Stat Review: Duke (3/4/23)

JimmyNaismith · Mar 5, 2023

STAT	VALUE	PCTLE	HISTORICAL COMPARISON
Base Stats
FG%	30	1
3FG%	22	13
2FG%	36	5
FT%	86	91
fg%	38	71
3fg%	31	61
2fg%	40	75
ft%	78	26
PTS/POSS	0.71	5
pts/poss	0.89	37
TOTPOSS	148	10
POSDIF	-2	28
%LOB	12	77
%lob	11	13
SmithIdx	-0.2810	8
Interesting Stats
AST/FG	0.47	19
ast/to	0.50	84
%from3	22	91
%FROM3	41.1	91

STAT = Statistic being reported
VALUE = Value of reported stat from the current game
PCTLE = Percentile When Compared to All UNC Games since 1996
Historical Comparison = Graphic Portrayal of PCTLE. Marks depict 20% quintiles, as well as 50%.

FG% = UNC Total Field Goal Percentage (47.0% avg since 1996)
3FG% = UNC 3-point Field Goal Percentage (35.6%)
2FG% = UNC 2-point Field Goal Percentage (51.4%)
FT% = UNC Free Throw Percentage (70.0%)
fg% = Opponent Total Field Goal Percentage (41.6%)
3fg% = Opponent 3-point Field Goal Percentage (33.8%)
2fg% = Opponent 2-point Field Goal Percentage (45.9%)
ft% = Opponent Free Throw Percentage (68.2%)
PTS/POSS = UNC Points Per Possession (Smith Method, 0.934)
pts/poss = Opponent Points Per Possession (Smith Method, 0.846))
POSS = UNC Total Possessions (Smith Method, 85.6)
POSDIF = UNC Advantage in Total Possessions (Smith Method, 2.03)
%LOB = UNC Percentage Loss of Ball (TO/POSS, 15.9)
%lob = Opponent Percentage Loss of Ball (to/poss, 16.4)

MOV = Margin of Victory (9.43)
%FROM3 = UNC Percentage of FG Attempts Taken From 3 (35.6%)
AST/POSS = UNC Assists Per Possession (Smith Method, 0.20)
AST/FG = UNC Assists Per Field Goal (0.59)
AST/TO = UNC Assists Per Turnover (1.4)
%from3 = Opponent Percentage of Shots Taken From 3 (33.8)
ast/poss = Opponent Assists Per Possession (Smith Method, 0.16)
ast/fg = Opponent Assists Per Field Goal (0.52)
ast/to = Opponent Assists Per Turnover (1.1)
poss = Opponents Total Possessions (Smith Method) (83.6)
TOTPOSS = Total Possessions in the Game(Smith Method, 169.3)
SmithIdx = UNC Total of Pts/Poss minus Offensive Goal (0.95) + Defensive Goal (0.85) minus Opponent Pts/Poss (avg: -0.01)

Discussion
UNC welcomed Duke in for Senior Day, and gave one of its most impotent performances in the 3-point era. UNC scored 0.71 pts/poss, a performance only better than 50 of UNC's previous 989 games. Defensively UNC only kind of bad, allowing 0.89 pts/poss. Duke outrebounded UNC, getting 2 more possessions than the Heels.

A little more about that shooting: UNC took 41% of their shots from behind the 3-point arc ... while shooting a miserable 22% from there. RJ Davis was 3-5 while Nance, Black, Dunn, and Love combined for 2-23.

Caleb Love was 0-6. His last 0-fer outing was against Louisville on 1/14. Since then he's made 1 or 2 3-pointers in 7 of the 13 games.

To put a little more perspective on this: UNC's best 3-point shooter is RJ Davis, and he ranks #36 in the 15-team ACC. Leaky Black is #49, and Caleb Love is #55. Only 3 players in the league have taken more 3-pointers this season than Caleb Love, and they average .332, .367, .386 (average of 0.361). Love has shot .301. So, if Caleb Love's shooting accuracy were on par with players getting comparable shots, he would have made 82 3s this season; an additional 14 made. That's 42 more points distributed throught the season. In games where Love attempted more than 10 3s, he was 3-11, 4-13, 2-10, 4-11, and 2-12. There seems to be absolutely no recognition by him or the coaches when he is shooting worse than 70 players in this league. How many times has Love eclipsed that expected 36% from 3 in UNC's 31 games? Just 10.

With all of these woes, the coaching staff has continued to allow players like Black and Love to continue shooting 3s. In this game UNC shot 41% of their shots from behind the arc. Only 104 times in the last 989 have they opted for more 3s. This team is just 0.2% from being the worst 3-point shooting team in program history, yet is it taking 37% of its shots from there. The all-time proportion of 3s taken for the program is 29%. So Davis has opted for a game plan that his players, especially Caleb Love cannot execute, and by my observations, Davis hasn't realized the obscene number of possessions that are being wasted.

Inside the arc was a disaster, too. UNC had too many missed dunks and tap backs for me to count. They shot an atrocious 36% inside the arc, the 44th-worst performance in the last 989. One of the big problems with this team is the amazingly wimpy play down low. Players are jumping with their ankles and not their knees. Below-the-rim play by players who are 6'9" or taller is resuling in easily blocked shots and an awful percentage on putbacks. We blew at least 10 of our 73 possessions in this game due to this.

I watched a Charlotte NBA game toward the end of Larry Brown's coaching career, and as they went to a commercial, Brown was caught on a hot mic telling a big mad entering the huddle,"Just dunk the g*&%$@# thing!" Ever since Roy Williams arrived, it seems the culture of aggressive interior play, attacking the rim, has vanished. Tyler Hansbrough was certainly an exception, but outside of him? Forget Vince Carter, Jerry Stackhouse, Julius Peppers, or JR Reid. I'd bet there haven't been as many aggressive plays in the last 21 teams combined as Brendan Haywood amassed in his 4 years in Chapel Hill. (Haywood, a McDonald's All-American played 13 seasons in the NBA)

As a whole the team averaged 30% from the field. UNC has only had nine games in the last 989 where they shot worse.

We've talked about increasing defensive pressure, creating more fast break opportunities. That just hasn't happened. In this game there were only 148 possessions. Only 90 games have been slower. Our 28-year average on pace is 169 possessions. How many of our 31 games has more than 169 possessions? 5. Is it the woefully ill-prepared bench that is forcing Davis to play Davis/Love the entire second half?

Hubert Davis says he is taking this one game at a time. With this lack of defensive pressure, slow tempo, wimpy play down low, and horrendous green light to Caleb Love, that's about all he's going to get this season.

kjcooper · Mar 5, 2023