All The Marbles
Will Coach K Earn His Fourth Set Of Agates?
It started with 65; it’s down to two. When they NCAA Tournament’s 2010 brackets were released three weeks ago, we here at the PiRate Ratings told you that our criteria showed that Kansas, Kentucky, and Syracuse were not going to make it to the final round. We selected Duke based on a criteria score that blew the other teams out of the water.
Well, we are one win away from being able to say we have selected the national champion five times in the last six years, missing only on Florida in 2006.
Before we break down the stats, let’s take a quick look something. We’re talking about Duke here. Consider this about this Blue Devil basketball team. Their coach is with one of the best around. Consider that this Duke team has two of the best inside players in the game and a couple of wing players that can shoot lights out. Throw in a reserve who might be a star in the NBA in a few years, and this team looks unbeatable.
Now the opponent is coming into this game on a very long winning streak, longer than any team in many years. This opponent is a bit undersized compared to Duke, but they have a unique style of play. This opponent wins games with a huge spurt or two. Except for those spurts, they appear to be little better than an above-average team.
Wait a minute! We don’t want to mislead you here. We’re not talking about 2010. We’re talking about 1964. That’s right. In 1964, Duke had a sure-championship team with a top-notch coach in Vic Bubas, who had already guided Duke to a Final Four. That team had two talented post players in 6-10 twin towers Jay Buckley and Hack Tison. Wing player Jeff Mullins was a deadly shooter who could take it inside and finish the fast break. On the bench, sophomore Jack Marin would be an NBA star in the latter part of the 1960’s and 1970’s. That Blue Devil team looked unbeatable.
Their opponent was a small team with no starter over 6-5. They came into the championship game on a 29-game winning streak. They played a unique style of ball, pressing all over the floor and running the fast break on every opportunity. They relied on a couple of spurts in every game, and the rest of the time, they basically played teams evenly. That team, of course, was UCLA, and it was the first of 10 national champions produced by the legendary Wizard of Westwood—John Wooden.
Can Butler become the 2010 alternative to UCLA of 1964? Their unique style of ball is completely different from Wooden’s Bruins, but it produces the same results. Rather than rely on quick spurts in two minutes (UCLA scored 16 consecutive points on Duke in less than two minutes just before the end of the first half), Butler’s defense has long stretches where it holds opponents scoreless or to just a couple of points.
Unfortunately for the Bulldogs, this is not 1964. This Duke team is closer in comparison to the 1970 UCLA team, the one that had Henry Bibby, John Vallely, Curtis Rowe, Sidney Wicks, and Steve Patterson. That Bruin team pounded opponents inside with brute force and stung them from outside with great perimeter shooting. Thus, we strongly believe we will have successfully picked yet another national champion when the clock strikes zero.
Before getting to the PiRate Data which will predict the outcome of the game, let’s take a look at the position by position matchups. We are guessing that the two Butler players who left the Michigan State game (Mack & Howard) will both be available to play but neither will be 100%.
Point Guard
Duke: John Scheyer Butler: Shelvin Mack
Neither player is your atypical point guard. Both can lead their respective teams in scoring in any game and will come down the floor and pop a three point attempt before setting up any offensive play.
Scheyer is the better of the two when it comes to natural point guard duties, and he adds something extra—a rebounding force.
Mack suffered from dehydration in Saturday’s semifinal game, and he will be better hydrated for this game. However, he won’t be 100%.
Advantage: Duke
Shooting Guard
Duke: Nolan Smith Butler: Ronald Nored
Nored is not much of an offensive threat, but he is a fairly good defensive player, especially in Butler’s help and recover defense. He is a plus at the free throw line, but unless the Bulldogs are trying to nurse a small lead in the final minutes, this won’t come into play.
Smith is a stud. He can drain the three and take a defender to the basket on the drive. He will dominate Nored in this game, and this will be one of the areas where the Blue Devils will exploit.
Advantage: Duke
Small Forward
Duke: Kyle Singler Butler: Gordon Hayward
This is the matchup of the game. Both teams’ best players square off. The only chance Butler has of keeping the game close and having a chance to win is if Hayward is red hot and gets open shots, while Singler is ice cold, much like he was when Duke edge Baylor in the South Regional Finals.
We think Singler has a little more speed, but Hayward is a little more consistent.
Advantage: Tossup
Power Forward
Duke: Lance Thomas Butler: Willie Veasley
The stats on paper point to a Butler advantage in this game, but Thomas has been a rebounding machine in this tournament. While Singler, Scheyer, and Smith have been firing shots at rapid pace, Thomas has been banging like Charles Barkley and has been pulling down a large number of offensive rebounds. If you’ve read any about our PiRate Criteria, you know how much we award an offensive rebound that leads to points. It is not just gold; it is platinum.
Veasley isn’t chopped liver, and he could easily score 10-15 points in this game, but if Thomas gets four or more offensive rebounds, it won’t matter.
Advantage: Duke
Center
Duke: Brian Zoubek Butler: Matt Howard
When Thomas isn’t pulling down offensive rebounds, Zoubek is. In fact, the big 7-1 center just may be the best offensive rebounder in college ball. He won’t scare Butler offensively, but because he is a coordinated seven-footer, the Bulldogs have to prevent him from getting the ball in low. That will allow the perimeter players to get open.
Howard suffered a mild concussion against Michigan State and is considered a game-time decision on whether he can play. We expect he will play but will not be very effective.
Advantage: Duke
Bench
These teams remind us of teams from yesteryear in that neither relies all that much on depth. Both go only eight deep for the most part, and none of the reserves on either side is likely to step up and have a big game.
Butler’s three contributing reserves will need to play much better against Duke than they did against Michigan State. Zach Hahn is the best three-point shooter on either team, but he looked like he came in from the crowd rather than the bench in the semifinal game. If he could play 12 minutes and hit two or three from behind the arc, it could give BU a shot in the arm and fire the rest of the team up.
Duke has three capable reserves that could start for half of the teams in college basketball. If Andre Dawkins ever find “it,” he is going to be a real star. He plays schizophrenically; he’s either the next Grant Hill or the next Benny Hill, and you never know what you are going to get. The Plumlee Brothers, Miles and Mason are very consistent and supply positive minutes when they are in the game.
Advantage: Duke
NCAA National Championship Game
Monday, April 5, 2010
Lucas Oil Stadium, Indianapolis
Tipoff: 9:21 EDT
Butler Bulldogs (33-4) vs. Duke Blue Devils (34-5)
Butler
Roster
|
No. |
Name | Pos | Ht | Wt | Yr | Status |
| 1 | Shelvin Mack | G | 6-3 | 215 | So | Starter Status Unsure after injury vs. MSU |
| 2 | Shawn Vanzant | G | 6-0 | 172 | Jr | Key Reserve |
| 3 | Zach Hahn | G | 6-1 | 176 | Jr | Plays In Every Game |
| 5 | Ronald Nored | G | 6-0 | 174 | So | Starter |
| 11 | Alex Anglin | G/F | 6-5 | 177 | Jr | Seldom Plays |
| 14 | Nick Rodgers | G | 6-2 | 168 | Sr | Seldom Plays |
| 20 | Gordon Hayward | G/F | 6-9 | 207 | So | Starter |
| 21 | Willie Veasley | G/F | 6-3 | 206 | Sr | Starter |
| 22 | Grant Leiendecker | G | 6-5 | 182 | Jr | Seldom Plays |
| 24 | Avery Jukes | F | 6-8 | 215 | Sr | Plays In Every Game |
| 30 | Emerson Kampen | C | 6-9 | 189 | Fr | Seldom Plays |
| 32 | Garrett Butcher | F | 6-7 | 209 | So | Seldom Plays |
| 33 | Chase Stigall | G | 6-4 | 195 | Fr | Seldom Plays |
| 44 | Andrew Smith | C | 6-11 | 239 | Fr | Plays Considerable Time |
| 54 | Matt Howard | F | 6-8 | 230 | Jr | Starter Status Unsure after injury vs. MSU |
| HC | Brad Stevens | |||||
| Ast | Matthew Graves | |||||
| Ast | Terry Johnson | |||||
| Ast |
Micah Shrewsbury |
Results
| Record:33-4, 18-0 Horizon | |||
| Colors: Blue & White | |||
| Opponent | But | Opp | |
| Davidson | 73 | 62 | |
| at Northwestern | 67 | 54 | |
| at Evansville | 64 | 60 | |
| Minnesota (Anaheim) | 73 | 82 | |
| UCLA (Anaheim) | 69 | 67 | |
| Clemson (Anaheim) | 69 | 70 | |
| at Ball State | 59 | 38 | |
| Valparaiso | 84 | 67 | |
| Georgetown (at NYC) | 65 | 72 | |
| Ohio State | 74 | 66 | |
| Xavier | 69 | 68 | |
| at Alabama-Birmingham | 57 | 67 | |
| UW-Green Bay | 72 | 49 | |
| UW-Milwaukee | 80 | 67 | |
| at Wright State | 77 | 65 | |
| at Detroit | 64 | 62 | ot |
| Cleveland State | 64 | 55 | |
| Youngstown State | 91 | 61 | |
| at Loyola of Chicago | 48 | 47 | |
| at Illinois-Chicago | 84 | 55 | |
| at UW-Green Bay | 75 | 57 | |
| at UW-Milwaukee | 73 | 66 | |
| Detroit | 63 | 58 | |
| Wright State | 74 | 62 | |
| Loyola of Chicago | 62 | 47 | |
| at Youngstown State | 68 | 57 | |
| at Cleveland State | 70 | 59 | |
| Illinois-Chicago | 73 | 55 | |
| Siena (Bracketbuster) | 70 | 53 | |
| at Valparaiso | 74 | 69 | |
| UW-Milwaukee (Horizon Trn) | 68 | 59 | |
| Wright State (Horizon Trn) | 70 | 45 | |
| UTEP (NCAA) | 77 | 59 | |
| Murray State (NCAA) | 54 | 52 | |
| Syracuse (NCAA) | 63 | 59 | |
| Kansas State (NCAA) | 63 | 56 | |
| Michigan State (NCAA Final 4) | 52 | 50 |
Statistics
| Player | Min/G | Pts | Reb | FG% | 3pt % | FT% | Ast | Bk | Stl |
| Gordon Hayward | 33.3 | 15.6 | 8.3 | 47.2 | 29.9 | 82.2 | 61 | 30 | 39 |
| Shelvin Mack | 30.9 | 14.2 | 3.7 | 45.7 | 38.9 | 73.4 | 113 | 5 | 50 |
| Matt Howard | 25.4 | 11.6 | 5.2 | 48.5 | 27.3 | 79.0 | 30 | 23 | 22 |
| Willie Veasley | 31.2 | 10.0 | 4.3 | 49.4 | 36.0 | 65.5 | 33 | 9 | 43 |
| Ronald Nored | 30.1 | 6.0 | 2.9 | 40.8 | 18.2 | 62.3 | 135 | 4 | 66 |
| Zach Hahn | 15.6 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 43.0 | 40.9 | 92.9 | 24 | 0 | 13 |
| Shawn Vanzant | 14.6 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 32.1 | 30.4 | 72.5 | 45 | 6 | 15 |
| Avery Jukes | 10.4 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 37.6 | 34.4 | 69.4 | 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Garrett Butcher | 5.6 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 19.4 | 11.1 | 33.3 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Team Stats | But | Opp | |||||||
| Points | 69.0 | 59.4 | |||||||
| FG% | 44.5 | 41.5 | |||||||
| 3PT % | 34.2 | 31.8 | |||||||
| FT% | 73.8 | 68.0 | |||||||
| Rebounds | 32.6 | 29.9 | |||||||
| Turnovers | 12.1 | 14.0 | |||||||
| Steals | 7.1 | 5.3 | |||||||
| Blocks | 2.3 | 3.1 | |||||||
| Off. Rebound % | 29.7 | ||||||||
| Possessions/G * | 64.9 | ||||||||
| Offensive Rebound % = Off. Reb/(Off. Reb + Opp. Def Reb + Opp. Dead Ball Def Reb) | |||||||||
| * Avg Possessions estimated and based on this formula | |||||||||
| FG attempts + (.5* FT attempts) + Turnovers – Offensive Rebounds | |||||||||
Duke
Roster
| No. | Name | Pos | Ht | Wt | Yr | Status |
| 2 | Nolan Smith | G | 6-2 | 185 | Jr | Starter |
| 3 | Seth Curry | G | 6-1 | 175 | So | Does Not Play |
| 5 | Mason Plumlee | F | 6-10 | 230 | Fr | Key Reserve |
| 12 | Kyle Singler | F | 6-8 | 230 | Jr | Starter |
| 13 | Olek Czyz | F | Seldom Plays | |||
| 20 | Andre Dawkins | G | 6-4 | 190 | Fr | Key Reserve |
| 21 | Miles Plumlee | F | 6-10 | 240 | So | Key Reserve |
| 30 | Jon Scheyer | G | 6-5 | 190 | Sr | Starter |
| 34 | Ryan Kelly | F | 6-10 | 220 | Fr | Key Reserve |
| 41 | Jordan Davidson | G | 6-1 | 180 | Sr | Seldom Plays |
| 42 | Lance Thomas | F | 6-8 | 225 | Sr | Starter |
| 51 | Steve Johnson | F | 6-5 | 210 | Jr | Seldom Plays |
| 52 | Todd Zafirovski | F | 6-8 | 240 | Fr | Does Not Play |
| 53 | Casey Peters | G | 6-4 | 185 | Jr | Seldom Plays |
| 55 | Brian Zoubek | C | 7-1 | 260 | Sr | Starter |
| HC | Mike Krzyzewski | |||||
| Ast | Steve Wojciechowski | |||||
| Ast | Chris Collins | |||||
| Ast | Nate James |
Results
| Record: 34-5, 13-3 ACC | ||
| Colors: Royal Blue & White | ||
| Opponent | Duke | Opp |
| UNC Greensboro | 96 | 62 |
| Coastal Carolina (Pre NIT) | 74 | 49 |
| Charlotte (Pre NIT) | 101 | 59 |
| Radford | 104 | 67 |
| Arizona State (Pre NIT @NYC) | 64 | 53 |
| Connecticut (Pre NIT @ NYC) | 68 | 59 |
| at Wisconsin (ACC/B10) | 69 | 73 |
| St. John’s | 80 | 71 |
| Gardner-Webb | 113 | 68 |
| Gonzaga (at NYC) | 76 | 41 |
| Long Beach State | 84 | 63 |
| Penn | 114 | 55 |
| Clemson | 74 | 53 |
| Iowa State (at Chicago) | 86 | 65 |
| at Georgia Tech | 67 | 71 |
| Boston College | 79 | 59 |
| Wake Forest | 90 | 70 |
| at N. C. State | 74 | 88 |
| at Clemson | 60 | 47 |
| Florida State | 70 | 56 |
| at Georgetown | 77 | 89 |
| Georgia Tech | 86 | 67 |
| at Boston College | 66 | 63 |
| at North Carolina | 64 | 54 |
| Maryland | 77 | 56 |
| at Miami (FL) | 81 | 74 |
| Virginia Tech | 67 | 55 |
| Tulsa | 70 | 52 |
| at Virginia | 67 | 49 |
| at Maryland | 72 | 79 |
| North Carolina | 82 | 50 |
| Virginia (ACC Tournament) | 57 | 46 |
| Miami (FL) (ACC Tournament) | 77 | 74 |
| Georgia Tech (ACC Tournament) | 65 | 61 |
| Ark. Pine Bluff (NCAA) | 73 | 44 |
| California (NCAA) | 68 | 53 |
| Purdue (NCAA) | 70 | 57 |
| Baylor (NCAA) | 78 | 71 |
| West Virginia (NCAA Final 4) | 78 | 57 |
| Player | Min/G | Pts | Reb | FG% | 3pt % | FT% | Ast | Bk | Stl |
| Jon Scheyer | 36.7 | 18.3 | 3.5 | 39.9 | 38.7 | 88.0 | 189 | 8 | 64 |
| Kyle Singler | 35.8 | 17.6 | 6.9 | 41.2 | 39.6 | 79.6 | 94 | 30 | 40 |
| Nolan Smith | 35.4 | 17.5 | 2.8 | 44.4 | 39.9 | 79.9 | 110 | 9 | 45 |
| Brian Zoubek | 18.3 | 5.5 | 7.7 | 63.5 | 0.0 | 55.4 | 38 | 29 | 27 |
| Miles Plumlee | 16.5 | 5.3 | 5.0 | 56.8 | 100.0 | 66.1 | 12 | 25 | 19 |
| Lance Thomas | 25.1 | 4.7 | 4.9 | 43.3 | 0.0 | 74.3 | 36 | 8 | 22 |
| Andre Dawkins | 12.8 | 4.6 | 1.2 | 40.0 | 38.3 | 73.5 | 13 | 2 | 11 |
| Mason Plumlee | 14.5 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 46.2 | 25.0 | 54.3 | 30 | 30 | 18 |
| Ryan Kelly | 6.5 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 35.6 | 26.3 | 66.7 | 13 | 14 | 8 |
| Team Stats | Duke | Opp | |||||||
| Points | 77.4 | 61.0 | |||||||
| FG% | 44.1 | 40.3 | |||||||
| 3PT % | 38.7 | 28.1 | |||||||
| FT% | 76.1 | 68.7 | |||||||
| Rebounds | 39.1 | 32.7 | |||||||
| Turnovers | 10.9 | 14.3 | |||||||
| Steals | 6.6 | 6.3 | |||||||
| Blocks | 4.0 | 4.0 | |||||||
| Off. Rebound % ^ | 40.3 | ||||||||
| Possessions/G * | 67.2 | ||||||||
| ^ Offensive Rebound % = Off. Reb/(Off. Reb + Opp. Def Reb + Opp. Dead Ball Def Reb) | |||||||||
| * Avg Possessions estimated and based on this formula | |||||||||
| FG attempts + (.5* FT attempts) + Turnovers – Offensive Rebounds | |||||||||
PiRate Criteria Comparison
| Stat | Duke | Pts | Butler | Pts |
| Scoring Margin | 16.4 | 5 | 9.6 | 3 |
| FG% Margin | 3.80% | 0 | 3.00% | 0 |
| Rebound Margin | 6.4 | 3 | 2.7 | 0 |
| Turnover Margin | 3.4 | 3 | 1.9 | 1 |
| R+T * | 11.79 | 11.79 | 5.94 | 5.94 |
| Road W-L | 17-5 | 3 | 16-4 | 3 |
| Schedule Strength | 61.05 | 11.05 | 60.62 | 10.62 |
| Total | Duke | 36.8 | Butler * | 25.6 |
| * Butler Receives 2 extra points for quasi-home team advantage | ||||
| Duke has a PiRate Criteria Advantage of 11.2 points | ||||
| This Computes To An Overall Advantage of 15 points | ||||
| * R+T is a formula that combines rebounding margin and turnover margin. It is weighted | ||||
| to give turnover margin a little more clout and steals even more clout based on the fact that | ||||
| turnovers, especially steals, produce a higher percentage of easy fast break points. | ||||
| R+T Formula: R+T= (.2S * 1.2T)+ R | ||||
| R = Rebounding Margin, T = Turnover Margin, S = Avg. Steals per Game | ||||
| If Turnover Margin is a negative number, then Steals are dropped from the formula | ||||
| PiRate Prediction | ||||
| Duke 70 | ||||
| Butler 55 | ||||
The Pi-Rate Ratings 