MBB: ACC Preseason Talk

[Olympic Fan]

Let me make the case for Syracuse. (I am a Syracuse grad, now Duke faculty and Cameron season ticket holder for 20 years. I love both programs.)

I think Syracuse will be the 2nd best team in the ACC this year.

You’ve probably read recently that Jim Boeheim says this is his best team since 2011-12. Why is that significant?

Because since 2011-12, Syracuse has been to 2 Final Fours (more than Duke’s 1), won 12 NCAA Tournament games (more than Duke’s 11) and won 75% of their NCAA Tournament games (more than Duke’s 73%).

So, when Boeheim says this team better than others in that period, that is significant.

The Cuse will big, deep and experienced. They are built for the 2-3 zone this year. One key addition is an athletic 7’2 shotblocker named Chuckwu. Historically, Boeheim’s zone has been devastating when they have a shotblocker. It really allows them to extend the zone to challenge the 3.

Tyler Lydon will be a 1st round draft pick this spring, and Tyus Battle may be as well. They've added a couple 5th year guards, one of whom was honorable mention All Big Ten.

You'll all remember Tyler Roberson (20 rebs at Cameron in February). He's back.

They appear to have it all. Boeheim thinks so.

I'm sorry, I don't get the love for Syracuse. Yes, they made a nice NCAA run last year, but don't forget -- they were 9-9 in the ACC, tied for ninth. They were very fortunate even get a bid last year.

And now Boeheim and his fans think they will be better?

Well, the Orange lost two fifth-year senior guards. They lost their three leading scorers and their three most prolific 3-point shooters.

What do they return?

Well, I very much like Tyler Lydon -- he's the only returning player with any solid numbers -- he scored 10.1 ppg, 6.3 rpg and hit 49 3-pointers as a freshman. He has the chance to be a very good ACC player.

Next is Tyler Roberson, a 6-8 senior who was so erratic as a junior that Boeheim kept threatening to bench him. He has DaJuan Coleman, a fifth-year senior who has been mediocre at best since suffering an injury two and a half years ago and Franklin Howard, a sophomore guard who averaged 1.6 ppg as a freshman.

That's not a great core, but let's look at the additions. Boeheim has added two four-star prospects in wing guard Tyus Battle and forward Taurean Thompson -- but while both are fine prospects and will, I'm sure, be quality players, how often do you see a four-star recruit come in and excel as a freshman in the ACC. It happens, but more often, such players take a while to make a big impact.

Then there are the three transfers. Paschal Chukwu is 7-2 and will, I'm sure be a good defensive player in the middle of the zone, but he was a nonentity in his season at Providence, unable to score or rebound. I'm sure he will be better, but how much better than Coleman in the middle?

Then there is John Gillon, a 6-0 transfer from Colorado State. He was a mediocre player on a mediocre team in a mediocre league ... and he's the guy Boeheim is talking about as his point guard.

Finally, there is Andrew White, who was a good -- not great -- player for Nebraska last year in the Big Ten. He made honorable mention all-conference as the best player on a team that didn't make the NCAA Tournament.

I actually think Lydon and White are pretty talented guys ... Roberson is a pretty average ACC player ... Battle and Thompson have potential. I'm not sure anybody else on the roster is worth getting excited about.

Don't get me wrong. I think Syracuse will be pretty good, but in the ACC this year, their talent level doesn't come close to half a dozen other teams. I certainly think NC State is better if Yurtseven is eligible. I thought Virginia Tech was better before Blackshear's injury (they were certainly better down the stretch last season, when Syracuse lost four of its final five ACC games).

Still, I love debating this stuff. That's why I was so excited to see this thread appear. Please don't let it be derailed by delusional fans of the Cheaters next door.

[duke043]

You make some excellent points, Olympics Fan, such as the fact that Syracuse was lucky to make the tournament last year. Boeheim pulled that Final Four out of his butt.

I disagree, however, on your assessment of several of the players (for instance, Tyler Roberson who you'd think Duke fans would respect), but we'll see. That's why I can't wait for the season to begin.

But here is my point: Boeheim thinks this will be his best team in years, better than teams that have been 1-seeds and teams that made the Final Four.

Say what you want about Boeheim, but the guy knows talent - better than you and I do. And he has never been one to unrealistically hype his team, or his players. In fact, as you know, he's the ultimate pessimist. When he makes a comment like he did about his expectations for this year's team, basketball people take notice. Or should.

[DukieTiger]

Speaking of Syracuse, one of the most intriguing things to me this year will be the possibility that a couple of the ACC's "football schools" can make the jump and possibly surpass Syracuse and Notre Dame- both of whom are getting mixed reviews in the preseason prognostication department. Both lost significant pieces and may be getting the benefit of the doubt for various reasons.

Which teams do I think have a chance to upset the order of things? Well, VT is the obvious pick wth a very good coach, a solid returning bunch, and the dramatic improvement they made last year. For them, it's likely a matter of whether they can do it when they're not the "surprise team". And I haven't seen their ACC schedule, so of course that factors as well.

The other team also returns quite a lot and adds some good pieces via transfer. They bring back probably the second best returnee in the conference after Grayson (sorry Wheat.) The problem for this team is that they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt right now. They love to lose to complete cupcakes early in the season, rattle off enough quality ACC wins to get in the bubble conversation, then completely blow it. But for reference, this team actually had a better league record than Syracuse last year. Unfortunately for Brad Brownell, the term "Clemsoning" might better apply to Hoops than Football these days.

VT and Clemson- two 10-8 ACC teams last year- both missed the tournament. Both should be better. ND (11-7) and Cuse (9-9) had more non-conference and tournament success, but lost major pieces and arguably will take a step back. If Tech and Clemson can be respectable in the non conference, I can see them surpassing two of the better programs in the conference, at least for next year.

[Indoor66]

Speaking of Syracuse, one of the most intriguing things to me this year will be the possibility that a couple of the ACC's "football schools" can make the jump and possibly surpass Syracuse and Notre Dame- both of whom are getting mixed reviews in the preseason prognostication department. Both lost significant pieces and may be getting the benefit of the doubt for various reasons.

Which teams do I think have a chance to upset the order of things? Well, VT is the obvious pick wth a very good coach, a solid returning bunch, and the dramatic improvement they made last year. For them, it's likely a matter of whether they can do it when they're not the "surprise team". And I haven't seen their ACC schedule, so of course that factors as well.

The other team also returns quite a lot and adds some good pieces via transfer. They bring back probably the second best returnee in the conference after Grayson (sorry Wheat.) The problem for this team is that they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt right now. They love to lose to complete cupcakes early in the season, rattle off enough quality ACC wins to get in the bubble conversation, then completely blow it. But for reference, this team actually had a better league record than Syracuse last year. Unfortunately for Brad Brownell, the term "Clemsoning" might better apply to Hoops than Football these days.

VT and Clemson- two 10-8 ACC teams last year- both missed the tournament. Both should be better. ND (11-7) and Cuse (9-9) had more non-conference and tournament success, but lost major pieces and arguably will take a step back. If Tech and Clemson can be respectable in the non conference, I can see them surpassing two of the better programs in the conference, at least for next year.

Notre Dame is a football school?

[DukieTiger]

Notre Dame is a football school?

Ha- that thought didn't even occur to me.

[OldPhiKap]

Notre Dame is a football school?

Notre Dame is in the ACC?

[flyingdutchdevil]

On Grayson...he's getting the preseason media hype on NPOY, but I have some doubts on that. Don't get me wrong, he's very good and probably 1st team All ACC because he can fill it up in a hurry and everybody loves a shooter/scorer. But he has room to be a more complete player. If he dedicates himself this season to being a better distributor and defender, works at screening harder for his teammates and continues to improve on his ball handling, he certainly can be NPOY.
Criticism of a potential NPOY's game is a little like pointing out a flaw on a super model, I know. And I don't use words like "dominating scorer" lightly either, Grayson can play and I like his game.

He's very good? I'd argue that Joel Berry is very good. Amile Jefferson is very good. Grayson? He's arguably the top returning player in all of college basketball (and most certainly the ACC)! There are plenty of articles out there now about how Grayson represents what many love about college ball: upperclassmen with proven star potential (think Redick, Hield, and...sigh...Hansbrough).

Also, probabaly 1st team All ACC? He was 1st team All-ACC in the 2015-16 season. I'd say it's a near certainty minus injury or a complete breakdown of this Duke team that Grayson isn't 1st team All-ACC. I assume you, and many of your UNC brethren, considered Paige a lock for 1st team All-ACC during Paige's junior year after he secured 1st team honors during his sophomore year. I think that would be a smart assumption. However, injuries got the best of Paige. Without them, he's probably 1st team again. Same story with Grayson.

I agree Grayson isn't a complete player, and his defense is pretty porous. But he's the most coveted player in college basketball (don't believe me? Check this out: http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...on-their-team/) and he's a proven commodity, which seems to be an important criteria for you.

Lastly, I agree that UNC will be good. Their talent level is good, but there experience is second-to-none. And I think that's what makes them dangerous. I really like Joel Berry and think that Jackson can have a breakout year, but I''m not sold on Hicks as All-ACC nor am I will be put much equity into Nate-Britt-Preseason-ACC-Player-of-the-Year, Meeks, or Pinson.

[whereinthehellami]

UNC - I have mixed feelings on them and tend to think they are overrated. I like Berry and Hicks. Both have potential to be 1st team All-ACC. After that I just see role players, including Jackson who's shooting got worse last year across the board, he regressed. I think there are some depth issues, that is going to effect the way UNC likes to play and will factor in some losses. My bold prediction is that UNC does not finish in the top 3 in the ACC.

VT – Prior to Blackshear’s injury, VT was going to be my bold prediction to finish in the top 3 in the ACC. But that is a big loss. I still think this scrappy team of guards/forwards (Allen 6-1 SR, Robinson 6-1 SO, Bibbs 6-5 JR, Hill 6-5 JR, Clarke 6-6 SO, Outlaw 6-6 JR, and LeDay 6-7 SR) will see an improvement in their record from last year (20-15) and be an NCAA team.

UVA – I like UVA a lot on paper. Sure they lost a lot from last year but I think Bennett still has the right pieces for his system. I think their record will be worse than last year but that they will be dangerous and in contention for spots 2-5 in the ACC. Perrantes and maybe Nichols will be in the mix for 1st team All-ACC. I think it might take them a bit to get an identity and find their offensive groove but once they do, they will start to roll.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

" I still think Duke has a great chance this year, but there are no givens."
Those of us old enough to remember the first Final Four against Kentucky sure hope there ARE no "givens".
Love, Ima

[sagegrouse]

" I still think Duke has a great chance this year, but there are no givens."
Those of us old enough to remember the first Final Four against Kentucky sure hope there ARE no "givens".
Love, Ima

The first Final Four against Kentucky was the night in 1966 that Bob Verga got sick. The Jack Givens performance was in the first and only national championship game against Kentucky.

[Troublemaker]

Have you seen any of Dukes freshmen play or are you basing your opinions on the Internet * rating?
I know I follow CBB as close as anyone and I don't get that opportunity. Much less see them play against bigger, stronger, more experienced college players.

One thing to keep in mind is that whether we're dealing with freshmen or returnees, we're still making projections for their performance. There are no guarantees no matter what. For example, you've talked up Isaiah Hicks as possibly being a stud performer this season. Well, he averaged 9 points and 5 rebounds his junior year. You're projecting that he can cut down his fouls and be very efficient in a much larger role. I think you're probably going to be right about him, but it's still a risky projection. At Duke, based on Coach K's track record of getting great performance from OADs, I think many of us actually feel projecting Jayson Tatum to be a stud player is actually less risky a projection.

Other ACC contenders besides UNC who need key players to make a jump:

Louisville -- Donovan Mitchell. Mitchell showed a lot of promise as a freshman, but now they need him to be their best player and one of the best in the ACC.

Virginia -- Austin Nichols. He was good at Memphis -- a 13 and 6 guy -- but they probably need him to produce 18 points and 8 rebounds a game to truly threaten.

Syracuse -- Tyler Lydon. Ditto here. 10 and 6 last year, but now he needs to be one of the ACC's best.

[grad_devil]

<snip>
I agree Grayson isn't a complete player, and his defense is pretty porous. But he's the most coveted player in college basketball (don't believe me? Check this out: http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...on-their-team/) and he's a proven commodity, which seems to be an important criteria for you.
</snip>

From that URL, there are three (3) Duke players in the top 16, UNC-CH? Zero. The exact prompt is

"If you could pick any Division I player and put him on your team this season, which player would you pick?"

School breakdown:

• 3 - Duke
• 2 - Kansas
• 2 - Villanova
• 1 - California
• 1 - Clemson
• 1 - Iowa State
• 1 - Kentucky
• 1 - Maryland
• 1 - NCSU
• 1 - Oregon
• 1 - Washington
• 1 - Wisconsin

So, I guess I'm saying that other coaches don't value UNC-CH's experienced players over Duke's talent - event the unproven talent.

Just my $0.01,

[superdave]

From that URL, there are three (3) Duke players in the top 16, UNC-CH? Zero. The exact prompt is

School breakdown:

• 3 - Duke
• 2 - Kansas
• 2 - Villanova
• 1 - California
• 1 - Clemson
• 1 - Iowa State
• 1 - Kentucky
• 1 - Maryland
• 1 - NCSU
• 1 - Oregon
• 1 - Washington
• 1 - Wisconsin

So, I guess I'm saying that other coaches don't value UNC-CH's experienced players over Duke's talent - event the unproven talent.

Just my $0.01,

I am just praying that Harry Giles is full speed by the New Year. If we miss out on a great season from him the same way we missed out on Kyrie, I will be bummed. Hope that kid gets healthy.

[Troublemaker]

Looking at Duke and heels schedules re away ACC games this year.

Both have UVA, Wake, Miami.
Obviously the home and home with each other - a wash

Duke - VaT, FSU, Louisville, ND, Syracuse
UNC - GaT, Clemson, BC, NCSU, Pitt.

Looks to me that Duke's is tougher, at least pre-season on paper. Based on Jeff Goodman's thoughts, UNC has 2 of the 3 bottom feeders on the road. Although nothing is ever a true breather on the road in ACC, much rather play those two on the road this year than VaT in Blacksburg or up in Syracuse.


Also, a note on Isaiah Hicks - have talked with his high school coach (Hicks is from my town) who has been impressed with his weight and strengths gains this past year. Not mentioned by Wheat, though, is Hicks' difficulty staying on court with fouls. Last season, he averaged 7 fouls per 40 minutes. If he can stay out of foul trouble, he will be a load to handle.

Regarding the whole Duke vs UNC thing (how predictable was it that this thread would be sidetracked by that?!?!), I think you must look at schedules. UNC has a truly brutal, murderous stretch of games. Check out the end of Carolina's season.

at Duke
at NCST
vs. Virginia
vs. Louisville
at Pitt
at Virginia
vs. Duke

That is the toughest 7 game stretch of any team in the country, bar none! The Heels could play well in every one of those games and go 2-5. So, if Carolina seems to have a lead in the standings as the calendar turns from Jan to Feb, don't forget that the Heels must run a gauntlet at the end and I'll be stunned if they don't come out of it with at least 3 losses... probably more.

-Jason "the top tier team with the easiest ACC schedule is Louisville -- they only play Duke and UNC once each" Evans

You guys motivated me to start looking at the ACC schedule a bit. (A link with all the schedules on one page, for anyone else who wants to poke around)

Most interesting tidbit so far? Pitt has to play the top tier teams 9 times (using Goodman's five "lock" teams as the top tier). Every other ACC team only has to play the top tier 5 or 6 times. For example, Duke has to play the top tier 5 times, albeit 4 are on the road (UNC, @UNC, @UVA, @Lville, @Cuse). So yeah, I take back what I said in the early posts about Pitt being a "likely" tournament team. They're now a "maybe" to me.

Also, Jason, I think Syracuse edges out Louisville for easiest schedule among the top tier. (Putting aside for a second whether Syracuse belongs as a top tier team.) Louisville plays the top tier 6 times (3 home, 3 road) and Cuse plays them 5 times (3 home, 2 road). (They both only play Duke and UNC once.) Louisville only has 3 games against the bottom-tier of Wake-GaTech-BC, and Syracuse has 5 games against them.

And getting back to Duke for a sec. Those 4 road games against the top-tier stand out. UNC and Cuse have 2 such games. Louisville and UVA have 3 such games.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

You guys motivated me to start looking at the ACC schedule a bit. (A link with all the schedules on one page, for anyone else who wants to poke around)

Most interesting tidbit so far? Pitt has to play the top tier teams 9 times (using Goodman's five "lock" teams as the top tier). Every other ACC team only has to play the top tier 5 or 6 times. For example, Duke has to play the top tier 5 times, albeit 4 are on the road (UNC, @UNC, @UVA, @Lville, @Cuse). So yeah, I take back what I said in the early posts about Pitt being a "likely" tournament team. They're now a "maybe" to me.

Also, Jason, I think Syracuse edges out Louisville for easiest schedule among the top tier. (Putting aside for a second whether Syracuse belongs as a top tier team.) Louisville plays the top tier 6 times (3 home, 3 road) and Cuse plays them 5 times (3 home, 2 road). Louisville only has 3 games against the bottom-tier of Wake-GaTech-BC, and Syracuse has 5 games against them.

And getting back to Duke for a sec. Those 4 road games against the top-tier stand out. UNC and Cuse have 2 such games. Louisville and UVA have 3 such games.

To be fair, when you are a "top tier team" you necessarily have one less top tier opponent.

Still, tough road for Pitt.

[Troublemaker]

To be fair, when you are a "top tier team" you necessarily have one less top tier opponent.

Still, tough road for Pitt.

Right, but it still worked out that EVERY ACC team except Pitt plays 5 or 6 games against that tier, and Pitt plays 9 games against them. That's just really bad scheduling luck, if the top tier ends up playing like the top tier.

[JasonEvans]

You guys motivated me to start looking at the ACC schedule a bit. (A link with all the schedules on one page, for anyone else who wants to poke around)

Most interesting tidbit so far? Pitt has to play the top tier teams 9 times (using Goodman's five "lock" teams as the top tier). Every other ACC team only has to play the top tier 5 or 6 times. For example, Duke has to play the top tier 5 times, albeit 4 are on the road (UNC, @UNC, @UVA, @Lville, @Cuse). So yeah, I take back what I said in the early posts about Pitt being a "likely" tournament team. They're now a "maybe" to me.

Also, Jason, I think Syracuse edges out Louisville for easiest schedule among the top tier. (Putting aside for a second whether Syracuse belongs as a top tier team.) Louisville plays the top tier 6 times (3 home, 3 road) and Cuse plays them 5 times (3 home, 2 road). (They both only play Duke and UNC once.) Louisville only has 3 games against the bottom-tier of Wake-GaTech-BC, and Syracuse has 5 games against them.

And getting back to Duke for a sec. Those 4 road games against the top-tier stand out. UNC and Cuse have 2 such games. Louisville and UVA have 3 such games.

I think a pretty solid case can be made that FSU, NCSt, and Va Tech are every bit as likely to finish in the top 5 in the conference as Syracuse is. I think placing Syracuse in the same tier as Duke, UNC, UVA, and Louisville is flawed methodology.

That said, your analysis is strong and you are right about Pitt having a murderous schedule this season. good stuff, my Troubled friend.

-Jason "do you feel like going back and re-doing your analysis without Syracuse?" Evans

[Troublemaker]

I think a pretty solid case can be made that FSU, NCSt, and Va Tech are every bit as likely to finish in the top 5 in the conference as Syracuse is. I think placing Syracuse in the same tier as Duke, UNC, UVA, and Louisville is flawed methodology.

That said, your analysis is strong and you are right about Pitt having a murderous schedule this season. good stuff, my Troubled friend.

-Jason "do you feel like going back and re-doing your analysis without Syracuse?" Evans

Yes, I think I am interested.

I think I'm going to use 3 tiers to analyze the schedules:
- Top Tier - Duke, UNC, Louisville, UVA
- Bottom Tier - Wake, GaTech, BC
- Middle Tier - the remaining 8 teams

So basically I'm going to collapse Goodman's "Likely" teams and "Maybe" teams into one Middle Tier. Because I feel like there's more "eye of the beholder" differences in opinion about the Middle Tier. For example, I'm bullish on VaTech but I could see someone reasonably arguing, "The Hokies were 20-15 last season and have only made one NCAAT appearance in the past 20 years, and now they're a "likely" NCAA tournament team?"

[Spanarkel]

FWIW, Frank Jackson was named to the Cousy Award Watch List(20 players in all, 4 other freshman, including Dennis Smith of NCS). I think it's a favorable sign of respect for his potential.

[newclasspack]

I can Def. Do a Breakdown of State if anyone is interested. i find it polite to ask first before i just go posting stuff on other teams boards but i am def. excited about this season.