Autopsy of a Loss: Duke vs FSU

[VA_BDevil]

The fact that it's FSU with the streak may not really be all that random though. It certainly could be influenced by the fact that playing against FSU under Hamilton is HARD. They are always tall, with multiple strong-bodied, athletic guys who play a very aggressive style. It wears the opponent down. And they do throw a lot of bodies at you. It wears the opponent down physically and mentally. It stands to reason that the Seminoles are usually going to be less worn down physically and mentally than are their opponents after 40 minutes, even if the score is tied. And if that is the case, the less worn down team -- FSU -- would likely have an advantage in coming out on top when the length of the game is extended.

Yes, I believe having a deep rotation is a key factor in FSU's overtime success. This leads to fresher legs at the end of regulation and overtimes, and likely fewer players being tentative on defense due to having 4 fouls.

[FUBARDoorBuster]

I mean, you don't win 13 in a row by accident.

I would say that the body of work - overall wins, unranked wins against top 25 opponents (passed Bobby Knight), overall ACC wins (5th all time under K, Dean, Roy, Gary), and 13 straight OT wins...

That starts to suggest that Hamilton might be a pretty dang good coach. Oh, and they nearly set the record for streak of ACC home wins earlier this season.

I'd say odds are good Leonard Hamilton has more than one secret in his pocket that other coaches would like to get a hint of

He has also been around a long time, as measured by his total record, including losses. I looked this up to find Coach K's ranking in total career losses, #43, and found both Hamilton and Larranegra tied at #4 on the career loss list. They have seen a lot of basketball, and a lot of things that did not work. Congrats to both of them that their experience is paying off in their later years. Hamilton earned and deserves those accolades that you quote above

That's why I have been harping on the last time out of the game and how it leads to wins.

[Phredd3]

Looking at those numbers, nobody is judging either Scheyer or Moore on their worst four games.

Actually, that was my entire point. Everyone is judging Moore on his last four games. Two weeks ago, would anybody on this site have said that Wendell Moore was an inadequate point guard?

No, that's incorrect. Everyone is judging Moore PARTIALLY on his last four games. Unless there is a clear reason to believe that these four games are systemically different from the rest of his career, it is more likely to be correctly predictive with those four games included. And this is the part where I point out that his total statistics are considerably improved from last year: His scoring average is up, his FG% is up, his 3P% is up, his rebounding is up, his assists per game are dramatically up, and his turnovers are down slightly. That's with the four games included.

Would we like him to get back to the brilliance he showed earlier in the season? Sure, everyone would. Has he had a bad stretch? Obviously. Is he "adequate"? Time will tell, but the numbers so far look pretty decent. There's no reason to deduct the four games, and your argument is far stronger if you don't. And his TO rate is still unlikely to be comparable to Scheyer's at the end of the season.

But I certainly agree with you that, at least based on what we know so far, he looks superior to Roach as the primary ball-handler. Maybe Roach's last couple games are signs of real improvement, I don't know. But I agree with you that it is too early to tell. We'll likely be getting a side-by-side comparison pretty often until Keels is healed, though, so that will be something to keep an eye on.

[ingrjc1]

First of all, thanks for the breakdown of the first few minutes of the second half, CDu. I noted at the time in the in-game thread that the first four minute segment of the second half last night was the single worst segment of the entire year for this team, and I believe that to be true. Your breakdown only solidifies that opinion.



But why would that be? Even if Mark can't box out his man because he's going for a block, the OTHER guys still need to be boxing out, and they're not. That is why FSU had so many guys crowded around the offensive board playing volleyball in there, or otherwise just beating us to boards. It was the other guys not boxing out their assignments that was killing us, and I don't have an excuse or a reason for that.



I agree with the last of these three assertions, not sure about the second -- sometimes we do, sometimes we don't, but I don't agree with the first. We had I believe a 14 point second half lead on the road against OSU and their physicality, and stormed back in the second half to take the lead against FSU and their physicality only to lose a one point decision. Had one ball bounced another way and we had gotten the win, our outlook would be pretty different, I think. There were obviously stretches of last night's game where we didn't deal well with their physicality, but there were also stretches where we controlled that game -- primarily the last stretches of both halves.

Bottom line for me is that yes, the obvious culprits last night were allowing way too many offensive rebounds, making too many sloppy turnovers, and not getting the ball to our best offensive player for ridiculously long stretches of time. But it took them making an extremely difficult driving layup to send the game to OT, much like it took Miami's Moore throwing in a lucky shot late that allowed them to have a chance, and we ended up losing both games by a point having had a last possession chance to win it. The sky is not falling (and I know you're not at all one saying it is). Two very tough losses by one point, including one to a big physical team in a very hostile environment. No panic here at all. Things to work on. But no panic. We still have an excellent chance at a very high seed in the tournament, and I think we'll get one.

Not sure if it has been said yet, but maybe a better strategy is NOT to go for so many blocks. It is obvious that teams are now trying to "challenge MW and get it on the rim" and then crash hard. The math does not always benefit Duke here. On the best night, he blocks 8 shots, so maybe 8 points if the team is shooting 50%. I get that he also it changes and avoids many other inside shots, but Duke is giving up way too many second shots that result in points. Maybe MW stays on his feet a bit more and gets in better position to board.

[Phredd3]

I mean, you don't win 13 in a row by accident.

I believe the entire point of uh_no stats treatise was that you CAN actually win 13 in a row entirely by accident, so it isn't really possible to ascribe to Hamilton some kind of secret sauce. But IANAS, either, so perhaps I missed a trick.

[cato]

I believe the entire point of uh_no stats treatise was that you CAN actually win 13 in a row entirely by accident, so it isn't really possible to ascribe to Hamilton some kind of secret sauce. But IANAS, either, so perhaps I missed a trick.

I think that was his argument, but I don’t see it as definitive. Just because stats demonstrate that this type of streak could be expected to happen doesn’t mean that FSU achieved this by pure luck. More likely, they are doing something right *and* they benefited from a bit of luck.

That, after all, is the true secret sauce for success in college ball: put yourself in position to win and have the ball bounce your way.

[DoubleBlue]

I meant second longest current streak. Sorry.

-jk

The article I linked above also states: https://www.thescore.com/ncaab/news/2279923

Florida State entered the season tied alongside five other schools with 11 straight overtime wins.

So there could be one or two teams with 12-game streaks.

The fact that there are five teams with 11-game OT win streaks does give creedance to the lack of rarity.
But since 13 is now the Division 1 record, that is quite an achievement. (I know its contradictory)

[freshmanjs]

The article I linked above also states: https://www.thescore.com/ncaab/news/2279923


So there could be one or two teams with 12-game streaks.

The fact that there are five teams with 11-game OT win streaks does give creedance to the lack of rarity.
But since 13 is now the Division 1 record, that is quite an achievement. (I know its contradictory)

If OT outcomes are a coin-flip, then you'd expect 1/4 as many 13 game streaks as 11 game streaks

[tommy]

Not sure if it has been said yet, but maybe a better strategy is NOT to go for so many blocks. It is obvious that teams are now trying to "challenge MW and get it on the rim" and then crash hard. The math does not always benefit Duke here. On the best night, he blocks 8 shots, so maybe 8 points if the team is shooting 50%. I get that he also it changes and avoids many other inside shots, but Duke is giving up way too many second shots that result in points. Maybe MW stays on his feet a bit more and gets in better position to board.

I don't know about that. What's the old saying about you don't make 100% of the shots you don't take? Mark's shotblocking not only prevents every shot he blocks from going in the basket, obviously, but I really have noticed how many times this season guys have been in the paint with the ball or made drives towards the basket and got close enough to shoot the ball, but saw Big Mark looming, and thought the better of it and passed the ball out. Those shots that were not taken obviously had zero chance to go in, as they weren't taken. So those are wins. Sure they could lead to other shots that go in, but they will do so at a rate less than 100% obviously. Mark deterring a shot from being taken is a 100% success for us -- zero chance, zero points. Of course he would have a chance to be in better rebounding position were he to not seek to block shots, but some percentage of those shots would go in, and of those that didn't, he's not going to get all the rebounds anyway. We need the other guys to block out better whether Mark is going for a blocked shot or not.

[Skydog]

… Mark deterring a shot from being taken is a 100% success for us -- zero chance, zero points. Of course he would have a chance to be in better rebounding position were he to not seek to block shots, but some percentage of those shots would go in, and of those that didn't, he's not going to get all the rebounds anyway. We need the other guys to block out better whether Mark is going for a blocked shot or not.

Its an exaggeration to say deterring a shot can be counted as a zero points, 100% success. Stealing the ball has that effect but deterring a shot usually just leads opponent to take a different shot. Yes, that’s usually good, but I wouldn’t equate that to “zero chance, zero points.” Instead it is worth a fraction of a point, depending on the quality of the shot deterred and the shot actually taken (if any). That has to be weighed against the cost of us rebounding poorly.

As an extreme example -we are up 3 with 4 secs left, opponent drives toward basket. Mark steps up and forces opponent to instead pass to an open teammate standing beyond the arc. You counting that deterrent a 100% success?