Duquesne Dukes (Round 2)

Preview

Date/Time: Wednesday March 2nd @ 7:00 PM ET at The Charles E. Smith Center in Washington, DC.
TV: NBC Sports Washington / ESPN+
2021-22 Projected Record: 7-22, 2-15 (14th in A10)

Offensive Efficiency:  277th (KenPom), 288th (Bart Torvik)
Defensive Efficiency: 269th (KenPom), 258th (Bart Torvik)
Offensive Shot Quality Rank: 282nd
Defensive Shot Quality Rank: 178th
Rim & 3 Rate: 294th
Pace: 261st (KenPom), 254th (Bart Torvik)

Projected Starting Rotation: (You can switch some of the guys off the bench with the starters, but it doesn't really matter. Dambrot is trying different combos at this point to see who plays the best together)

Amir 'Primo' Spears (Freshman; Hartford, CT) 10.8 PPG, 2.4 RPG, 2.8 APG, 1.2 SPG; 34% FG, 31% 3-PT, 75% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 15 points, 4 rebounds, 2 assists; 6-17 FG, 1-2 3-PT, 2-2 FT in 32 minutes.

Tyson Acuff (Freshman; Detroit, MI) 5.7 PPG, 2.8 RPG; 45% FG, 44% 3-PT, 74% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 7 points, 3 rebounds; 2-4 FG, 0-1 3-PT, 3-4 FT in 21 minutes.

Toby Okani (Freshman; Orange, NJ) 3.9 PPG, 3.9 RPG; 37% FG, 21% 3-PT, 74% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 2 points, 4 rebounds; 1-5 FG, 0-1 3-PT in 14 minutes.

Mounir Hima (Freshman; Niamey, Niger) 1.6 PPG, 2.6 RPG; 38% FG, 83% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 4 points, 6 rebounds, 3 blocks; 1-5 FG, 2-2 FT in 17 minutes.

Mike Bekelja (Freshman; Solon, OH) 1 PPG; 31% FG, 36% 3-PT, 75% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 0-1 FG, 0-1 3-PT in 11 minutes.

Projected Off the Bench Rotation:
Kevin Easley (Sophomore; Indianapolis, IN) 10.4 PPG, 6.4 RPG, 1.2 SPG; 39% FG, 35% 3-PT, 70% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 11 rebounds, 3 steals; 0-12 FG, 0-7 3-PT in 26 minutes. I doubt he goes scoreless another time.

Leon Ayers III (Junior; Troy, MI) 10 PPG, 4 RPG, 1.6 APG, 1.1 SPG; 37% FG, 27% 3-PT, 83% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 2 points, 4 rebounds; 1-4 FG, 0-1 3-PT, 0-1 FT in 21 minutes.

Jackie Johnson III (Freshman; Wichita, KS) 8.4 PPG, 1.4 RPG, 1.2 APG; 42% FG, 34% 3-PT, 82% FT
      Game 1 @ Duquesne: 4 points; 2-7 FG, 0-4 3-PT in 19 minutes.

Team Conference Stats (in A10 play):
Blocked Shots Per Game: 4.53 BPG (2nd in A10)
Team Offensive Rebounds Per Game: 10.7 RPG (2nd in A10)
Team FT Percentage: 72.7% (6th in A10)
Opponent FT Percentage: 71.3% (7th in A10)
Steals Per Game: 5.87 SPG (9th in A10)
Turnover Margin: -0.47 (9th in A10)
Scoring Defense: 72.4 PPG (11th in A10)
Combined Team Rebounds Per Game: 32.7 RPG (12th in A10)
3-Point FGs Made Per Game: 5.4 (13th in A10)
Combined Opponent Team Rebounds Per Game: 38.1 RPG (13th in A10)
Opponent Field Goal Percentage: 47.7% (13th in A10)
Rebounding Margin: -5.3 RPG (13th in A10)
Assist/Turnover Ratio: 0.75 (14th in A10)
Assists Per Game: 9.27 APG (14th in A10)
Opponent 3-Point FG Percentage: 39.6% (14th in A10)
Scoring Margin: -14.4 PPG (14th in A10)
Scoring Offense: 58 PPG (14th in A10)
Team 3-Point FG Percentage: 27.9% (14th in A10)
Team Defensive Rebounds Per Game: 22.1 RPG (14th in A10)
Team Field Goal Percentage: 38% (14th in A10)

You don't really need stats to come to the conclusion that the Dukes are not a very good team. It's an interesting discussion where they rank among the worst A10 teams of all time (or at least from the past 10 years). Fordham has had their share of bad teams of course, but they have always been good defensively that you could make the argument Duquesne is worse than those teams. Even Mojo's last team dug in a bit more defensively than Duquesne.

The Dukes are among the best in blocking shots and crashing the glass on the offensive end. Unfortunately, the season-ending surgery for Tre Williams (meniscus) makes Duquesne significantly less strong in these two areas as Williams was the best on the team in both categories (the former probably gets hit the hardest, although Hima has some potential). Easley can still provide the Dukes with a bit of offensive rebounding.

But that's about it. Duquesne ranks bottom 4 in 14 of the above 20 categories. The figures that stick out the most are scoring margin, field goal percantage, and assists per game. The Dukes have been outscored by over 7 PPG more than the 13th place team in the A10 in margin, UMass. Opponents shoot nearly 10% better from the field in conference play, and the difference gets even wider behind the three point line where A10 foes have shot 11.7% better than them. As a young team, the Dukes tend to score in isolation (as we saw in the first game). The average nearly three assists fewer than the 13th place team, Fordham. There are plenty of other bad statistics, but those three pop the most. Things have been real bad.

Individual Conference Stats (in A10 play):

Scoring:
None in the top 25.

Rebounding:
Kevin Easley - 6.3 rpg (T-18th in A10)

Field Goal Percentage:
None in the top 25.

3-PT Field Goal Percentage:
None in the top 25.

Free Throw Percentage:
None in the top 25.

3-PT Field Goals Per Game:
None in the top 25.

Assists:
Amir 'Primo' Spears - 2.9 apg (17th in A10)

Blocked Shots:
Tre Williams* - 1.9 bpg (6th in A10)
Mounir Hima - 1.2 bpg (T-11th in A10)
Toby Okani - 0.7 bpg (T-21st in A10)

Steals:
Kevin Easley - 1.7 spg (T-7th in A10)

Haslametrics Preview:

DUQUESNE IN POSSESSION:
The Duquesne offense appears to be at an analytical disadvantage when matched up against the G. Washington defense. The G. Washington defense is ranked #176 in Division I, while Duquesne comes in nationally at #282 on offense.

SHOT SELECTION: These two teams exhibit contrasting shot preferences on this end of the court. The Duquesne offense leans slightly toward putting up more outside shots, while the G. Washington defense conversely tends to give up a few more chances from the paint. Against the G. Washington defense, this site projects that the shot makeup of the Duquesne offense will be 29.8% three-pointers (7.4% below the D1 average), 34.7% mid-range jumpers (6.3% above the D1 average), and 35.5% near-proximity twos (1.1% above the D1 average).

SHOOTING PERCENTAGE: Duquesne has struggled to consistently convert field goals this year, ranking 325th nationally in overall field goal percentage. The G. Washington defense, meanwhile, has been unexceptional in defensive field goal percentage, rated 170th nationally in that category. The G. Washington defense has a sizeable advantage at all three levels on this end of the floor. This site expects Duquesne to shoot 27.6% from three (6.5% below the D1 average), 35.5% from the mid-range (3.4% below the D1 average), 54.3% from near-proximity locations (4.9% below the D1 average), and 39.8% overall (4.3% below the D1 average).

REBOUNDING: G. Washington may very well have a slight rebounding advantage at this end of the floor. Duquesne has the fingerprint of a team whose offensive rebounding abilities are a bit worse than the D1 norm. They are also somewhat below-average at turning second-chance opportunities into points (rated 250th nationally in second-chance conversion percentage). Their opponent in this matchup, G. Washington, is relatively mediocre when it comes to eliminating second-chance opportunities, and they likewise rate right around the average in defensive second-chance conversion percentage (ranked #155 in that category).

TURNOVERS: The G. Washington defense is likely to force a few takeaways on this end of the floor. On offense, Duquesne is a fairly average D1 team when it comes to ball-security. As for the opposition, the G. Washington D is neither aggressive nor conservative from a turnovers perspective. They are accomplished to a degree at converting turnovers into quick points on the scoreboard (nationally ranked 121st in that category).

FREE THROWS: Duquesne will probably acquire fewer free throw attempts than normal in this encounter. They're usually a team that won't see many opportunities at the charity stripe (329th in the country in free throw attempt rate), and they're a below-average unit at converting their foul shots (68.9%, 269th in the country). As for the opposition, the G. Washington D is pretty average in defensive free throw attempt rate, ranking 161st in the country in that category.

G. WASHINGTON IN POSSESSION:
The G. Washington offense appears to have a bit of an edge on the Duquesne defense at this end of the floor. G. Washington is currently 227th in the country in offensive efficiency, while Duquesne nationally comes in at #294 in defensive efficiency.

SHOT SELECTION: The shot preferences of these two teams contrast somewhat on this end of the floor. The G. Washington offense leans slightly toward putting up more outside shots, while the Duquesne defense conversely tends to give up a few more chances from the paint. Against the Duquesne defense, this site forecasts that the shot breakdown of the G. Washington offense will be 34.2% three-pointers (3.1% below the D1 average), 27.4% mid-range jumpers (1.0% below the D1 average), and 38.4% near-proximity twos (4.0% above the D1 average).

SHOOTING PERCENTAGE: G. Washington rates in the middle of the Division I pack when it comes to floor shooting and is currently ranked #221 in overall field goal conversion rate. Meanwhile, the Duquesne defense usually fails to disrupt opposing shooters, ranking 308th in the nation in defensive field goal percentage. On this end of the court, the G. Washington offense has a notable advantage in both three-point shooting and near-proximity shooting, while the Duquesne defense has the edge in mid-range shooting. We expect G. Washington to shoot 36.9% from behind the arc (2.8% above the D1 average), 37.8% from mid-range locations (1.2% below the D1 average), 61.8% from near-proximity (2.7% above the D1 average), and 46.7% overall (2.6% above the D1 average).

REBOUNDING: G. Washington should comfortably win the rebounding battle on this end. G. Washington appears to be a unit that is below-average by NCAA standards on the offensive glass. Conversely, they're actually considered to be somewhat above-average when gauging second-chance conversion percentage (nationally rated #108 in that department). Meanwhile, Duquesne has the identity of a team that will typically struggle to keep foes off the offensive glass, and they're likewise horrendous when rating defensive second-chance conversion percentage (ranked 342nd in D1 there).

TURNOVERS: Neither team has much of an advantage in this category. When in possession, G. Washington rates somewhat close to the Division I norm when it comes to protecting the basketball. Their rating for potential quick points allowed off steals needs improvement, as the team places 252nd in the nation in that category. Meanwhile, the Duquesne defense demonstrates fairly balanced pressure and shouldn't be considered overly conservative or aggressive.

FREE THROWS: There almost certainly won't be many chances at the foul line for the G. Washington offense here. They're typically a team that won't get to the charity stripe very often (nationally ranked #292 in free throw attempt rate), though they're more mediocre converting their shots from there (70.6%, ranked #210 in Division I). Meanwhile, the Duquesne D has been excellent at minimizing opponents' free throw opportunities, ranking 18th in the NCAA in defensive free throw attempt rate.

THE X-FACTORS:
PACE: The projected tempo for this contest is fairly average by D1 standards. G. Washington (130th in the NCAA in game pace) adopts an intermediate tempo, but Duquesne (279th) is more likely to pump the brakes.

AWAY/HOME COURT: Duquesne may fare better than expected here, as their performances away from home, on average, have been superior to their performances at home.

MOMENTUM: G. Washington appears to have a noteworthy momentum advantage. They come into this game playing above their norm (27th in the country in positive momentum), while Duquesne (fifth from the bottom) has been more inefficient than normal in recent contests.

CONSISTENCY: Duquesne is the more consistent team from an efficiency standpoint, but the difference is largely negligible.

Projected Score: GW 72, Duquesne 65. 79% chance to win (Bart Torvik). ESPN gives us a 78.2% chance to return to .500 in conference. We open as a 6 point home favorite on Senior Day.

Hoping to see less of a reliance on jump shots and we attack the rim consistently. Tre Williams is out for the rest of the year so there is really no one to be afraid of inside for the Dukes. We should aim for 25 free throws. Duquesne could of course shoot ridiculously well from the field, but if this game ends up being closer than it should be it will likely be because we took too many jump shots that didn't fall instead of getting better shots.

Hope all the seniors on the team see action as well. The fact that Maddie didn't see action in WBB's senior game was disappointing.
 

We should try to keep them in as long as possible.  I expect a win but this will be a closer game.  Last time out, Duquesne was playing its 3rd game in 5-6 nights so we caught them with tired legs.  I think we cover but by no means is this a blowout imo

Miles nails a 3.  He was SUPER excited when it went in.
Look at Miles Gally!!!

Reminds me why I am still a GW fan 25+ years later, through thick and thin.
 
Certainly isn't to whine all day every day about GW

Taking terrible shots and getting outworked on the defensive glass. Couple of nice pick 6s by Ricky keeping us in the game. 

7 steals already for Duquesne. What?!

They are pretty much playing  Joe B and Bishop with 3 and daring us to beat them with our other players.  So far it has worked for them

How bad is Duquesne?  We are up at the held by 2 playing really bad basketball with poor decision making

Was that the worst half GW has played in conference this season? Sure seemed like it. Talk about playing down to the opponent!

Now is the time to put these guys aways (mucked around letting them stay close for too long)

GW Alum Abroad wrote:

Now is the time to put these guys aways (mucked around letting them stay close for too long)

Or keep committing careless turnovers and allow them to stay in the game. I think the fact that we are playing so poorly and still winning (albeit narrowly) shows how bad Duquesne is