Welcome!

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

SignUp Now!

Pomeroy

According to the online list, there is 1 guest browsing this thread right now. I imagine that Pomeroy is an egomaniac who has long since found the one sports message board on the internet that, despite being filled with perverts, worships him like a god (that he is) and is more invested in his algorithm than anyone.

Naturally he will make a blog post that happens to address this issue before we can scoop him
 
Up to 2 guests.

Laura Keeley is the other one. She is crying and fidgeting simultaneously.
 
Well, guys...I've got some bad news.

We just foul really good FT shooters. Our opponents have only scored 1.235 extra points this season due to FT luck.

That would move us to about #15 instead of #17.
 
Why 75% this year though?

Initially I was inclined to think something about our defense led to better players taking the shots, but even in our shit years (2012 and 2014) that opposing number was never above 69%.

In fact I looked at all the numbers compared to our adjusted D in the KP era and there was no correlation at all between opposing FT% and adjusted defense ranking.


Even though we're fouling "good" shooters, could the bad luck now simply be that we are fouling those guys more often than bad ones, which is chance?
 
It's a small enough sample size this season that it's reasonable to expect that the players shooting those FTs against us will have their FT%s go down this season. I don't believe that Duke has played teams with true far above average FT shooters on them.
 
There's really only one way to root this out. Comparing our FT% allowed the last 10 years to that of Louisville, who plays the opposite style of Defense.

Lville since 2005:

68.0, 66.5, 68.3, 68.1, 70.2, 69.6, 66.3, 65.8, 68.1, 56.3 (clearly a disgusting outlier but nonetheless will be included)

Duke since 2005:

66.7, 70.7, 67.2, 68.9, 68.7, 65.0, 68.9, 72.4, 69.3, 75.9


Lville Avg, SDV: 66.72, 3.92
Duke Avg, SDV: 69.37, 3.08


Even including the outliers, this difference is still well within the range of normal statistical chance fluctation, and taking out the outlier for both teams this year so far, the averages become almost identical


This feels like a fantasy league kicker situation. There's statistically no real difference from a season long perspective no matter which guy you pick, despite what it may look/feel like. There's no real difference between type of defensive scheme run, or quality of that scheme, when it comes to fouling "better" or "worse" FT shooters.


Which means that Duke's defense is being "punished" still for the fluke, while Louisville's, which I did not realize earlier, is also being propped up to a degree.
 
That 56.3% figure for Louisville ranks 5th in the country and i'd be real goddamn impressed if I knew that wasn't good fortune at play. If a coach ever invented a scheme that consistently allowed that, he should go down as the greatest basketball mind of a generation
 
The high midrange accuracy is the bigger problem, and I'm not so sure it's mostly bad luck. "Midrange" in the data includes stuff like 3-foot hook shots and floaters, which aren't anything like 18-foot jumpers. I'd say the typical "midrange" shot against Duke in the data is from 8 feet out.

Is Duke failing to get hands up and at least contesting that stuff? Do the Duke players have short arms? I would think this is mostly bad luck so far, since I don't know why Amile and Justise would be extremely poor midrange area defenders, and they're probably carrying the load there.

Duke has more room for luck to improve than for regression now. I really don't think Kentucky's numbers will get any better.
 
I looked at every person who has shot a FT against duke this season and compared how many they made and how many they were expected to make.

The net was +1.235 actual made.
 
But I guess the fact that good shooters are the ones going to the line could be bad luck.

Either way, it has 0 predictive value.
 
I've got the Z-rating working and I've been looking at Kenpom's numbers...I'm pretty sure he's still got a good chunk of preseason data in there and we're not gonna be happy when it clears out.
 
He still has Florida at #18, so yes, I think preseason numbers are still weighing heavily at this point.
 
DrKlahn said:
defense is that bad?
Click to expand...

Our defense isn't as good as we think it is. Kentucky's is better than we think it is.
 
Based on all his blog posts on preseason weighting, the preseason ratings are currently worth 3 games. So 3/11 of Duke's rating is based on preseason. They burn out in January.
 
All this is crushing my spirit. SMTTEM's charts are at least slightly encouraging.
 
ZackM said:
DrKlahn said:
defense is that bad?
Click to expand...

Our defense isn't as good as we think it is. Kentucky's is better than we think it is.
Click to expand...

How could last year's numbers help this year's defensive rating? You would think it would be the opposite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Chat users

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Chat rooms

  • General chit-chat 0

Forum statistics

Threads
1,067
Messages
424,921
Members
624
Latest member
Bluegrass Blue Devil
Back
Top Bottom