Duke Post Game Thread

[Leebo]

Not sure why they'd still be putting out this ad this far after the game, but I just got a reddit ad that was half Solo Ball tax app commercial and half Tarris Reed breakaway dunk

 

[TheShot1990]

How many baby Braylons are gonna be born in 9 months?

 

[WeAreUCONN]

1.6K views · 12 reactions | Legendary high school basketball coach Bob Hurley Sr. has seen his fair share of unexpected endings. But he told Otis Livingston that his son Dan Hurley’s team’s come-from-behind victory against Duke on Sunday was truly sp

Legendary high school basketball coach Bob Hurley Sr. has seen his fair share of unexpected endings. But he told Otis Livingston that his son Dan Hurley’s team’s come-from-behind victory against Duke...

www.facebook.com

 

[Waquoit]

Yup. The first thing he says - "All Duke had to do there was hold it". He's stunned they screwed it up

I feel bad for the kid. His coach was telling him to pass it.

 

[HooperScooper]

Unfortunately, no I don’t believe a hook and hold is reviewable. But if you watch it live, you’ll realize Alex was being held so aggressively and violently, he actually couldn’t escape.

I'm almost certain a hook and hold is reviewable. I've seen lots of them where the refs review it on the monitor. Anyone else want to weigh in on this?

The rule change was enacted to increase player safety, but has already been the subject of controversy this season. The most notable incident that led to this change happened during the 2018 NCAA Tournament, when Purdue's Isaac Haas fractured his elbow while going for a rebound against Cal State Fullerton. The foul is now reviewable and a Flagrant 1 (two foul shots and the ball) or Flagrant 2 (offending player is also ejected) can be assessed depending on the severity of the play. The differences between a legal rebound and a "hook and hold" may seem minute to most viewers, but don't be surprised if officials call the foul during the 2019 NCAA Tournament.

What is the 'Hook and Hold' Rule? NCAA's New Rebounding Rule Explained

The NCAA instituted the "hook and hold" rule for this season after the 2017-18 season.

www.si.com

 

[TheShot1990]

I'm almost certain a hook and hold is reviewable. I've seen lots of them where the refs review it on the monitor. Anyone else want to weigh in on this?

The rule change was enacted to increase player safety, but has already been the subject of controversy this season. The most notable incident that led to this change happened during the 2018 NCAA Tournament, when Purdue's Isaac Haas fractured his elbow while going for a rebound against Cal State Fullerton. The foul is now reviewable and a Flagrant 1 (two foul shots and the ball) or Flagrant 2 (offending player is also ejected) can be assessed depending on the severity of the play. The differences between a legal rebound and a "hook and hold" may seem minute to most viewers, but don't be surprised if officials call the foul during the 2019 NCAA Tournament.

What is the 'Hook and Hold' Rule? NCAA's New Rebounding Rule Explained

The NCAA instituted the "hook and hold" rule for this season after the 2017-18 season.

www.si.com

If you are correct and it was a flagrant one, then Alex would’ve had two shots (he would’ve made them both of course) and we’d be down by two with the ball.

Then we could’ve beat Duke the good old-fashioned way, and let them walk away with some tiny amount of dignity. But they insisted on making things difficult.

 

[Hurleyman216]

Nowadays, there are so many made 3's in the last minute of the game, primarily because the leading team is afraid to foul the shooter, that the majority of coaches foul up 3. Its stupid not to. I've often had games where I was -3 and screwed because of this. The fact that Danny didn't, really threw them off. It was basically reverse psychology, but a major risk.

You clearly don’t watch as much college ball as I do, it’s definitely not what most teams do. The largest recent study on the “foul up 3” question was performed by Harvard and it showed that 11.7% of teams intentionally committed a foul when leading by 3 at the end of a game. That’s not a majority…not even close, but don’t let actual facts get in the way of making yourself a message board warrior.

 

[auror]

I'm almost certain a hook and hold is reviewable. I've seen lots of them where the refs review it on the monitor. Anyone else want to weigh in on this?

The rule change was enacted to increase player safety, but has already been the subject of controversy this season. The most notable incident that led to this change happened during the 2018 NCAA Tournament, when Purdue's Isaac Haas fractured his elbow while going for a rebound against Cal State Fullerton. The foul is now reviewable and a Flagrant 1 (two foul shots and the ball) or Flagrant 2 (offending player is also ejected) can be assessed depending on the severity of the play. The differences between a legal rebound and a "hook and hold" may seem minute to most viewers, but don't be surprised if officials call the foul during the 2019 NCAA Tournament.

What is the 'Hook and Hold' Rule? NCAA's New Rebounding Rule Explained

The NCAA instituted the "hook and hold" rule for this season after the 2017-18 season.

www.si.com

Coaches don't need to "challenge" for a hook and hold, but they can "appeal" to the refs to go and look for it since it's a flagrant 1.

 

[HooperScooper]

Coaches don't need to "challenge" for a hook and hold, but they can "appeal" to the refs to go and look for it since it's a flagrant 1.

Which means it's reviewable.

 

[TheShot1990]

Which means it's reviewable.

But Danny was very far from the play, diagonally across the entire court I believe. Something caught my eye, which caused me to rewind and take those pictures. Only then did I realized how blatantly Ngongba was hooking.

 

[DRBackup]

The more I see the 10 seconds, it dawns on me that Dook went with the DONT GET FOULED!!! strategy. Fireable.

Sure. It's not a bad strategy, necessarily, just poor execution!

 

[Hamms30]

But Danny was very far from the play, diagonally across the entire court I believe. Something caught my eye, which caused me to rewind and take those pictures. Only then did I realized how blatant Ngongba was hooking.

The problem is it was RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE REF THAT CALLED IT the other way for Duke.

 

[REB1094]

Is anyone else still not over this W?

 

[HCCForever]

Is anyone else still not over this W?

I thought that I grew tired of watching the replays yesterday morning. I was wrong.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Is anyone else still not over this W?

I still vividly remember the feeling when Langdon tripped over himself and our first title (something that a baker's dozen years earlier would have seemed a ridiculous aspiration) was secure.

I can't speak for everyone, but the way I felt when the ball went through the net will stick with me forever.

 

[tzznandrew]

I still vividly remember the feeling when Langdon tripped over himself and our first title (something that a baker's dozen years earlier would have seemed a ridiculous aspiration) was secure.

I can't speak for everyone, but the way I felt when the ball went through the net will stick with me forever.

Yup. every time I watch the Hamilton shot vs. Washington, the end of the title game, the Kemba step back, I still get chills. This will be the same.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

How many baby Braylons are gonna be born in 9 months?

Judging by my experience after 2011, there are definitely going to be a lot of dogs named Braylon in the state of CT in the next few years.

 

[Jay-Bone]

You clearly don’t watch as much college ball as I do, it’s definitely not what most teams do. The largest recent study on the “foul up 3” question was performed by Harvard and it showed that 11.7% of teams intentionally committed a foul when leading by 3 at the end of a game. That’s not a majority…not even close, but don’t let actual facts get in the way of making yourself a message board warrior.

I also watch a lot of basketball. And bet all D1 teams (see below), so I'm frequently observing end of game situations very closely. I don't really have the time or care to get into it, but are you poaching the 2010 study? A lot has changed since then. Can you link your source please? I will say, betting wise, fouling up 3 is terrible for me trying to cover, so I hope you're right. I may not have covered this one otherwise. "Message board warrior" is hilarious btw. You need to calm down, I didn't attack you and I barely even post here anymore.

 

[HCCForever]

Judging by my experience after 2011, there are definitely going to be a lot of dogs named Braylon in the state of CT in the next few years.

My guess is that you named your dog Kemba. Kemba, Bazz and Braylon are great dog names. I still can't believe that AK has a dog named Duke as he disclosed on the Jared podcast this week.

 

[storrsroars]

I thought that I grew tired of watching the replays yesterday morning. I was wrong.

I saw some new stuff this morning I didn't catch on my previous viewings.

(All apologies to Tom as it's AI and Tracy would never use bad language, and I am steadfastly against using AI of actual people... but hey, it's Duke.)

 

[HCCForever]

I saw a FB post yesterday from WPLR and the Chaz and AJ show. They interviewed Scott Burrell. It's on audioboom. Scott is on a group text chain with teammates Lyman, Oliver Macklin, Rod and others and still vested in UConn.

 

[JustbrewitMan]

I thought that I grew tired of watching the replays yesterday morning. I was wrong.

I went back and watched the last 15:13 (from where we were down 52-38) for probably the 5th time last night.

Such a gritty hard-fought comeback. We didn't play close to perfect basketball but we totally outhustled, out-defensed, out 50/50-balled, and out-willed them from that point to the finish.

 

[Dove]

 

[Hurleyman216]

I also watch a lot of basketball. And bet all D1 teams (see below), so I'm frequently observing end of game situations very closely. I don't really have the time or care to get into it, but are you poaching the 2010 study? A lot has changed since then. Can you link your source please? I will say, betting wise, fouling up 3 is terrible for me trying to cover, so I hope you're right. I may not have covered this one otherwise. "Message board warrior" is hilarious btw. You need to calm down, I barely even post here anymore.

View attachment 119220

Congrats on your betting. Based on everything I can find and running through multiple LLMs, it looks like in more modern games the percentage of teams that foul in this situation is up from 11.7% in 2010 to an estimated 20-30% in recent times. Again, that means 70-80% of the time teams aren’t intentionally fouling. I’ve probably watched over 400 games this year and I also used to coach AAU, so I can tell you it’s not textbook and certainly not what most teams do. Again, the media chose not to discuss, but in my opinion it was a huge misjudgment by Scheyer.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

My guess is that you named your dog Kemba. Kemba, Bazz and Braylon are great dog names. I still can't believe that AK has a dog named Duke as he disclosed on the Jared podcast this week.

I did not but I know at least 3 people that did. May be forgetting some.

 

[navery12]

Congrats on your betting. Based on everything I can find and running through multiple LLMs, it looks like in more modern games the percentage of teams that foul in this situation is up from 11.7% in 2010 to an estimated 20-30% in recent times. Again, that means 70-80% of the time teams aren’t intentionally fouling. I’ve probably watched over 400 games this year and I also used to coach AAU, so I can tell you it’s not textbook and certainly not what most teams do. Again, the media chose not to discuss, but in my opinion it was a huge misjudgment by Scheyer.

Are you talking about the Boozer foul on Silas? I don't think that was an intentional foul that Scheyer wanted, I think Boozer was just too slow to stay in front of him

 

[Jay-Bone]

Congrats on your betting. Based on everything I can find and running through multiple LLMs, it looks like in more modern games the percentage of teams that foul in this situation is up from 11.7% in 2010 to an estimated 20-30% in recent times. Again, that means 70-80% of the time teams aren’t intentionally fouling. I’ve probably watched over 400 games this year and I also used to coach AAU, so I can tell you it’s not textbook and certainly not what most teams do. Again, the media chose not to discuss, but in my opinion it was a huge misjudgment by Scheyer.

Congrats on calming down and having a more measured response. That foul by Boozer, intentional or not, was not why they lost.

I was actually referring more to the MSU game where we didn't foul Fears up 65-62 and they were confused. There's a good chance I would not have covered -1.5 if they did. Thank God Kur Teng missed.

 

[3rdbass]

I saw some new stuff this morning I didn't catch on my previous viewings.

(All apologies to Tom as it's AI and Tracy would never use bad language, and I am steadfastly against using AI of actual people... but hey, it's Duke.)

I thought we wren't supposed to post AI Slop.