DWBB 2022-23 Season

[dukelifer]

Duke wins 54-41. Celeste Taylor with 18 points, 4 assists and 6 steals.
Overall offense was adequate and defense was good, forcing 20 turnovers.

Not sure why Duke teams can’t shoot. Are they expending too much energy on D- do they not work on shooting? Just don’t get it.

[burnspbesq]

Duke wins 54-41. Celeste Taylor with 18 points, 4 assists and 6 steals.
Overall offense was adequate and defense was good, forcing 20 turnovers.

Duke held OSU to 26.4 percent shooting (2-19 from three) and forced 20 turnovers. Beavers got 0.603 points per possession.

As someone much wiser than me once said, “an ugly win counts just as much as a pretty one.”

[CameronBornAndBred]

Duke has two votes in the AP poll. That's respectable given the beatdown from UCONN.

[dudog84]

OMG. I just watched Kara's press conference and she referred to the Oregon State player by number, not name. Is this the beginning of the end?

[CameronBornAndBred]

OMG. I just watched Kara's press conference and she referred to the Oregon State player by number, not name. Is this the beginning of the end?

1441650517-qp7kr.jpg

[uh_no]

1441650517-qp7kr.jpg

I think Mr. Hankey has a pretty good claim. Or Bono.

[Kedsy]

Sorry about the late stats. Just got home from over the pond.

OFFENSE

Possessions: 68.3 (Duke seems like they should be a fast team, but five of our seven games have had fewer than 70 possessions)
oRtg: 0.70 (terrible, but good enough to win)
eFG%: 37.1% (awful; believe it or not, we shot better against UConn)
3pt%: 20.0% (bad, but we've only topped 25% from three once this season, out of seven games, so for us this is close to normal)
2pt%: 39.2% (really bad; second straight game under 40% from two)
%threes: 22.7% (normally, I'd say this is too low, but for a team shooting 22% from three for the season, you probably don't want to shoot too many more threes than this)
FT rate: 9.1% (yikes, this is horrendous)
OR%: 30.2% (decent)
TO%: 19.0% (for Duke women historically, anything under 20% is good)
a/to: 1.1:1
%assisted: 60.9% (we shared the ball well)
fast break pts: 17 (31.5% of points; outstanding)

DEFENSE

dRtg: 0.60 (fabulous; fourth game this season with dRating under 0.65, and sixth game out of seven below 0.79; defense is our calling card)
eFG%: 28.3% (yowsa; this is amazing)
3pt%: 10.5% (ditto)
2pt%: 35.3% (excellent)
%threes: 35.8% (acceptable)
FT rate: 30.2% (not good, but not terrible)
DR%: 71.4% (decent, with a 6'9" opposing center)
TO%: 29.3% (great)
a/to: 0.3:1 (very low)
%assisted: 42.9%
stl%: 17.6% (crazy good)
blk%: 11.8% (2pt shots) (strong)
fast break pts: 5 (12.2% of points; pretty good)


This Duke team sure can defend. On good shooting nights we should be able to beat anybody outside the top five.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Sorry about the late stats. Just got home from over the pond.

This Duke team sure can defend. On good shooting nights we should be able to beat anybody outside the top five.

Asking in a very non snarky way. Love your stats post, but have you actually watched us play this year yet? When I see one of those legit top 10 teams (not 5, but 10) there is a clear separation. Those teams are just flat out smooth. I don't know any better way to describe it.
That's not Duke. Not yet at least, so this isn't a blasting post. But it's obvious we have a long way to go, and "anyone outside the top five" is a big stretch. I fully expect us to at some point be ranked this season, and I fully expect us to make the dance, but I'm not on board with your lofty implications, even if backed up by stats.

I hope those numbers prove me wrong.

[DoubleBlue]

Asking in a very non snarky way. Love your stats post, but have you actually watched us play this year yet? When I see one of those legit top 10 teams (not 5, but 10) there is a clear separation. Those teams are just flat out smooth. I don't know any better way to describe it.
That's not Duke. Not yet at least, so this isn't a blasting post. But it's obvious we have a long way to go, and "anyone outside the top five" is a big stretch. I fully expect us to at some point be ranked this season, and I fully expect us to make the dance, but I'm not on board with your lofty implications, even if backed up by stats.

I hope those numbers prove me wrong.

This team is still a rag-tag collection of hither-gotten talent that is being pieced together with, in my opinion, a loose coaching style and minimum game planning. I've been critical in the past and others have defended it as the inevitable outcome of a new coach with limited recruiting time. Yes, that's all true but the pieces don't fit together well yet and the results are wildly inconsistent. There are times that the team looks great, but others where they look like the keystone cops. Its frustrating as an observer and I'm sure it is more so as a coach or player. It seems to me that Coach Lawson is looking long term, trying to instill some principles like defense and ball movement, but other fundamentals such as shooting and ball handling are not stressed enough. I'm sure others will have different views but that's my current thoughts.

[Kedsy]

Asking in a very non snarky way. Love your stats post, but have you actually watched us play this year yet? When I see one of those legit top 10 teams (not 5, but 10) there is a clear separation. Those teams are just flat out smooth. I don't know any better way to describe it.
That's not Duke. Not yet at least, so this isn't a blasting post. But it's obvious we have a long way to go, and "anyone outside the top five" is a big stretch. I fully expect us to at some point be ranked this season, and I fully expect us to make the dance, but I'm not on board with your lofty implications, even if backed up by stats.

I hope those numbers prove me wrong.

I've watched every game other than those only available on ESPN+ (no subscription), meaning I didn't see Davidson or Toledo.

Our defense has been superb so far this season. Even against UConn, while our defense was poor in a vacuum, it was tied for the best defensive performance UConn had faced to that point (I didn't check Iowa's D against UConn, the game after they played Duke). Our offensive numbers other than shooting (i.e., turnovers, offensive rebounding, free throw rate) have also been good, though without seeing national stats I can't say exactly how good. The past two games, our eFG has been under 38%, which is unacceptable. If that was up at, say 55% (a "good shooting night") and everything else (including defense) stayed the same, we'd be really hard to beat.

I'm not saying we'd beat the UConns or South Carolinas of the world, but if our shooting gets hot in a particular game, I think we can beat any ACC team. We may find out whether that's true, since there are four ACC teams in the top 12 currently. We may also find that this Duke team isn't capable of shooting well against top 10/top 12 teams, but that wouldn't necessarily invalidate my comment.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I've watched every game other than those only available on ESPN+ (no subscription), meaning I didn't see Davidson or Toledo.

Our defense has been superb so far this season.

I 100% agree with the defense, this team is stifling. Visually, however, you can see a difference in how an elite team plays offense and the way Duke plays. We aren't awful with the ball or anything, it's just that we don't "flow" like the UCONNs and South Carolinas do. We are better than last year, and less turnovers point to that, but there are still too many of those that are unforced. We will get there, and as DoubleBlue points out we're still feeling each other out. But I don't see us truly competing with a top 5 team for another season at least.
Of course, we still have all of this one for me to happily be proven wrong.

Having some excellent competition in upcoming ACC play will help.

[dukelifer]

I've watched every game other than those only available on ESPN+ (no subscription), meaning I didn't see Davidson or Toledo.

Our defense has been superb so far this season. Even against UConn, while our defense was poor in a vacuum, it was tied for the best defensive performance UConn had faced to that point (I didn't check Iowa's D against UConn, the game after they played Duke). Our offensive numbers other than shooting (i.e., turnovers, offensive rebounding, free throw rate) have also been good, though without seeing national stats I can't say exactly how good. The past two games, our eFG has been under 38%, which is unacceptable. If that was up at, say 55% (a "good shooting night") and everything else (including defense) stayed the same, we'd be really hard to beat.

I'm not saying we'd beat the UConns or South Carolinas of the world, but if our shooting gets hot in a particular game, I think we can beat any ACC team. We may find out whether that's true, since there are four ACC teams in the top 12 currently. We may also find that this Duke team isn't capable of shooting well against top 10/top 12 teams, but that wouldn't necessarily invalidate my comment.

In watching the team- they tend to play fast on O. Shay is not a calming influence out there and gets frustrated when her shot is not falling. De Jesus is better as a PG in my opinion but can get rattled. Taylor can be great but plays faster than her teammates and is at best a streaky shooter. This team needs a reliable outside threat. If someone emerges- they can be dangerous. But they are not a good shooting team right now.

[Phredd3]

In watching the team- they tend to play fast on O. Shay is not a calming influence out there and gets frustrated when her shot is not falling. De Jesus is better as a PG in my opinion but can get rattled. Taylor can be great but plays faster than her teammates and is at best a streaky shooter. This team needs a reliable outside threat. If someone emerges- they can be dangerous. But they are not a good shooting team right now.

Agree. And at least a couple of people on the team are proven non-shooters. There aren't that many people on this team I would trust to hoist up even an open shot from range, let alone a contested one. Given that, I'm pretty happy we've been keeping our 3pt shooting rate on the low side.

[dudog84]

The reason these other teams flow better on offense is that they have better players. It's pretty simple. Even without its top player, UConn can put three top-5 rated high school recruits on the floor. I don't believe Duke has a single top-10 recruit at the moment. Celeste was ranked #40 in her class. Shy was #41. Top-5 talent is far more important in the women's game than the men's.

I really like our team, but it's gonna take time. If you're gonna compare us to South Carolina (in addition to Boston (#3), they got #4, #10, and #11 in that class and they're all seniors), UConn, and Stanford (two #1 recruits!) at the moment, you're gonna be miserable all season. Next year we get our first top-5 recruit in a long time, and that still gives us 1 compared to multiple on other teams. I firmly believe others will follow Jadyn, and I am firmly confident in Kara's abilities.

[Kedsy]

I 100% agree with the defense, this team is stifling. Visually, however, you can see a difference in how an elite team plays offense and the way Duke plays. We aren't awful with the ball or anything, it's just that we don't "flow" like the UCONNs and South Carolinas do. We are better than last year, and less turnovers point to that, but there are still too many of those that are unforced. We will get there, and as DoubleBlue points out we're still feeling each other out. But I don't see us truly competing with a top 5 team for another season at least.
Of course, we still have all of this one for me to happily be proven wrong.

Having some excellent competition in upcoming ACC play will help.

In my observation, women's teams in general, even the top teams, have more turnovers and miss more layups than we see on the men's side. I think that skews our view of Duke's women's teams. For example, so far this season Duke women's offensive turnover percentage is better than the 2006 team's offensive turnover percentage (20% vs. 22%). And I think it's fair to say that 2006 national finalist was an elite team. Another comparison with an elite team would be with this year's UConn, which has the same TO% so far this season (20%) as Duke does. So I find it difficult to criticize this year's team for its turnovers.

I also think one reason this year's team looks like it lacks flow is our lengthy rotation and substitution pattern by necessity means we don't have a regular point guard running the show (like, e.g., UConn has with Muhl). It doesn't necessarily make our offense worse (though I suppose it might but it probably also makes our defense better), but it probably makes it look less pretty. Right now we have five players who might act as lead guard at any particular point in a game, and they're all very different players who create different sorts of offensive opportunities. It's hard for a team to look smooth under those circumstances.

Ultimately, I continue to believe that if Duke suddenly became a good shooting team (not saying it will happen, but IF), we'd be a top 15 team or better, capable of beating anyone outside the top five. Everything except shooting looks pretty good to me for this team.

[wandalee]

We play Northwestern this afternoon at 5:00 on the ACC Network.

[CameronBornAndBred]

We play Northwestern this afternoon at 5:00 on the ACC Network.

Their two losses have both come against tournament teams, and both were blowouts. They lost to #20 Oregon 57-100 and to Notre Dame 58-92. They are on a current three game winning streak, however.

[DoubleBlue]

Duke is favored by 15.5 pts vs. Northwestern tonight. Go Duke!

[CameronBornAndBred]

Thin crowd, but it's a Thursday at 5:00. Not exactly an attractive matchup to leave work early for.

[DoubleBlue]

In my observation, women's teams in general, even the top teams, have more turnovers and miss more layups than we see on the men's side. I think that skews our view of Duke's women's teams.

There's also a big drop-off in talent after the top 10 teams and the top 30 players. The women's college game is nowhere near as deep as men's college and I imagine the same goes for coaching, so the second-tier teams tend to do poorly against the top tier.