Austin Rivers and 1st Team All-ACC

[CDu]

Its certainly going to be an interesting selection. Statistically speaking, I'd have a hard time putting Rivers in ahead of Barnes. Barnes is outproducing Rivers in points, rebouns, steals, and blocks despite playing fewer minutes per game. He's got a better FG%, 3pt FG%, and FT%. He's turning the ball over less than Rivers. The only things in Rivers' favor right now seem to be assists and the game winner. If UNC wins this weekend and Barnes plays well, I think it'll be tough to argue that Rivers should be 1st team over him.

I think Zeller and Scott are locks. I think

I'm not sure where the Michael Snaer talk is coming from for 1st team. He's FSU's leading scorer, but he doesn't have a great FG% and he doesn't bring a ton to the table outside of that. And now that FSU is at best going to be #3 in the conference, there's no issue with the top team not having a 1st team guy.

If I had to guess now, I'd say the first team would be:
Zeller
Henson
Scott
Barnes
Stoglin/Marshall/Rivers

With the second team being
Stoglin/Marshall/Rivers
Stoglin/Marshall/Rivers
Leslie
Harris
Green/Brown/Mason

Third team being:
Green/Brown/Mason
Green/Brown/Mason
McKie
Snaer
James/Kadji

[Duvall]

I'm not sure where the Michael Snaer talk is coming from for 1st team. He's FSU's leading scorer, but he doesn't have a great FG% and he doesn't bring a ton to the table outside of that. And now that FSU is at best going to be #3 in the conference, there's no issue with the top team not having a 1st team guy.

My guess is that people are contrasting Snaer's defensive contributions to Barnes' limited efforts in that area.

[Des Esseintes]

Its certainly going to be an interesting selection. Statistically speaking, I'd have a hard time putting Rivers in ahead of Barnes. Barnes is outproducing Rivers in points, rebouns, steals, and blocks despite playing fewer minutes per game. He's got a better FG%, 3pt FG%, and FT%. He's turning the ball over less than Rivers. The only things in Rivers' favor right now seem to be assists and the game winner. If UNC wins this weekend and Barnes plays well, I think it'll be tough to argue that Rivers should be 1st team over him.

I agree. It may be an artifact of Barnes scuffling earlier in the season, but I think people here are sleeping on his numbers a bit. He's leading Carolina in scoring with 18ppg, getting 5 boards, shooting 40% from deep, and for all the talk of how he won't put the ball on the floor he's going to the line 5 times a game. And UNC only has two losses, so it's hard to argue the numbers are empty. Seems like a strong argument for first team to me. It is, of course, fair to say that both this season and last his hype have exceeded his play. That hardly means his play has been poor, though. It's been a notch below conference player of the year levels. There is little shame in falling short of that mark at age 19.

Some other ways in which he's conducted himself--there might be some shame there. But that's the subject of a different thread...

[Wander]

Its certainly going to be an interesting selection. Statistically speaking, I'd have a hard time putting Rivers in ahead of Barnes. Barnes is outproducing Rivers in points, rebouns, steals, and blocks despite playing fewer minutes per game. He's got a better FG%, 3pt FG%, and FT%. He's turning the ball over less than Rivers. The only things in Rivers' favor right now seem to be assists and the game winner. If UNC wins this weekend and Barnes plays well, I think it'll be tough to argue that Rivers should be 1st team over him.

Actually, in ACC games, Rivers has better percentages than Barnes (both from three and general FG%, not sure about free throws). If Rivers has a good game against Carolina on Saturday and we win the game, I think that's enough to put him on 1st team ahead of Barnes.

[devilsadvocate85]

This is meant to be a leading question -- What does it say about the respective coaches when you have two teams tied for the conference lead and one following closely behind; one of those teams has 3 serious contenders (two "locks") for the all-conference first team (including the likely conference POY) and the other two teams only have one player getting serious consideration for first team? Is it necessary to say that I love our coach?

[slower]

Actually, in ACC games, Rivers has better percentages than Barnes (both from three and general FG%, not sure about free throws). If Rivers has a good game against Carolina on Saturday and we win the game, I think that's enough to put him on 1st team ahead of Barnes.

Yeah, but it seems to me that BOTH Barnes and Rivers will make First Team, along with Scott and Zeller and probably Henson. Are the cases strong enough for Stoglin or Snaer (or Marshall, although I just can't see four Holes making First Team, no matter how many lapdogs they have in the media) to supplant any of Barnes, Henson or Rivers?

Scott and Zeller are locks, as is Barnes, in MY mind. So, it's Rivers, Henson, Marshall, Snaer and Stoglin fighting for the other two spots? Barring any last-week craziness.

And somebody please refresh my memory - do tournament games count in the calculations?

[CDu]

Actually, in ACC games, Rivers has better percentages than Barnes (both from three and general FG%, not sure about free throws). If Rivers has a good game against Carolina on Saturday and we win the game, I think that's enough to put him on 1st team ahead of Barnes.

That's a fair point on the in-conference percentages, though I wonder how much that will be taken into consideration. I do agree that Rivers will make 1st team if we beat UNC and he plays well. I don't know that I agree that it will be replacing Barnes, though.

[CDu]

My guess is that people are contrasting Snaer's defensive contributions to Barnes' limited efforts in that area.

I disagree here. I don't know that Snaer is any better a defender than Barnes (who I actually think is pretty decent defensively). Snaer plays on a team with a fantastic defense (#9 nationally according to Pomeroy). But UNC's defense is also terrific (#13 nationally). Neither player is the lynchpin on those defenses (that would be Henson and James) but I'd say both are regarded as solid defensively. There's no doubt in my mind that Barnes is ahead of Snaer on the All-ACC list.

[luvdahops]

That's a fair point on the in-conference percentages, though I wonder how much that will be taken into consideration. I do agree that Rivers will make 1st team if we beat UNC and he plays well. I don't know that I agree that it will be replacing Barnes, though.

My understanding is that in-conference stats tend to be assigned more weight than overall stats, and that team success and an individual's perceived contributions to / impact on team success are also given major consideration. I would give Rivers the edge on the last of these, and for now at least on the first as well. Overall team success is, of course, still TBD.

While I agree that Barnes will likely make it, I think you may underestimate the sense among ACC beat writers that Barnes has become a more one-dimensional player and has regressed on defense this year. I would be shocked if he gets more votes than either Zeller or Henson, who are both very strong two-way players.

[jimsumner]

I disagree here. I don't know that Snaer is any better a defender than Barnes (who I actually think is pretty decent defensively). Snaer plays on a team with a fantastic defense (#9 nationally according to Pomeroy). But UNC's defense is also terrific (#13 nationally). Neither player is the lynchpin on those defenses (that would be Henson and James) but I'd say both are regarded as solid defensively. There's no doubt in my mind that Barnes is ahead of Snaer on the All-ACC list.

Michael Snaer is considered the best defensive perimeter player in the ACC. He's also the leading scorer on a nationally-ranked team that likely will finish third in the ACC. And he has two signature, buzzer-beaters.

That's an All-ACC resume. IMO.

[CDu]

Michael Snaer is considered the best defensive perimeter player in the ACC. He's also the leading scorer on a nationally-ranked team that likely will finish third in the ACC. And he has two signature, buzzer-beaters.

That's an All-ACC resume. IMO.

Fair enough. I'll be shocked if Snaer is 1st team All-ACC over Barnes.

[jimsumner]

Fair enough. I'll be shocked if Snaer is 1st team All-ACC over Barnes.

I'm not sure they are mutually exclusive. What's wrong with a Zeller-Scott-Rivers-Barnes-Snaer first team?

That leaves Stoglin off. But there are precedents for leaving the leading scorer off the first team and the guy's coach has called him out on more than one occasion.

[CDu]

I'm not sure they are mutually exclusive. What's wrong with a Zeller-Scott-Rivers-Barnes-Snaer first team?

That leaves Stoglin off. But there are precedents for leaving the leading scorer off the first team and the guy's coach has called him out on more than one occasion.

It also leaves Henson off. I'd suspect that the DPoY winner and conference leader in rebounds and #2 in blocks who plays on the #1 or #2 team in the ACC would go ahead both Snaer and Stoglin.

[jimsumner]

It also leaves Henson off. I'd suspect that the DPoY winner and conference leader in rebounds and #2 in blocks who plays on the #1 or #2 team in the ACC would go ahead both Snaer and Stoglin.

I suspect not everyone would agree with putting three UNC players on the first team and no FSU players on the first team.

[CDu]

It also leaves Henson off. I'd suspect that the DPoY winner and conference leader in rebounds and #2 in blocks who plays on the #1 or #2 team in the ACC would go ahead both Snaer and Stoglin.

I suspect not everyone would agree with putting three UNC players on the first team and no FSU players on the first team.

That may be the case. However, this year it appears that three players from UNC are going to make it and no players from FSU are. And it makes sense. UNC is a better team than FSU, and more importantly they are much more reliant on their top 4 players than FSU is. FSU is a team that wins due to team defense and balance. They don't have any elite scorers (Snaer is closest, but he's far less efficient than some of the other elite scorers in the conference). I'm guessing we can find instances in which the #3 team in the conference didn't have a first team All-ACC performer.

If Snaer somehow makes it on the first team and one of Henson or Barnes doesn't, I'll be very surprised and very willing to eat crow. But I don't suspect that will happen.

[sagegrouse]

That may be the case. However, this year it appears that three players from UNC are going to make it and no players from FSU are. And it makes sense. UNC is a better team than FSU, and more importantly they are much more reliant on their top 4 players than FSU is. FSU is a team that wins due to team defense and balance. They don't have any elite scorers (Snaer is closest, but he's far less efficient than some of the other elite scorers in the conference). I'm guessing we can find instances in which the #3 team in the conference didn't have a first team All-ACC performer.

If Snaer somehow makes it on the first team and one of Henson or Barnes doesn't, I'll be very surprised and very willing to eat crow. But I don't suspect that will happen.

CDu: Your comments are perspicacious (I have no idea what that means), but Sumner and I think that the voting process will penalize some of the UNC players.

Many voters will be reluctant to put three players from one team on a first-team ballot. So those who vote for two UNC players will spread them over four players. Similarly for those who vote for three. In 2003, first team All-ACC Dukies JWill, Boozer and Dunleavy were the only Duke players receiving votes.

Moreover, only one Duke, UVa and FSU player will receive first-team support, and those teams are having good seasons. I predict only scattered first-team support for others (Stoglin (Md) and C.J. Leslie (State)). Therefore, there are seven candidates for five positions. I personally don't think UNC will get three of those.

But maybe you are right, and fortunately we only have to wait a week to find out --

sagegrouse

[Duvall]

That may be the case. However, this year it appears that three players from UNC are going to make it and no players from FSU are. And it makes sense. UNC is a better team than FSU, and more importantly they are much more reliant on their top 4 players than FSU is. FSU is a team that wins due to team defense and balance. They don't have any elite scorers (Snaer is closest, but he's far less efficient than some of the other elite scorers in the conference).

Efficient elite scorers? I thought we were talking about Harrison Barnes.

Snaer in conference play.
Barnes in conference play.

[CDu]

Efficient elite scorers? I thought we were talking about Harrison Barnes.

Snaer in conference play.
Barnes in conference play.

I based that on overall play, in which Barnes is averaging a higher points per FGA, higher FG%, and higher 3pt% than Snaer. And he goes to the line more frequently than Snaer. I know that the writers are supposed to base it solely on ACC play. But I suspect that they let full-season play bias them. There's really no point in nitpicking each other on this, as none of us (to my knowledge) are voters. I think both Barnes and Henson are more likely to make 1st team than Snaer. Feel free to think differently on this.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

I suspect not everyone would agree with putting three UNC players on the first team and no FSU players on the first team.

I thought All-ACC was supposed to be an individual acheivement award based on the caliber of play?

It shouldn't matter what team a player is on, (in a perfect world), should it?

The five best performing players to me are clearly Zeller,Scott,Henson,Rivers,Barnes.

My second five would be Snaer, Marshall, Stoglin,Leslie and Brown.

[jimsumner]

I thought All-ACC was supposed to be an individual acheivement award based on the caliber of play?

It shouldn't matter what team a player is on, (in a perfect world), should it?

The five best performing players to me are clearly Zeller,Scott,Henson,Rivers,Barnes.

My second five would be Snaer, Marshall, Stoglin,Leslie and Brown.

Would you argue that team success shouldn't be a factor?