PDA

View Full Version : Discuss other ACC teams 2009-2010



ACCBBallFan
07-26-2009, 03:37 PM
I'm enjoying the recent direction of this thread. It now looks like the best discussions of UNC basketball can be found at DBR.

Actually, I'm surprised DBR members don't go into depth about the other ACC teams more often. We may not be as emotionally invested, but we watch enough ACC basketball each season to have informed opinions.

Moderators: any chance each of the other 11 teams gets its own thread this fall?N&O just published their reviews and I will add my thoughts below

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1615219.html

There are four separate links with 3 ACC teams each if you modify this link slightly

http://blogs.newsobserver.com/accnow/summer-hoops-preview-part-ii-0

When I sum all the predictions I have seen (skeewed by mostly from Duke boards):

139 01 Duke
134 02 UNC

99 03 FSU
97 04 GA Tech

89 05 Clemson
87 06 MD
84 07 BC

65 08 Wake
50 09 VA Tech

42 10 Miami
30 11 UVA
21 12 NC St

UNC's biggest question mark is PG but there are only a half dozen guys rated higher than Drew II. (see below). If there is such a thing, there is some concern that Heels may be too strong at the power positions. That would be if Henson cannot guard 3’s. Not to worry though, Ginyard is best in ACC at that, if Graves can’t either. Then either or both of the 4*’s Strickland and MacDonald would have to step up at combo guard slot to provide an outside presence.

Regardless of where Marcus is classified, he guards the best perimeter guys anyway:

Delaney, Vasquez, Singler or Scheyer, Landesberg, Shumpert, Singleton, Stitt or Johnson, Dews or Hurdle, LW Williams or Ish Smith, and whoever that is for NC State.

Similarly Duke's biggest weakness is Center but there are only a half dozen guys rated higher than Zoubek/Miles, and most are not speed merchants. They rank pretty low on PF's too but have a lot of options with Thomas, the Plumlees and Kelly and every ACC team has someone pretty good or better or better than pretty good at PF (not all better than Duke's trio).

GA Tech needs for its 4* PG Udolfia or Mo Miller to fare as well as Drew II. The jackets have Peacock to back up Lawal/Favors, have Shumpert to play SG instead of PG where he struggled with turnovers, D'Andre Bell returns from red-shirt to play SF. They also have a brutal unbalanced ACC Schedule having to play UNC, Duke, Clemson, FSU and Wake home and home.

Clemson's two biggest needs are for Noel Johnson to be able to replace Ogelsby @ SG and for Milton Jennings to be able to play SF aside Sykes/Grant and Trevor Booker and Stitt in a different set than they had with KC Rivers.

BC has the same need as UNC and GA Tech (and FSU), Point Guard, and has to hope Reggie Jackson can somewhat make up for loss of Tyrese Rice. They are basically same team as least year without their leader.

Wake needs their 4* Ari Stewart to come through at SF and for Chas MacFarland to be consistent and stay out of foul trouble, as opposed to consistently get into foul trouble, They lack depth but have Ish Smith, LD Williams, Aminu and MacFarland, and some potential backup centers in Woods and Walker.

FSU, like UNC, GA Tech and BC needs their PG to play well enough to somewhat make up for loss of Toney Douglas. They also need Ryan Reid to play well enough @ PF than they can plays Chris Singleton at SF, 7-foot Solomon Alabi at center, rookie 5* Snaer @ SG/SF. So they like Duke have to play SG JUCO x-fer Kitchen or Snaer at PG if either has those skills or else go with light weights Dulkys and Loucks.

Miami is hard to figure out. They seem covered at every position but could not win with the same guys and McClinton last year. Collins, Dews, Hurdle, McGowan, Dequan Jones has to live up to his 5* rating from last year, Rios and Degand Scott a new 5. May not have a go to guy.

VA Tech has some quality but lacks depth. Malcolm Delaney and Jeff Allen are consistent. J.T. Thompson, and Dorenzo Hudson have some potential and they are hurting at center and depend on Raines C-9 4* or Davila and no bench. Seth plays all his guys 30 plus minutes anyway. The alternate would be to play Allen at center, Thompson @SF and Tyrell Bell @ SF.

Maryland is basically same team as last year without Dave Neal the giant 6'7 260 who roamed the perimeter. Vasquez, Hayes, Milbourne, some other decent guards and have to depend on Williams C-16 4* (Braxton Dupree left the team) or get killed on boards with no PF/C. If not, Milbourne probably has to move from SF to PF where every ACC team has someone better.

UVA is pretty much just Sylvan Landesberg and Mike Scott. Calvin Baker, Sam Zeglinski, Jamil Tucker and Jeff Jones are okay and they have a new 4* Spurlock SF-18, and an returning 4* Brandenberg C-16.

NC State has Tracy Smith and is hurting everywhere else after losing Costner, MacCauley & Fells and JJ Hickson the year before. The Red coat will try to keep score close with Horner, Gonzales, Degand, Feguson, Painter PF-20 4*, and Howell PF-16 4*.

Point Guards:

Delaney PG-13 4*
Scheyer SG-3 5* has to play out of position
Stitt PG-18 4*
Hayes PG-19 4*
Hurdle G JC 1*
Smith, Ish PG-17 4*
Drew II PG-4 4*
Udolfia 4* PG-5
Jackson SG-24 4* has to play out of position
ZeglinskiPG NR 3*
Kitchen SG JC 4* has to play out of position
Young PG-6 4*
Rios PG-16 4*
Miller PG-20 3*
Loucks PG-22 3*
Gonzales PG-30 3*
Paris PG NR 2*
Foreman G NR 1*

Combo Guards
Vasquez SG-25 4*
Shumpert SG-5 5*
Ginyard SG-15 4*
Smith, Nolan SG-7 4*
Sanders SG-21 4*
Dews SG-28 4*
Williams, LD SF-26 3*
Snaer 5* SG-3
Scott, D 5* SG-5
Tucker, J SG-24 4*
Baker, C SG NR 2*
Mosley SG-8 4*
Hudson SG-16 4*
Strickland 4* SG-8
MacDonald 4* SG-12
Johnson, Noel 4* SG-13
A. Dawkins 5* SG-3 2010
Jones, Jeff SG -22 4*

Wings
Singler SF-1 5*
Landesberg SF-8 4*
Singleton PF-5 5* if Reid can play PF
Henson 5* PF-1 if he can defend SF
Raji SF NR 3*
Jennings 5* PF-8 if he can defend aside Booker and Sykes
D’Andre Bell
Jones, Dequan SF-5 5* needs to live up to his potential
Graves SF-18 4*
Potter SF-21 3*
Horner SF-22 3*
Stewart 4* SF-8
Smith, Tanner SF-22 3*
Williams, CJ SF-28 3*
Bowie SF-28 3*
Thompson, JT PF-31 4* unless Allen plays center and he plays PF, then who?
Tucker, C SF-32 3*
DeMercy SF NR 3*
Bell SF-35 3* if JT Thompson plays PF
Roche SF-39 3*
Spurlock 4* SF-18

Forwards - everybody in ACC is pretty good here unless some have to play Center

Booker, T. PF-24 4* with Sykes
Lawal PF-7 5*
Aminu SF-4 5* with MacFarland
Trapani PF NR 2* with Southern
Allen PF-13 4* may have to play center and regain weight he lost
Davis PF-3 5* considered Deon the center
Smith, Tracy PF-18 4* may have to play center or Painter
Scott, Mike PF-19 4* assuming Brandenberg can play center
Collins PF-22 4* considered McGowan the center
Thomas PF-4 5* or Mason Plumlee or Kelly
Zeller PF-7 5* considered Henson the SF
Kelly 5* PF-4 with Lance Thomas and Plumlees
Plumlee, Mason 5* PF-6 with lance Thomas and Kelly
Reid PF-22 4* so Singleton can play SF
Peacock PF-30 4* so Lawal can play SF
Milbourne SF-33 3* undersized but who else?
Plumlee, Mi PF-14 4* probably plays center alternating with Zoubek
Wear , D PF-13
Wear, T PF-14
Howell 4* PF-16
Booker, D 4* PF-17
Painter PF-20 4* may have to play center if Tracy Smith does not
Weaver PF NR 3*
Wicher PF NR 3*

Centers
Thompson, D C-5 4*
Alabi C-5 5*
Favors C-1 5*
MacFarland C-26 3*
Sykes C NR 3*
Southern C-23 4*
Zoubek C-7 4* when Plumlees are not in post
McGowan C-8 4* with Collins considered PF
Walker C-4 5*
Davilla C-21 3*
Woods C-10 4*
Raines C-9 4* or Davilla or else Jeff Allen plays center
Gibson C-13 4*
Baciu C-14 4*
Dupree C-16 4* or frosh Williams
Brandenberg C-16 4*
Williams C-16 4* or Dupree
Sheehan C-22 3*
Gamble C-27 3*
Sene C-23 3*
Grant C-29 3*

ACCBBallFan
07-26-2009, 04:44 PM
With people bringing up some good info on new frosh, I amended my prior analysis of ACC returnees to also include new 5*'s and 4*'s weighted, plus returnees who were 5* or 4* in prior years if not already included among better returnees.

I am sure some people can take exception with an individual being included who they think should not, vice versa, or rated top versus medium etc, but these should be indicative of overall depth and strength.

Some results that surprised me, especially Wake and VA Tech being not nearly as strong as I expected:

Top 5* Med 4* Other 4* ACC

77-Duke 7 1 2 Singler, Scheyer, Smith, Thomas, Kelly, Mason Plumlee, Dawkins, Zoubek, Miles Plumlee, Czyz-?

75-UNC 4 7 0 Thompson, Ginyard, Davis, Henson, Graves, Drew II, Zeller, Strickland, MacDonald, Wear(2)

71-FSU 5 4 1 Alabi, Singleton, Reid, Kitchen, Snaer, Dulkys, Loucks, DeMercy, Shannon, Gibson

70-GA T 5 4 0 Lawal, Shumpert, Peacock, Bell, Favors, Miller, Storrs, Udolfia, Holsey

67-Clem 4 5 2 T. Booker, Stitt, Sykes, Jennings, Potter, Grant, Young, Johnson, D. Booker, Baciu-?

55-BC 5 1 0 Sanders, Trapani, Raji, Southern, Jackson, Paris

53-Mia 4 2 3 Collins, Dews, Hurdle, Scott, McGowan, Kirk, Dequan Jones Jackson, Rios

50-MD 3 4 0 Vasquez, Milbourne, Hayes, Bowie, Mosley, Tucker, Williams,

46-Wake 4 1 1 Aminu, MacFarland, Williams, Smith, Stewart, Walker

46-UVA 2 5 1 Landesberg, Scott, Baker, Zeglinski, Tucker, Jones, Spurlock, Brandenberg

45-NCS 2 5 0 Tracy Smith, Horner, Gonzales, Degand, Feguson, Painter, Howell

35-VA T 2 3 0 Delaney, Allen, Thompson, Hudson, Raines

Of course since not all 5*’s are created equal, and some like Lance play more like 4*’s, this method has some limitations.

The results though were pretty similar to the rankings summations in post above, first 5 even in same order, and most of the bottom being the same except perhaps Miami could move up slightly if guys like Dequan Jones and the freshman 5 * Duran Scott play well. Conversrely Maryland could come down a smidge.

So I used the weights above rather than the fan rankings in prior post to determine strength of schedule as objectively as I could as I could not how to otherwise factor in GA Tech who had only 2 ACC wins last season (see below)

Honors for most difficult ACC unbalanced schedule goes to GA Tech who must play all four of the top teams twice (UNC, FSU, Duke and Clemson). MD and BC are only other teams to have to play 3 of the top 4 twice.

UNC has the second most favorable schedule playing two of the three weakest teams per this analysis twice (NC St and VA Tech twice, UVA once). Other teams who play two of the weakest 3 are: MD, Wake, VA Tech, Miami and UVA).

GA Tech, FSU, Duke and Clemson, perhaps the 4 teams who challenge UNC for ACC champ) play all 3 weakest teams only once each. So UNC gets perhaps an extra win vis a vis the competition's one less versus so called “easy win” though anything can happen in ACC particularly on the road.

Strength ACC unbalanced Schedule

957 GA Tech plays all 4 of the top 4 teams twice UNC, FSU, Duke and Clemson and plays 4 of the bottom 5 only once (Wake (2), Miami, VA Tech, UVA and NC St)

948 Clemson must play FSU, Duke and GA Tech twice and plays all 5 of the bottom 5 only once (Wake, Miami, VA Tech, UVA and NC St)

946 MD must play FSU, Duke and Clemson twice

939 BC must play FSU, Duke and Clemson twice

934 Wake must play UNC and GA Tech twice

932 Duke must play UNC, Clemson and GA Tech twice and plays all 5 of the bottom 5 only once (Wake, Miami, VA Tech, UVA and NC St), has benefit of never having to play top rated 1-2 Duke.

930 VA Tech must play UNC, BC twice

916 FSU must play Clemson, GA Tech and BC twice and plays 4 of the bottom 5 only once (Wake, Miami(2), VA Tech, UVA and NC St)

899 NC St plays only UNC twice among top 6

891 Miami only plays FSU and BC twice of top 6

889 UNC only plays Duke and GA Tech of top 6 twice, has benefit of never having to play top rated 1-2 UNC.

875 UVA plays none of the top 6 teams twice could not be easier unless they could play UVA instead of Duke or UNC

So even without the benefit of getting to play themselves, the bottom teams Va Tech, Miami, UVA and NC State have some of the easiest schedules,

while the middle tier ACC teams have the toughest GA Tech, Clemson, MD, BC and Wake,

pretty much making FSU the main competition to Duke and UNC for top honors.

Wander
07-26-2009, 08:41 PM
I liked Maryland to suprise and finish 2nd or 3rd in the conference, but I had no idea Dupree wasn't returning, that hurts quite a bit. I still think they can do pretty well - I wouldn't want Milbourne playing PF for a Final Four team, but I think he can do well enough for above .500 in the ACC. I guess they'll be ultra-dependent on injuries and other fluky things happening to their center now though.

ACCBBallFan
07-26-2009, 10:12 PM
I liked Maryland to suprise and finish 2nd or 3rd in the conference, but I had no idea Dupree wasn't returning, that hurts quite a bit. I still think they can do pretty well - I wouldn't want Milbourne playing PF for a Final Four team, but I think he can do well enough for above .500 in the ACC. I guess they'll be ultra-dependent on injuries and other fluky things happening to their center now though.Yeh, the N&O article says Gregory will be the center. I woud suspect that the 4* Jordan Williams C-16 gets a crack at that. Ironically C-16 on Scouts is where Dupree was last year.

In a way MD is mirror image of UNC who is tyring to fnd PT by possibly playing John Henson out of positon at Sf since Hee;ls have so many PF/C.

With Vasquez, Hayes, Bowie, Mosley and Milbourne, plus probably a couple I am forgetting or don'lt know enough about, Gary has too many perimeter guys and too few bigs.

He never has trouble motivating his guys to play UNC and Duke, but a few years ago he missed the NCAAs losing 3 times to I think is was Clemson and then won 3 of 4 NIT games with that squad in 2004-05.

gw67
07-27-2009, 08:47 AM
ACCBBallFan,

Thanks for your analysis of the team schedules and relative strengths of the teams. I come away from your posts and the N&O articles that you linked concluding that predictions for this coming basketball season will be difficult. It appears that seven of the teams (BC, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Virginia Tech and Wake) are relatively equal and schedule, impact of freshmen, and development of last year’s freshmen will play an important role in how these teams finish.

My mid-summer analysis of Maryland is as follows:

• The strength of the team will be the returning seniors – Vasquez, Milbourne and Hayes. Vasquez will likely be a pre-season All ACC 1st team pick and I expect him to have a solid season. Milbourne is a perimeter player who had to play one of the two inside positions in the flex offense. He was very inconsistent but by year’s end he seemed very comfortable on both ends of the court. Hayes has the best combination of outside and mid-range game on the team. He averaged over 15 ppg in the ACC and NCAA tourney games and I expect him to pick up his scoring this year to 13-14 ppg.
• A player the Terps are counting on for big improvement is Sean Mosley. As a freshman he played nearly 20 mpg and provided the team some toughness on the defensive boards and a willingness to play defense. Mosley is a consistent jump shot away from being a good player in the ACC.
• Maryland is depending on freshmen Williams and Padgett to join Milbourne and Gregory as inside players. I consider this an upgrade over last year. Neither Milbourne nor Gregory had played inside the previous year and they should both be improved. Williams and Padgett are, of course, the unknowns. Based on what I’ve seen of Padgett, he will be an upgrade over last year in the areas of rebounding and defense. I’ve not seen Williams but the hope is that he complements Padgett by providing some inside scoring.
• Bowie and Tucker provide some depth on the perimeter. Bowie’s strengths are driving to the basket and defense while Tucker is second to Hayes as a long-range shooter.
• I like the potential of Kim (Choi?) as a player but he will have a difficult time getting minutes unless he comes on very strong in practice.

I see the Terps slightly improved over last year. Unless Mosley and Williams can provide some additional offensive punch, they will continue to have a difficult time getting points. Against top teams, this could result in a one-sided game. Nevertheless, the ACC is not as strong as last year and Maryland’s conference schedule appears easier. I expect them to wind up 4-6 in the league standing with a 9-7 record.

gw67

ACCBBallFan
07-27-2009, 10:25 AM
Agree with everything you said GW except I do think MD has one of the toughest ACC unbalanced schedules, third only to GA Tech and Clemson which makes three very solid ACC teams a tad further down than UNC and Duke again.

I have not really looked at it from a home vs Away standpoint, just form strength. So I just did.

http://www.theacc.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/acc/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/model-three-years

having two games with UVA and two with NC State should be good for 3-4 wins.

Home only is with UNC, GA Tech and Miami. One one hand, that gives Terps a better chance vs. the two most stacked rosters, and it could depend on getting them early before their frosh and inexperienced sophs get their sea legs vs MD senior laden guard oriented team. GA Tech in particular has diffuclty on the road and Gary like Seth always gets his teams up for UNC and Duke.

Have to be able to beat Miami at home to compete.

Road only are BC, VA Tech and Wake all relatively equal teams. So that could work to Maryland's disadantage since all road games are tough to win in ACC, but again having 3 seniors helps.

So that's 5-6 wins with NC St(2), UVA(2), Miami or GA Tech .

So if Gary can get 3-4 wins vs. Duke(2), Clemson(2), FSU(2), UNC @ home, BC on road, VA Tech on road, an Wake on road, something like 9-7 and 4th - 6th in ACC as you predict is certainly a good possibility.

Just can't have the type of letdowns or plain old match up problems the 2004-05 had losing 3 times to Clemson.

Back to your other point, depending on how things shake out, could even be an 8th team Miami who has benefit of relatively easy ACC schedule and depending on Durand Scott and Dequan Jones fare could join the 7 you listed.

I have a hard time ,making much of a case for UVA who new coach is very good but having to play with players he did not recruit, or NC State who is finally playing with players he recruited, just not enough good ones. N&D has a different starting back court than I would have expected. So probably a lot of lineup shuffling again by these two teams.

Klemnop
07-27-2009, 12:53 PM
Ray Sykes graduated this past spring. He has exhausted his eligibility.

Ray was a fun player while he served in a secondary role during his Soph and Jr seasons (mostly a poor-man's version of James Mays.) Ray was a disaster as a starter. I used to say to my wife that if Ray was doing anything other than dunking or grabbing a rebound to be immediately handed off, it was a very bad thing. And it usually was. He was slow defensively and mostly found himself out of position against teams which ran any semblance of an offense. He was death in Clemson's own set offense as he lacked both the basketball IQ and the hands/coordination to be effective.

I won't miss him. I don't think Oliver Purnell will either.

Jerai Grant is an improvement - although it didn't take much to be considered as such. Grant has better (not great) hands and is slightly less turnover-prone when he's involved in the offense. He's less "long" and also less athletic/acrobatic than Ray Sykes was. He's better defensively - at least from the perspective of being where he's supposed to be and focusing on the fundamentals of position and blocking out as opposed to relying on pure athleticism to compensate for poor execution. (It doesn't hurt to have been schooled at DeMatha.) But...if Jerai Grant logs more minutes than either Devin Booker or Milt Jennings in '09-'10 then things will not have gone well. Not well at all. Grant is a serviceable back-up. He's not a guy to rely on.

Clemson's success will be determined by the ability of Booker Two (Devin) to come in and be a force down low immediately. He's vastly more athletic than either Sykes or Grant (he logged the 2nd best vertical on the team this summer - edged out only by Brian Narcisse - a state champion high jumper) and also posseses (reportedly) the ability to shoot out to 15 feet. Oliver Purnell has been wanting since he first arrived at Clemson to run a true High-Low offense - and the Brothers Booker will afford him that opportunity. IF (that's a big IF) Devin can compete from the outset. By all accounts Devin is as accomplished coming in as a freshman as his brother was - and his brother started from his first game and never looked back. In fact some have said that Devin has a better skill-set coming in than his brother did - already able to keep defenses honest with a good jump shot.

Milt Jennings, essentially playing as a WG, is the other half to the equation. As a 6'9" sharp-shooter with at least moderate ability to take his man off the bounce, Jennings should present match-up headaches to opposing teams. Assuming he actually forces defenses to respect his outside shooting ability. Jennings also presents another option for the High-Low game. My concerns about Milt are less that he'll be able to handle the offensive load but that he'll be able to compete defensively at the level that Oliver Purnell would expect. (That said, OP carried Terrence Oglesby as a starter all of last season - so Jennings would have to be horrid to be a downgrade as a perimeter defender.)

So, Clemson won't run the tallest front-line in the league out there. Nobody who will see significant minutes is bigger than 6'9". It's more of an under-sized athletic/skilled front than an overpowering front. I can see teams like Carolina, GaTech and FSU causing real problems with sheer size. Hopefully the match-ups on the other end balance out.

The wild-card would be that Catalin Baicu (7'2") improves his weight and footwork (and general basketball IQ) to a degree to be effective this year. I don't see that happening. But, if it did, it would intorduce an interesting extra dimension on both ends of the floor.

Klemnop

FWIW, I think Clemson finishes 4th in the league. One of GaTech/FSU will finish 3rd and the other will finish 5th. The fight for 3/4/5 should be highly interesting all year. If Clemson doesn't finish 4th it will be because they finish 1/2. The pieces are there.

whereinthehellami
07-27-2009, 01:28 PM
Good post ACCBBallFan. I agree with most of your thoughts. I also agree with gw67 about Mosley. I liked him last year and think he becomes more of a household name this year (at least in the ACC anyways).

roywhite
07-27-2009, 01:35 PM
In regards to Clemson, isn't the question primarily about their backcourt, as opposed to the frontcourt?, which should be pretty solid, esp. with Trevor Booker as a potential All-America.

I didn't detect great sadness from Klemnop about Oglesby's decision to move on; although he was an excellent (if somewhat streaky) threat from 3-points, he was also prone to indifferent defense and some boneheaded plays in general.

Not entirely familiar with Clemson's roster; do they indeed have first division talent in the ball handling and shooting areas?

jesus_hurley
07-27-2009, 01:44 PM
Looks like UNC's roster is out (http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/unc-m-baskbl-mtt.html).

I'm surprised Zeller is only 220 - I expected him to bulk up more. Hensen is just 185, which if he's going to play the 3 like they hope is probably sufficient (kelly is 35Lbs heavier and the same height). I guess all-in-all I'm surprised how a frontcourt loaded team could appear to be so small in the girth department.

sagegrouse
07-27-2009, 01:47 PM
I didn't detect great sadness from Klemnop about Oglesby's decision to move on; although he was an excellent (if somewhat streaky) threat from 3-points, he was also prone to indifferent defense and some boneheaded plays in general.



You mean like getting ejected (http://www.sportingnews.com/college-basketball/article/2009-03-19/clemsons-oglesby-ejected-throwing-elbow)in the NCAA tournament, leading to his team's defeat? Fine way to end one's college career -- "I'm outta here!"

sagegrouse

Klemnop
07-27-2009, 04:16 PM
In regards to Clemson, isn't the question primarily about their backcourt, as opposed to the frontcourt?, which should be pretty solid, esp. with Trevor Booker as a potential All-America.

I didn't detect great sadness from Klemnop about Oglesby's decision to move on; although he was an excellent (if somewhat streaky) threat from 3-points, he was also prone to indifferent defense and some boneheaded plays in general.

Not entirely familiar with Clemson's roster; do they indeed have first division talent in the ball handling and shooting areas?

Clemson's backcourt should be a strength. You've got Demontez Stitt back as a Junior to begin with. Stitt has been the team's PG for two seasons and has handled that position very ably. He's a solid ball-handler and distributor who is also strong enough to get into the lane and create points for himself in traffic. There were a couple of games last season where he showed he could be a dominant force. He's also a strong defender. Basically you're talking about the starting PG from two consecutive NCAA teams - so he's at least serviceable.

Behind Stitt - or, more likely, alongside Stitt - you've got rising Soph Andre Young. Young is undersized but lightning quick. A tremendous ballhandler and tenacious defender - he's also got decent range from outside (which is a soft spot for Stitt.) He showed last year that he can overcome his size on the defensive end with his speed.

That's two ACC-caliber PGs, one entering his 3rd year as a starter. Relative to the rest of the league, that puts Clemson in great shape.

I also wouldn't be surprised to see a line-up with AYoung at PG and Stitt at 2G.

At SG/WG we've got an interesting collection of pieces - though I have no idea how they'll be mixed and matched.

David Potter is a Senior. He's sound defensively (when he's not whiffing on attempted steals of last second passes to Wayne Ellington in OTs) and has improved his offensive game every year. He can hit the outside shot. He can get to the hoop. He can hit a pull-up jumper. He's not exciting, but he's been through the wars and knows how to play.

Tanner Smith is a rising Soph. He appeared overwhelmed at times with the speed of play but showed that he knows his way around the court. He can hit an outside jumper, grab a rebound, bring the ball up the court and generally be an all-purpose guy.

Donte Hill is an incoming Frosh (6'4") with a reputation as a defense-first player. Long, fast and athletic - he's being compared to Cliff Hammonds at the same stage. That's a defensive comparison, I assume. I expect this is a kid that will first find his niche as an enforcer in one of Oliver Purnell's beloved trapping formations.

Noel Johnson (6'6") was a very late recruit, picked up in the aftermath of the Tim Floyd mess at USC. Johnson has a reputation as a prolific wing scorer with the ability to hit outside jumpers as well as a well-developed medium-range game. He's also got a reputation for loafing - so it remains to be seen if he's got the commitment to playing defense that will earn him the chance to showcase his offense. Putting that aside, he was a concensus Top 50 Recruit.

The collection of Jennings, Johnson, Booker and Hill is easily Clemson's best recruiting class - ever. On paper.

Altogether, Clemson's got 10 guys that should be part of a regular rotation:

Booker, Book II, Grant and Jennings across the 4-5.
Jennings, Potter, Smith as 3s.
Johnson, Smith and Hill as 2s.
Stitt and AYoung as 1s.

When you're talking about a coach like Oliver Purnell who really embraces a deep bench and the philosophy of wearing opponents down through attrition over the course of a game, this is a really exciting collection of talent.

KC Rivers will be sorely missed. I think he was the most complete basketball player to come through Clemson in 10 years (going back to Greg Buckner). And Oglesby had that one, amazing, skill - which will definitely be missed. But overall this is a more highly-skilled, verstaile line-up. From Day One this should be a better defensive team. By mid-season it could be just as good offensively as any Oliver Purnell has fielded at Clemson*.

*A lot of my optimism is predicated on the idea that the incoming freshman are as good as advertised and able to adjust both to Oliver Purnell's style and demands as well as the level of competition that Clemson will face. They're freshman - so that's likely fool's gold.

ACCBBallFan
07-27-2009, 06:17 PM
Thanks for the calrifications, Klemnop.

Tough to keep up with all 12 ACC teams. Threads like these make it easier for knowledgeable people like yourself to add to our knowledge without being told to stay on your own board.

I was relying on ESPN which showed Raymond Sykes only played 3 years, which it sounds like was more than enough for you.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=27027

We really only see him when matched up with Duke or UNC. Certainly no James Mays or Trevor Booker.

While not a super star, one less somewhat experienced guy that could have given Duke a push for better center than Zoubbek/Miles if Duke goes truly big with Mason/Lance at PF.

That lineup of Booker T and the MD's - Milton Jennings and Devon Booker would be interesting to watch if the two frosh could resemble the elder Booker.

Grant has some good basketball genes. Potter has had some good minutes in reserve role when I have seen him. I did not know much about Young. I knew about Oliver Purnell's good fortune with Noel Johnson exodus from USC.

Coaching may give the Tigers the edge over GA Tech and FSU, if the other stars/planets you outline align.

I think I read somewhere recently that the 7 footer Baciu may be injured, which like Zoubek last year, would further erode his summer development.

Would be interested in knowing who is playing each guard slot for NC state, if anyone on the board has any insights.

Greg_Newton
07-27-2009, 06:39 PM
Looks like UNC's roster is out (http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/unc-m-baskbl-mtt.html).

I'm surprised Zeller is only 220 - I expected him to bulk up more. Hensen is just 185, which if he's going to play the 3 like they hope is probably sufficient (kelly is 35Lbs heavier and the same height). I guess all-in-all I'm surprised how a frontcourt loaded team could appear to be so small in the girth department.

That is quite surprisingly that Kelly would apparently be tied for the 2nd heaviest big man on UNC. Carolina's likely rotation of bigs weigh 245, 220, 215, and 185 pounds, respecively, while Duke's weigh 260, 240, 230, and 225.

Carolina has some strong wings though... Graves at 245, Ginyard at 220, and Strickland at 215.

ACCBBallFan
07-27-2009, 06:46 PM
That is quite surprisingly that Kelly would apparently be tied for the 2nd heaviest big man on UNC. Carolina's likely rotation of bigs weigh 245, 220, 215, and 185 pounds, respecively, while Duke's weigh 260, 240, 230, and 225.

Carolina has some strong wings though... Graves at 245, Ginyard at 220, and Strickland at 215.
On site I looked at Strickland was stil listed at 6'3" 175 but MacDonald had gone from 185 to 210.

Given that a couple of those UNC centers Davis and Henson seem most effective within 5 feet of the basket, may be able to muscle them out of their comfort zone.

One Wear is listed at 230, the other 220.

A pair of Bookers and Milton Jennings though not overly tall could be powerful for Clemson on 220 pounders as could Favors/Lawal/Peacock, Alabi/Reid/Singleton, and MacFarland-Woods-Aminu-Walker.

Not many other really big duos but some individual guys like Tracy Smith, Dwayne Collins/McGowan, Jeff Alllen and Mike Scott.

ACCBBallFan
07-27-2009, 07:36 PM
To give you an idea of how volatile these ACC prediction models are, here is the impact of Sykes not being a returning player for Clemson.

The order of strength of team did not change.

However quite a bit of movement in Strength of ACC Schedule.

Clemson benefit of not having to play Clemson went down, and those playing Clemson twice are not as adversely affected.

Rated, Top 5*, Med 4*, Oth 4*, ACC,
77, 7, 1, 2, Duke, Singler, Scheyer, Smith, Thomas, Kelly PF-4 5*, Plumlee, Ma PF-6 5*, Dawkins SG-3 5* 2010, Zoubek, Miles Pl, Czyz

75, 4, 7, 0, UNC, Thompson, Ginyard, Davis, Henson, Graves, Drew II, Zeller, Strickland SG-8 4*, MacDonald SG-12 4*, Wear(2), PF13-14

71, 5, 4, 1, FSU, Alabi, Singleton, Reid, Kitchen, Snaer SG-3, Dulkys, Loucks, DeMercy, Shannon PF-28, Gibson

70, 5, 4, 0, GA Tech, Lawal, Shumpert, Peacock, Favors, Miller, Bell, D'Andre, Udolfia PG-5 4*, Storrs, Holsey PF-30 4*

57, 3, 5, 2, Clemson, T. Booker, Stitt, Jennings, Potter, Grant, Young, Johnson, Noel SG-13 4*, Booker, D PF-17 4*, Baciu

55, 5, 1, 0, BC, Sanders, Trapani, Raji, Southern, Jackson, Paris

52, 4, 2, 2, Miami, Collins, Dews, Hurdle, Scott, Degand 5*, McGowan, Deq Jones, Rios, Kirk PF-23 4*

50, 3, 4, 0, MD, Vasquez, Milbourne, Hayes, Bowie, Mosley, Tucker, Williams C-16,

46, 4, 1, 1, Wake, Aminu, MacFarland, Williams, Smith, Stewart SF-8 4*, Walker

46, 2, 5, 1, UVA, Landesberg, Scott, Baker, Zeglinski, Tucker, Jones, Spurlock SF-18 4*, Brandenberg

45, 2, 5, 0, NC St, Tracy Smith, Horner, Gonzales, Degand, Feguson, Painter PF-20 4*, Howell PF-16 4*

35, 2, 3, 0, VA Tech, Delaney, Allen, Thompson, JT, Hudson, Raines C-9 4*

Here is the revised Strength of ACC unbalanced Schedule

SOS-UNC-DU-FS-GT-Clem-MD-BC-WF-Miami-VT-UVA-NC St-ACC Team
-------------
946 -075-154-142-140-000-100-110-046-053-035-046-045-Clemson
-------------
936 -150-154-142-000-114-050-055-092-053-035-046-045-GA Tech
926 -075-154-142-070-114-000-055-046-053-035-092-090-MD
923 -150-077-071-140-057-050-055-000-106-035-092-090-Wake
-------------
919 -150-077-071-070-057-050-110-046-106-000-092-090-VA Tech
918 -075-154-142-070-114-050-000-046-106-070-046-045-BC
910 -150-000-071-140-114-100-110-046-053-035-046-045-Duke
-------------
894 -075-077-000-140-114-100-110-046-106-035-046-045-FSU
887-150-077-071-070-057-100-055-092-053-070-092-000-NC St
-------------
880 -075-077-142-070-057-050-110-092-000-070-092-045-Miami
878 -000-154-071-140-057-050-055-092-053-070-046-090-UNC
-------------
863 -075-077-071-070-057-100-055-092-106-070-000-090-UVA

Taking these two metrics and opinion polls at equal weight, I currently have the following tiers.

I think, though, that this gives too much credit to unbalanced schedule which would explain Miami and UVA so high realtively speaking, as well as Clemson and MD and GA Tech so low:

33- UNC
31-Duke
28 -FSU

20-GA Tech
19-BC
19-Miami

17-Clemson
17-UVA
15 - MD

13- Wake
12-NC St
10-VA Tech

ACCBBallFan
07-27-2009, 07:58 PM
If I instead weight them 5 for Talent, 3 for Opinion and 1 for SOS, this looks more realistic:

103 - Duke
099 - UNC
088 - FSU

74 - GA Tech
65 - Clemson
59 - BC

49 - MD
49 - Miami
39 - Wake

33 - UVA
22 - VA Tech
22 - NC State