value of the program, in terms of goodwill, media coverage, and all of the other things that having a very successful WBB program that was consistently a national title contender could mean for the university as a whole.

[Phredd3]

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2015)

Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses (2015): +$513,479
Total Revenues for Women’s Sports minus Total Expenses for Women’s Sports (2015): -$2,713,943
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2015): -$2,317,145
(Source: Equity in Athletics Team Information (2015))

Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018)

Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses (2018): $0
Total Revenues for Women’s Sports minus Total Expenses for Women’s Sports (2018): -$4,806,409
Total Revenues for WBB minus Total Expenses for WBB (2018): -$3,129,452
(Source: Duke - Equity in Athletics Team Information (2018))

What this says to me is that Duke really wants a good women's basketball team. Enough to pay several million dollars per year to get it. It also says to me that the return on that investment is dwindling. Revenues for women's sports as a whole are up 24%. Revenues for women's basketball, on the other hand, are only up 19%. That seems fairly self-evident to anyone who really follows the team, in that the gym is less filled and you almost never see the Duke women's team as a featured game on network television any more. I would guess that local broadcast revenue - both TV and radio - has also not grown much. And, of course, the team isn't actually all that good anymore - certainly not good enough to be considered a national title contender.

So at what point does Duke say either a) we're not really interested in paying millions annually for a top-flight women's basketball program and mediocrity (or worse) is good enough (a scholarship is a scholarship, and the program as a whole is just a necessary adjunct of Title IX), or b) we have to change something to get back among the elite programs, with the resulting bump in revenue and prestige that would (hopefully) bring with it?

Clearly up to this point, breaking even financially has not been the goal of Duke women's basketball.

[Phredd3]

I am thrilled to announce that Lisa Borders, T’79, will be Duke’s 2019 Commencement Speaker.

As the President and CEO of Time’s Up, Lisa is leading the way toward building a more just, equitable future for women, a mission that she has carried with her throughout her career in business, public service, philanthropy and the WNBA. Lisa also serves as a Duke Trustee, and I have been honored to have her wise counsel since arriving at Duke.

You don't suppose they've spoken about DWBB, do you? It's hard to think of anyone more knowledgeable on the subject.

[miramar]

Given all of the expenses for athletics at Duke, the lack of a large net margin/income (in terms of Grand Total Revenue minus Grand Total Expenses), the percentage of expenses for women's sports that is spent for women's basketball, and the overwhelming percentage of the deficit of women's sports attributable to women's basketball, I cannot see Duke Athletics spending an additional $600,000 per year for each of the next two years for a new WBB head coach while still paying approximately $900,000 or so for each of the next two years to Coach P, per her contract.

If my math is off, please feel free to let me know (and to show me where the data/information is incorrect so that any errors may be fixed).

I am sure that your numbers are right, but I don't think that the university can continue to lose money and lose games in what should be the best part of Duke women's sports. Even if we only look at the financial aspects of WBB, a winning program should generate positive cash flow and help finance other women's programs.

Assuming that the university can hire a winning coach, at some point a buyout would represent an investment in the future of WBB at Duke. In my view it's a question of whether we are at that point, and I would guess that most observers would say yes.

[jimsumner]

McCallie has two years left on her contract. But at some point in the not too distant future she's going to ask for an extension based on recruiting. Recruits want to know who's going to be coaching when they show up.

So, Kevin White will have a decision to make. And likely, so will McCallie.

History lesson.

Bucky Waters signed a five-year contract. After four years he went to AD Carl James and asked for an extension for exactly the reason I mentioned.

James declined. Waters resigned, only days before the beginning of practice.

McCallie has already had a recent extension. Barring a remarkable stretch run, Duke is looking at its worst season since 1993 (12-15), perhaps since 1978, Debbie Leonard's first team which went 1-19.

It's a young team, with a lot of injuries. But Duke WBB has too many resources, too much tradition to be struggling this much.

McCallie will not be negotiating from a position of strength.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I am sure that your numbers are right, but I don't think that the university can continue to lose money and lose games in what should be the best part of Duke women's sports. Even if we only look at the financial aspects of WBB, a winning program should generate positive cash flow and help finance other women's programs.

Uh, I think maybe only UConn consistently, and perhaps ND or Stanford or Baylor generate positive cash flow from WBB. Perhaps someone can correct this, but I'd be surprised (and interested) to find out any differently. Has Duke ever generated positive cash flow from WBB?

[jimsumner]

Uh, I think maybe only UConn consistently, and perhaps ND or Stanford or Baylor generate positive cash flow from WBB. Perhaps someone can correct this, but I'd be surprised (and interested) to find out any differently. Has Duke ever generated positive cash flow from WBB?

I would think South Carolina has a pretty good WBB cash-flow.

[sagegrouse]

Uh, I think maybe only UConn consistently, and perhaps ND or Stanford or Baylor generate positive cash flow from WBB. Perhaps someone can correct this, but I'd be surprised (and interested) to find out any differently. Has Duke ever generated positive cash flow from WBB?

I would think South Carolina has a pretty good WBB cash-flow.

Maybe, but I am not sure about the TV revenue, or one how even one might allocate revenue, given that it is likely a lump sum per year per school with some add-ons for bowl revenue, NCAA hoops revenue and maybe for other sports.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I would think South Carolina has a pretty good WBB cash-flow.

They might, now that you mention it...since Dawn Staley got the program going. They had been way down for a long time since the days of, what's her name? Pam Parsons? And as a matter of fact, I have a contact in Gamecock land who might know.

I would also think that Pat Summit's teams at UT were maybe more profitable than a men's program that was nondescript for a long time (outside of the Ernie and Bernie Show years).

If I had to guess, and this is an outsiders observation of athletic departments...some of this might depend on how schools apportion the conference pay outs. For example, Duke's value to the ACC TV pay outs are limited to MBB...but there is probably an accounting there for FB and for WBB. For Clemson, the conference pay out is all about FB. And so on. TV dollars can be moved from sport to sport to achieve whatever balance sheet result a certain school might want.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Maybe, but I am not sure about the TV revenue, or one how even one might allocate revenue, given that it is likely a lump sum per year per school with some add-ons for bowl revenue, NCAA hoops revenue and maybe for other sports.

I tried to give you the GMTA spork! See my comment written simultaneously with yours!

[miramar]

According to this article, some teams make money, but apparently not over $500,000:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm.../#4a730db638b5

Another article says that Stanford is a revenue machine, generating twice as much as UConn. I guess that's the difference between Silicon Valley and a small state in New England:

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...m-revenue.aspx

The article also says that Miami (+34%) and FSU (+94%) generate way more revenue than Duke.

A huge state school like FSU may not be comparable to Duke, but UM is. Miami is of course a much larger city, but fans in South Florida are notoriously fickle and total frontrunners, not to mention that there is a lot of competition out there, so there is no way that they should generate over a million dollars more than Duke. But then again Katie Meyer has teams that are fun to watch and they usually win 20 or more games every season, so there is a definite economic incentive to playing good basketball. I would say that a buyout would not be free, but a solid team would get a lot of that money back and generate a modest profit in the long term.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

According to this article, some teams make money, but apparently not over $500,000:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm.../#4a730db638b5

Another article says that Stanford is a revenue machine, generating twice as much as UConn. I guess that's the difference between Silicon Valley and a small state in New England:

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...m-revenue.aspx

The article also says that Miami (+34%) and FSU (+94%) generate way more revenue than Duke.

A huge state school like FSU may not be comparable to Duke, but UM is. Miami is of course a much larger city, but fans in South Florida are notoriously fickle and total frontrunners, not to mention that there is a lot of competition out there, so there is no way that they should generate over a million dollars more than Duke. But then again Katie Meyer has teams that are fun to watch and they usually win 20 or more games every season, so there is a definite economic incentive to playing good basketball. I would say that a buyout would not be free, but a solid team would get a lot of that money back and generate a modest profit in the long term.

One take away from the article...is that accounting practices are hard to follow, and the article indicates a lot of schools will funnel money from other sports to make bottom lines look better on WBB and so on.