Tonight's Games

The early games both sucked bigtime. Carolina got up by 30 before Marquette realized a basketball game was being played. And Kansas just came out on a mission called, "Don't pull a Kansas" and totally dispatched of Richmond by the third TV timeout. Two dominating performances by teams and coaches who know how to win in March.

Meanwhile, the late games are both fantastic. VCU and Florida State keep exchanging the lead in San Antonio, while Ohio St. and Kentucky are mired in a dogfight in Newark. I'm very impressed by Kentucky's athleticism for sure, but also their composure. Considering how young that team is, they are playing a very experienced and good Ohio State team extremely well.

Update: VCU is now putting some distance between themselves and FSU--57-49 with just under 10 minutes. Kentucky up 53-51 with just over 6 left.

Morning Thoughts

1. No more Duke talk. It's over, has been blogged about, and we can move on. I have closure.

2. Archer is a great show, undeniably boosted by the presence of the hottest female ever animated, Lana Kane. Good lord, she puts those Disney princesses to shame. Take that, Jasmine!

3. April on Parks and Recreation gets more and more hateable each episode. April, we get it, you don't care. Now shut up and stop being such a b*tch and wasting screen time. You are taking away valuable Tom and Ron minutes, as far as I am concerned.

4. My brother-in-law is a total snob. He's complaining that his coffeemaker smells of French Vanilla coffee and that it's nauseating. Seriously? If only the rest of the world suffered like he did.

5. Mother Nature officially sent out a huge F You to its Northeastern residents last week, blessing us with a 75 and sunny Friday afternoon. I busted out the flip flops, donned shorts and walked around the yard, happy that spring had arrived. Wednesday, it snowed 3 inches. The highest temperature we'll see in the next 7 days is 48 degrees. Meanwhile, back home in Louisiana, it's a balmy 84 today. Winter sucks.

6. It was about two years ago that I happened upon Ben Howland at the Westwood BrewCo in Los Angeles. It was probably midnight on a Wednesday and Howland was double-fisting Buds--my kind of man. Excited to see UCLA's basketball coach five feet away, I drunkenly and loudly mentioned to my buddy, "There's Coach Howland!" Because I am loud and obnoxious, Howland heard me. Surprisingly, he approached us and engaged us in conversation. We talked over a couple of drinks about his recent Final Four runs, Duke basketball, UCLA basketball, and the like. Finally, Howland let us in on the occasion for his Bud-swilling: Jrue Holliday had just decided to bolt UCLA for the NBA, a decision that would leave UCLA bankrupt at PG after recruits had all been locked up for the next year. Howland clearly had no idea what he was going to do, so he drank. The last two years have shown just why Howland was so devastated by Holliday's move. Going from perennial title contender to a team battling to make the NCAAs is tough. But looking at UCLA's 2010-11 season and what's to come, I bet he has a lot to look forward to from here. Here's to you, Coach Howland--let's hope 2011-12 brings good things to UCLA!

A Rambling About Stats

Let me get this out of the way first: Ken Pomeroy is one smart dude. He does stuff with sports and numbers that I could only dream of, and he's turned it into what seems to be an awesome career, being a student of sports and stats, earning courtside seats at NCAA games and tweeting win probabilities. The guy has gained traction among the most renowned sportswriters out there, and for that he deserves all the credit in the world.

Now that I've gotten that out of the way, let's talk about win probabilities. I just don't get it. I understand that each and every possession has some varying amount of impact on how the rest of the game will play out, based upon the success or failure of that possession. However, from what I've followed of the KenPom win probability tweets during the tourney, they just seem off.

Example #1: Villanova vs. George Mason, Ken has Nova at 80% at the under-4 media timeout in the second half. Now, all things considered, being up by 6 points with 4 minutes left is an enviable position, but purely on the surface, I see it as only a two possession game when each team has around 4 possessions left. Inwardly, I doubted the 80% probability, knowing of GMU's penchant for magic and Nova's, well, shittiness to end the season, especially that horrible loss to USF at the Big East tourney. At the end of the season, Nova clearly looked like a team that didn't know how to win games; Mason, on the other hand, has the experience of a recent Final Four trip and a coach who can coax great things out of his players. I know KenPom is only looking at numbers, but when handicapping a game with win probability, don't these intangibles/qualitative factors matter at least a little bit, if not a whole lot? How can Nova's late-season futility factor into that win probability? Maybe it does--I know KenPom is a smart guy and generally thinks his numbers through to the last detail. But still, 80% seemed very high to me in a two-possession game with 4 minutes left, and Mason ended up actually winning the game.

Example #2: Duke vs. Arizona, KenPom has Duke at 91% at halftime. Duke is up by 6 in a game that has seesawed during the first half, with neither team convincingly pulling ahead of the other for a sustained period (Duke was up 11, but the lead vanished rapidly). Knowing what I know as a Duke fan--that long, athletic, strong rebounding teams are the perfect recipe for disaster for Duke; that Arizona goes 2-3 guys deeper than Duke and would thus likely be fresher in the second half; and knowing what stats gurus know about Arizona--that Sean Miller is the best after-timeout coach in the NCAA, how does KenPom handicap Duke at 91% in a two-possession game when Sean Miller is coming out of a 20-minute timeout? Again, I'm not using science here--I am just saying that if someone had given me 9 to 1 odds on Arizona winning that game at halftime, I would have taken them in a heartbeat. That game was not nearly 90% decided at the half, but somehow KenPom's numbers said it was.

I only bring this up because of something that happened to me long ago. When interviewing for a job, my boss-to-be asked me, "Can you statistically prove that there is such a thing as 'The Zone?'" He offered the Mike Dunleavy, three 3's in three possessions scenario that unfolded in the 2001 Duke-Arizona title game. As a 35-38% three-point shooter at the time, the chance that Dunleavy makes three in a row is not great--around 4-5%. Yet Dunleavy did it in the game, and I'm certain at many other points in the season, although I cannot be sure without watching tape. Of course, I bombed the question, but the fact remains, Dunleavy made a 4-5% likely scenario occur more than 4-5% of the time, suggesting that there is such a thing as "The Zone" which makes him more likely to hit 3-point shots on a given night. The idea is similar to the recent financial crisis, where some uncountable number of six-sigma events all occurred one after the other. By definition, six-sigma events should occur once every 10,000 years or something bizarre like that, yet we had Bear Stearns funds collapsing, Lehman failing, housing tanking, and subprime lenders failing all at the same time. In that case, the economy was in "The Zone" of doing really shittily. Just like Dunleavy was in "The Zone" for making 3's against Arizona in 2001. So while numbers explain a lot, much of the time--more often than the number suggest--the numbers end up being flat-out wrong. Which brings me back to the damn win probabilities. Nova = wrong. Duke = wrong. Bigtime. The numbers told us one thing, the reality was something different--and no one was THAT surprised.

I can't begin to understand the numbers, models, and details involved in calculating a win probability. I just know that the win probability cannot and will not incorporate all the available information at hand (intangibles, qualitative factors, fatigue in a late-season game), and thus cannot be that accurate. I'd be interested to know how the win probabilities have fared for the entire tournament. Until then, I'll just go with my gut.

Just For The Record

Dear ESPN,

Between March 16 and April 2, no one gives a shit that the Colts are on the Clock. Give it up. The NFL is in a lockout right now, and all signs point to my fall Sundays totally blowing goats. So, to make up for it, during these three weekends, Sportscenter should be 99% college bball and perhaps 1% other stuff, mostly former college bball stars like Derrick Rose tearing it up in the NBA. Any other time in the year, yes, I may care that the NFL draft is looming. But right now, hell no. But yes, I will gladly watch the Wayne Rooney bicycle kick on Best of the Best if you continue to show it.

That is all,

Arie

Tough Loss for the Blue Devils

Well, what's done is done.

Duke closed the book on another strong season earlier tonight, even if it did so in a remarkably disappointing manner. As a Duke alum and lifelong Duke fan, this one hurts, but it is what it is. Some thoughts on the game, the season that was, and the future for Duke:

1) Arizona played a damn, damn good basketball game. In the first half, Arizona's offense was merely the Derrick Williams show (and what a show it was). In the second half, it was anything but. Williams only logged 7 points out of Arizona's 55 point outburst in the second half, while the Wildcat role players Lamont Jones, Solomon Hill, and Jamelle Horne delivered debilitating haymakers and humiliating posterizations to the Devils. Even on the few possessions Duke managed to play decent D, Zona still managed to knock down tough, mid-range jumpers or at least scrap around for an offensive rebound and get a putback. The second-half rebounding imbalance was astronomical--something like 25-8 before garbage time truly began. While Duke could have done better, any impartial observer has to give the lion's share of the credit to Arizona. Those guys played their butts off, huslted to every loose ball and routed Duke to show for it. Also, Derrick Williams made himself a rich(er) man tonight. That guy is something else. He just needs to pin his damn ears back.

2) The Pac-10, which many considered down, may not be so down. Arizona dismantled Duke like no one has this year; Washington gave UNC all it could handle in a de-facto home game for the Heels in Charlotte; and UCLA knocked Izzo out and gave Florida a scare in Tampa for 38 minutes. For a conference whose highest seed in the tourney was a 5, that's a pretty solid effort. And looking forward, the Pac-10 is positioned to be one hell of a conference next year. The Wear twins will debut for the Bruins, Arizona will likely continue its resurgence under Sean Miller, and LoRo will have the Huskies barking as usual in Seattle. Now if only my boy Johnny Dawkins could get something going out at The Farm...

3) It's tough to see Duke's season end. I think I speak for Blue Devil Nation when I say I was absolutely ecstatic for Kyrie Irving's arrival in Durham. To only see the kid play for 11 games is crushing. I am left wondering just how good he could have been--and how good this team could have been--if Kyrie had 37 games under his belt. Sadly, because the Cavs totally suck and need a PG, I think we've seen the last of Kyrie in a Duke jersey. Best of luck to him going forward, and I personally will follow his NBA career with great interest.

4) But with Irving's (likely) exit, Duke can open the book on another scintillating recruit: Austin Rivers. Rivers has already made history in Florida (no school had ever won consecutive 6A state titles before Rivers' Winter Park squad did it this year), and we hope he'll do it again at Duke next year. While his youtube videos don't seem as fascinating as Irving's from last year, we've yet to see Rivers against a true crop of elite recruits--that will come in about a week when he suits up for the McDonald's All-America game. The early thinking on Rivers is that he'll be a great mismatch guy positioned at the 2 for Duke. In addition, Duke will add Quinn Cook, another highly-touted recruit who can dribble, drive, and finish with the best of them. We'll look for Cook and Rivers to contribute almost immediately for Duke next year with the losses of Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler. Finally, Marshall Plumlee will come into the fold, and hopefully he'll have some post moves that he can teach his brothers. With the recruits and the return of Dawkins, Curry, Plumlee, Plumlee, Kelly, Thornton, and Hairston, Duke could probably be looking at a preseason top 10 or 15 ranking. If Irving returns (and that's an enormous if, because, again, the Cavs suck), then Duke could legitimately be a preseason top 5 team.

5) I'm done with all the Dos Equis in the house, and am now onto the Miller Lites. It's 2:30 am, and I have no intention of quitting anytime soon. I might drink straight til Sunday evening.

6) Teams I'll be rooting for on Friday: Kansas (shoutout to my boys The Face and MattyJ), FSU (gotta show my ACC loyalty, though I love the VCU story), Ohio St (unstoppable so far), and Marquette (I know UNC will win, but I can't root for them. Realistically though, they are just too much for Marquette; looking for a big game from Barnes on a big stage).

7) My picks Saturday/Sunday (same as teams I'll be rooting for): Butler over Florida (can't get enough of Brad Stevens and what he's done there, and that Butler D is STOUT), UConn over Zona (Kemba pulls a Kemba; Oriakhi and Okwandu can battle on the boards), Ohio St over UNC (experience over youth, Marshall could clam up in the big game), and Kansas over FSU (too much to deal with inside for FSU).

After Five Years, We're Back Up!

Hello all!

After four years, I've decided to re-launch the old blog. I'll still have the same old Duke bias as always, but I'll cast a wider net and cover anything and everything interesting, relevant, and noteworthy. Welcome!