07-08 in Recap

Well I've had some time now to take some perspective on the season and what happened. It was pretty clear that the season took a turn for the worse after the UNC game. The disparity is actually quite stark.

In the first half of the ACC season, Duke scored 693 points and surrendered 573 points on 597 possessions - that's 1.16 points per possession scored and 0.96 points per possession surrendered for an efficiency margin of an astounding 0.20. At this point, we as Duke fans were justifiably excited about our season. At the end of this stretch of games, we were 8-0 in the ACC, 20-1 overall and performing at an extremely high level.

At some point (I like to look at the UNC game) and for some reason (read on for some hypothesis), Duke's effectiveness on both offense and defense dropped by about the same amount each. In the 2nd half of the ACC season, Duke scored 647 points and surrendered 617 points in 600 possessions: scoring 1.08 ppp, surrendering 1.03 ppp for an efficiency margin of only 0.05. Well, what went wrong? I have no answers, but I am fairly confident it's NOT a few things:

MYTH: Duke's shooting woes started because of fatigued legs or something similar (reason why Duke's offense got worse)

Basically, I'm not going to argue that Duke shot just as well in the last 8 games as they did in the first 8 games. In the first 8 Duke shot 55.6% eFG, and in the second 8, they shot 49.6%. It's obvious that they shot much worse. But the assumption in this statement is that Coach K didn't play enough players, they got tired and the long distance shooting (which was essential to Duke's success - sub-myth #1) suffered.

The truth is actually that Duke shot better from 3 (37.7% to 36.7%) and shot 3s slightly more often (41.4% of the time against 40.3%) in the 2nd 8 games of the season. The huge difference came in Duke's 2 point shooting. Duke shot 55.9% from 2 in the first half of the ACC season, a number that dipped down to 44.7% in the second half.

The biggest question is why that is? Was it a function of something Duke was doing wrong, or the function of something the opponents were doing differently? In other words, was it scouting that exposed a previously unknown weakness or did a weakness arise as the season went on? My tentative and unsatisfyingly conservative answer is: a bit from column A, a bit from column B. My sense just from watching the games was that Henderson's injury really hindered his offensive effectiveness. He was obviously still a very useful player, but he was also a very versatile offensive player near the beginning of the year.

It would be stupid of me just to suggest that Henderson's injury was 100% of it though. In the first 8 games, Duke's opponents blocked 28 of Duke's shots. In the final 8 games, Duke's opponents blocked 51 of Duke's shots. Obviously the big contributers to that total that were absent in the first 8 games were Boston College (21st best block rate, and with Tyrelle Blair, the player with the 9th highest block rate in the country at 14.2%) and Wake Forest (the 14th best block rate, with James Johnson, Chas McFarland and David Weaver all sporting 5-9% block rates). And of course, the biggest contributing game was the North Carolina game in Durham where UNC blocked 15 of Duke's shots behind tremendous defensive performances of Danny Green and Deon Thompson.

As I said, I think part of this was scouting. It's easier to block the shot of a 6'3" or 6'4" perimeter player driving to the basket than a 6'9" or 6'10" player in position for a similar shot. It's possible that teams played less to take away the 3 and more to block or contest the 2s in the second half of the season. A team as dependent on guys creating good 2 point shots off the dribble as Duke was required either excellent 3-point shooting every night or hitting the 2s - especially considering how average Duke was on the offensive glass all season.

This was the significantly most important difference between Duke's offense in the two halves of the ACC season. Duke did turn it over slightly more often (17.5% vs. 16.9%) and rebounded slightly worse offensively (32.5% vs. 34.8%), but the one huge glaring difference was Duke's struggle in converting their twos in the second half of the ACC season.

MYTH - In the 2nd half of the season, Duke was abused more heavily by big men or quick guards scoring easy baskets (reason why the defense got worse)

Actually it appears that in two key areas related to defensive play on the interior, Duke improved in the second half of the ACC season. Teams shot 51.2% inside the arc against Duke in the first half of the season, and 47.7% inside the arc in the 2nd half. Additionally, Duke grabbed 65.5% of possible defensive boards in the 2nd half as compared to 63.2% of defensive boards in the first half of the year.

The decline in defensive effectiveness appears to come chiefly from 3 factors: teams shot much better from 3, teams turned it over a bit less often against us, and teams hit their free throws.

Uniformly throughout the ACC season, teams barely took 3s against Duke. Whether this was a result of Duke's defense or because teams perceived more of a weakness on the interior defense is ultimately unknowable and irrelevant, but Duke is consistently among the top of Division I in fewest 3 point attempts allowed per field goal attempt. Now, in the first half of the season, Duke opponents took only 101 3s, and made just 27 of them (26.7%), whereas in the 2nd half of the season teams made 42.1% of their 3s (45 for 107). Obviously good 3 point shots have to be created. I saw the Wake game and the Miami game - quick guards breaking down Duke's defense and requiring help left shooters open and guys hit their shots. That was, without a doubt, a contributing factor. Though, I am not sure it was the only factor. Sometimes, teams just shoot better against you.

The turnovers were noticeable but not a huge reason for Duke's defensive decline. In the first half, Duke caused 149 turnovers in 597 possessions - thus, opponents lost 25% of their possessions to turnovers. In the second half, Duke caused 144 turnovers in 600 possessions, leaving 24% of opponent possessions empty. The difference is there, but it's not huge. Duke continued to turn teams over late into the season, just slightly less often.

Finally, free throws. Whether by luck or providence, teams shot a fairly abysmal 61.7% against Duke in the first half of the ACC season, making 116 of 188 free throws. In the second half of the season, Duke's opponents shot fewer free throws (156) but made just 2 less. I'll readily admit that the first half of the year, Duke probably benefited from opponents shooting poorly from the stripe. This wasn't always just dumb luck (see: Clemson's season long woes from the stripe - minus the one mystical game against Duke in the ACC semis of course - who's bitter?), but if teams shot as poorly in the 2nd half of the season from the line and from 3 as they did in the first half, I estimate Duke would have surrendered about 0.97 ppp - negligibly worse than the first half (probably due to fewer turnovers). More realistically, you should expect your opponents to shoot about 70% from the stripe. If that happened consistently all season - Duke would have had about a 0.99 ppp in the first half of the season, and 1.02 ppp in the 2nd half - not such a huge difference and still successful (frankly not on a Kansas or UCLA level of defensive dominance, but pretty good nonetheless).


So what's the point of all this? Well, clearly Duke played worse down the stretch. Clearly the team did not perform up to the expectations either of the program or that the team held for itself up to and including the first North Carolina game. But it's not always doom and gloom, it's the end of the world, Duke was exposed, it's smoke and mirrors, it's this, it's that. Sometimes the explanations are pretty rational. It seems to me that teams became more adept at attacking Duke's defense, but the biggest problems in the 2nd half of the ACC season came offensively. Teams scouted the players well, one of Duke's best inside-the-arc offensive players was fairly badly injured and for whatever reason, they were unable to finish around the basket like they did earlier in the year.

It's not all terrible - Duke hit over 50% of their 2s in 4 of the final 8 games (including 2 of the losses, oddly enough), had a fantastic offensive game against Georgia Tech in the ACC tournament (47.4% from 3, 54.3% from 2, 40% offensive rebounding rate). I am not sure you can say that the Clemson game was a poor performance as much as it was Clemson playing very well and hitting free throws. The one weekend Duke stayed in the NCAA tournament was a nightmare through and through. Were the players sick? Perhaps. It's ultimately irrelevant. The point is really that the way Duke performed that weekend is incongruent with Duke's performance even the previous week and certainly "down the stretch." Often fans remember only the last and worst memories of a season and no doubt many will walk away from 2007-08 remembering how close Duke came to joining a none too illustrious club of #2 seeds to lose to a #15 and how Duke lost a relatively comfortable lead against West Virginia and were embarrassed to the media by the West Virginian players. Fair enough, but it's pretty unfair for a team that played extremely high levels of basketball deep into the season before one unfortunate weekend derailed the team.

I leave this post with a bit of a stat dump: herein are the stats of each major player in ACC play only for 2006-07 and then 2007-08 including Duke's team performance for both years. There is no doubt the team and all the constituent players improved dramatically from 07 to 08 and there is no reason why fans should not be excited to see these same players improve once again from 08 to 09. In my estimation, Duke fans have a little too often called for a reboot and should appreciate the quality of players Duke has right now. Perhaps Duke in 08 is not as good as UCLA in 08 or North Carolina in 08 or Kansas in 08, but it's a luxury as a Duke fan to believe that we should always be among the elite teams, but a foolish one when one consider just how difficult it is to be that good year in, year out. Enough of the didactic nonsense, here's the goods.

2006-07

Player	%Minutes	Ortg	%Poss	Floor%	3P%	eFG%	TO%	FTRate	OR%	DR%	Ast%	Stl%	Blk%
DeMarcus Nelson	78.9%	99.1	24.8%	47.1%	34.5%	51.5%	19.6%	20.9	5.4%	13.7%	14.6%	2.8%	1.1%
Josh McRoberts	88.9%	103.8	21.1%	51.2%	20.0%	53.2%	21.5%	38.6	7.0%	20.6%	15.6%	2.2%	5.7%
Jon Scheyer	83.8%	120.5	19.0%	53.3%	34.7%	50.3%	12.1%	47.4	4.2%	8.2%	9.3%	2.3%	0.4%
Greg Paulus	84.3%	105.0	22.2%	45.6%	41.1%	54.7%	23.9%	21.1	1.4%	7.2%	23.7%	1.7%	0.2%
Gerald Henderson	49.0%	99.2	22.5%	48.7%	35.7%	52.4%	22.4%	20.8	5.1%	11.6%	13.1%	1.5%	0.9%
David McClure	55.4%	105.6	11.6%	53.5%	50.0%	52.0%	22.7%	39.2	10.1%	17.7%	3.9%	2.8%	3.0%
Lance Thomas	33.9%	84.0	16.4%	44.8%	0.0%	61.3%	39.6%	67.7	11.4%	12.2%	0.8%	1.9%	0.9%
Brian Zoubek	13.1%	68.3	19.2%	37.4%	0.0%	50.0%	47.2%	110.0	11.8%	19.5%	4.0%	0.0%	3.4%

2007-08

Player	%Minutes	Ortg	%Poss	Floor%	3P%	eFG%	TO%	FTRate	OR%	DR%	Ast%	Stl%	Blk%
DeMarcus Nelson	80.2%	116.0	24.2%	57.4%	45.7%	59.6%	16.1%	62.3	5.3%	13.3%	17.4%	3.3%	0.6%
Kyle Singler	77.7%	107.9	23.0%	48.3%	34.8%	52.7%	17.9%	24.7	7.0%	14.7%	8.4%	2.4%	2.1%
Gerald Henderson	69.4%	107.0	22.4%	55.0%	25.0%	51.2%	17.7%	62.6	6.6%	13.1%	11.6%	2.3%	2.1%
Jon Scheyer	71.4%	129.3	16.9%	58.8%	37.7%	54.9%	11.8%	51.3	4.0%	9.8%	15.0%	2.9%	0.8%
Greg Paulus	71.9%	124.1	18.8%	51.0%	41.8%	55.0%	13.2%	30.5	1.5%	7.4%	19.6%	3.7%	0.4%
Nolan Smith	34.4%	103.7	22.9%	47.1%	40.7%	57.3%	27.1%	29.0	4.1%	11.0%	16.9%	1.0%	0.4%
Taylor King	19.1%	93.4	21.6%	36.9%	30.0%	40.8%	13.0%	14.3	7.4%	12.9%	5.9%	1.9%	3.1%
Lance Thomas	45.3%	96.3	13.8%	52.1%	0.0%	48.9%	18.5%	80.0	10.9%	14.2%	2.3%	2.6%	2.9%
Brian Zoubek	9.2%	108.1	11.3%	52.9%	0.0%	60.0%	17.0%	20.0	9.6%	16.5%	3.0%	1.9%	6.3%
David McClure	20.9%	81.7	10.1%	39.1%	0.0%	35.3%	29.3%	5.9	8.4%	15.5%	7.2%	1.7%	2.1%

Duke 06-07		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		52.6%	50.0%
TO%		22.2%	21.8%
ORB%		34.0%	29.1%
FTRate		22.1%	33.7%
Tempo		66.7
Offensive Efficiency		103.8
Defensive Efficiency		99.3
3-point FG%		36.1%	37.4%
2-point FG%		52.0%	48.2%
Free Throw %		68.9%	74.7%
Block %		9.2%	10.6%
Steal %		10.4%	10.9%
3PA/FGA		30.8%	22.5%
A/FGM		49.6%	51.6%
Duke 07-08		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		53.6%	50.9%
TO%		17.2%	24.7%
ORB%		33.3%	34.9%
FTRate		29.6%	37.6%
Tempo		70.3
Offensive Efficiency		113.2
Defensive Efficiency		99.1
3-point FG%		37.4%	34.0%
2-point FG%		51.8%	50.9%
Free Throw %		68.8%	66.6%
Block %		7.5%	11.7%
Steal %		13.1%	7.2%
3PA/FGA		41.1%	22.3%
A/FGM		49.9%	45.7%

Finally, I leave with this - to help us remember the good times in the coming months of darkness!

Rematch - UNC at Duke

My apologies to whoever actually reads my blog about my scant updates during the ACC season. It's been an up and down ride (mostly up, to be sure) with a couple disappointing losses mixed in with a number of satisfying 'revenge' wins.

At this point in the season (15 out of 16 conference games played) we know who teams are. There's no more excuses left like "Well they can't do that against conference opponents" or "watch them fall apart on the road." In this post I am using ACC-only stats for UNC and Duke because I think out of conference scheduling tends to inflate personal and team stats.

First I want to comment on just how astounding the similarities between Duke and UNC are at this point, quantitatively.

Duke

Tempo		74.93
Offensive Efficiency		113.17
Defensive Efficiency		99.11

North Carolina

Tempo		74.70
Offensive Efficiency		114.00
Defensive Efficiency		99.06

As it stands, Duke (13-2 overall, 7-0 at home, 6-2 on the road) and UNC (13-2 overall, 6-2 at home, 7-0 on the road) play an almost identical pace, and have almost identical offensive and defensive efficiencies in conference (slight edge to UNC, but Duke has played 1 more road game than UNC has).

What is even more remarkable than that is that the two teams accomplish this in completely different ways. Once again, the ACC comparison:

Duke

		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		53.60%	50.96%
TO%		17.17%	24.72%
ORB %		33.33%	34.91%
FT Rate		29.57%	37.64%

3-Point FG %		37.43%	34.01%
2-Point FG%		51.82%	50.95%
Free Throw %		68.75%	66.57%
Block %		7.45%	11.68%
Steal %		13.11%	7.21%
3PA/FGA		41.08%	22.34%
A/FGM		49.88%	45.67%

As you can see, Duke's offense runs on a tripod of protecting the ball, getting good shots (especially 3s - 41.1% of Duke's shots are 3s in ACC play), and getting to the line. Some have noted that the combination of a high FT rate for Duke (almost 30%) and a very high 3PA:FGA rate is unusual and perhaps unintuitive, given the fact that 3 pointers tend not to draw many fouls. No doubt that is true, and I don't have exact numbers yet to support this claim, but my position is that Duke's shots are largely of the "layup" or "3 pointer" variety. Some players on occasion take the "mid-range" shot (Scheyer has some, Henderson, Paulus, Singler) but it's a rare shot. Duke's offense is built on the layup or 3 pointer model - a model that is incredibly intelligent.

Defensively, Duke's success hinges almost entirely on causing turnovers and preventing teams from taking 3s. The Duke defense is built on funneling opposing players into "dead zones" on the court (mid-range shots) and allowing those shots while trying to limit the layups/3pointers. The big weakness, in my estimation, is the lack of a real "help" presence in the paint for both blocking/altering close shots and rebounding, as those are Duke's main problems defensively. As a result, often Duke finds itself sending opposing teams to the line often, but the depth of this Duke team (Wake game notwithstanding) allows them to squeak by without debilitating foul trouble. Duke is often criticized for "switching" on screens on defense - largely a result of having few players who really can only defend in the paint (Zoubek being the obvious one) and being loaded with players capable of defending on the perimeter or in the paint (Henderson, Nelson, Thomas, McClure, Singler). Obviously none of those guys is a dominant paint defender, but the versatility really allows this Duke team to switch unlike any other team in the ACC and be successful doing so.

North Carolina

		UNC	Opp.
eFG%		51.57%	48.88%
TO%		19.43%	18.76%
ORB %		42.86%	29.07%
FT Rate		30.60%	28.51%

3-Point FG %		37.04%	32.84%
2-Point FG%		50.45%	48.67%
Free Throw %		78.44%	66.79%
Block %		10.14%	10.12%
Steal %		8.90%	10.88%
3PA/FGA		21.88%	34.73%
A/FGM		53.52%	54.48%

UNC, by contrast, takes very few 3s. They shoot well from the field, but not exceptionally well. Their biggest offensive strengths are in rebounding the ball extremely well on the offensive glass and getting to the line (and hitting those free throws - first in the ACC at 78.4% - if only Duke could hit that percentage from the line...). Hansbrough accounts for a huge portion of those free throws (139 of the 302 made; 171 of the 385 attempted) as he is by far their most aggressive player. My theory here (and it's not a novel one) is that aggressive players taking "lay-up" type shots (Hansbrough, Henderson, Nelson, Ginyard) are more likely to get fouled than guys who are more finesse or jump-shot oriented (Ellington, Thompson, Paulus, Singler). Their FT rates certainly support that theory at any rate.

Defensively, UNC follow the same model as Georgetown or Stanford - they don't cause turnovers - they just play good positional defense and contest shots, then limit second chance opportunities. Unlike Duke, the "Carolina system" is a more structure, more traditional basketball system based on the 5 traditional positions. On screens, UNC forwards tend to hedge hard (sometimes too hard) and recover rather than switching. UNC's biggest weakness defensively has been defending offenses that depend on guards creating off the dribble (UNC struggled, relatively, with Clemson, Duke and Florida State more than they did against other squads in the ACC). Often times this means that teams can get good 3 point looks based on a drive and kick after the help has come. Indeed, almost 35% of UNC's opponents' shots have been 3s, and they are shooting almost 33%.

At any rate, the match-up is legendary in its perfection. Duke has trouble guarding aggressive, strong big guys and UNC has trouble guarding drive-and-kick offenses. Just like in the first game, it should be fascinating to watch the match-ups develop.

As it stands, I think Duke will win this match-up and it's not just because I'm a huge Duke fan who will be in the stands for his final game as a Duke student - but rather because I think it is essential to turn Duke over if you are going to beat Duke. Obviously, it's possible to beat Duke without that (look at the NC State game - Duke had only 8 turnovers and escaped with a 1 point win), but I think that takes more extraordinary circumstances (for instance, NC State shooting 61% eFG from the field and 86% on 29 free throws from the line). When Duke turns it over on less than 20% of its possessions this year, Duke is 20-0, and 12-0 in the ACC. When Duke turns it over on more than 23% of its possessions, Duke is 2-3 (with one of those wins being against Eastern Kentucky) and 1-2 in the ACC. Again, turnovers tend to be undervalued by the college basketball media at large because so often is the focus on how Duke lacks a big man and too infrequently is the focus on the fact that Duke's most potent offensive weapon is its ability to make-up for a lack of offensive rebounding by limiting turnovers.

That being said, UNC has not proven itself in ACC to be a team that is capable or willing of causing many turnovers. Furthermore, at home Duke has not had a game with a TO rate over 20% since Eastern Kentucky in late November. Everyone knows UNC will out-rebound Duke. Duke knows it, UNC knows it, anyone knows it. The game won't be decided on the boards, because Duke doesn't value rebounds the same way it does turnovers.

The second reason I think Duke wins is Wayne Ellington. In 3 games against Duke, he has struggled each time. There is no guarantee he does now, but I think on the road against a heated rival, in a hot, loud building with his best friend hounding him all night - I'd be surprised if he had a great night.

Just to remind everyone about the first game between these teams:

		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		55.30%	42.75%
TO%		18.11%	24.02%
ORB %		27.50%	42.55%
FT Rate		24.24%	43.48%
Tempo		82.83
Offensive Efficiency		107.46
Defensive Efficiency		94.17
3-Point FG %		44.83%	17.65%
2-Point FG%		45.95%	48.08%
Free Throw %		59.26%	63.33%
Block %		11.54%	10.81%
Steal %		13.21%	3.62%
3PA/FGA		43.94%	24.64%
A/FGM		53.33%	60.71%

Duke protected the ball, shot well, got to the line and caused turnovers. UNC shot very poorly from 3 point range but rebounded very well and got to the line and shot pretty near their ACC average inside the arc (they average about 50%). Both teams basically did what they do well but Duke managed to protect the ball and UNC didn't, and UNC shot poorly from the outside. If tomorrow's game looks anything like that - Duke wins again.

I look forward to an exciting, up-tempo, well-played game that ends with a proper send-off for DeMarcus Nelson - a player who really epitomizes all that is great about college basketball. A guy who fought injury, who played out of position, who witnessed the worst Duke season in a decade with him at the helm, and then who rose to become one of the best seniors in the country and a great leader. I'll be clapping until my hands go numb for DeMarcus tomorrow night and win or lose, he'll forever be one of the finest Blue Devils ever, both on and off the court.

Oh hey, did I mention Tyler Hansbrough is a weird looking dude?

The Value of Turnovers

So Duke has lost a 2nd game on the season, falling to Wake on the road 86-73.

While there are many reasons Duke lost this game, I want to focus on one: turnovers. In fact, the similarity between Duke's loss to Pitt and Duke's loss to Wake is pretty stark (minus the fact that, well, 5 Duke starters did not foul out against Pitt).

Against Pitt, Duke turned the ball over 20 times in 73 possessions. That game, Duke shot 14 for 26 from the free throw line. Against Wake, Duke turned the ball over 22 times in 84 possessions and shot 13 for 25 from the free throw line.

Ignoring every other problem in those games (poor shooting, trouble defending certain players, etc), both games would have been won had Duke: (1) hit free throws, and (2) protected the ball.

That being said, Wake has a fantastic young team who needs to learn to win on the road. Adding in what scout ranks as the 4th best class in the country for 2008 (including 2 5 star recruits - 7' center Ty Walker and 6'8" wing forward Al-Farouq Aminu, as well as 4 star 6'10" center Tony Woods) to the already lightning quick backcourt of Smith and Teague and Wake will likely be either favored to win the ACC next year or among the top 2 or 3 teams (along with usual suspects Duke and UNC). Smith, Teague, Aminu, Johnson and Walker will make a very talented, but very very young, core group for Wake next year.

For the above reasons, however, I am not convinced that this loss portends some inexorable decline in the way Duke has been playing so far. One key thing for Duke fans to potentially lose sleep over is the health of Gerald Henderson's right wrist. Henderson sprained it against UNC in a game where he took 10 shots and had 12 points. In the three games since, Henderson has been 4 for 15. That said, during that stretch Nolan Smith had also been recovering from a hyperextended knee he suffered against Maryland that set him back. Against Wake, Nolan shot 8 for 12 for 21 points in 18 minutes of play. If he can get back into the groove he was in earlier in the ACC season, it might take some stress off Henderson to produce offensively and he can let his wrist heal. Sprained wrists suck. I fell while skiing in the winter of 2006 and my wrist wasn't 100% for a good 5 or 6 months. I hope Henderson's wasn't as bad as mine.

Miami will be a good test to see how this team rebounds. In the first meeting, Duke only turned it over 11 times on 72 possessions and shot 26 for 40 from the free throw line. Again in a hostile environment, if Duke can protect the ball and hit free throws, we should walk away with a win. Miami is a bit of a better match-up for us than Wake, so here's to hoping the players come out prepared to play hard.

Duke at North Carolina

Well after a moderately unimpressive 15 pt win over Miami, Duke set its sights on bitter rival UNC who sits 1 game back in the ACC standings.

This year's match-up between the two should be intriguing on a number of levels that last year's weren't. First, this is the first time the teams have faced off since the Henderson/Hansbrough incident in the Dean Dome last year. While the players are over it, the media and the fans are not (what are the media and fans there for if not to dwell on stupid things to ham up a story?), and UNC fans will likely not give Gerald Henderson a particularly good welcome.

Last year, the teams were both largely new. Duke had 3 sophomores, a freshman and a junior in the starting 5 last year with 3 other freshmen coming off the bench. UNC had 3 freshmen in the starting 5 to go with senior Reyshawn Terry and sophomore Tyler Hansbrough. Add to that that UNC was cutting up the ACC (they were, in fact, very dominant in spite of their 11-5 record) and Duke was squeaking by and in the midst of a 2 game losing streak when they first met last year, and you have a fairly uninspired meeting between the two.

A year has made a lot of difference. UNC sits at 21-1 (6-1) and Duke at 19-1 (7-0). If the battle for supremacy in the ACC wasn't enough, if the history between the programs wasn't enough, if the return of Gerald Henderson to the Dean Dome wasn't enough... to add to all of that, the styles of the two teams are as diametrically opposed as I can imagine (I suppose one could play a slow tempo and the other fast - so they both have that in common).

Duke is a guard oriented offense without a post-presence and current with 4 guys hitting over 40% of their 3s. Duke is a deep team, playing 9 deep (probably 10 when/if Zoubek is healthy). Duke's offensive strengths are in shot selection (55.9% eFG for the season) and protecting the ball (18.2% TO rate) and getting to the line with aggressive play attacking the basket (28.8 FT rate). The Devils take a lot of 3s (37.9% of Duke's shots are 3s, 83rd in the nation), and move the ball very effectively. Defensively, the Devils are based on perimeter pressure and forcing opposing offenses farther and farther out from their comfort zone. They force teams to move across the court rather than move towards the basket which leads to uncomfortable offensive sets, bad shots, and loads of turnovers. On the interior though, Duke's defense is not fantastic as Thomas, McClure, Singler and King are all fairly small for guarding the post at this level.

UNC is almost entirely different. UNC is a forward oriented offense, focused on taking few 3s and attacking the offensive glass. In fact, Southern Utah is the only Division I school to take 3s less often than UNC. That being said, UNC is also the best offensive rebounding team in the country with an ORB rate of 42.9%. Despite taking so many 2s, the Heels' 2-point FG% is not spectacular at only 51.6% and they are a fairly average 3 point shooting team when they take them. Their strength offensively is relentlessly attacking the basket, getting offensive rebounds and getting to the line (29.9 FT rate). Defensively, they are less versatile than Duke and have more trouble defending in the perimeter, but their excellent defensive rebounding and their bigger, stronger interior players allow them to defend the post a bit better. The biggest defensive weakness of UNC's so far this year has been in transition, because outside of Lawson and maybe Ginyard, they really lack the kind of quickness and speed needed to get back on defense against an up-tempo team.

So here you have it. UNC is strong at what Duke is worst at; Duke is strongest at what UNC is worst at. It's like the immovable object meets the very weak force, and the unstoppable force meets the very weak object. It's very clear that both will give, but to what degree? Who will be able to defend just good enough to pull out the win?

One key to the game are injuries, obviously, as Ty Lawson sprained his ankle in the 2nd most publicized ankle sprain of the last week and a half. Without Lawson, UNC's offense falls into relative disarray. Consider that without Lawson in two games this year, UNC has scored 66 and 67 points on 70 possessions (in both games), whereas with Lawson at the helm UNC is the most efficient offense in the country. Lawson creates so many easy baskets for the Heels by just turning on the motors and blazing his way down the court and through defenders for an easy lay-up. If Lawson is hampered by his ankle or does not play, UNC turns into something of a half-court oriented team and is far more prone to turnovers and taking jumpshots. That said, Thomas might be a better defender, but he will be facing fresh Duke guards while he racks up the minutes late in the game.

UNC's gameplan will be pretty obvious. In the half-court they will set screen after screen trying to force Duke defenders to switch into a serious mismatch on Hansbrough, then dump the ball inside and go up strong. I like the fact that our defenders are versatile enough to be able to defend inside and out to some extent, but it might be a good idea not to switch if it ends up with Paulus on Hansbrough somehow. Just a thought. This is exactly what Maryland and Clemson did with some early success.

Defensively Duke will need to cause turnovers and force UNC to take jumpshots. The closer the Heels get to the basket, the more offensive rebounds they get, and while Duke is not a terrible defensive rebounding team, it's been clear this year that good offensive rebounding teams can attack the glass pretty effectively on the offensive end with superior size and strength. That's not a shocker. Clemson is about as effective an offensive rebounding team as UNC.

UNC, on the defensive side, will need to prevent penetration and will need to hope Duke is not shooting well from outside.

Bold predictions:

• The team that shoots better will likely win!
• The team with fewer turnovers will likely win!
• The team with more points on the scoreboard at the end of the game will almost certainly win!

At any rate, here I will post my new favorite Scheyer-face picture for good luck. This is a big game for both teams. If Duke wins, it puts the Devils 2 games ahead of the Heels and on the inside track for the #1 seed in the East. If Duke loses, the two are once again tied (indeed, UNC will be up on tiebreaker) and the 2nd half of the season will be a war.

Oh, and.. GO TO HELL CAROLINA, GO TO HELL!

Did State Give Up?

As I stood in the stands in Cameron, I saw the half-time score at 46-37 in favor of the visiting team and wondered what the hell was wrong with my team. It's now the second straight game where we have trailed by 9 at half. A little part of me thought that we might actually lose, but another part of me was just worried that there was some problem with our defense that was being easily exploited by our last two opponents: something that can be very worrisome since we have the biggest game of the season so far coming up next Wednesday.

Duke took a 10-4 lead by pressuring the ball effectively, causing turnovers and attacking the basket aggressively, but then took a number of possessions off, reached more than defended with their feet and got into foul trouble as a team early. State shot 13 free throws in the final 5 minutes of the first half to take that half-time lead. Again, like with Maryland, Duke looked completely lost in the first half. Here are the first half stats.

		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		50.00%	65.38%
TO%		19.15%	24.28%
ORB %		18.75%	50.00%
FT Rate		54.17%	65.38%
Tempo		73.10
Offensive Efficiency		101.23
Defensive Efficiency		125.85
3-Point FG %		22.22%	80.00%
2-Point FG%		60.00%	52.38%
Free Throw %		72.22%	70.59%
Block %		14.29%	0.00%
Steal %		16.18%	8.21%
3PA/FGA		37.50%	19.23%
A/FGM		54.55%	46.67%

Again, like with Maryland, Duke stormed out of the locker room. State's lead had been erased when Paulus hit a 3 with 16:17 to go. After State made a couple of good plays to take the lead back to 55-52, Paulus hit another 3 to tie it. I am fairly sure at this point, State's players gave up.

From this point forward, Duke outscored State 37-17. Duke's offensive performance in the 2nd half is just absurd. Here are the stats:

		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		76.56%	50.00%
TO%		13.21%	30.35%
ORB %		76.92%	30.77%
FT Rate		18.75%	77.78%
Tempo		60.55
Offensive Efficiency		181.67
Defensive Efficiency		85.88
3-Point FG %		63.64%	0.00%
2-Point FG%		66.67%	64.29%
Free Throw %		66.67%	57.14%
Block %		0.00%	9.52%
Steal %		13.49%	6.61%
3PA/FGA		34.38%	22.22%
A/FGM		42.86%	44.44%

Even though Duke won this game by 20, I think there is some reason to be concerned about the current state of Duke's defense. While we started the season off exceptionally strong defensively and continued to be consistently excellent defensively for most of the season, 3 of the last 4 games have been lackluster defensively. To be fair, in all three games the poor defense was isolated to the first half, but such a game could spell disaster against a team with an elite offense like UNC.

I will need to re-watch the State game, but my impression was that after some early problems with Duke's pressure, State dropped 4 guys inside the arc and tried to slowly move the ball with screens and methodical dribbling into a position where they could get it to Hickson. That being said, a lot of their offensive success in the first half was due to shooting 4 of 5 from 3, and getting 13 free throws in the final 5 minutes.

Next Wednesday we will need to put together a complete game - two halves of excellent basketball if we are going to steal one from Carolina on the road. We need to play well defensively, we need to attack offensively, we need to have all 10 guys who get significant minutes on the same page and playing well. I will say this though - if we shoot as well as we did in the 2nd half against State, against any team, we will win. I don't think that's a terribly controversial position though.

Next up: Miami on Saturday

Maryland: A Tale of Two Halves

If ever this overused cliche used in the title of this post has been appropriate, it very well should be this game against Maryland over the weekend.

First Half

Maryland started off with great intensity and were successfully using their substantial frontcourt advantage to attack Duke, as well as executing a well scouted gameplan replete with effective cuts to the basket that exploited Duke's tendency to use guards to help on the blocks. Indeed, Maryland shot 65.5% eFG from the field against Duke in the first half, as well as rebounding 41.7% of available offensive boards to take a 9 point lead to halftime. One thing I found strange was how the announcers seemed to suggest that Duke was only in the game at half-time because Maryland had committed 13 turnovers to just 6 for Duke (a 28.5% TO rate for Maryland). But is this not Maryland's MO? Duke recorded 7 steals, as well as several offensive fouls - they were not unforced turnovers reflecting a mental lapse. This is exactly what most analysts should have expected coming in to the game: Duke would force Maryland to turn the ball over. Perhaps they should have said, "Maryland's white hot shooting is the only reason they are now in the lead against a Duke defense that has caused them to turn it over on almost 30% of their possessions!"

Duke, on the other hand, came out looking offensively stagnant. For the half, the Devils shot just 42.8% eFG and had a 26.1% offensive rebounding rate. The good news was that Maryland, predictably, was not causing Duke to turn the ball over.

At this point, while I was worried, I still knew that Maryland did not hold as big a lead as they could have shooting as well as they were and rebounding as effectively as they were.

The tempo-free team stats broke down like so:

		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		45.83%	65.52%
TO%		14.55%	28.54%
ORB %		26.09%	41.67%
FT Rate		25.00%	62.07%
Tempo		82.45
Offensive Efficiency		101.88
Defensive Efficiency		123.71
3-Point FG %		27.27%	33.33%
2-Point FG%		48.00%	69.57%
Free Throw %		81.82%	72.22%
Block %		4.35%	12.00%
Steal %		15.37%	2.43%
3PA/FGA		30.56%	20.69%
A/FGM		40.00%	77.78%

Second Half

It's hardly worth even mentioning that the key sequence of events in the second half came in the first minute. Maryland began with Osby turning it over, leading to Lance Thomas scoring on the other end. Immediately, DeMarcus Nelson stole the in-bound and laid it up to cut the lead to 5 within the first 40 seconds of the 2nd half. After Singler stole the entry pass to Osby at the other end, Duke ran a flawless inbound play straight to Nelson on the block who missed a layup but got the subsequent tip-in. Now with exactly 1 minute elapsed in the 2nd half, Maryland's substantial 9 point half-time lead was trimmed to 3. Sound familiar?

The second half was simply dominated by Duke. Maryland looked flat - perhaps tired or emotionally spent against a foe with greater depth and intensity than any team they have faced. The teams battled back and forth for the next 15 minutes or so, but Duke ultimately pulled ahead to take an 84-75 lead with 4:33 left. The stall was used quite effectively for the last minutes, despite Maryland pulling it to within 3 at 84-81 on 3 pointers by Hayes and Gist, and despite Vasquez getting to the line for a crucial 1 and 1 after Paulus made a costly turnover. Maryland had their chance then to make it a game for the last 2:42, but Duke closed out with good free throw shooting and a clutch driving lay-up by Nelson.

The second half team stats look thus:

		Duke	Opp.
eFG%		57.81%	50.00%
TO%		11.25%	25.51%
ORB %		50.00%	31.58%
FT Rate		43.75%	32.14%
Tempo		71.10
Offensive Efficiency		143.46
Defensive Efficiency		92.83
3-Point FG %		42.86%	33.33%
2-Point FG%		56.00%	50.00%
Free Throw %		77.78%	55.56%
Block %		9.09%	8.00%
Steal %		17.01%	8.44%
3PA/FGA		21.88%	21.43%
A/FGM		17.65%	76.92%

Completely different games.

Coming up: Duke has two games this week at home against North Carolina State and Miami. I will try to post what I think will be the key for the Devils in those games, but I hardly think I need to mention that Duke will be heavily favored in both affairs.

Next Wednesday is Duke at North Carolina.