WOLFERETTI: How NC State took a 97th ranked defense to Top-10 levels with just 2 moves, and how they can try to replicate it this year

It’s no secret that everyone is frustrated about how this season has gone so far.

I know it’s only January 6th, but the Pack has lost every one of its competitive non-conference games and now they’re 1-2 in conference play.

And look, I’ve seen some of you on X telling the fanbase that they’re overreacting right now, arguing that it’s still early. And while that might be true, NC State is almost out of needle-moving matchups. And honestly, that’s not even why most of us are so frustrated.

We’re frustrated because over the past 6 years, we had only finished in the upper third of the ACC once, made the tournament twice, and hadn’t won a game in either of those appearances.

Then, after another subpar season, finishing 10th in the conference, something happened…

We started to win.

As we all know. We reeled off 5 straight wins, beating #9 Duke and #4 UNC to bring home the ACC Tournament Championship. Then we reeled off 4 more wins in the NCAA Tournament, beating Texas Tech, Oakland, #11 Marquette, and #9 Duke again, before falling to #2 ranked Purdue in the Final Four.

NC State hadn’t made a run like this in 40 years. Certainly not in the Keatts era.

But instead of constructing a roster based on the learning from that magical run or trying to replicate what worked, we are right back running the same system and making the same mistakes that have failed us over and over in the past.

Now, you can be someone who says “They just started to believe!” or “They caught lightning in a bottle!”, and you’d be correct. But you’d be doing yourself a disservice if you ignored the underlying metrics of it all. HOW did this happen? Did something change? Was it the style of play, a new lineup? Did the DJs just get hot? Or was it really just plain luck?

The eye test is one thing, but to really figure that out, we dove into the stats. And look, there are a million inputs that go into the final product and the eventual outcome, but if you want to find an overarching stat that does its best to collect those inputs, it’s Adjusted Offensive Efficiency and Adjusted Defensive Efficiency.

Adjusted offensive efficiency is the amount of points a team scores per 100 possessions, or trips down the floor with the basketball.

Adjusted defensive efficiency (AdjD): This is the amount of points a team allows per 100 possessions.

This is a stat that is calculated per game and is adjusted to take into consideration the strength of the opponent and whether they played at home, away or on a neutral court.

At the end of the day, this is one of the most stable stats out there if you want to look for true trends over the course of a season.

THE BASELINE

REGULAR SEASON
Adjusted Offensive Efficiency: 112.1
Adjusted Defensive Efficiency: 101

NC State wasn’t great all season on offense with a 112.1 AdjO. At the end of the regular season, they were ranked 65th in the nation.

Defensively they were bad. With an AdjD of 101 on the season, they ranked 97th overall.

These stats gave us a baseline of where NC State was overall at the end of the regular season. Their offense was pretty bad and their defense stunk. But you can’t just stop there. We wanted to look deeper. Where there any fluctuations over the course of the season?

When we dug in, lo and behold, the answer was yes…

IN-SEASON TRENDS

First, we looked at Adjusted Offensive Efficiency. For most of the season, it was up and down, with no real strong trends. But on Saturday, February 10th, against Wake Forest, NC State started a streak of 17 straight games with an AdjO of over 110.

We then looked at the Adjusted Defensive Efficiency numbers and we found this. NC State was consistently in the 90s and 100s all season long, but suddenly, in the 2nd round of the ACC Tournament, against Syracuse, they had a 9-game span where 5 of their games saw their AdjD in the 80s and 2 more in the low 90s…

MAPPING THE TRENDS TO TANGIBLE CHANGES

These two trends were the main outliers during the season and it was significant that the overlap of these two trends just so happened to be the magical post-season run that saw NC State turn from a 10th place ACC team to a National Contender. We were interested in trying to identify what caused these trends, and we looked through a lot of data before we saw these two tangible changes.

The trend on offense maps perfectly to the date that Kevin Keatts committed to expanding Mo Diarra’s role and solidified him as the team’s starting 4 going forward.

The trend on defense maps almost perfectly to the date that Kevin Keatts committed to abandoning the full court pressure defense and playing a more compact half court style of defense.

Let’s dig deeper on those….

THE MO DIARRA THEORY

Mo Diarra was a very versatile 6’10 wing who was one of the leading JUCO scorers just two years prior. He could drive it, shoot it, rebound it and score in the post. He was an active, do-it-all type guy. After JUCO he left for Missouri where he played a season for 2nd year coach, Dennis Gates. Gates had Kobe Brown, who was a versatile big man that liked to face up and attack. He could shoot the 3, attack off the dribble, or post you up. He was basically a more polished, stronger, version of Diarra. So Gates used Diarra as his big man. Posting him up and relegating him to the paint. Diarra didn’t thrive in this role and averaged just 3 points and 3 rebounds in 12 minutes per game. He then transferred to NC State.

Give Keatts credit here for seeing that misuse and bringing him to NC State as a potential 4-man, coupling with DJ Burns who certainly would spend his entire time in the paint. Keatts even brought in Middlebrooks to back up Burns, so it was clear that Keatts viewed Diarra as a stretch forward.

But this is where things get strange.

Keatts started Diarra in the first 2 games and played him over 20 minutes in both. State won big in both of those games and Mo went for 10 and 14 in the opener and then 9 and 11 in game 2. Then Diarra started the next game, but only played 14 minutes which seemed strange. State won big again. The next game he started and only logged 7 minutes, even more strange.  He started State’s first real competitive game vs. BYU, but only logged 13 minutes. NC State lost.

The next game, against Ole Miss, Diarra was removed from the starting lineup for Dennis Parker Jr. Diarra only played 5 minutes, and NC State was smoked by 20. Then inexplicably, Diarra didn’t start vs. Boston College, but he did log 35 minutes and went off for 8 points and 18 rebounds.

His minutes then went like this: 14, 5, 3, 1, 12, 3.

In mid-December we even wrote an article wondering what was up with Diarra’s usage. Keatts said he was banged up, but then how did he log 35 minutes vs. BC in the middle of a run where he was removed from the starting lineup and logging very few minutes?

I’d like to believe that there is information here that we’re not privy to, but Keatts has a history of strange minute management early in the season, so I’m really not sure what was going on and I won’t speculate any further.

Long story short, Diarra’s minutes started to tick up in January but he still only logged about 20 minutes or less in those games and it wasn’t really clear what is role was.

Then after losing 4 of 6 in late January/early February, Keatts seemingly committed fully to Mo Diarra. On Saturday, February 10th, Diarra logged 33 minutes. From that point on, Diarra was locked in as a major piece of the Wolfpack rotation.

Let’s look at the AdjO and AdjD stats prior to the Mo Diarra role increase and after and let’s just focus on the regular season for now so we don’t overlap with the defensive trend numbers. I want to isolate the Mo Diarra factor….

PRIOR TO DIARRA ROLE INCREASE (Regular Season)
Adjusted Offensive Efficiency: 109
Adjusted Defensive Efficiency: 99

AFTER DIARRA ROLE INCREASE (Regular Season)
Adjusted Offensive Efficiency: 121.8 (+12.8)
Adjusted Defensive Efficiency: 107.8 (-8.8)

From 2/10 forward, Diarra was locked into the 4 spot for Keatts, and from February 10th forward, NC State’s AdjO increased by almost 12.8 (which is a big jump). However, during that same span, the defense dropped off a cliff, falling by 8.8 (a big drop). But the most important takeaway is the fact that during this stretch of regular season, NC State was still losing.

So what is my takeaway on the Mo Diarra Theory?

I think when Keatts committed to Mo Diarra,  something changed offensively. He was shooting more 3s, he was attacking more on offense, he was all over the offensive boards, he just looked like a much more confident player overall. I think a confident Mo (who was knocking down 3s), alongside Burns, was a major factor. He could stretch the defense and allow Burns to work, but he was also there to clean up any misses.

At the same time, however, NC State was looking worse defensively.

I think all season, Mo struggled to play in the fast-paced, pressure defense where there were tons of blow-bys, tons of switching, and constant pressure on the help side defender.

During those final 8 regular season games, while NC State’s offense certainly hit its stride, their defense was going through its worst stretch, and Diarra’s role increase, for the time being, was not equating in wins. The Pack LOST 6 of 8 during this stretch to close the season.

Meanwhile….

THE HALF-COURT DEFENSE THEORY

NC State’s defense was awful all season long. Then suddenly it wasn’t.

We just presented the idea that while Mo Diarra’s role increase was a big part of rounding out the offense, it did not set off some kind of defensive revelation. In fact, it got worse.

So if we ignore Diarra for a moment, and isolate the sudden flip of the switch from a season’s worth of poor defense to suddenly putting up defensive efficiency ratings that rival a Top 10 team, can we find a tangible moment or change?

Well, if you’ve followed me or you watched any of the run last year, then you know what that change was.

NC State stopped pressing and stopped extending their defense to the half court line. With their only avenue to the postseason requiring 5 wins in 5 days, Keatts had to conserve energy, so he had his guys back off.

Don’t believe me? Here is Casey Morsell, who was a senior on last year’s team explaining that as the main reason for the sudden success in March…

“It takes time to figure out the recipe that works. At the right time we found a recipe of playing more in the half court. One thing we never succeeded in was the full court pressure. And when we decided to go back and guard at what we call the NBA 3 line, it worked for us and we were able to be high level defenders, which made teams struggle on the offensive end.” said Morsell on the ACC Network Telecast earlier this season.

That information maps almost perfectly with timing of NC State’s sudden shift in defensive metrics.

THE TAKEAWAY

REGULAR SEASON
Adjusted Offensive Efficiency: 112.1
Adjusted Defensive Efficiency: 101

POSTSEASON
Adjusted Offensive Efficiency: 116 (+3.9)
Adjusted Defensive Efficiency: 92.9 (+8.1)

I think for most people, it was apparent that our defense was much better during the post season, so looking at the metrics, it’s no surprise that the trend of stellar defensive numbers came during that time. It was also fact (based on the comments from Morsell) thatthe Pack had changed their defensive strategy, backing off of the full court pressure and focusing more on cutting off drives and playing disciplined position defense (something I’ve been publically begging for since 2021). This resulted in a Adjusted Defensive Efficiency of 92.9. Had NC State been able to replicate that during the regular season, they would have had the 6th best defense in the nation.

For those who argue that the offense was the reason for the run, the metrics really don’t back that up. The offense improved during the run, yes, but it HAD already improved starting in early February, and that didn’t equate to wins. 

I don’t really believe there is much magic to bottle. Sure, you don’t get this opportunity without a magical half court heave by Mike O’Connell, but we all realize there was luck involved there. However, to use that in order to look away from the stats that came during and after the run doesn’t make much sense (at least if you’re trying to learn from your experiences).

Keatts is a good talent evaluator and he had the horses. He had tough, quick, long defenders, who he motivates to give it their all on defense. But he was wearing them down and spreading them out too much. He wasn’t getting their full potential. Too many blow by on over aggressiveness. Too many missed help side rotations. Long, poor closeouts. Continuous chaos on defense. That is what got you a 10th place ACC finish and a poorly ranked defense.

Look, disciplined defense wins basketball games. That might not be a sexy statement in 2025, but it’s as true now as it was in the 1970s. And NC State found that out last season. Suddenly all of that toughness, length and quickness was bottled up into a half court bee hive. Teams couldn’t get in the paint, they couldn’t get off clean shots. And I believe NC State could likely come close to replicating their turnover numbers AND bring down opponent FG%’s by a good margin by abandoing the press and going to a half court defense THIS YEAR.

Why do I think that? Well, because last year they forced and average of 12.2 turnovers per game, and during the run, when they pulled back their defense, they still forced an average of 11.2 turnovers per game. So one less turnover per game. That’s what your trading for all of the blow bys, chaos on defense, and exhausing your guys with full court pressure.

At the end of the day, this was simple in my mind.

NC State started playing a smarter, more disciplined style of basketball. They changed up the defensive strategy and got elite results. I think the way Mo Diarra fits into this is that you unlocked his full potential by increasing his role and giving him confidence. (PS. had NC State replicated their postseason offense during the regular season they would have finished with the 32nd best offense).  But I also think the shift in defense paid dividends for Mo. I don’t think he fit well with the full court, extended pressure. So I believe the combination of the two trends and the area where the metrics overlap is the answer to how NC State was able to take a bottom dwelling ACC squad and turn them into a Final Four team.

CAN WE REPLICATE IT THIS SEASON?

Short answer. No, not totally, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try.

You don’t have the same level of talent on this team that you had last year and this roster wasn’t built for to play this style of basketball (although I believe it should have been.) That said, last year’s roster wasn’t built to play this style of basketball, but they shifted some pieces around and it ended up working.

This shift isn’t about turning this year’s team into a Final Four team. It isn’t about turning them into a team that is going to win the ACC Tournament. The shift this year would be about salvaging the season, finishing in the upper third of the ACC and giving yourself an outside shot at an at-large bid.

As we explained, the shift last year began when Mo Diarra took on a larger role. Well NC State doesn’t have 6’10, 215lb Mo Diarra anymore, but they do have 6’9, 215lb Ismael Diouf who was the number one overall pick in the Canadian Elite Basketball League and opted to come to college instead. Let the 4 spot be his to lose.

You have the same point guard.

You lost Casey Morsell, a high-level defender who actually struggled last year offensively, but you have Jayden Taylor who has a very similar profile.

You lost DJ Horne, but you have Marcus Hill. Now, this is where you start realizing that you really aren’t going to be able to fully replicate things. Hill isn’t Horne. He’s probably a little more slippery off the bounce, but he’s about 20% worse in 3pt percentage and that hurts NC State. But this is your biggest area of weakness, even bigger than losing Burns. There is no one on this roster than can fill Horne’s shoes.

Then you lost Burns. And yes, Burns is a massive loss because there were certain games that he just took over and won. But honestly, as we showcased earlier, the NC State offense didn’t see THAT much of a statistical shift during the run, it was the defense. And Burns was a definite liability on defense. In fact, there were games during the run that Middlebrooks was just as valuable as Burns. Middlebrooks had 12 and 6 and kind of saved the day vs. UVA. Then he went crazy for 21 points in the win over Texas Tech. Don’t get me wrong, Burns did damage those games too, but Middlebrooks does provide much better defense, physicality and rim protection than Burns was able to. So if you’re going to focus on defense, then I think Middlebrooks is actually an upgrade.

To do all of this, however, you need to slow things down. You can’t have two 6’9 guys on the floor and try to play full court defense or extend your half court defense out to the midcourt line. Just adding Mo Diarra to the mix didn’t equate to wins. Just like adding Ismael Diouf to the mix this year isn’t going to equate to wins. It was a meshing of going big with a versatile 6’9 4, plus compacting your defense so your larger lineup is playing within their comfort zone.

At the end of the day, there is no guarentee that this works and NC State starts winning games. However, if you want study your most successful run over the past 40 years, and you want to overlay it with the statistics, then this would be the most logical way to see if you could replicate it.

At this point, what can it hurt?