Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 225

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Duke MBB v Wake Forest (2/15 7:00 p.m. EST ESPN) Pre- and In-Game Thread

    The Super Bowl is starting and I couldn't care less about the outcome. I don't hold a grudge against either team, I just don't really care. Anyway, Duke has a big game on Tuesday night, so let's talk Duke!

    Wake Forest comes to Durham looking for revenge. They lost to Duke earlier in the season while Coach K was home following a COVID exposure. In that matchup, Duke allowed ACC POTY frontrunner Alondes Williams to score well enough, racking up a game-leading 25 points. The issue for Williams and Wake Forest in that game was that Williams turned the ball over 7 times. Duke only coughed up the ball 7 times total in that game. Paolo Banchero and Duke also kept one of their star players, Jake LaRavia, in check for most of the game. LaRavia finally started to score the ball later in the second half, a period when Duke had the game well in hand.

    Duke used hot shooting from 3 in the first matchup to build a big lead. AJ Griffin and Paolo Banchero shot a combined 5-11 from beyond the arc with each reaching 20+ points. Duke in general is bigger and longer than Wake Forest 1 through 5 and used that strength and height advantage to bully their way to the rim where the Blue Devils shot 18-24 for the game as well as making 8 dunks. Banchero and Williams punished Wake's interior defense in particular.

    Wake was without the services of 6'6" SO G/F Damari Monsanto in the first matchup. He adds another perimeter scorer to the mix as he's a talented marksman from deep. Just 8 of his 46 FG attempts on the season have come inside the arc. The Deacons could use his shooting in the rematch with Duke as they made just 2 of 16 3-point attempts in the first game.

    Duke will be looking to further distance itself from Wake Forest in the ACC race in this matchup. Wake lost a tough one to Miami on Saturday and find themselves uncomfortably close to the bubble. A win against Duke would secure their place in the tournament. Wake is just 1-3 in Q1 games as of Sunday and 4-6 in Q1+2 games with its best non-conference win being over Northwestern in OT during the annual ACC/B1G Challenge. They will be highly motivated to win this game.

    If Duke has any plans on earning a 1 seed in the NCAAT and earning the ACC regular season record, they will need to win this matchup. Simply put, Duke cannot afford to lose another game if the Blue Devils are to be comfortable come Selection Sunday. A strong showing against a Wake Forest would cap a mostly impressive stretch of 7 games that included 5 road games and the final 5 games over just 11 days. Duke will have a few days of rest after Tuesday. Can they punctuate this tough stretch with another quality win?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Hello Friend!
       

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich View Post
    Hello Friend!
    We could all use an in-game friend!

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    The Super Bowl is starting and I couldn't care less about the outcome. I don't hold a grudge against either team, I just don't really care.
    You’re not interested in NFL playoff games, particularly a game between the winner of each conference?

    Anyway, thanks for the Wake preview.
       

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Van Nuys, CA
    We are getting better play from Banchero,Keels, Williams, Moore, and John. I have concerns regarding Roach, Baker and Jones play lately. Griffin is still having issues on defense and his handle needs work. As the team calls the Crib has not been the advantage Duke teams usually get from the intense fan base at Cameron. This is a much better Wake Forest team. Duke can not start slow and have the usual unforced turnovers that is plaguing this team. Duke should be getting better at this point in the season. They should not be tired either.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven43 View Post
    You’re not interested in NFL playoff games, particularly a game between the winner of each conference?

    Anyway, thanks for the Wake preview.
    My interest in the NFL has been declining every year for more than a decade. The Halftime Show was a good time. The game was exciting, but I didn't really care. It held as much interest to me as a November college basketball game between Kansas and Kentucky might.

    Now we have 3 weeks of the college basketball season remaining and then the ACC and NCAA Tournaments. This is the best time of year for sports, or it would be if MLB wasn't a dumpster fire.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    My interest in the NFL has been declining every year for more than a decade. The Halftime Show was a good time. The game was exciting, but I didn't really care. It held as much interest to me as a November college basketball game between Kansas and Kentucky might.

    Now we have 3 weeks of the college basketball season remaining and then the ACC and NCAA Tournaments. This is the best time of year for sports, or it would be if MLB wasn't a dumpster fire.
    snoop dogg bringing a new definition to a "super bowl"
    1200. DDMF.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    snoop dogg bringing a new definition to a "super bowl"
    This old white geezer was highly entertained, even if much of the music was from the 90s.

    Kendrick is arguably the best of all of them.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by DevilYouKnow View Post
    This old white geezer was highly entertained, even if much of the music was from the 90s.

    Kendrick is arguably the best of all of them.
    Can't say that I am overly familiar with Kendrick Lamar, but that was an incredible performance from him and the dance crew. The visuals and cinematography of it was amazing.

    I hope to see the Duke team play with that level of coordination and energy on Tuesday night.

  10. #10
    My curiosity… did Roach regress after Keels became ready to play? Maybe he is looking over his shoulder and pressing himself. When Keels was clearly out, Roach played very well.
       

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by gep View Post
    My curiosity… did Roach regress after Keels became ready to play? Maybe he is looking over his shoulder and pressing himself. When Keels was clearly out, Roach played very well.
    Roach had started playing well before Keels went out (his good play coincided with Griffin taking his starting spot) and played well in Keels’ first game back.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by gep View Post
    My curiosity… did Roach regress after Keels became ready to play? Maybe he is looking over his shoulder and pressing himself. When Keels was clearly out, Roach played very well.
    Roach protected the ball well when Keels was out.

    But Roach's shooting in ACC play - regardless of whether Keels was in or out - is horrific. He's shooting 36% from 2 and 24% from 3 in conference play. Last year, in conference play, Roach shot 61% from 2 and 29% from 3. He's never been a good 3pt shooter, but his 2pt shooting - mainly layups - was okay. This year? Gawd awful.

    Put another away, during ACC play, Roach has only played 2 games where he's shot equal to or better than 50% from the field. That's not good at all.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Roach protected the ball well when Keels was out.

    But Roach's shooting in ACC play - regardless of whether Keels was in or out - is horrific. He's shooting 36% from 2 and 24% from 3 in conference play. Last year, in conference play, Roach shot 61% from 2 and 29% from 3. He's never been a good 3pt shooter, but his 2pt shooting - mainly layups - was okay. This year? Gawd awful.

    Put another away, during ACC play, Roach has only played 2 games where he's shot equal to or better than 50% from the field. That's not good at all.
    One metric we don't often talk about is +/-. Jeremy is -1.1 on offense (1.0 combined and Theo is the only regular rotation player with a negative OBPM), so he is a below average offensive player, to say the least. His playmaking of late has been a minor revelation, but his scoring has been a disappointment this year. His defense is decent, but I question a little bit if his D justifies the PT he gets.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    It feels like that first Wake game was a lifetime ago, but the calendar tells me it was only about a month. Isn't that the game Scheyer coached while K had a non-covid illness? Anyways, our team has evolved quite a bit since then. Mark has really come on and has been able to stay on the floor even against smaller teams with bigs who can extend to the perimeter. That was a big issue earlier in the season. Our rebounding has improved a ton, and we're committing fewer turnovers although from game to game that can vary. We're also forcing fewer, but honestly I'm okay with that if it means staying home on your man instead of gambling for steals. Stopping Alondes Williams is goal #1 on defense, in the first game he scored a lot of points but had to take a high volume of shots to get there which I guess is what you want.

    I'm looking forward to seeing how the team has progressed now that we're starting to play teams for a second time. The teams and coaches are getting to know each other and have plenty of game film on the opposing team's tendencies and how to beat them, so it really comes down to execution. Would love for Jeremy to have a bounce back game as he's been struggling lately.

  15. #15
    Below is an advanced stats profile of Wake Forest, which might tell us what to expect from an advanced stats standpoint. Note that all of the below numbers are unadjusted for competition (except for oRating and dRating, for which I'm using Pomeroy's adjusted ratings).


    OFFENSE

    Pace: 71.1; Wake Forest is one of the two fastest (#74 nationally) teams in the ACC (along with UNC) (Duke is #141 at 69.4); last time Duke played a game with 71 or more possessions was mid-December; last time we played Wake the game had 68.4 possessions and when we played the ACC's other fast-ish team (UNC) we still played slow (68.7 possessions), so it'll be interesting to see what happens here.

    oRating: 110.1; according to Pomeroy, Wake Forest has the #51 offense in the country. (Duke's dRating is 90.9, the #18 defense in the country.)

    eFG%: 56.4%; Wake Forest is very accurate from the field, with the #12 eFG%. (Duke has the #20 opposing eFG%, at 45.0%.)

    3pt%: 34.9%; Wake Forest is middling at making three pointers, the #125 3pt%. (Duke has the #13 opposing 3pt%, at 29.0%.)

    %threes: 42.2%; Wake takes a ton of threes (#86). (Duke's average opponent takes 32.8% of their shots from three, the 40th-lowest.)

    2pt%: 59.4%; Wake Forest is dominant from two (#3); (Duke's opponents generally shoot poorly from two, 45.0%, #16.)

    FT rate: 33.0%; Wake Forest gets to the free throw line a good amount (#88). (Duke is excellent at keeping opponents from getting to the line, at just 18.8%, #2 in the country.)

    OR%: 25.7%; Wake Forest doesn't get many offensive boards (#258); (Duke's DR% of 72.4% is #214.)

    TO rate: 19.3%; Wake Forest is somewhat sloppy with the ball, #222; (Duke doesn't turn its opponents over very much, 17.1%, #268.)

    assist%: 53.5%; Wake Forest assists more than half its baskets (#127); (Duke's opponents, on average, assist on a little bit less than half (49.8%, #137.)

    steal%: 11.0%; Wake Forest gets the ball stolen from them a lot (#328); (Duke is middling at stealing, 10.0%, #138.)

    block%: 8.1%; Wake Forest gets blocked a middling amount (#110); (Duke blocks a lot, 13.0%, #36.) (NOTE: I believe these numbers are only for two-point shots.)


    DEFENSE

    dRating: 94.7; according to Pomeroy, Wake Forest has the #42 defense in the country; (Duke's oRating is 116.5, the #11 offense in the country.)

    eFG%: 46.0%; Wake Forest stops the ball from going in the basket (#34); (Duke has an average eFG% of 54.9%, good for #26 in the nation.)

    3pt%: 31.1%; Wake Forest's opponents don't shoot that well from three (#73); (Duke shoots pretty well from three, 36.6%, #43.)

    %threes: 35.7%; Wake Forest's opponents shoot a middling number of threes (#101); (Duke doesn't shoot many threes, 35.5%, #236.)

    2pt%: 45.6%; Wake Forest's opponents miss a lot from two (#29); (Duke makes a lot from two, 54.9%, #23)

    FT rate: 26.8%; Wake Forest keeps its opponent off the line reasonably well (#103); (Duke doesn't get to the line very much, 28.5%, #229.)

    DR%: 73.4%; Wake Forest is only OK on the defensive boards (#157); (Duke does pretty well on the offensive boards, 31.1%, #82.)

    TO rate: 17.4%; Wake Forest doesn't force too many turnovers (#254); (for the season, Duke does not turn it over very much, 15.4%, #22)

    assist%: 49.3%; Wake Forest's opponents assist on a bit less than half their baskets (#127); (Duke assists a lot, 57.5%, #51.)

    steal%: 9.0%; Wake Forest doesn't get many steals (#224); (Duke gets stolen from a fair amount, 9.2%, #161.)

    block%: 10.0%; Wake Forest blocks a middling number of shots (#127); (Duke gets blocked a middling amount, 8.3%, #129.)


    The skinny: From a statistical standpoint, Wake Forest is very similar to Duke. They shoot well while keeping their opponents from shooting well. They're inconsistent on offensive turnovers, don't foul too much, aren't great at rebounding or forcing turnovers. The main differences between the teams are Wake attempts a lot more threes (and isn't great at making them). They also foul a little more, turn it over more, and offensive rebound less.

    Everything's gotta give: Because the teams have such a similar statistical profile, there are a lot of areas where one team or the other might unexpectedly excel. For example, since January 1, Wake has been one of the country's sloppiest teams with the ball (21.7% TO rate, #329) while in the same timeframe Duke has been the 4th-worst team in the nation at forcing turnovers (13.0%, #355). One of these things won't be true tomorrow night. Similarly, Wake is not a good offensive rebounding team, while Duke is mediocre at defensive rebounding. Duke has been inconsistent at offensive turnovers while Wake doesn't force many. Wake gets to the line a lot while Duke hardly fouls -- we did have a subpar opposing FT rate the last time we played Wake, but Duke has put its road opponents on the line at a rate more than twice as high as at home, so hopefully that'll improve.

    Unstoppable force, meet immovable object: The biggest clash of the titans situation comes with shooting, especially two-point shooting. Wake is #3 in the country at making twos while Duke is #16 in the country in preventing them. It's a little less severe on threes, as Wake is #125 in making and Duke is #13 in stopping. On Duke's side, the #23 team at making twos (#43 at threes) meets the 29th stingiest 2pt defense (#73 at threes). Whoever wins the shooting matchup has a good chance of winning the game.

    There's a potentially interesting situation when it comes to quantity of threes, as Wake takes a lot (42.2%) while Duke generally limits its opponents looks from out there (32.8%). Except in this game if Duke "wins" this battle it might actually suffer for it, because that would mean more two-pointers for Wake which is the Demon Deacons' biggest strength.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Pace: 71.1; Wake Forest is one of the two fastest (#74 nationally) teams in the ACC (along with UNC) (Duke is #141 at 69.4); last time Duke played a game with 71 or more possessions was mid-December; last time we played Wake the game had 68.4 possessions and when we played the ACC's other fast-ish team (UNC) we still played slow (68.7 possessions), so it'll be interesting to see what happens here.
    It's weird that these days Duke has played slow in league games even against fast-ish teams. The thing is, so far this season, we've played better in games with more than 71 possessions than we do in games with less than 69 possessions:

    Code:
    	Gms	Poss	frc TO%	D FB	Adj oRat	Adj dRat	D TO%	Opp FB
    >71	8	74.62	23.1%	18.0	1.199		0.865		12.4%	10.5
    <69	15	65.87	14.2%	8.5	1.177		0.905		17.1%	6.9
    Keeping in mind that TO% is per possession, so in theory is pace independent, Duke has forced 23% in fast games but only 14% in slow games. But on offense, Duke's TO% is 12% in fast games and 17% in slow games. Obviously fast break points are going to happen more in fast games, but Duke's fast breaks are significantly better in fast games (18 to 8.5) than Duke's opponents' fast breaks are (10.5 to 7). Both our adjusted oRating and our adjusted dRating are better in fast games.

    Having said all that, it's probable that there's something else going on, potentially unrelated to pace. All of our fast games occurred December 15 or earlier, mostly against inferior teams (the only fast games against good teams were against Kentucky and Gonzaga; Ohio State was neither above 71 nor below 69). And while the oRatings and dRatings in the above table are adjusted, it's very possible they weren't adjusted quite enough against overmatched teams. And the TO% and fast break numbers in the above table are unadjusted for competition.

    More evidence that pace may not be the real reason for the above differences is that in three slow games before the Covid Pause, our forced TO% was 16.9% while in the 12 slow games after the pause, our forced TO% was only 13.5%. Though that might just be noise, since three games is such a very small sample and 16.9% is still a lot worse than our forced TO% in fast games.

    The disappearance of our fast break game is even stranger. In our 16 games on or before January 15, we averaged 15.9 fast break points per game, fast or slow. In our first 4 slow-paced ACC games after the Covid pause, we averaged 14.3 fast break points per game. However in our 9 games after January 15, we've averaged a mere 4.8 fast break points per 40 minute game.

    I'd feel a lot better about the rest of our season if we started forcing more turnovers and getting more fast break points. What's actually going on here, I have no idea, but it will be interesting to see if we can play a faster game against Wake Forest, which is usually one of the two fastest teams in the ACC, and if we do whether we follow the above trends.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    It's weird that these days Duke has played slow in league games even against fast-ish teams. The thing is, so far this season, we've played better in games with more than 71 possessions than we do in games with less than 69 possessions:

    Code:
    	Gms	Poss	frc TO%	D FB	Adj oRat	Adj dRat	D TO%	Opp FB
    >71	8	74.62	23.1%	18.0	1.199		0.865		12.4%	10.5
    <69	15	65.87	14.2%	8.5	1.177		0.905		17.1%	6.9
    Keeping in mind that TO% is per possession, so in theory is pace independent, Duke has forced 23% in fast games but only 14% in slow games. But on offense, Duke's TO% is 12% in fast games and 17% in slow games. Obviously fast break points are going to happen more in fast games, but Duke's fast breaks are significantly better in fast games (18 to 8.5) than Duke's opponents' fast breaks are (10.5 to 7). Both our adjusted oRating and our adjusted dRating are better in fast games.

    Having said all that, it's probable that there's something else going on, potentially unrelated to pace. All of our fast games occurred December 15 or earlier, mostly against inferior teams (the only fast games against good teams were against Kentucky and Gonzaga; Ohio State was neither above 71 nor below 69). And while the oRatings and dRatings in the above table are adjusted, it's very possible they weren't adjusted quite enough against overmatched teams. And the TO% and fast break numbers in the above table are unadjusted for competition.

    More evidence that pace may not be the real reason for the above differences is that in three slow games before the Covid Pause, our forced TO% was 16.9% while in the 12 slow games after the pause, our forced TO% was only 13.5%. Though that might just be noise, since three games is such a very small sample and 16.9% is still a lot worse than our forced TO% in fast games.

    The disappearance of our fast break game is even stranger. In our 16 games on or before January 15, we averaged 15.9 fast break points per game, fast or slow. In our first 4 slow-paced ACC games after the Covid pause, we averaged 14.3 fast break points per game. However in our 9 games after January 15, we've averaged a mere 4.8 fast break points per 40 minute game.

    I'd feel a lot better about the rest of our season if we started forcing more turnovers and getting more fast break points. What's actually going on here, I have no idea, but it will be interesting to see if we can play a faster game against Wake Forest, which is usually one of the two fastest teams in the ACC, and if we do whether we follow the above trends.
    One positive from this; we’re winning games without heavy fast break points. Since most tournament games seem to be more “half court” games, maybe a good sign we don’t have to rely on fast break offense to win.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mount Kisco, NY
    GAME DAY!

    This is a BIG game, Wake is tough and, big surprise, needs a big W to build their NCAA resume.

    I am less interested in Xs and Os and more into whether or not our team shows up ready for a war from the jump. It is wild that 2 of our 3 conference losses came within venerable CIS! Let's draw that blue line and defend our home!!!!

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy Dat View Post
    GAME DAY!

    This is a BIG game, Wake is tough and, big surprise, needs a big W to build their NCAA resume.

    I am less interested in Xs and Os and more into whether or not our team shows up ready for a war from the jump. It is wild that 2 of our 3 conference losses came within venerable CIS! Let's draw that blue line and defend our home!!!!
    Indeed—it's a night to see some floor slappin' and to hear the "OUR HOUSE" chant reverberate in the Cameron rafters!

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy Dat View Post
    GAME DAY!

    This is a BIG game, Wake is tough and, big surprise, needs a big W to build their NCAA resume.

    I am less interested in Xs and Os and more into whether or not our team shows up ready for a war from the jump. It is wild that 2 of our 3 conference losses came within venerable CIS! Let's draw that blue line and defend our home!!!!
    I’m with ya Billy Dat. We can throw out the Xs and Os. What kind of heart are our guys bringing tonight? Go Duke!
       

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 90
    Last Post: 01-08-2019, 08:59 PM
  2. MBB: Duke 79, Wake Forest 71 Post-Game Thread
    By JBDuke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 03-05-2016, 03:03 PM
  3. MBB: Duke 83, Wake Forest 63 Post-Game Thread
    By JBDuke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-06-2014, 10:19 PM
  4. MBB: Duke 75, Wake Forest 70 Post-Game Thread
    By JBDuke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 02-01-2013, 12:20 AM
  5. MBB: Duke 91, Wake Forest 73 Post Game Thread
    By Bob Green in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 01-20-2012, 10:47 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
  •