This ten day break i think is huge for Tre. He got pretty banged up yesterday.
Shooting, yo.
- Thread starter PatrickYates
- Start date
I think it’s important to look at our margin for error when judging how worrisome our weaknesses are.
The only games I envision us losing this season will be ones where our opponents play exceptionally well on offense (as we saw with Gonzaga). I think the emphasis the coaches have put on our D is spot on, we hold teams below 80 points, we are probably going to win.
The reason why our shooting doesn’t really concern me is that although we may not be a great 3-point shooting team (by Duke standards) we are an exceptionally good 2-point shooting team. If you look at the last two games where we shot a paltry 19% and 24% from 3, and about 65% from the line, we still scored 84 and 91 points. We also have a history of not playing our best around exam and holiday time, what with our players going to non made-up classes and all. If you assume that we will fall closer to our average of 33% from outside, which honestly shouldn’t be too much to ask, we are probably in the 100 point range almost every time and we aren’t losing many games when we score 100 points.
The only games I envision us losing this season will be ones where our opponents play exceptionally well on offense (as we saw with Gonzaga). I think the emphasis the coaches have put on our D is spot on, we hold teams below 80 points, we are probably going to win.
The reason why our shooting doesn’t really concern me is that although we may not be a great 3-point shooting team (by Duke standards) we are an exceptionally good 2-point shooting team. If you look at the last two games where we shot a paltry 19% and 24% from 3, and about 65% from the line, we still scored 84 and 91 points. We also have a history of not playing our best around exam and holiday time, what with our players going to non made-up classes and all. If you assume that we will fall closer to our average of 33% from outside, which honestly shouldn’t be too much to ask, we are probably in the 100 point range almost every time and we aren’t losing many games when we score 100 points.
I agree. To your point, the lack of 3-ball production relative to past seasons is negated by our 2-point shooting. In fact, our defensive pressure creates more fast break opportunities. We run down the court and make more dunks and layups faster then trying to set up a 3 point shot. Maybe this will change when Cam’s confidence and mojo are re-introduced. Not the part of the team’s game that gives me stress.
Last edited:
I do think our half court offense needs to be a focus going forward. Like some have said we’ll run into teams that take better care of the ball. As a result we won’t get as many break out chances that we’ve had so far.
I don’t think we have the pure shooters that we’ve had in the past. The strength of this team is attacking the rim and drawing contact. I believe emphasizing efficiency in the half court and getting the best looks possible is our best use of time going forward. We aren’t going to all of a sudden become great 3 pt shooters or free throw shooters. But being efficient in our half court sets will help against teams that don’t turn it over as much. I think this team is capable of hitting open 3’s but the minute we “need” 3’s we are in trouble if that makes sense.
I don’t think we have the pure shooters that we’ve had in the past. The strength of this team is attacking the rim and drawing contact. I believe emphasizing efficiency in the half court and getting the best looks possible is our best use of time going forward. We aren’t going to all of a sudden become great 3 pt shooters or free throw shooters. But being efficient in our half court sets will help against teams that don’t turn it over as much. I think this team is capable of hitting open 3’s but the minute we “need” 3’s we are in trouble if that makes sense.
It gets tough out here knowing it all
Possibly my biggest worry....anyone else notice how vanilla our offensive sets have been essentially the whole year?? It's gotten REALLY noticeable the last couple games, we really don't run much on half-court offense. It's give the ball to RJ or Zion and let them take their man, with Cam sprinkled into the mix.
Given our competition lately, we can still score 90 without running anything, but I'd like to see a lot more movement in the half-court. Why aren't we running the back-pick play more for a lob for Zion?? I'd like to see Cam and RJ curling off a lot more screens. Also, the high screen-n-roll with our guard (Tre or RJ) has always been K's bread and butter on offense.
We are 9999 miles ahead of the curve on defense, that is fantastic. If we run some sets and move more on offense, we will get better looks from 3, and I bet we start making more of them.
Given our competition lately, we can still score 90 without running anything, but I'd like to see a lot more movement in the half-court. Why aren't we running the back-pick play more for a lob for Zion?? I'd like to see Cam and RJ curling off a lot more screens. Also, the high screen-n-roll with our guard (Tre or RJ) has always been K's bread and butter on offense.
We are 9999 miles ahead of the curve on defense, that is fantastic. If we run some sets and move more on offense, we will get better looks from 3, and I bet we start making more of them.
K doesn’t want to show everything so soon. Don’t want opposing coaches being extra prepared, lol
Guys, our free throw shooting isn't that big of a problem.
The math is pretty straightforward to consider worst case scenario.
Take the Auburn game - we went 23-34 from the line (67.7%). Terrible right?
Well lets look at what that means in points per possession. Throw out any fouls that happened on 3's, any technical or flagrant foul shots, and any and-1 situations - those free throws are a bonus for a normal possession. So assume all 34 attempts didn't happen in one of these situations. Also, assume the worst thing possible (missing the front end of a 1 and 1) for all possible opportunities. Meaning, since there are 3 possible 1 and 1 situations in the first half and 3 in the second half, the worst thing that could happen is we miss the front end of a 1 and 1 6 times. Assume that happened against Auburn. That means that we went 23-28 on the other possessions in which we shot free throws (since I'm assuming we went 0-6 in 1 and 1 situations). 28 free throws equates to 14 possessions. This means we scored a total of 23 points on those 20 possessions (6 front ends plus 14 others) in this worst case scenario.
This equates to 57.5% from 2 or 38.3% from 3. Against Auburn we were 44% from 2 and 28% from 3. Auburn should have made us take more 3's - not made us shoot more FTs - in the worst case scenario. Had Auburn fouled us on more possessions, they would have lost by more. (Again, I've made the math as unfavorable as it can be for FT shooting)
In reality, those FTs were shot on fewer than 20 possessions, so the math is MORE favorable. I could do the same analysis for any game, and I'm sure the math is similar.
Not to mention, a missed FT rarely results in a run-out score the other way like a missed 3. Additionally, shooting FTs means the other team has fouled - thus restricting minutes for players.
I would argue the math (combined with common sense) CLEARLY points to 3 point shooting as a much bigger issue that FT shooting for this team. It's actually not even close.
Fans see a missed FT, late in a game, and put too much weight on that possession. Never mind the missed 3 on the previous one or the missed long 2 on the next one.
I'm not arguing that we are good FT shooters. But as I've argued in other threads, I think if we get beat, it will not be on an off FT shooting night, but an off 3 pt shooting one.
The math is pretty straightforward to consider worst case scenario.
Take the Auburn game - we went 23-34 from the line (67.7%). Terrible right?
Well lets look at what that means in points per possession. Throw out any fouls that happened on 3's, any technical or flagrant foul shots, and any and-1 situations - those free throws are a bonus for a normal possession. So assume all 34 attempts didn't happen in one of these situations. Also, assume the worst thing possible (missing the front end of a 1 and 1) for all possible opportunities. Meaning, since there are 3 possible 1 and 1 situations in the first half and 3 in the second half, the worst thing that could happen is we miss the front end of a 1 and 1 6 times. Assume that happened against Auburn. That means that we went 23-28 on the other possessions in which we shot free throws (since I'm assuming we went 0-6 in 1 and 1 situations). 28 free throws equates to 14 possessions. This means we scored a total of 23 points on those 20 possessions (6 front ends plus 14 others) in this worst case scenario.
This equates to 57.5% from 2 or 38.3% from 3. Against Auburn we were 44% from 2 and 28% from 3. Auburn should have made us take more 3's - not made us shoot more FTs - in the worst case scenario. Had Auburn fouled us on more possessions, they would have lost by more. (Again, I've made the math as unfavorable as it can be for FT shooting)
In reality, those FTs were shot on fewer than 20 possessions, so the math is MORE favorable. I could do the same analysis for any game, and I'm sure the math is similar.
Not to mention, a missed FT rarely results in a run-out score the other way like a missed 3. Additionally, shooting FTs means the other team has fouled - thus restricting minutes for players.
I would argue the math (combined with common sense) CLEARLY points to 3 point shooting as a much bigger issue that FT shooting for this team. It's actually not even close.
Fans see a missed FT, late in a game, and put too much weight on that possession. Never mind the missed 3 on the previous one or the missed long 2 on the next one.
I'm not arguing that we are good FT shooters. But as I've argued in other threads, I think if we get beat, it will not be on an off FT shooting night, but an off 3 pt shooting one.
I think our biggest weakness has to be not running the pick and roll. We do that and are unstoppable!
Seriously though, while the last couple of teams were at an athletic disadvantage, I'm pretty sure they were at the top of their conferences last year and returned nearly everyone important. You can say a lot of their turnovers were unforced, but we were also in their heads a bit.
Maybe Gary has a category for blown forced turnovers that resulted in an unforced turnover?
Seriously though, while the last couple of teams were at an athletic disadvantage, I'm pretty sure they were at the top of their conferences last year and returned nearly everyone important. You can say a lot of their turnovers were unforced, but we were also in their heads a bit.
Maybe Gary has a category for blown forced turnovers that resulted in an unforced turnover?
I am trying to follow...and I am not bad at math.
Fast-break points and 2 pointers are occurring at a higher rate than 3 pointers. In addition, the chances of offensive rebounds are higher than 3 pointers. I think the 3 point situation is (kind of) binary. Cam, Jack, and AOC are all very good behind the arc. They will find the groove. Free throws are, well, free. You should make them. Increasing the FT% shouldn't hurt the rest of your game.
At this point, I think we can argue the finer points. Here is what I can say. Would like higher 3 point % and higher FT %.
I believe you. I'm not bad at math either.
Say on every single possession of the game we shoot 2 FTs. Say you make half of them. Alternatively, say you shoot 2 points on every single possession of the game and you make half of them. These two scenarios are IDENTICAL in terms of points scored.
What I did was take the number of FTs shot against Auburn, calculated the MAX number of possessions these could occur on (since this would drive the points per possession down), and compared to what they identical production would be on 2s and 3s.
I didn't take into account offensive rebound rate, and this is one area where my analysis is a bit misleading. For instance, I'm sure we are more likely to rebound a missed 2 than a missed FT. So we'd get another possession on the former but not the latter. This would be hard to account for simply, but even still, my guess is it wouldn't matter.
Cam, Jack, and AOC are all very good. So were Gary and Grayson, and I contend that their 3pt shooting in the great 8 game last year is the *main* reason we lost.
I would say would could argue finer points, but the main point (that 3pt shooting is a bigger issue for this team than FT shooting) is hard to argue against.
Your last sentence, I could not agree more.
I will meet you half way. I think 3 pointers are a bigger deal for those on the team that have a 3 point role. EVERYONE shoots free throws at some point and all would benefit from getting better -- like Mason Plumlee. He got better and better through the season and opponents still fouled him thinking he wasn't improving.
Well, first of all, if I shoot 33.33% from three, I have to shoot 50% from 2. So there is that. Duke will be fine if they just do not take stupid threes. Now, because of my job, I have limited time in seeing Duke, but most of what I have seen, they are not taking stupid threes. Most of them have been good shots.
Another factor that cannot be measured is what the Gonzaga game showed. Duke can be down by double-digits and within a couple minutes be tied in a blink. On the reverse, I think our defense is good enough that if we hit a cold spell, I do not see a team making up any sizeable Duke lead in the same time frame. That is a little demoralizing for a team if you work your butt off for a 15-point lead against Duke and in a blink, it is gone.
And I know it was against Yale and Hartford, but look how quickly a 5-point game (Yale) and about a 10-point lead (Hartford) became a laugher?
Finally, it was earlier this season, but I believe it said Duke offensive rebounds like 50% of its missed shots. So how many missed threes turned into easy twos inside? My guess would be about half of the offensive rebounds. And how often does Duke miss a three badly enough and it turns into a fastbreak opportunity for the opponent? Meanwhile, Duke has the horses that any miss can quickly turn into a fastbreak opportunity.
There are faults, but there are a few chicken littles on this thread. In the history of college basketball, every team had their weaknesses and faults. Especially in the one and done era, you have a good shot of losing if your strengths do not work that game. That is why I hate "live and die by the three." Everyone lives and dies by what they do best. Did anyone say live and die by the two when Duke lost in 2015 at ND when they had so many inside shots rim out?
Another factor that cannot be measured is what the Gonzaga game showed. Duke can be down by double-digits and within a couple minutes be tied in a blink. On the reverse, I think our defense is good enough that if we hit a cold spell, I do not see a team making up any sizeable Duke lead in the same time frame. That is a little demoralizing for a team if you work your butt off for a 15-point lead against Duke and in a blink, it is gone.
And I know it was against Yale and Hartford, but look how quickly a 5-point game (Yale) and about a 10-point lead (Hartford) became a laugher?
Finally, it was earlier this season, but I believe it said Duke offensive rebounds like 50% of its missed shots. So how many missed threes turned into easy twos inside? My guess would be about half of the offensive rebounds. And how often does Duke miss a three badly enough and it turns into a fastbreak opportunity for the opponent? Meanwhile, Duke has the horses that any miss can quickly turn into a fastbreak opportunity.
There are faults, but there are a few chicken littles on this thread. In the history of college basketball, every team had their weaknesses and faults. Especially in the one and done era, you have a good shot of losing if your strengths do not work that game. That is why I hate "live and die by the three." Everyone lives and dies by what they do best. Did anyone say live and die by the two when Duke lost in 2015 at ND when they had so many inside shots rim out?
Hack-a-Shaq works when you have a player like Shaq. There are two parts. He scores at a very high efficiency from the field and he shoots very poorly from the line. In 2013 Mason was shooting 60% from 2 and 68% from the line. If a few of those FTs are front ends of 1 and 1s, then you are close to the same production. Zion is shooting 66% form the field and 67% from the line. Teams should probably foul him more. He's also shooting 14% from 3. I would give those to him until that number goes up. No one else on the team (except Jav, who gets a lot fewer opportunities), would it make sense to intentionally foul to limit 2 point shots.
Lets take RJ as an example. He gets a bad rap is inefficient, in the Kobe model, but he's still shooting 48% from the field. UNC fans like to laugh at how RJ had missed more shots than Zion had taken - but RJ's shooting % is better than the all-universe player Luke Bird Maye.
RJ is shooting 63% from the line. This really is not an acceptable number. If you're the best player in the country, and a future number 1 overall pick, this is not OK unless you are like Shaq.
But we would score more points, not less, if teams fouled RJ instead of making him take 2s and 3s. It really is that simple. His 9-25 from 2 was the difference in the Gonzaga game, not his 4-8 from the line.
Be careful what you ask for@PatrickYates top that
Mason shot 68% for the year. He started out OK around 71% first ten games, then dropped to about 55-60% in mid season, and then by the end was around the 75% mark. He got better at the end of the season and it helped the team.
Now Zion is shooting 67% from the line. And you have him in practise, do you say, "Zion, I need you to work on your 3 pointers for the next 2 hours" or do you say, "Zion, let's work on your free throws for the next couple of hours".
I think we are saying the same thing. I am just trying to bring it up a level with the whole team. If Zion, Marques, Jav, everyone increased their FT% it would be a better thing for the team.
You’re absolutely correct with that last point you made. Even if R.J. percentages stay the same, we would rather he get fouled and shoot free throws more than shoot 3s. Our opportunity to score points in a possession increases. For that matter, I trust anybody at the free throw line more than at the 3 point line.
I got Mason's stats from here:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2013.html
I wouldn't work on either for 2 straight hours, but I get your point. And with Zion, I would probably emphasize working on FTs. There's a lot more room for improvement from 3 (14%) than FT (67%), but as I argued earlier, his FT VOLUME should be higher than it is. Teams should foul him more. He's the only player (again, sans Jav) that this applies to. But I would say, if I'm the other team, the thing I want least is the ball in Zion's hands. That is a really high percentage play for Duke. Zion is the least of my worries (unless he's taking a bunch of 3s).
EVERY OTHER guy who has gotten significant minutes, not named Bolden or Jav, though, I would work on 3s.
I do think we are somewhat saying the same thing. And again, we are NOT good from the line. My point is, in the NCAA tournament, if we go 50% from the line but 40% from 3, we are virtually unbeatable. Last year we were 71% from the line and 37% from 3 for the season. Against KU, we were 78% from the line and 24% from 3. We win with 50% from the line and 40% from 3.
We are taking about 24 FTs a game right now at a 65% clip. Two years ago when our guys couldn't/wouldn't guard their own shadows, we were 76% from the line. So if this year's team shot like that team, we'd be scoring 2.6 more points per game from the line. Lets round that up to 3 to account for the fact that occasionally a missed front end turns into a made front end.
We are taking 25 3s a game, making 33%. We'd have to go from 8.3 (current) makes per game to 9.3 to get that additional 3 points. This would be 37% from 3.
I think it's a lot easier to get this team to 37% from 3 than 76% from the line - both have the same impact on points scored. And since we are taking 25 3s per game and only 24 FTs, improving in the area where the impact can be greatest is a good strategy.
I'm not always sound at making things concise/clear. But I think I have the math (and the point) correct here. We aren't good FT shooters. It isn't where we should *focus* on improving.With a name like @dukephysics, I'm not envisioning an english major
** I think this is a set play for Cam, Jack or AOC and we get the extra additional bucket.
Comments embedded above with **
First, love the statistical analysis. The likelihood of getting extra possessions on offensive rebounds live vs. off FTs should be easy enough to pull stats for I would think. I know offensive rebound % is a highly tracked metric these days.
Also, fouling Zion more might just end up giving him more and-1 opportunities given his size, strength, and ability to finish around the rim. RJ is also pretty good at finishing through contact and getting the and-1.
Finally, the scary thing about our FT shooting is not the overall statistical effect, but the inability to close out a close game. We may find ourselves in a game with a 7 point lead and 2 minutes to go and we either need to take the ball out of our best players' hands or send <70% FT shooters to the line to close it out.
Also, fouling Zion more might just end up giving him more and-1 opportunities given his size, strength, and ability to finish around the rim. RJ is also pretty good at finishing through contact and getting the and-1.
Finally, the scary thing about our FT shooting is not the overall statistical effect, but the inability to close out a close game. We may find ourselves in a game with a 7 point lead and 2 minutes to go and we either need to take the ball out of our best players' hands or send <70% FT shooters to the line to close it out.
That’s why the first thing I said was I don’t see it or see it.. meaning I don’t think it can be improved in 2 months, and it won’t be the focus anyway to improve. (Imo)
I tried to think about how to do this. The difficult part is I can't separate offensive rebounds out by what kind of shot they came on. For instance, if a team only shoots 2s, and shoots 50% from the field, and rebounds 1/2 of all misses, you'd get something like:
50% of possessions you get 2 points, making your first shot
12.5% of possessions you miss and get the rebound and score
12.5% of possessions you miss and don't get the rebound
and so on with smaller percentages for miss, miss, make or miss, miss, miss
But for offensive rebound stats, you don't know how it breaks down by rebound off missed 3, missed 2, missed FT.
Right. The kind of "foul Zion more" fouls I'm suggesting are the clearly foul him so he doesn't make a shot variety. Not the aggressively contest a shot type. Intentionally put him on the line.
This is true, but FT shooting is a stat that seems to have less variance than other types. You see teams shoot between 10-50% from 3 on a game to game basis (live by the 3, die by the 3) whereas the spread on FT shooting seems to be smaller.
Dachamp said it right, in crunch time, if I can choose RJ to the line or RJ taking a jumper, I'm choosing line. 70% from the line is a higher percentage shot than a 2.
Let me say it this way - say you have 3 teams and all 3 teams have RJ Barrett and on all 3 teams RJ takes every shot. Team 1 only shoots 2s, team 2 only shoots 3s, and team 3 only shoots free throws. I would mortgage my house and put all my money on team 3 to win it all.
FT shooters kinda are what they are and usually stay around the same % they always were. A few improve though, but not in no 2 3 months. Maybe I’m wrong about that and someone can give me some examples of guys doing that.
Crunch time. I’d rather have RJ take a (good) midrange shot 40% and have to make it once, rather then having him at the line at 70% having to make both. Same with Lebron!!
Last edited:
Something was noticably wrong with Zion's FT stroke on Saturday. Prior to Saturday, I thought his stroke looked fine at the line, made sense for him to float around the 65% number.
However, I don't know what was going on Saturday, it's like he was pushing the ball forward, aiming at the rim essentially. He wasn't shooting his FT like he normally does. It was definitely a mechanical issue, his stroke looked god awful.
I'm sure the staff will fix it, but it made sense for him to brick every free throw he shot Saturday, he wasn't shooting the ball.
However, I don't know what was going on Saturday, it's like he was pushing the ball forward, aiming at the rim essentially. He wasn't shooting his FT like he normally does. It was definitely a mechanical issue, his stroke looked god awful.
I'm sure the staff will fix it, but it made sense for him to brick every free throw he shot Saturday, he wasn't shooting the ball.