MBB: Duke 79, Pittsburgh 64 Post-Game Thread

[UrinalCake]

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

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

[NYBri]

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

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

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

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

[jv001]

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

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

[BoiseDevil]

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

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

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

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

[ChillinDuke]

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

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

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

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

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

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

- Chillin

[BoiseDevil]

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

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

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

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

[OldPhiKap]

Roy is the gluten of the ACC.

[uh_no]

Roy is the gluten of the ACC.

yes, but that precludes tasty beverage...

[Saratoga2]

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

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

[BandAlum83]

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

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

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

Zioin has had some really good FT shooting games:

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

That's 80% over 7 games!

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

[HereBeforeCoachK]

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

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

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

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

- Chillin

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

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

[Troublemaker]

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

Steven, not sure if you saw my post a few days ago, but I conceded that I'm almost certainly going to lose our bet on the 3-pt shooting already.

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

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

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

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

Remember when Auburn and FSU were quality wins?

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

Was that when TT was a quality win as well?

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

[devilsadvocate85]

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

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

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

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

- Chillin

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

[BandAlum83]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Phredd3]

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

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

[COYS]

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

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

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

[Kedsy]

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

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

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

the three is a requirement, period.

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

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

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

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

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

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

[BandAlum83]

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

Attachment 8982

Attachment 8983

It's just lighting...

two face.jpg

[UrinalCake]

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

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

[BandAlum83]

Steven, not sure if you saw my post a few days ago, but I conceded that I'm almost certainly going to lose our bet on the 3-pt shooting already.

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



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

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




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

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

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