Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 112
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    There are still so few data points (i.e. Duke has only played 9 games) that my feeling is that it's mostly luck (while agreeing that it's not 100% luck). Here's a question for you. If I set the over/under on opponent 3-pt% for the rest of the season to be 36%, would you take the over or the under? For me, it's under easily.
    Well, first of all, 36% would still be the third-worst opposing three-point percentage in Duke history, so I'm thinking that's not such a high bar.

    Second, I might take the over. Our first 9 games have been against, in aggregate, a bunch of poor-shooting teams. Only two of our nine opponents average better than 34.2% from three. In aggregate, the nine teams shoot 33.5% (assuming their usual number of three-point shots per game), but against us they shot 37.3% from three, almost four percentage points higher than you'd expect.

    Of our remaining 13 scheduled games, 8 out of 13 currently average 35.3% or better from three. In aggregate (again assuming their average number of threes per game), they shoot 34.6% from three, a full percentage point better than what we've played so far. The only reason we might hit your 36% is because we play Syracuse, who shoots 28.7% from three on a whopping 27.9 attempts per game -- without the Orange, our remaining 12 opponents aggregate 35.2%. So if you took Syracuse out, if basically any of our performance so far has not been luck, then the over is the better bet. With Syracuse in the mix, it's a tougher call, but since I think at least half of it isn't luck, I'd probably still take the over.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    That's partly true. On the other hand, Duke's opponent 3-point rate (the share of FG attempts that are 3's) is quite low at 33.3%, the 56th lowest rate of 3's allowed per game. Teams are hitting a very high percentage of their 3's but are not taking all that many. In some cases, it is pure luck. Against Pitt, Justin Champagnie entered the game hitting 25% of his 3's on the year. He drained 4 of 7 shots. Duke wanted him to take jumpers. It's just that he made a career high 4 3's that game. Meanwhile, the rest of their team was just 3-13 from beyond the arc. The defensive strategy was sound. It just didn't work.

    Louisville shoots the ball poorly as a team and at a very low rate. They shoot just 30.9% of their FG attempts from outside. That's 305th in the nation. They don't make all that many when they do take those shots, either. The challenge for Duke in this game (and most games this year) is the free throw battle. Duke has been abysmal at getting to the FT line and preventing teams from taking a parade of FTs. Louisville excels at that this year. Duke's big men are going to have to play sound defense and contest the Louisville guards without fouling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    It's true that we keep our opponents from shooting a lot of threes. In fact, Pitt was our first opponent to shoot more threes (as a matter of percentage) than they average for the season, and even then it was close (Pitt for the season takes 35.7% of their shots from three and against us attempted 38.5% of their shots from three; also Coppin State shot 50.0% of their shots against us from distance and from the season only averages 49.9%, but I'm calling that a tie).

    On the other hand, it's unlikely to be "pure luck" when almost everybody shoots well against you. For the season, Duke has allowed its opponents to make 37.3% of their three-point shots, which (unadjusted) is the 37th worst three-point make rate in the nation (5th worst, among "Big Six" teams). In comparison, Duke held its opponents under 35% from three in each of the past 20 seasons. We've held opponents under 33% in 16 of 20 seasons. Last season, we held opponents under 30%. I don't think it's luck.
    Interestingly, Kenpom argues (back in an old blog post) that a team's defensive prowess on 3 pointers SHOULD be assessed based on a team's ability to prevent the taking of 3s rather than % made.

    https://kenpom.com/blog/3point-defen...-opponents-3p/
    With few exceptions, the best measure of three-point defense is a teamís ability to keep the opponents from taking 3ís...When someone discusses three-point defense in terms of three-point percentage, they might as well make the leap to discuss free-throw defense in similar terms. Teams have much more control over how many threeís their opponents shoot than how many they make.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Well, first of all, 36% would still be the third-worst opposing three-point percentage in Duke history, so I'm thinking that's not such a high bar.
    Well, I wasn't thinking that we were going to barely clear that bar or anything, but okay, let's use your 35% from the bolded below and I'll still take the under:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    In comparison, Duke held its opponents under 35% from three in each of the past 20 seasons.
    Yeah, let's track this. Essentially, for the rest of the season, I think this Duke team will prove that it's like any other Duke team from the past 20 years as far as opponent 3-pt %. (Which to me would mean that the bad start through 9 games is mostly bad luck).

    If you're willing to go over 36%, I assume you're certainly going over 35%. We don't have to wager anything, other than that one of us will be right and one will be wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    The only reason we might hit your 36% is because we play Syracuse, who shoots 28.7% from three on a whopping 27.9 attempts per game -- without the Orange, our remaining 12 opponents aggregate 35.2%. So if you took Syracuse out, if basically any of our performance so far has not been luck, then the over is the better bet. With Syracuse in the mix, it's a tougher call, but since I think at least half of it isn't luck, I'd probably still take the over.
    Cuse is shooting 32.2% from three, fyi. (You're looking at their defensive numbers). Also, they actually make me nervous since Buddy Boeheim is surely a better shooter than the 29.4% he's shooting so far. Hopefully he doesn't "return to the mean" too much against Duke.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedog View Post
    Interestingly, Kenpom argues (back in an old blog post) that a team's defensive prowess on 3 pointers SHOULD be assessed based on a team's ability to prevent the taking of 3s rather than % made.

    https://kenpom.com/blog/3point-defen...-opponents-3p/
    Yeah, I read that article years ago, and while there's some sense to it, I don't entirely buy it. There's no question that almost every player would shoot threes better when unguarded than when closely guarded. After that, it's just a matter of degree, right?

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    Cuse is shooting 32.2% from three, fyi. (You're looking at their defensive numbers). Also, they actually make me nervous since Buddy Boeheim is surely a better shooter than the 29.4% he's shooting so far. Hopefully he doesn't "return to the mean" too much against Duke.
    Well, I'm very embarrassed to say this, but if I was looking at defensive numbers that means ALL my numbers were wrong. I'm not sure whether I'm willing to recalculate -- let me think about it and if I am I'll repost the accurate numbers here.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    Yeah, let's track this. Essentially, for the rest of the season, I think this Duke team will prove that it's like any other Duke team from the past 20 years as far as opponent 3-pt %. (Which to me would mean that the bad start through 9 games is mostly bad luck).

    If you're willing to go over 36%, I assume you're certainly going over 35%. We don't have to wager anything, other than that one of us will be right and one will be wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Well, I'm very embarrassed to say this, but if I was looking at defensive numbers that means ALL my numbers were wrong. I'm not sure whether I'm willing to recalculate -- let me think about it and if I am I'll repost the accurate numbers here.
    OK, I wasn't willing to let incorrect numbers just sit there, so I went back and plugged in the correct numbers. Predictably, it's less clear cut now.

    The nine opponents we've played so far have an aggregate 3pt shooting pct of 34.4% (again, against us they shot 37.3%). The 13 opponents we currently have on the schedule, in aggregate, shoot 34.0%, so basically the same but a little bit worse.

    But still, if any decent portion of our problem so far were due to poor defense, then the remaining opponents should logically clear 35% so I'm willing to track it and report on it and admit it if I'm wrong.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Well, I'm very embarrassed to say this, but if I was looking at defensive numbers that means ALL my numbers were wrong. I'm not sure whether I'm willing to recalculate -- let me think about it and if I am I'll repost the accurate numbers here.
    Louisville (x2) shoots 32.3%
    UNC (x2) shoots 30.7%
    Ga (x2) Tech shoots 36.8%
    Clemson shoots 33.9%
    Notre Dame shoots 37.4%
    NC State shoots 37.3%
    Wake Forest shoots 33.7%
    UVa shoots 38.5%
    Syracuse shoots 32.1%
    Pitt shoots 31.2% (may not play this one)
    FSU shoots 38.6% (may not play this one)

    So 7 opponents shoot under 34% and 5 shoot over 36%. Or 8 and 6 if we end up playing those two postponed ACC games.

    ETA: looks like you already did it, so nevermind.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA.
    I have a bold prediction to make. I think Duke wins this game and it is the start of a turnaround for the team. Not saying they will go undefeated from here on out, but I think they will look like a much more formidable foe going forward than they have so far this season.
    "We are not provided with wisdom, we must discover it for ourselves, after a journey through the wilderness which no one else can take for us, an effort which no one can spare us, for our wisdom is the point of view from which we come at last to regard the world." --M. Proust

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Hillsborough,nc
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    I have a bold prediction to make. I think Duke wins this game and it is the start of a turnaround for the team. Not saying they will go undefeated from here on out, but I think they will look like a much more formidable foe going forward than they have so far this season.
    I certainly hope you are right. ( and I think you are ). Not much chance they could look worse.
    Last edited by Rickshaw; 01-22-2021 at 04:21 PM. Reason: None

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Van Nuys, CA

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by Rickshaw View Post
    I certainly hope you are right. ( and I think you are ). Not much chance they could look worse.
    We are on a trajectory for Coach K's first season at Duke. Losing record and no NCAA tournament. If Steward and Roach start playing better basketball and we start executing as a team then there is that possibility we drastically improve.Hurt and Johnson are good , but everyone else needs to step up.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    I have a bold prediction to make. I think Duke wins this game and it is the start of a turnaround for the team. Not saying they will go undefeated from here on out, but I think they will look like a much more formidable foe going forward than they have so far this season.
    I tend to agree with rsvman,I think this team is gonna grow up in a hurry now, especially with all the pieces back and finally getting to play games at a regular pace. The talent is there and the coaching is certainly there, as everyone knows. I am looking for a victory over Louisville as the springboard. Letís go Duke and letís get it done!
       

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    I have a bold prediction to make. I think Duke wins this game and it is the start of a turnaround for the team. Not saying they will go undefeated from here on out, but I think they will look like a much more formidable foe going forward than they have so far this season.
    Jalen and Wendell playing well again, and Coach K going back to m2m would probably do it.

    BTW, much like with Pitt, on paper, a 3-2 zone doesn't seem to make much sense for Louisville. (A 2-3 zone could.) Louisville doesn't shoot well and doesn't even like taking threes, but they attack the basket well.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    I have a bold prediction to make. I think Duke wins this game and it is the start of a turnaround for the team. Not saying they will go undefeated from here on out, but I think they will look like a much more formidable foe going forward than they have so far this season.
    I like the cut of your jib.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lewisville, NC
    Is Louisville guard David Johnson (6'5" and 210#) a matchup problem for Duke?

    He was last year when Louisville won in Cameron, going for 19 points, 7 assists and 3 steals. This year, he has become more dangerous from 3-pt, shooting 43.5% from 3-pt while averaging 13.1 pts/game overall.

    Does Duke go primarily man-to-man or zone? Maybe Wendell Moore would be our best defender vs Johnson?

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Yeah, I read that article years ago, and while there's some sense to it, I don't entirely buy it. There's no question that almost every player would shoot threes better when unguarded than when closely guarded. After that, it's just a matter of degree, right?
    Yeah, and note that Duke has been a top-60 defense in 3pt% in 10 of the previous 11 years. That suggests it is all random.

    Over a 5-10 game sample? Sure, luck can play a decent role. Over a 35 (or 350) game sample, the luck gets teased out.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by heyman25 View Post
    We are on a trajectory for Coach K's first season at Duke. Losing record and no NCAA tournament. If Steward and Roach start playing better basketball and we start executing as a team then there is that possibility we drastically improve.Hurt and Johnson are good , but everyone else needs to step up.
    Krzyzewski was 17-13 in his first season at Duke.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    I have a bold prediction to make. I think Duke wins this game and it is the start of a turnaround for the team. Not saying they will go undefeated from here on out, but I think they will look like a much more formidable foe going forward than they have so far this season.
    I hope this is the case. There have been a couple of recent seasons when Duke looked listless or moving in the wrong direction and Louisville was a looming opponent. This was the case in 2015 and again heading into the ACC Tournament in 2017. In both cases, a different Duke team showed up and defeated the Cardinals. For 2015, it was a moment that propelled Duke to earning a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament. In 2017, it was a matchup that propelled Duke to the ACC Tournament Title. Again in 2019, Duke looked completely lost against a motivated Cardinals team before orchestrating one of the most dramatic and inexplicable comebacks in recent memory. Given the timing of the season, the opponent, and the odd-numbered year, it would be a great time to use this matchup to turn the season around.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    Krzyzewski was 17-13 in his first season at Duke.
    Be sure to "give thanks to Dennard and Banks." Tournament only had 48 teams that year.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Van Nuys, CA
    Quote Originally Posted by heyman25 View Post
    We are on a trajectory for Coach K's first season at Duke. Losing record and no NCAA tournament. If Steward and Roach start playing better basketball and we start executing as a team then there is that possibility we drastically improve.Hurt and Johnson are good , but everyone else needs to step up.
    1982/83
    https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb...duke/1983.html

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by heyman25 View Post
    That was K's third season.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 175
    Last Post: 01-18-2020, 08:20 PM
  2. MBB: Duke vs. Louisville (2/21, 9 p.m., ESPN) Pre-Game and In-Game Thread
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 02-21-2018, 10:51 PM
  3. Replies: 138
    Last Post: 01-14-2017, 01:57 PM
  4. Replies: 108
    Last Post: 02-20-2016, 02:08 PM
  5. Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-08-2016, 09:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •