DBR Newsletter #78
vs. Texas
For the best experience, I recommend reading articles in a web browser or via the Substack app. Duke Basketball Reference is not affiliated with Duke Athletics or Duke University.
Stats
I’ll be tracking 18 statistical categories1 for each game this season, along with some various data on lineups and maybe some additional stats as the sample size increases (i.e. more games played). Moving forward, I’m unsure if I’ll focus on just the key stats for each contest or continue posting them all, but I wanted to include every category for the first game of the year.
Duke 75 Texas 60
Total Possessions: 67
Duke Pts/Possession: 1.12 ppp
Texas Pts/Possession: 0.90 ppp
Key Factors2
Duke eFG %: 51.0%
Texas eFG %: 36.4%
Duke TO %: 14.9%
Texas TO %: 23.9%
Duke OR %: 32.4%
Texas OR %: 40.9%
Duke DR %: 59.1%
Texas DR %: 67.6%
Duke FT Rate: 57.7%
Texas FT Rate: 39.0%
Shot Efficiency
Duke Line Points: 49 pts
Texas Line Points: 32 pts
Differential: +17
Duke Pts from 3: 27 pts
Texas Pts from 3: 15 pts
Differential: +12
Duke 3P Pts/Shot: 1.17 pps
Texas 3P Pts/Shot: 0.88 pps
Duke Pts from FT: 22 pts
Texas Pts from FT: 17 pts
Differential: +5
Duke FT Pts/Shot: 0.73 pps
Texas FT Pts/Shot: 0.74 pps
Duke Pts from 2: 26 pts
Texas Pts from 2: 28 pts
Differential: -2
Duke 2P Pts/Shot: 0.90 pps
Texas 2P Pts/Shot: 0.67 pps
Other
Duke Assist %: 59.1%
Texas Assist %: 31.6%
Duke 3PA %: 44.2%
Texas 3PA %: 28.8%
Duke 2nd Chance Pts: 8 pts
Texas 2nd Chance Pts: 14 pts
Differential: -6
Duke Fast Break Pts: 11 pts
Texas Fast Break Pts: 6 pts
Differential: +5
Duke Pts in the Paint: 24 pts
Texas Pts in the Paint: 26 pts
Differential: -2
Notes
CFos: In the second half, Caleb Foster was +19 in 15:31 on the the floor with 7 points, 2 assists, and 0 turnovers3 - and I thought his defense on Jordan Pope was key as well. Pope went 3 for 3 from beyond the arc in a 3:44 span, the last of which cut Duke’s lead to 51-46 with 10:47 remaining. Over the final ten minutes, Pope would not get off another three-point attempt, while going 0 for 3 from two-point range. Of course, this was a team effort, but CFos did a great job denying the catch and forcing Pope to take contested twos with help in the lane.
Lineups: Duke used 20 different lineup combinations last night. After the game, Coach Scheyer noted “…this is our fifth day together as a team. Maliq Brown, it’s great to see him back out there. Obviously, he’s still working through a lot. Lineups, rotations, things we’re doing, this is a big time evolution….it’s a long way away from where we are versus where we’re going.” I’ll be super interested to see how Duke’s rotation evolves over the next couple of months, but here were the three lineups with the best plus/minus against the Longhorns (time on the floor):
1-Foster/ 3-Evans / 7-Sarr / 12-Boozer / 21-Ngongba: +9 (14:00)
2-Boozer / 3-Evans / 7-Sarr / 12-Boozer / 21-Ngongba: +8 (3:36)
1-Foster / 3-Evans / 6-Brown / 7-Sarr / 12-Boozer: +7 (4:23)
Thanks for reading, Go Duke!
eFG % - Effective Field Goal Percentage = ((3PM*1.5)+2PM) / FGA
TO % - Turnover Rate = (Turnovers / Possessions)
OR % - Offensive Rebound Rate
DR % - Defensive Rebound Rate
FT Rate = (FTA / FGA)
PPS - Points per Shot attempted
Line Points = Total Points from the 3-point line + Total Points from FT line
Assist % - Assist Rate = (Assists / FGM)
3PA % - 3-point Attempt Rate (3PA / FGA)
PPP - Points per Possession
OR% is the stat KenPom includes in his four factors. I like tracking the DR% as well, which is simply 1.00 minus your opponents OR%. I may omit one or the other going forward on a game-to-game basis, but will still track both for the season.
Foster’s +19 was tied for the best second half plus/minus, along with Isaiah Evans +19 (17:56) and Dame Sarr +19 (15:31).