Re: Louisville 2/8, Virginia 2/13, @UNC 2/17, @Louisville 2/
The defensive efficiencies are definitely out of whack.
I'm hoping the other numbers aren't blatantly wrong like that. If they're accurate, here are Duke's offensive play types sorted by points per possession:
1.22 Cut (6% of possessions)
1.16 Putback (6%)
1.16 Spot Up (29%)
1.14 Transition (14%)
1.02 Isolation (9%)
1.00 PnR w/roll man finishing (2%)
0.93 Post Up (5%)
0.91 Off Screen (5%)
0.87 Handoff (8%)
0.86 Other (7%)
0.77 PnR w/ball handler finishing (9%)
Things that stand out to me:
1. Our "PnR w/ball handler finishing" is dreadful, which is not too surprising and confirms the eye test that Duke's guards mostly don't finish too well in the paint.
2. Taking lots of Spot Up shots is the goal of Warriors/Rockets/Duke pace and space, so using 29% of possession on Spot Up shots and having elite efficiency on them is a sign that the offense is generally doing its job.
3. Too much Iso, but note that Duke is 6th in the country in Iso efficiency. When Duke plays Thunder ball, Duke does it about as well as we could hope for.
4. Virginia uses Cuts about twice as much as Duke, at the same efficiency level, and it's the highest efficiency play type for Duke. Princeton offense was the best offense all along. Duke should run more of it.
5. The Putbacks are efficient compared to other play types for Duke, but they're not all that efficient compared to the rest of the country (74th). I assume this is all on Plumlee, since no one else really grabs offensive rebounds, and I think Ingram is good at Putbacks. I don't think there's a magic bullet to make Plumlee an even more efficient garbage man, so we'll just live with it for this season. I suspect Giles will be ridiculous on Putbacks.
