Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

[2017-18] Pitt / at Wake / Virginia / Notre Dame / at St. John's

So this is perhaps interesting. Of all of the teams who have scored 1.0PPP or more against Duke, the only one whose offensive APL (average possession length) is significantly slower than national average is Texas (and they were right at 1.0). BC, NCSU, FSU, Michigan State (yeah), and of course Portland State all play significantly faster than national average. Of all of the teams who have scored less than 1.0PPP against Duke, the only one whose offensive APL is significantly faster than national average is Miami.
 
Even if that is good news for Saturday’s game, it is not good news going forward. Duke still has home and homes left with super fast Virginia Tech (14th) and UNC (19th), And in the NCAA Tournament, likely second round opponent Arizona State is 35th, likely Sweet 16 opponent Oklahoma is 3rd, likely Elite 8 opponent Kansas is 40th, and likely FF opponent Purdue is 55th, before another matchup with UNC in the final.
 
What gives me cautious optimism about our defense is how different it is from years past. Our two point defense ranks 26th in the nation, by far (like, really really far) the best we've done in that department since 2011, which is generally considered to be the last year that K was able to coach defense. We can officially retire the "layup line" narrative, at least for this year.

Another thing is that our ranking of 73rd defensively is a bit deceptive. Carolina is ranked 18th in the country defensively, but their adjusted efficiency (93.6) is closer to ours (98.0) than it is to any of the truly elite defenses (UVA, Cincinnati, Purdue). In fact, most of our defensive metrics are just flat-out better than Carolina's. We defend the three better, we defend the two better, we block more shots and we force more turnovers than they do. Their only clear advantage over us defensively is their rebounding rate.

I don't know if a 6% difference in defensive rebounding rate could be worth 4.4 points in adjusted efficiency, but I can't think of any other explanation for the discrepancy. We are a large team with two of the best rebounders in the conference. I know this is a historical weak point for Duke, but surely we should be able to compete better on the defensive glass.
 
There’s still some natural upward regression left to go with Duke’s defense as well. They’re still unlucky on the season in the three most luck-based components: 3pt% allowed, FT% allowed, turnover% forced.
 
I see. Definitely should've considered that.

Back to the issue of rebounding, it's remarkable how little we're getting on the glass from anyone not named Carter and Bagley. Trent, Duval, and Allen combined for a whopping one defensive rebound at Wake. Duval has 11 defensive boards total in 8 conference games. That is ass.
 
There’s still some natural upward regression left to go with Duke’s defense as well. They’re still unlucky on the season in the three most luck-based components: 3pt% allowed, FT% allowed, turnover% forced.
Yea, it's funny to me that we're among the better teams in the nation at getting steals, yet our forced TO% lagged well behind the national average until very recently. Would've thought those two stats were more closely correlated.
 
I see. Definitely should've considered that.

Back to the issue of rebounding, it's remarkable how little we're getting on the glass from anyone not named Carter and Bagley. Trent, Duval, and Allen combined for a whopping one defensive rebound at Wake. Duval has 11 defensive boards total in 8 conference games. That is ass.
I wonder if that is sometimes by design to leak out early. Trent is a capable rebounder when told to crash. He actually boxes out.

Then again maybe during the normal course of the game the guards just assume Carter and Bagley are going to get everything
 
Allen’s DReb% was good enough for a 6’4” 2G his sophomore and junior year. Maybe he really is watching Carter and Bagley too much.
 
LOL. Our fate this Saturday is in the hands of random Duke fan from Savannah.
 
I don't know if a 6% difference in defensive rebounding rate could be worth 4.4 points in adjusted efficiency, but I can't think of any other explanation for the discrepancy. We are a large team with two of the best rebounders in the conference. I know this is a historical weak point for Duke, but surely we should be able to compete better on the defensive glass.

Remember you're using unadjusted game stats to justify an adjusted efficiency.

Carolina's opponents on the year have an adjusted efficiency margin of +10.68, the toughest in the country. Playing Pitt and Wake twice each hasn't helped our schedule strength; even though we've played the 26th-toughest schedule still, our opponents are only +6.36. I think it's the adjustment for opponent quality that's responsible for most of Carolina's higher ranking, not their rebounding.
 
As it stands, Duke vs. Virginia is tied for the highest "thrill score" on Kenpom of any game so far this season. Kansas vs. Kentucky had the same thrill score, but that was back when both teams were rated higher than they are now. In retrospect, that game wouldn't come close to Duke vs. Virginia.

The formula for thrill score is not publicly known, but I assume it's based on quality of opponents and expected margin of victory. I doubt tempo matters much, if at all (arguably, a game with fewer possessions is more intense, but less exciting from moment to moment, like a pitcher's duel in baseball). Objectively, this will be the best game and most important game in college basketball.
 

Chat users

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Chat rooms

  • General chit-chat 0

Forum statistics

Threads
1,067
Messages
424,926
Members
624
Latest member
Bluegrass Blue Devil
Back
Top Bottom