Tobacco Road Report

By staff

With Duke in their biggest conference slump in a decade, hoop fans are wondering what is wrong with the Devils. In order to find out, we’ve invited Duke to spend some time on TRR’s couch for some introspection. The Id of Duke’s fan base is rattled right now, struggling to fulfill its emotional, sometimes irrational, need to be on top of the college basketball world. What we at TRR promise is a good dose of Ego, using our tempo-free statistics to give the Id a cold dose of reality.

We had originally thought about writing up the Maryland win over Duke in our usual format, examining the tempo-free statistics and matching them with what we saw live. However, we found ourselves repeating what should be familiar tunes by now for our readers about the Blue Devils, so we scrapped the idea in favor of a broader analysis of what they do well in their wins and where they fall short when they lose.

We compiled the tempo free statistics for Duke in conference wins this season versus their conference losses. For a review of what these statistics mean and how they are created, see here and here. These are the facts:

Pace of Play:
In Wins: 66.5 possessions/game
In Losses: 71.6 possessions/game

Effective Field Goal % (Offense)
In Wins: 55.7 percent
In Losses: 49.1 percent

Effective Field Goal % (Defense)
In Wins: 43.7 percent
In Losses: 52.1 percent

Offensive Rebound Percentage (Offense)
In Wins: 38.5 percent
In Losses: 27.2 percent

Defensive Rebound Percentage (Defense)
In Wins: 76.7 percent
In Losses: 71.0 percent

Efficiency:
Offense: Points Per Possession
In Wins: 1.11
In Losses: 0.93

Defense: Points Per Possession
In Wins: 0.86
In Losses: 1.01

Efficiency Margin:
In Wins: 0.25
In Losses: -0.08

Assists Per Possession
In Wins: 0.23
In Losses: 0.15

In conference games that Duke has won – games against Miami, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, and Boston College – the Blue Devils were able to control the tempo, hold the defensive glass, minimize turnovers, and create offensive opportunities in their half court sets. With the exception of Clemson, none of the teams on this list would qualify as being overtly athletic.

In the conference losses – games against Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Florida State, UNC, and Maryland – the Blue Devils have been forced to play at a higher tempo and have struggled to generate offense. Perhaps the most telling statistic in this regard is that Duke was only credited with assists on 15 percent of its possessions in its six losses versus 23 percent in their five conference wins.

The defense Duke has played in both its wins and losses has been credible (except for ten minutes during the recent Maryland game when the Terrapins blew the game wide open). In Duke’s losses, their effective field goal percentage allowed, defensive rebounding percentage, and points per possession have been fairly respectable. The worst we can say is that the defense hasn’t been able to control tempo enough, but an extra five possessions per game isn’t egregious and Duke has generally gotten stops when they’ve needed them. Consequently, we don’t believe the problem lies mainly on the defensive end.

We think the lack of assists in Duke’s losses, or “efficiency-gap,” is telling and points to problems on offense. In the last four conference losses, Duke has only been able to register 9, 10, 10, and 9 assists versus 56 turnovers. Teams that have beat Duke recently have been able to play the Blue Devils deep into the shot clock, which is a disadvantage for Duke since they don’t have anyone capable of creating their own shot consistently.

In lieu of attempting to generate offense through motion, sets that attempt to exploit mismatches, and screening off the ball, the Blue Devils have largely resorted to on-ball screens to try and create space between the primary ballhandler and defender. We specifically refer readers to the Florida State game, where Duke was frustrated by FSU’s ability to switch these screens and prevent dribble penetration or quick three pointers.

It’s been common analysis to push a lot of the blame for Duke’s poor play on Paulus. We agree that Greg could be more efficient with the ball, but we’re far from pointing the finger at any one player. Basketball is a team game – it’s won by teams and lost by teams. We’ve been surprised at the inability – or lack of desire – by Nelson to take over games offensively or create his own opportunities when the offense needs it.

The lack of a true post score has also helped defenses guard Duke. This isn’t necessarily a knock on McRoberts since we’ve known his style from day one on campus. Zoubek may be a year away in this regard, but we think he should be logging more than 8 minutes a game. Putting both Zoubek and McRoberts in the game has been effective at times and Duke could take advantage of the high-low mismatches it creates.

In sum, without anyone commanding a double team down low, and without Nelson generating dribble penetration, the outside shooting of Scheyer and Paulus has been unable to get going consistently. The end result has been a relatively easy team for opponents to guard, provided they have enough athleticism to get the job done. Unfortunately for Duke, there are a slew of teams in the middle of the conference with just the right blend of athleticism and depth.