Autopsy of a Loss: Duke vs FSU

[CDu]

Agree the Jones bros were and are incredible. But overall, we’re not seeing the annual maturation of the Quinn’s (Snyder/Cook) or many others we saw mature to very good guards in the past. And of course we lost a guy to Oklahoma this season that I think would have helped a lot. Don’t know if he leaves if we’re not bringing in another 5-star guard.

I think we probably net out as positive with Keels instead of Goldwire. Especially so if Keels starts to find his range from 3pt range. But yeah, there was no way we were keeping Goldwire and adding Keels. And I'm not even sure we'd have kept Goldwire even if we had not gotten Keels.

[uh_no]

Agree the Jones bros were and are incredible. But overall, we’re not seeing the annual maturation of the Quinn’s (Snyder/Cook) or many others we saw mature to very good guards in the past. And of course we lost a guy to Oklahoma this season that I think would have helped a lot. Don’t know if he leaves if we’re not bringing in another 5-star guard.

Quinn didn't even really maturehugely as a PG.A scorer, maybe, but his distribution seemed pretty stagnant sophomore->jr year, and his inability to break the press and defend pnr was a major problem in our loss to UL. This should NOT be construed to "blame" quinn for those...or that he didn't improve at all, only that he that he isn't exactly the best case for a guy who progressed to an extremely mature PG over the years, given that he was replaced by a freshman his senior year to great success of both.

[troach42]

I actually thought the defense last night was really good. They held FSU to sub-36% FG and sub-30% 3PT FG for the game. The problem wasn't defending the basket so much as it was rebounding the ball after the initial (and subsequent) miss. We've seen some BAD defense from Duke before (the '15 game at Cameron vs. Miami comes to mind...). Last night wasn't one of those games.

[CrazieDUMB]

I think it's more to do with extended pressure man defense. Because in theory a 2-3 zone defense weakens defensive rebounding (as you don't have a clear assignment).

Duke has largely valued taking away the 3pt shot. The upside of that is fewer 3pt shots made (duh, but important). The downside of that is you tend to not be as good a defensive rebounding team. The teams that are typically really good defensive rebounding teams generally also give up more 3s, and vice versa. Some teams defy that logic (UVa in its heyday was elite at both). But generally if you are aggressive defending the perimeter you tend to give up advantage inside, and if you are aggressive at defensive rebounding it tends to mean you've packed it in (which leaves the 3pt line open).

This is the reason I wasn't as upset as some others with K's decision to switch to man on the last possession. The zone was working because FSU wasn't hitting the open threes they were getting. I'd much rather take my chances with a RayQuan Evans circus shot layup for OT than risk losing on a 3 pointer.

[uh_no]

This is the reason I wasn't as upset as some others with K's decision to switch to man on the last possession. The zone was working because FSU wasn't hitting the open threes they were getting. I'd much rather take my chances with a RayQuan Evans circus shot layup for OT than risk losing on a 3 pointer.

It's a second guess. If they'd drawn up a play against the zone, and you threw man in surprise and they were stumped, it would look like a genius move.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Are we blaming the "era" now? Duke's 2012, 2013, and 2014 teams were veteran dominated teams that each only had one freshman in the rotation.

Duke is currently #22 in KenPom's defensive rankings, though before the Covid pause we were much better. So far, 41.8% of the team's minutes have been played by freshmen.

Since Pomeroy started crunching numbers in 2001-02, Duke has had eight teams before this year's team with more than 35.0% of the team's minutes played by freshmen:

Does it sound like I'm "blaming the 'era'"? All I said was the OAD era - which it absolutely is an era - creates dominant offense teams and unpredictable defensive teams. Not sure how you can disagree. Here's the breakdown:

02-10 offensive /defensive average ranking: 10.6 / 9.2
02-10 offensive / defensive 25%-75% percentile range ranking: 1-13 / 3-15

11-21 offensive /defensive average ranking: 6.2 / 40.9
11-21 offensive / defensive 25%-75% percentile range ranking: 3.5-7.5 / 10-79

And, for the record, I don't complain about the OAD strategy. Like any strategy, it has positives, negatives, and trade-offs. And one trade-off is giving offensively-gifted freshman who haven't spent enough time in a complicated defensive system plenty of minutes.

Maybe you're just historically sensitive about anyone saying anything negative about the OAD strategy (and based on your posts, that may very well be the case).

[FerryFor50]

I think we probably net out as positive with Keels instead of Goldwire. Especially so if Keels starts to find his range from 3pt range. But yeah, there was no way we were keeping Goldwire and adding Keels. And I'm not even sure we'd have kept Goldwire even if we had not gotten Keels.

Honestly, watching Goldwire at Oklahoma, I'm not seeing great decision making there either. A lot of the same head scratching moments that made us cringe last season. His turnover % is 20.4% this season (was 19.4% last season) and he's shooting worse from three (a Keels-esque 30.2%). He and Keels are both similar in number of assists. What Keels brings that Goldwire didn't was more strength, but I don't think Goldwire staying would have made or broke this team.

[CDu]

This is the reason I wasn't as upset as some others with K's decision to switch to man on the last possession. The zone was working because FSU wasn't hitting the open threes they were getting. I'd much rather take my chances with a RayQuan Evans circus shot layup for OT than risk losing on a 3 pointer.

It's a second guess. If they'd drawn up a play against the zone, and you threw man in surprise and they were stumped, it would look like a genius move.

Yeah, I was fine with the move. I'm sure that FSU had drawn up a play for the zone. And they did look a little confused. But they made a veteran play. And it was a tough shot, and one that could easily have been missed.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I actually thought the defense last night was really good. They held FSU to sub-36% FG and sub-30% 3PT FG for the game. The problem wasn't defending the basket so much as it was rebounding the ball after the initial (and subsequent) miss. We've seen some BAD defense from Duke before (the '15 game at Cameron vs. Miami comes to mind...). Last night wasn't one of those games.

FG defense was great. Problem was inability to end their possession. They had only 5 turnovers and 19 offensive rebounds, so they shot a lot. And even if their FG was low, a high number of shots x a low percentage still equals a lot of points.

[FerryFor50]

FG defense was great. Problem was inability to end their possession. They had only 5 turnovers and 19 offensive rebounds, so they shot a lot. And even if their FG was low, a high number of shots x a low percentage still equals a lot of points.

"Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

[CDu]

Honestly, watching Goldwire at Oklahoma, I'm not seeing great decision making there either. A lot of the same head scratching moments that made us cringe last season. His turnover % is 20.4% this season (was 19.4% last season) and he's shooting worse from three (a Keels-esque 30.2%). He and Keels are both similar in number of assists. What Keels brings that Goldwire didn't was more strength, but I don't think Goldwire staying would have made or broke this team.

I agree. Now, I think Goldwire would have been great to have as the 7th/8th man on this team. The problem is that he wanted to go somewhere where he could be a starter. And that was just not going to happen here.

He has been just slightly less effective overall than Keels (worse in conference play than Keels). But I don't think putting him in in place of Keels makes us better (probably slightly worse to this point), and I don't think it was ever realistic to have both of them.

And that's assuming Keels doesn't get any better. Which may or may not play out. But right now, the only thing Goldwire is doing better than Keels is shooting slightly less poorly from the perimeter. Keels is the better rebounder, as good a defender, and better ballhandler than Goldwire.

[tommy]

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.

The rebounding seems to have a lot to do with a lack of cohesion in finishing the play. But the biggest culprit is that we largely ball-watch on shot attempts. None of our guys are good at boxing out, with Williams and John being the only ones even adequate at it. But when Williams goes for a block, that means we don't have anyone boxing out.

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.

Because they still haven't figured out how to play against physicality on the road (OSU and FSU losses), they still haven't figured out how to utilize their 3 most talented players together, and they aren't getting 1st round pick play from 2 of those 5 in ACC play (Keels and Moore).

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.

[FerryFor50]

I agree. Now, I think Goldwire would have been great to have as the 7th/8th man on this team. The problem is that he wanted to go somewhere where he could be a starter. And that was just not going to happen here.

He has been just slightly less effective overall than Keels (worse in conference play than Keels). But I don't think putting him in in place of Keels makes us better (probably slightly worse to this point), and I don't think it was ever realistic to have both of them.

And that's assuming Keels doesn't get any better. Which may or may not play out. But right now, the only thing Goldwire is doing better than Keels is shooting slightly less poorly from the perimeter. Keels is the better rebounder, as good a defender, and better ballhandler than Goldwire.

I'd also point out that Oklahoma features mostly juniors and seniors and only has 3 freshmen playing more than 5 minutes per game. They're also - not coincidentally - a better overall team defense and allow fewer offensive rebounds than Duke, so Goldwire has help on defense more than he did at Duke.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb...homa/2022.html

[flyingdutchdevil]

I agree. Now, I think Goldwire would have been great to have as the 7th/8th man on this team. The problem is that he wanted to go somewhere where he could be a starter. And that was just not going to happen here.

He has been just slightly less effective overall than Keels (worse in conference play than Keels). But I don't think putting him in in place of Keels makes us better (probably slightly worse to this point), and I don't think it was ever realistic to have both of them.

And that's assuming Keels doesn't get any better. Which may or may not play out. But right now, the only thing Goldwire is doing better than Keels is shooting slightly less poorly from the perimeter. Keels is the better rebounder, as good a defender, and better ballhandler than Goldwire.

The problem is 7th/8th men at Duke don't play a lot of minutes. This isn't UNC, FSU, or Kentucky. So Goldwire could easily get <10 minutes a game.

That's arguably why he left. And that's why Duke has problems getting transfers to provide depth (I assume if there was a starting position that needed to be filled, there would absolutely be a transfer out there who would sign right away).

[CDu]

The problem is 7th/8th men at Duke don't play a lot of minutes. This isn't UNC, FSU, or Kentucky. So Goldwire could easily get <10 minutes a game.

That's arguably why he left. And that's why Duke has problems getting transfers to provide depth (I assume if there was a starting position that needed to be filled, there would absolutely be a transfer out there who would sign right away).

I agree. That is why it was never realistic to have both Keels and Goldwire, unless Goldwire was willing to go back to a minimal role.

[Kedsy]

Does it sound like I'm "blaming the 'era'"? All I said was the OAD era - which it absolutely is an era - creates dominant offense teams and unpredictable defensive teams.

Actually, I'm sorry but it did sound like that. But either way, I don't think the era creates anything. If you're talking about all college basketball, except at Duke and Kentucky, no team has consistently had a lot of one-and-dones, so OAD isn't affecting the vast majority of teams. If you're just talking about Duke, as I said in my previous post, what affects our defense is not the era and is not playing too many freshmen. When we have good defensive players, our defense is generally good and when we have poor defensive players, our defense is inconsistent (or sometimes just plain bad). It has little to do with OAD.

[sagegrouse]

The problem is 7th/8th men at Duke don't play a lot of minutes. This isn't UNC, FSU, or Kentucky. So Goldwire could easily get <10 minutes a game.

That's arguably why he left. And that's why Duke has problems getting transfers to provide depth (I assume if there was a starting position that needed to be filled, there would absolutely be a transfer out there who would sign right away).

I don't want Goldwire to play more -- I want Roach to play more. His A/TO was 6/1 last night.

[Kedsy]

I'd also point out that Oklahoma features mostly juniors and seniors and only has 3 freshmen playing more than 5 minutes per game. They're also - not coincidentally - a better overall team defense and allow fewer offensive rebounds than Duke, so Goldwire has help on defense more than he did at Duke.

According to KenPom our defense is better than Oklahoma's. Torvik says their D is better than ours, but before our last two games even he said Duke's defense was better.

Personally, I think Keels's defense is as good or better than Goldwire's. And that's saying something, since Goldwire is a very good defender.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I don't want Goldwire to play more -- I want Roach to play more. His A/TO was 6/1 last night.

Roach's A/TO in conference play has been great. He's got the highest A/TO on the team in conference play.

But, in conference play, Roach also has the worst defensive rating on the team (along with Joey Baker) and his offensive rating is in the same relative ballpark as Moore and Keels (and well below Banchero, Williams, and Griffin).

I wouldn't trade Roach for Goldwire, but I wouldn't mind having both Roach AND Goldwire.

[CDu]

I wouldn't trade Roach for Goldwire, but I wouldn't mind having both Roach AND Goldwire.

Much like the Keels vs Roach discussion, I'm not sure that was ever a realistic option, either.