PDA

View Full Version : Way too early ACC Predictions



gofurman
04-09-2013, 11:38 PM
I like the national rankings too but wanted to focus intra-ACC:

How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed! Subject to change with Len, UNC, Larkin etc early entries...

TIER ONE

Syracuse - I need to read up.. not sure who is returning yet?

UNC - lots of returning v good talent in McAdoo, Hairston and Bullock + strong recruiting gets UNC back at the top. I hope one of the 3 decides to leave and changes this. Unless one of them leaves I give them the slight edge over us as we have 2/3 (Hood?) starters return. They basically return the whole durn team

Duke - Cook and Suliamon + Hood and Jabari Parker, who plays the middle is a huge concern???

Notre Dame - dont know much but they always lurk in top 25

TIER 2
--------
uva - I expect strong coaching and stable core of players to put UVA in the top tier again this year... bubbe team again, very dangerous team to play as they rarely beat themselves

Pitt - they always play strong and tough

FSU - Wiggins? huge question mark. Would like to see Wiggins here vs UK and UNC. Still, many players return minus Snaer and they probably improve regardless as they were inexperienced this year.

GTech - Hunt, Carter, Miller all Freshman except Miller as Junior. And Hunt and Carter are very skilled (future pro?) freshman - see GTech moving up some nxt year

UMD - Lets assume Len is gone. Howard transfers. Team still has girth inside and Wells is v good. Not great team but ok.


TIER 3
----------
BC - this one intrigues me. The youngest team I have ever seen (all Fr 2 years ago, then all Fr and Soph this year with a stud Freshman) - now they will all be juniors and soph who are as experienced as most seniors and all played together. Ill say they get .500 this year unless the new schools are just too good. Either way they will be improved

Wake Forest - Similar to this year. Probably a little below .500 record. Lose one of the two studs but keep one and return all the other pieces. Key PG recruit coming or is that the nxt year?

Clemson - I like Brownell but where's the talent? Xs and Os, no Jimmys and Joes. McDaniels is very athletic 6'5" guy and all the guards return to improve but both "centers" are gone in Jennings and Booker.

Miami - Larkin back, but not much else proven - all else gone. Awesome PG though always gives you a chance but Miami is the biggest plummet as they lose 5 of their first 6 guys in rotation

NC State - well that was over fast. Nice recruiting but Everyone is gone now, even the PG. Youth will be served.

V Tech - No Eric Green nxt year.. could get ugly unless someone really steps up

licc85
04-09-2013, 11:49 PM
BC is going to be good. They got some really, really good young guys. Olivier Hanlan is an All-ACC player next year as a sophomore. Ryan Anderson will be a junior and is one of the best bigs in the ACC. Rahon was a pretty good PG for a freshman, and had some really good games down the stretch last year. Eddie Odio might inherit the most athletic white guy in the ACC title from Mason Plumlee. I respect Steve Donohue, those guys almost beat us @BC, they are pretty much keeping everyone, and will be a tough team next year. I'd put them at least in tier 2.

Kedsy
04-10-2013, 12:23 AM
BC is going to be good. They got some really, really good young guys. Olivier Hanlan is an All-ACC player next year as a sophomore. Ryan Anderson will be a junior and is one of the best bigs in the ACC. Rahon was a pretty good PG for a freshman, and had some really good games down the stretch last year. Eddie Odio might inherit the most athletic white guy in the ACC title from Mason Plumlee. I respect Steve Donohue, those guys almost beat us @BC, they are pretty much keeping everyone, and will be a tough team next year. I'd put them at least in tier 2.

I agree. BC is an NCAA team next year. I'm not sure where that puts them in the OP's tier structure, but certainly higher than the bottom tier.

I don't know whether Notre Dame or Pitt will be better next year. I suspect they're both NCAA teams. Ultimately, I'd guess the ACC gets six or seven teams into the big dance. How that fits into the OP's tier structure, I'll leave to someone else. UNC is only top tier if all three of their guys stay. If only two stay, I think UNC's on the border between top and middle tier. If one or zero stay, they're a bubble team.

If Len goes, then Maryland is bottom tier, IMO. I'd also be surprised if Georgia Tech is in the upper half of the ACC next season. Also, FSU needs to get Wiggins to stay in that middle tier, but even with him I doubt they can get up to top tier. Finally, if NC State gets the Davis kid from Tulane, I think they're at least a bubble team and thus probably deserve to be in the OP's middle tier.

Duvall
04-10-2013, 01:14 AM
I like the national rankings too but wanted to focus intra-ACC:

How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed!

Yeah, James Michael McAdoo shouldn't be listed among UNC's good players.

I think Maryland is an NCAA team next year even if Len goes - their big freshmen class should take a step forward next year either way. And it's not like Len was a reliable resource for them last season.

sporthenry
04-10-2013, 02:33 AM
I agree. BC is an NCAA team next year. I'm not sure where that puts them in the OP's tier structure, but certainly higher than the bottom tier.

I don't know whether Notre Dame or Pitt will be better next year. I suspect they're both NCAA teams. Ultimately, I'd guess the ACC gets six or seven teams into the big dance. How that fits into the OP's tier structure, I'll leave to someone else. UNC is only top tier if all three of their guys stay. If only two stay, I think UNC's on the border between top and middle tier. If one or zero stay, they're a bubble team.

If Len goes, then Maryland is bottom tier, IMO. I'd also be surprised if Georgia Tech is in the upper half of the ACC next season. Also, FSU needs to get Wiggins to stay in that middle tier, but even with him I doubt they can get up to top tier. Finally, if NC State gets the Davis kid from Tulane, I think they're at least a bubble team and thus probably deserve to be in the OP's middle tier.

I'd agree that BC deserves to be in the middle tier. I think BC and UVA will be the two of the non Duke/UNC old ACC teams fighting to join the top tier.

At this point, I'd say Duke and Syracuse are in their own tier. With ND and UNC (assuming they lose 1/2 of their guys) along with possibly UVA or BC jumping up to the next tier. I'm fairly low on Pittsburgh with their losses.

I think MD can still stay somewhat relevant without Len but returning Wells, Faust and Allen is a solid team. If Cleare can develop, they'll be a good team.

I agree that I'm not really seeing much from Georgia Tech or FSU (sans Wiggins). Even if Wiggins goes to FSU, they'll be a mediocre team who might be able to scratch their way into the tournament but I suspect that is what will drive him away from FSU because he wants to win.

BD80
04-10-2013, 08:03 AM
When does Louisville join in?

JNort
04-10-2013, 08:49 AM
Duke and Cuse will reign over the ACC next year with Unc probably being that third team. NC State will surprise people and will make the NCAA tourny next year. BC will be a tournament team as well. FSU with Wiggins would be interesting but without I won't give them the time of day. Notre Dame will be Notre Dame and prob be a top 25 team and Pitt will just be solid ole Pitt. Wake should improve but not by enough to worry the top teams. Maryland will drop down a bit as will VT by a lot without Green.

94duke
04-10-2013, 09:05 AM
When does Louisville join in?

2014, when MD leaves:
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals

CDu
04-10-2013, 09:21 AM
I think it is really hard to tell what these teams are going to look like for next year until after we know for sure who is going to be back. For example, the following teams have huge roster questions looming:

Syracuse: do Carter-Williams and Fair stay or go?
UNC: do McAdoo, Bullock, Hairston stay or go? does Wiggins join them?
NC State: do they add Josh Davis to go with Barber, Lewis, Lee, Turner, Warren, Anya, Vandenburg, and Washington?
FSU: does Wiggins join them?

If Syracuse loses both Carter-Williams and Fair, they could have a tougher time in the ACC (still very good, but maybe not elite). If UNC loses one or more of those guys and doesn't get Wiggins, they won't be elite. If they do get Wiggins, they could be VERY good. If State adds Davis, they'll be on the fringe of the NCAA tournament (sort of like their team 2 years ago). If FSU gets Wiggins and their PG play improves, they could be very solid.

Just too early (as the thread title suggests).

burnspbesq
04-10-2013, 09:47 AM
It's a shame we can't have promotion and relegation between the ACC and the SoCon. Davidson is much more capable of competing in the ACC in 13-14 than VaTech.

CDu
04-10-2013, 09:56 AM
It's a shame we can't have promotion and relegation between the ACC and the SoCon. Davidson is much more capable of competing in the ACC in 13-14 than VaTech.

Doubtful. Davidson is going to lose a lot of players this year. Next year will be a rebuilding year for them. Va Tech is sure to be terrible, but Davidson might be even worse.

matt1
04-10-2013, 04:45 PM
Next year's ACC could get double digit teams into the tournament. Could we challenge the 11 of the 2011 Big East (with one fewer team) or our percentage mark of 7/9 (78%) in about 2004?

Kedsy
04-10-2013, 05:05 PM
Next year's ACC could get double digit teams into the tournament. Could we challenge the 11 of the 2011 Big East (with one fewer team) or our percentage mark of 7/9 (78%) in about 2004?

A more realistic view would be 7 or 8. In time, 10 or 11 wouldn't be out of the question, especially after the conference adds Louisville, but I don't think next season has a great chance of that happening.

gofurman
04-10-2013, 09:34 PM
I think it is really hard to tell what these teams are going to look like for next year until after we know for sure who is going to be back. For example, the following teams have huge roster questions looming:

Syracuse: do Carter-Williams and Fair stay or go?
UNC: do McAdoo, Bullock, Hairston stay or go? does Wiggins join them?
NC State: do they add Josh Davis to go with Barber, Lewis, Lee, Turner, Warren, Anya, Vandenburg, and Washington?
FSU: does Wiggins join them?

If Syracuse loses both Carter-Williams and Fair, they could have a tougher time in the ACC (still very good, but maybe not elite). If UNC loses one or more of those guys and doesn't get Wiggins, they won't be elite. If they do get Wiggins, they could be VERY good. If State adds Davis, they'll be on the fringe of the NCAA tournament (sort of like their team 2 years ago). If FSU gets Wiggins and their PG play improves, they could be very solid.

Just too early (as the thread title suggests).

Syracuse Carter-Williams is gone apparently so that is one answer. Cmon UNC Players.. go pro - you know you are so good

sporthenry
04-10-2013, 10:24 PM
Next year's ACC could get double digit teams into the tournament. Could we challenge the 11 of the 2011 Big East (with one fewer team) or our percentage mark of 7/9 (78%) in about 2004?

They won't ever challenge that %. It works for a small conference but the ACC is way too weak at the bottom. To get to that %, the ACC next year would have to send 12 of its 15 teams to the dance. When you realize that Clemson, Wake and Va. Tech just aren't very good. That means all of MD, FSU, Miami, UVA, BC, Georgia Tech and NC State would have to make it.

Similar with 11 teams. Conference just isn't good enough next year. On a good year, they might be able to get it but Miami, NC State, and FSU seem to be trending down next year and BC, Tech, and UVA still have a ton to prove.

Syracuse, Duke, UNC, and Notre Dame would seem to be in good shape. Add UVA and Pitt and you are up to 6. Then you might get 1-2 more out of BC, Tech, NC State and Miami and that'll leave you with 7-8 teams.

gofurman
04-10-2013, 10:57 PM
They won't ever challenge that %. It works for a small conference but the ACC is way too weak at the bottom. To get to that %, the ACC next year would have to send 12 of its 15 teams to the dance. When you realize that Clemson, Wake and Va. Tech just aren't very good. That means all of MD, FSU, Miami, UVA, BC, Georgia Tech and NC State would have to make it.

Similar with 11 teams. Conference just isn't good enough next year. On a good year, they might be able to get it but Miami, NC State, and FSU seem to be trending down next year and BC, Tech, and UVA still have a ton to prove.

Syracuse, Duke, UNC, and Notre Dame would seem to be in good shape. Add UVA and Pitt and you are up to 6. Then you might get 1-2 more out of BC, Tech, NC State and Miami and that'll leave you with 7-8 teams.

Still , the ACC will be impressive once again. Wouldnt be shocking to see half the teams in the dance. Say 8 of 16 once Louisville is in... that is strong !

For example- Duke, UNC, Syracuse and Louisville are almost locks. Then let's admit Pitt and Notre Dame are better than much of the ACC in current form and were in the dance this year. That's six 'easy'. All you need is two of NC State, FSU, GTech, UVA, Miami, BC, Clemson, Wake etc... not hard at all once Wake realizes Bzdelik has to go.

On that note I have to admit I am somewhat shocked Bzdelik got another year. Will someone Please hire me for a job where I can go 8-20 and make a million a year?

Olympic Fan
04-11-2013, 12:34 AM
Next year's ACC could get double digit teams into the tournament. Could we challenge the 11 of the 2011 Big East (with one fewer team) or our percentage mark of 7/9 (78%) in about 2004?

The ACC never put 7 of 9 in the tournament. The record is 75 percent -- the ACC put 6 of 8 in the tournament four times -- in 1986, 1987, 1989 and 1991. We put 6 of 9 (66.7 percent) in 1993, 1996, 1997, 2001, and 2004.

The most raw numbers -- 7 teams -- came in 2007 and 2007. But that was 7 of 12 both years.

the Big East does have the record for most teams (11/of 16), but the ACC holds the record for the highest percent (75.0 percent).

Going into next year, I think the ACC has a good chance to beat its own record of 7, but not the Big East record of 11 or the ACC record of 75 percent.

Right now, I like Duke, Syracuse, UNC for sure (although if UNC loses all three studs to the NBA or Syracuse loses Fair, they could be borderline) ... Maryland, Virginia, Notre Dame and Pitt to have strong chances ... Boston College and maybe FSU (if they get Wiggins, move them to the second tier. N.C. State could possibly be in the mix if they add Josh Davis ... but even then I rate them less than 50-50. I even think Georgia Tech might have a slim chance (if they find a point guard).

Miami, Wake, Clemson and Virginia Tech, I rate no chance ... that means 11 is the absolute max, although I think 7-8 is more likely.

-bdbd
04-11-2013, 12:38 AM
Really looking forward to a very interesting 2013-14. Duke will be a lot of fun to watch, with a lot more dynamism and scoring options, but likely to lose a lot of rebounding battles. Also looking forward to ACC roadtrips to places like Syracuse, Pittsburgh and South Bend.

I posted this link to an early ESPN rankings on the general 2013-14 Expectations thread:
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9147684/very-early-top-25-2013-14-season-ncaa-men-college-basketball

ESPN predicts three ACC teams ranked nationally -- #5 Duke, #8 UNC, and #10 Syracuse. No others in their early top-25.

Based on that - and by the way Syracuse lost Cartier Williams to the NBA today - I'd have to put Duke, UNC and Syracuse in a "top tier." Louisville would be at the very top if they were in the ACC in 2013-14.

The second tier would have Notre Dame (despite some losses), Pitt (a NCAAT team this year), the well-coached and overall improving program at UVA, probably MD (Shaq Clear was a McD AA and should be ready to backfill Len in the middle), and could see FSU in this tier if they get Wiggins.

The third tier is BC (though they are young and will be inconsistent), FSU (w/o Wiggins), I probably don't see GT here unless they play more mature/consistent, but I think State has enough remaining parts (and pride) to hang on to the third-tier rung.

Fourth (bottom) Tier: I see VPI and Wake duking it out for the bottom honors, and Clemson only slightly better. It'll be interesting if Larkin can carry a team on his shoulders following some pretty major losses in South Beach (if so they COULD) eek out a third-tier rating by season's end.



I like the national rankings too but wanted to focus intra-ACC:

How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed! Subject to change with Len, UNC, Larkin etc early entries...

TIER ONE

Syracuse - I need to read up.. not sure who is returning yet?

UNC - lots of returning v good talent in McAdoo, Hairston and Bullock + strong recruiting gets UNC back at the top. I hope one of the 3 decides to leave and changes this. Unless one of them leaves I give them the slight edge over us as we have 2/3 (Hood?) starters return. They basically return the whole durn team

Duke - Cook and Suliamon + Hood and Jabari Parker, who plays the middle is a huge concern???

Notre Dame - dont know much but they always lurk in top 25

TIER 2
--------
uva - I expect strong coaching and stable core of players to put UVA in the top tier again this year... bubbe team again, very dangerous team to play as they rarely beat themselves

Pitt - they always play strong and tough

FSU - Wiggins? huge question mark. Would like to see Wiggins here vs UK and UNC. Still, many players return minus Snaer and they probably improve regardless as they were inexperienced this year.

GTech - Hunt, Carter, Miller all Freshman except Miller as Junior. And Hunt and Carter are very skilled (future pro?) freshman - see GTech moving up some nxt year

UMD - Lets assume Len is gone. Howard transfers. Team still has girth inside and Wells is v good. Not great team but ok.


TIER 3
----------
BC - this one intrigues me. The youngest team I have ever seen (all Fr 2 years ago, then all Fr and Soph this year with a stud Freshman) - now they will all be juniors and soph who are as experienced as most seniors and all played together. Ill say they get .500 this year unless the new schools are just too good. Either way they will be improved

Wake Forest - Similar to this year. Probably a little below .500 record. Lose one of the two studs but keep one and return all the other pieces. Key PG recruit coming or is that the nxt year?

Clemson - I like Brownell but where's the talent? Xs and Os, no Jimmys and Joes. McDaniels is very athletic 6'5" guy and all the guards return to improve but both "centers" are gone in Jennings and Booker.

Miami - Larkin back, but not much else proven - all else gone. Awesome PG though always gives you a chance but Miami is the biggest plummet as they lose 5 of their first 6 guys in rotation

NC State - well that was over fast. Nice recruiting but Everyone is gone now, even the PG. Youth will be served.

V Tech - No Eric Green nxt year.. could get ugly unless someone really steps up

rsvman
04-11-2013, 12:19 PM
....The most raw numbers -- 7 teams -- came in 2007 and 2007. But that was 7 of 12 both years.

.....

Speaking of numbers, something doesn't seem quite right in the sentence above. A typo, almost certainly. Perhaps you could provide the other year? Inquiring minds want to know. :)

Olympic Fan
04-11-2013, 02:24 PM
Speaking of numbers, something doesn't seem quite right in the sentence above. A typo, almost certainly. Perhaps you could provide the other year? Inquiring minds want to know. :)

Sorry ... it was a typo -- 2007 and 2009 were the two years we put 7 of 12 teams in the tournament.

Reilly
04-11-2013, 02:44 PM
...The record is 75 percent -- the ACC put 6 of 8 in the tournament four times -- in 1986, 1987, 1989 and 1991. ....

Given that the tourney expanded to 64 in 1985, and these four 75% years happened in a 6-year span and during the first 7 years post-expansion, I was wondering if there might've been some "big conference" bias w/ respect to the last ACC at-large team selected.

I looked at sports-reference.com to find the at large ACC team invited to the tourney which had the lowest "SRS" number -- to see where that team ranked nationally.

Turns out, there was no "big conference" bias. The 6th ACC team invited in each of those years was very worthy:

1986 - Virginia - SRS 14.8 - 24th best team nationally
1987 - Ga Tech - SRS 11.2 - 36th best team nationally
1989 - Clemson - SRS 11.6 - 39th best team nationally
1991 - Wake Forest - SRS 13.8 - 30th best team nationally

What glory years for the ACC. Every night a battle. Duke went 9-5 in conference four straight years ('87-'90) during that era. You played each team twice, and most teams were very good (NCAA worthy).

gofurman
04-15-2013, 02:17 PM
* asterick * notates new since last time.

How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed! Subject to change with Len, UNC, Larkin etc early entries...

TIER ONE

Syracuse - I need to read up but *Carter-Williams is gone.

UNC - lots of returning good talent in McAdoo, Hairston and Bullock + strong recruiting gets UNC back at the top. I hope one of the 3 decides to leave and changes this. Unless one of them leaves I give them the slight edge over us as we have 2/3 (Hood?) starters return. They basically return the whole durn team which is huge edge these days. *Hairston is returning* - Bullock and McAddo?? Wiggins?

Duke - Cook and Suliamon + Hood and Jabari Parker, who plays the middle is a huge concern???

Notre Dame - Lose 2 key guys (Cooley) but they always lurk in top 25

TIER 2
--------
UVA - I expect strong coaching and stable core of players to put UVA in the top tier again this year... bubbe team again, very dangerous team to play as they rarely beat themselves

Pitt - They always play strong and tough

FSU - Wiggins? huge question mark. Would like to see Wiggins here vs UK and UNC. Still, many players return minus Snaer and they probably improve regardless as they were inexperienced this year.

GTech - Hunt, Carter, Miller all Freshman except Miller as Junior. And Hunt and Carter are very skilled (future pro?) freshman - see GTech moving up some nxt year

UMD - *Len is gone.. *Howard transfers. Team still has girth inside and Wells is v good. Not great team but ok.


TIER 3
----------
BC - this one intrigues me. The youngest team I have ever seen (all Fr 2 years ago, then all Fr and Soph this year with a stud Freshman) - now they will all be juniors and soph who are as experienced as most seniors and all played together. Ill say they get .500 this year unless the new schools are just too good. Either way they will be improved

Wake Forest - Similar to this year. Probably a little below .500 record. Lose one of the two studs but keep one and return all the other pieces. Key PG recruit coming or is that the nxt year?

Clemson - I like Brownell but where's the talent? Xs and Os, no Jimmys and Joes. McDaniels is very athletic 6'5" guy and all the guards return to improve but both "centers" are gone in Jennings and Booker.

Miami - Larkin back, but not much else proven - all else gone. Awesome PG though always gives you a chance but Miami is the biggest plummet as they lose 5 of their first 6 guys in rotation

NC State - well that was over fast. Nice recruiting but Everyone is gone now, even the PG. Youth will be served.

V Tech - No Eric Green nxt year.. could get ugly unless someone really steps up

gumbomoop
04-17-2013, 11:25 AM
Still a little early, but maybe by now the 2 biggest issues for early-predicting top tier are:

does Wiggins come to the ACC, either FSU or UNC?
does C.J. Fair stay at Syracuse or head to the NBA?

Even if Fair returns, however, I'm having trouble seeing them as better than UNC, even if Wiggins does not come to UNC. Syracuse loses it's #2, 3, and 4 scorers, and it's top 2 [actually only 2] assist guys.

Here are some observations imported from the "UNC next year" thread:


no matter what some people say McAdoo returning is great for UNC. He, Hairston and Paige with everyone on the team improving is a good team. Maybe not great but v good.... They have much better potential next year than this year.


Unless UNC adds Wiggins, I don't think they are a huge threat to be better than us next year.


If they do land Wiggins, I think they have to be viewed as a serious threat.


.... seems to me Bullock's departure definitely hurts; Heels could project near the top of the league if many things go right, but more likely to be a notch or two below first place.

Parsing some of these thoughts, I agree with gofurman that the Heels will be substantially improved. I agree with CDu that the Heels will not be as good as the Devils, unless they add Wiggins. Implicitly, CDu agrees [as do I] with Gary that if the Heels get Wiggins, they are a serious threat to Duke for ACC #1. I would agree with roywhite that the Heels are #2-3, unless they get Wiggins. But I certainly wouldn't put them lower than ACC #2 if Wiggins comes to UNC.

If Wiggins lands in Tallahassee, I suppose I could be convinced FSU nudges the Heels out of second place in the ACC. If Wiggins attends UNC, I'd say the Heels and Devils should be co-favorites. If Wiggins doesn't come to the ACC, I have trouble seeing any team better than the Heels for second place behind Duke.

Implicit in all the above is that Duke is a likely favorite - at worst co-favorite - in 2013-'14 ACC race.

noworries
04-17-2013, 12:55 PM
I expect the UVA will be a tourney team next year, barring injury. Jesperson left cause he knows he won't see the court much. Brogdon back and Anthony Gill in. Only losing Evans, but replacing him with a solid freshman point. Harris, Mitchell, Anderson return.

sporthenry
04-17-2013, 08:03 PM
Still a little early, but maybe by now the 2 biggest issues for early-predicting top tier are:

does Wiggins come to the ACC, either FSU or UNC?
does C.J. Fair stay at Syracuse or head to the NBA?

Even if Fair returns, however, I'm having trouble seeing them as better than UNC, even if Wiggins does not come to UNC. Syracuse loses it's #2, 3, and 4 scorers, and it's top 2 [actually only 2] assist guys.

If Wiggins lands in Tallahassee, I suppose I could be convinced FSU nudges the Heels out of second place in the ACC. If Wiggins attends UNC, I'd say the Heels and Devils should be co-favorites. If Wiggins doesn't come to the ACC, I have trouble seeing any team better than the Heels for second place behind Duke.

Implicit in all the above is that Duke is a likely favorite - at worst co-favorite - in 2013-'14 ACC race.

You think Wiggins going to FSU makes them contenders for 2nd place? I'd say Wiggins to FSU more puts them in contention for an NCAA bid. I know Wiggins is good but you need more than 1 player and while FSU has some decent pieces, they won't be very good without Wiggins. I guess the closest thing would be someone like OJ Mayo who went to USC and led them to a 6 seed. Sure Wiggins might be better than Mayo but that USC team also had talent with guys like Taj Gibson that FSU doesn't have.

As for UNC versus Syracuse, I guess UNC isn't that far behind but losing Bullock and presumably not getting Wiggins is a fairly big loss for them. I don't really see how the rest of their roster gets that much better. Paige will improve and I guess they have Britt to go to in case but I don't see them as anything more than a top 20/25 ish team which was about what they were this year after the lineup change.

As for Syracuse, sure they have some questions with guards but they have Fair and Christmas returning which is probably the best front-court in the country and in the ACC, that will probably dominate. And then with the zone, I think that will give some of the ACC teams trouble and they'll probably steal a few games just through that.

gofurman
04-17-2013, 10:46 PM
asterick * notates new since last time.

How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed! Subject to change with Len, UNC, Larkin etc early entries...

TIER ONE

Duke - Cook and Suliamon hopefully improve, + Hood and Parker, who holds the middle??? Plumlee? Jefferson?

Syracuse - I need to read up but *Carter-Williams is gone.

UNC - lots of returning good talent in McAdoo, Hairston and + strong recruiting gets UNC back at the top. I give them the slight edge over us as we have 2/3 (Hood?) starters return. They basically return the whole durn team which is huge edge these days. *Hairston and McAdoo returning- apparently Bullock is gone * ... Wiggins? Basically they have the pieces to improve over the summer with a lot of returning players

Notre Dame - Lose 2 key guys (Cooley) but they always lurk in top 25

TIER 2
--------
UVA - I expect strong coaching and stable core of players to put UVA in the top tier again this year... bubbe team again, very dangerous team to play as they rarely beat themselves

Pitt - They always play strong and tough

FSU - Wiggins? huge question mark. Would like to see Wiggins here vs UK and UNC. Still, many players return minus Snaer and they probably improve regardless as they were inexperienced this year.

GTech - Hunt, Carter, Miller all Freshman except Miller as Junior. And Hunt and Carter are very skilled (future pro?) freshman - see GTech moving up some nxt year

UMD - *Len is gone.. *Howard transfers. Team still has girth inside and Wells is v good. Not great team but ok.


TIER 3
----------
BC - this one intrigues me. The youngest team I have ever seen (all Fr 2 years ago, then all Fr and Soph this year with a stud Freshman) - now they will all be juniors and soph who are as experienced as most seniors and all played together. Ill say they get .500 this year unless the new schools are just too good. Either way they will be improved

Wake Forest - Similar to this year. Probably a little below .500 record. Lose one of the two studs but keep one and return all the other pieces. Apparently Bizdelik has pictures that the AD doesn't want made public as he still has his job

Clemson - I like Brownell but where's the talent? Xs and Os, no Jimmys and Joes. McDaniels is very athletic 6'5" guy and all the guards return to improve but both "centers" are gone in Jennings and Booker.

Miami - Larkin back, but not much else proven - all else gone. Awesome PG though always gives you a chance but Miami is the biggest plummet as they lose 5 of their first 6 guys in rotation

NC State - well that was over fast. Nice recruiting but Everyone is gone now, even the PG. Youth will be served.

V Tech - No Eric Green nxt year.. could get ugly unless someone really steps up

gumbomoop
04-18-2013, 12:49 PM
[1] You think Wiggins going to FSU makes them contenders for 2nd place? I'd say Wiggins to FSU more puts them in contention for an NCAA bid. I know Wiggins is good but you need more than 1 player and while FSU has some decent pieces, [2] they won't be very good without Wiggins.

As for UNC versus Syracuse, I guess UNC isn't that far behind but losing Bullock and presumably not getting Wiggins is a fairly big loss for them. [3] I don't really see how the rest of their roster gets that much better. Paige will improve and I guess they have Britt to go to in case but I don't see them as [4] anything more than a top 20/25 ish team which was about what they were this year after the lineup change.

As for Syracuse, sure they have some [5] questions with guards but they have Fair and Christmas returning which is probably the best front-court in the country and in the ACC, that will probably dominate. And then with [6] the zone, I think that will give some of the ACC teams trouble and they'll probably steal a few games just through that.

Fair points, worth an attempt on my part to respond.

[1] I do think Wiggins is an exceptional talent, different from Jabari Parker, but spectacularly gifted. But you're right that it takes more than a single player, which leads to [2]. Last preseason I thought it strange that anyone could think FSU would be better than Miami; i.e., I thought they were too young, whereas Miami had talent and experience galore. But next season, even without Wiggins, I think they have some still-young but very promising talent - all those bigs, plus perimeter Thomas, Bookert, Miller, Whisnant, and Brandon - plus vets like very talented White and returned-from-injury-and-rebounder-and-team-leader Shannon. So I'm thinking next year rather than being overrated, they'll be underrated. I think they'll [I]contend for NCAAT even without Wiggins. With Wiggins, top-3 ACC. [Obviously I'm sold on Wiggins, and think he's a difference-maker for FSU or UNC.]

UNC v. 'Cuse - [3] I think Paige is solid, shot very well from 3s late season, made some clutch shots. Hairston should be a star and leader. I think more of McAdoo than most on EK, though do not deny his inefficiency and will hope he continues to be inconsistent. I think Johnson will emerge, nice shot and moves from 4. So [4] I definitely see them as better than top 20-25 to start next season. I think they're top 10-12 without Wiggins, top 3-4 with.

[5] Yes, I might be underestimating Syracuse. Maybe their ceiling will depend substantially on how quickly frosh PG Ennis comes along; he might have to play 30+ mpg all season long. Forgot, too, about Gbinije's possible contributions to [6] that stifling zone.

CDu
04-18-2013, 01:20 PM
Fair points, worth an attempt on my part to respond.

[1] I do think Wiggins is an exceptional talent, different from Jabari Parker, but spectacularly gifted. But you're right that it takes more than a single player, which leads to [2]. Last preseason I thought it strange that anyone could think FSU would be better than Miami; i.e., I thought they were too young, whereas Miami had talent and experience galore. But next season, even without Wiggins, I think they have some still-young but very promising talent - all those bigs, plus perimeter Thomas, Bookert, Miller, Whisnant, and Brandon - plus vets like very talented White and returned-from-injury-and-rebounder-and-team-leader Shannon. So I'm thinking next year rather than being overrated, they'll be underrated. I think they'll [I]contend for NCAAT even without Wiggins. With Wiggins, top-3 ACC. [Obviously I'm sold on Wiggins, and think he's a difference-maker for FSU or UNC.]

UNC v. 'Cuse - [3] I think Paige is solid, shot very well from 3s late season, made some clutch shots. Hairston should be a star and leader. I think more of McAdoo than most on EK, though do not deny his inefficiency and will hope he continues to be inconsistent. I think Johnson will emerge, nice shot and moves from 4. So [4] I definitely see them as better than top 20-25 to start next season. I think they're top 10-12 without Wiggins, top 3-4 with.

[5] Yes, I might be underestimating Syracuse. Maybe their ceiling will depend substantially on how quickly frosh PG Ennis comes along; he might have to play 30+ mpg all season long. Forgot, too, about Gbinije's possible contributions to [6] that stifling zone.

I tend to agree with you on FSU. They have some talent there. The issue is inexperience (especially at PG and C). Their guards should be better next year. And they add two 4-star recruits (a 6'4" guard and a 6'9" PF). If their PG play improves and they get improvement from their 3 monster bigs, they'll be a very tough team. And if they add Wiggins to the mix, they'll be REALLY tough.

Honestly, aside from Hairston I'm not sure I see a huge difference right now between UNC and FSU. I think White and McAdoo are comparable, and I might even give the edge to White for defensive reasons. Shannon is better than anything UNC has other than McAdoo (less skilled but stronger and tougher than Johnson). And they have three 7'0" guys. If any of them emerge, FSU becomes a beast inside. On the perimeter, Paige is better than Bookert and Whisnant right now - we'll see where both are as sophomores (and Whisnant as a junior). At SG, Miller and McDonald are a wash. The only noticeable difference between those two teams is Hairston, who is better than Brandon and Thomas.

If Wiggins goes to UNC, UNC is MUCH better than FSU. If Wiggins goes to FSU, FSU is probably better than UNC (because FSU then has the better SF and better best player).

I do think you're underestimating Syracuse. They will be really tall/long/athletic, and as such their zone will give ACC teams fits. And they will have plenty of talent even without Carter-Williams.

And I think you're overestimating UNC a bit. I see them more as a 15-20 right now, top-5 with Wiggins. I think the concerns about Paige (who became a good shooter but only a so-so PG), the bigs (lots of names, not a lot of performance), and McAdoo (incredibly poor shooter, turnover machine, and not a great defender) are legitimate, even though I think McDonald will be solid and Hairston will be terrific.

gofurman
04-24-2013, 09:42 PM
* asterick * notates new since last time.

How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed! Subject to change with Len, UNC, Larkin etc early entries...

TIER ONE

Syracuse - I need to read up but The Orange already will be without seniors Brandon Triche and James Southerland, as well as sophomore Michael Carter-Williams, who announced his decision to enter the NBA draft. *But CJ Fair is retruning. That is a big boost. Still, like us, they lose A LOT in Triche, Southerland and Carter-Williams

UNC - lots of returning good talent in McAdoo, Hairston and Bullock + strong recruiting gets UNC back at the top. I hope one of the 3 decides to leave and changes this. Unless one of them leaves I give them the slight edge over us as we have 2/3 (Hood?) starters return. They basically return the whole durn team which is huge edge these days. Hairston is returning as is McAddo- * Bullock is gone a a 6'7" guard, Big question is Wiggins?

Duke - Cook and Suliamon are the only known quantities + RHood and Jabari Parker, but who plays the middle is a huge concern??? Just learned Marshall P is out for several months now..

Notre Dame - Lose 2 key guys (Cooley) but they always lurk in top 25

TIER 2
--------
UVA - I expect strong coaching and stable core of players to put UVA in the top tier again this year... bubbe team again, very dangerous team to play as they rarely beat themselves

Pitt - They always play strong and tough

FSU - Wiggins? huge question mark. Would like to see Wiggins here vs UK and UNC. Still, many players return minus Snaer and they probably improve regardless as they were inexperienced this year. I think they have Okaro White and Terrance Shanon and a LOT of 7 footers which is a good start.

GTech - Hunt, Carter, Miller all Freshman except Miller as Junior. And Hunt and Carter are very skilled (future pro?) freshman - see GTech moving up some nxt year

UMD - Len is gone.. Howard transfers. Team still has girth inside (Shaq Cleare) and Wells is v good. Not great team but ok.


TIER 3
----------
BC - this one intrigues me. The youngest team I have ever seen (all Fr 2 years ago, then all Fr and Soph this year with a stud Freshman) - now they will all be juniors and soph who are as experienced as most seniors and all played together. Ill say they get .500 this year unless the new schools are just too good. Either way they will be improved

Wake Forest - Similar to this year. Probably a little below .500 record. Lose one of the two studs but keep one and return all the other pieces. Key PG recruit coming or is that the nxt year?

Clemson - I like Brownell but where's the talent? Xs and Os, no Jimmys and Joes. McDaniels is very athletic 6'5" guy and all the guards return to improve but both "centers" are gone in Jennings and Booker.

Miami - Larkin back, but not much else proven - all else gone. Awesome PG though always gives you a chance but Miami is the biggest plummet as they lose 5 of their first 6 guys in rotation

NC State - well that was over fast. Nice recruiting but Everyone is gone now, even the PG. Youth will be served.

V Tech - No Eric Green nxt year.. could get ugly unless someone really steps up

-------
***Do you Agree or disagree with these three tiers of teams? - now we know CJ Fair is back - all that remains I think is Wiggins unless Larkin declares or something...

sporthenry
04-24-2013, 11:22 PM
I'm still confused as to why BC is in the 3rd tier behind teams like UMD, FSU, and Georgia Tech. BC went 2-0 against Georgia Tech. BC loses Van Nest while Georgia Tech loses Udofia. Neither teams bring in much. Both have very good big men and 2 good freshmen who will look to develop. I personally like BC's role players a bit more but how you can draw a line between the two is beyond me.

With FSU, they lose Snaer who had 4 game winners this year. Take him out, and how does FSU look without Wiggins. They have White and a rising Sophomore Bookert, a top 30 SG coming in along with some solid role players but I think they'll miss Snaer quite a bit even with a top recruit coming in. Obviously things change with Wiggins but as of now, I'm not expecting much out of Ojo as he looked way too raw last year and they'll need someone to make a huge jump. And just this year, they beat BC by 3 with Snaer went off going 8-10 for 21 points.

Maryland loses Len and Howard along with a few other role players. They still have Wells, Allen, and Faust and add Smotrycz from Michigan. They have some quality freshmen bigs who will look to take the jump but even this year with Len, they only split with BC.

Perhaps I'm looking at this too much based off last year and failing to acknowledge development although it is hard to determine who will develop what. But all 3 of those teams seemed to be at or around BC's level yet all of those teams are losing more than BC. Additionally, freshmen usually make the biggest jump and BC has as many freshmen ready to make the jump as the other teams if not more.

I'd say those 4 teams deserve their own tier and Pitt/UVA can make a tier with ND behind Duke, UNC and Syracuse.

CDu
04-25-2013, 09:54 AM
How and why do you see the ACC stacking up nxt year based on what we know so far? Please let me know where and why you think I missed! Subject to change with Len, UNC, Larkin etc early entries...

TIER ONE

Syracuse
UNC
Duke
Notre Dame


TIER 2

UVA
Pitt
FSU
GTech
UMD


TIER 3

BC
Wake Forest
Clemson
Miami
NC State
V Tech


***Do you Agree or disagree with these three tiers of teams? - now we know CJ Fair is back - all that remains I think is Wiggins unless Larkin declares or something...

I don't think Notre Dame should be in the top tier. They may find a way to be decent again, but there's just no reason to expect them to be in the same discussion as Duke and Syracuse. Similarly, I don't think UNC should be in that discussion either unless they get Wiggins. Without Wiggins, I don't think they are much better than FSU.

I'd actually put UVa ahead of UNC right now. They have the best returning player in the conference (Harris is better than Larkin). They have a ton of size and experience inside. They have a ton of talented wing players. And they are extremely well coached. At the very least, I see them as in their own Tier 2 (if not at the bottom of Tier 1).

As for the bottom tier, I think it will be Va Tech, Clemson, and NC State, unless NC State adds one or two more quality big men (talk has apparently cooled on Josh Davis unfortunately). And Miami might well join that group if they can't find anyone to help Larkin out (or if Larkin leaves).

I see little reason to differentiate BC, Wake, and Georgia Tech right now. I'd put them at the bottom of a bigger middle tier, with Maryland, Pitt, and FSU (without Wiggins) as the top of that tier. I'd put UNC and Notre Dame in the next tier up.

Olympic Fan
05-02-2013, 02:18 PM
Not huge news, but I haven't seen it elsewhere on DBR.

Wake Forest just added a grad-student transfer -- 6-2 guard Coron Williams from Robert Morris.

Williams averaged 9.1 ppg for RMU. Most importantly, he shot 41.6 on 178 3-point attempts. That's something Wake needs will the graduation of CJ Harris and the transfer of Chase Fisher, the only two guys on last year's team that could shoot 3s (well, Travis McKie could shoot them, but he only made 32 percent of his 146 attempts). He had six points (on 2-4 3-point shooting) in RMU's NIT upset of Kentucky.

Also, it looks like NC State won't be adding Josh Davis, a 5th-year guy from Tulane. Instead, they signed a kid named Freeman from Oak Hill. In the long term, that's probably a good thing for the Pack -- Freeman has a lot of potential -- but he's unlikely to have a lot of impact next year ... wheras Davis averaged 17 points and 10 rebounds at Tulane. He would have provided an immediate bump. Haven't heard lately, but Pitt is a player for him.

CDu
05-02-2013, 02:21 PM
Also, it looks like NC State won't be adding Josh Davis, a 5th-year guy from Tulane. Instead, they signed a kid named Freeman from Oak Hill. In the long term, that's probably a good thing for the Pack -- Freeman has a lot of potential -- but he's unlikely to have a lot of impact next year ... wheras Davis averaged 17 points and 10 rebounds at Tulane. He would have provided an immediate bump. Haven't heard lately, but Pitt is a player for him.

Yeah, not getting Davis is a big loss for State. From what I've heard from my State friends, it sounds like he's looking to go West Coast (San Diego State or Gonzaga). So I think Pitt would be a surprise. In any case, it's a tough break for State. With Davis, I think they're a legitimate bubble team. Without him? It puts a lot of pressure on Vandenburg and the 3 freshmen bigs.

gumbomoop
05-03-2013, 12:08 AM
Thinking about Kedsy's and CDu's comments from the other way-early thread, so I've imported their comments about UNC and ACC "elites" from that thread.


It possibly depends on your definition of "elites." Should UNC (w/o Wiggins) be in the conversation of teams that could finish 3rd or 4th in the ACC? Probably. But that doesn't sound like an "elite" to me.


I would put Duke, Syracuse, and possibly UVa above UNC without Wiggins. I don't know enough about what Notre Dame will put on the court next year (I know they lose a lot), so I wouldn't put them ahead of UNC.

I don't think UNC will be bad by any means. But I don't think they should be in the discussion of teams that could win the title. I mean, I'd say they have only an outside chance at winning the ACC regular season title.

Without getting hung up on "elite," and instead thinking "top tier," I guess there still might be some real differences re UNC, and maybe ND and Syracuse, too. It probably comes down to this: I'm higher on UNC - even without Wiggins - than are many others. I anticipate real improvement from Paige, MCadoo, and Johnson. I thought Paige, in particular, had a strong final 1/3 of last season.

To some extent, my thinking UNC does "belong in the top tier conversation" is related to my view that Syracuse has to replace a whole lot, and is therefore not obviously superior to UNC, nor to UVa or ND. And really, it appears to me that Syracuse will depend very heavily on a strong year from (1) frosh PG Tyler Ennis, and (2) Michael Gbinije, who appears to be the SG.

So, I have enough questions about Syracuse's inexperienced backcourt, combined with admiration for the steadiness and experience of UVa and ND, to say that the top tier - probably after Duke, but maybe even including Duke - is pretty wide open.

ND will have a senior guard tandem [Grant & Atkins] that together averaged 24.5 ppg last season, with 11 apg and only 5 tpg. Their 2 returning bigs are decent, and they have a solid wing scorer plus a very good frosh PG coming in. I like ND for top tier. UVa will challenge for top tier, and most posters will know enough about them already.

Both FSU [even without Wiggns] and Md might surprise. Now, admittedly they might surprise precisely by nudging ahead of a Wiggins-less UNC. But overall, except for Duke, which seems clearly [yes??] the team with which "the conversation" begins, it seems to me the rest of the top tier is wide open among ND, UVa, Syracuse, and UNC. Any of Md, FSU, and Pitt might surprise and nudge downward a couple of the possible top tier [after Duke] teams.

Kedsy
05-03-2013, 12:35 AM
Without getting hung up on "elite," and instead thinking "top tier," I guess there still might be some real differences re UNC, and maybe ND and Syracuse, too. It probably comes down to this: I'm higher on UNC - even without Wiggins - than are many others. I anticipate real improvement from Paige, MCadoo, and Johnson. I thought Paige, in particular, had a strong final 1/3 of last season.

It could happen, it's "way too early" to tell at this point. But my thinking is UNC needs a lot of things to go right to even be in the ACC top tier discussion. Could they all go right? Sure. But let's look at the three guys who you think are the key:

McAdoo: I haven't thoroughly researched this, but my guess is players who make "the jump" tend to be players who had low usage and jump a tier to high usage. This wouldn't be the case for JMM, because his usage percentage of 27.2% was already 3rd in the ACC. His oRating of 91.2 was pretty bad, so presumably he could increase his efficiency, but I just don't know how likely it is that a guy who was already used so much can make a quantum leap.

Johnson: I'm assuming Isaiah Hicks is the guy who runs away with the UNC PF competition. If I'm wrong and Johnson is the guy, I don't really care so much, because if Johnson starts and plays big minutes that means Hicks won't.

Paige: OK, he improved over the latter part of the season. But his oRating for the season was 96.4. To put that into perspective, Josh Hairston's oRating was 97.4. Paige's oRating was worse than every Duke player who played more than 6.5 mpg. In other words, Paige has to improve a LOT just to be adequate. He's not the sort of PG that leads an "elite" team, or a top notch ACC team, much less a team with Final Four hopes.

So I just don't see a top tier team here. If everything goes right for them, then maybe. But everything is just as likely to go right for a lot of other teams too. I could be wrong of course, but I don't think it's my Duke blue glasses that sees UNC as a middle tier ACC team, assuming Wiggins goes elsewhere.

gumbomoop
05-03-2013, 07:26 AM
So I just don't see a top tier team here. If everything goes right for them, then maybe. But everything is just as likely to go right for a lot of other teams too.

Your final point is a key - and admittedly a key perennially, for many teams in all conferences. But other than Duke as possibly the clear, "logical" early ACC #1, it seems to me there are 4 or 5 teams who might emerge into top tier, or might not.

My take on UNC perhaps assumes too much might go right for them, compared to the other contenders, to be "in the conversation." As I posted earlier, I'm inclined to think things will go right more for ND and UVa [and UNC] than for Syracuse. But maybe their zone will perplex many of their new ACC opponents. Gbinije appears to be a guy who must play a lot, and well.

Overall, it's the wide-openness - or at least what I see as the wide-openness after, maybe, Duke - that leads me to say UNC is "in the conversation" for top tier [meaning, I guess, top 3, maybe 4].

For anyone: Is Duke the clear favorite? Is Syracuse - my own skepticism notwithstanding - the clear way-early #2?

gofurman
05-03-2013, 11:33 AM
Thinking about Kedsy's and CDu's comments from the other way-early thread, so I've imported their comments about UNC and ACC "elites" from that thread.





Without getting hung up on "elite," and instead thinking "top tier," I guess there still might be some real differences re UNC, and maybe ND and Syracuse, too. It probably comes down to this: I'm higher on UNC - even without Wiggins - than are many others. I anticipate real improvement from Paige, MCadoo, and Johnson. I thought Paige, in particular, had a strong final 1/3 of last season.

To some extent, my thinking UNC does "belong in the top tier conversation" is related to my view that Syracuse has to replace a whole lot, and is therefore not obviously superior to UNC, nor to UVa or ND. And really, it appears to me that Syracuse will depend very heavily on a strong year from (1) frosh PG Tyler Ennis, and (2) Michael Gbinije, who appears to be the SG.

So, I have enough questions about Syracuse's inexperienced backcourt, combined with admiration for the steadiness and experience of UVa and ND, to say that the top tier - probably after Duke, but maybe even including Duke - is pretty wide open.

ND will have a senior guard tandem [Grant & Atkins] that together averaged 24.5 ppg last season, with 11 apg and only 5 tpg. Their 2 returning bigs are decent, and they have a solid wing scorer plus a very good frosh PG coming in. I like ND for top tier. UVa will challenge for top tier, and most posters will know enough about them already.

Both FSU [even without Wiggns] and Md might surprise. Now, admittedly they might surprise precisely by nudging ahead of a Wiggins-less UNC. But overall, except for Duke, which seems clearly [yes??] the team with which "the conversation" begins, it seems to me the rest of the top tier is wide open among ND, UVa, Syracuse, and UNC. Any of Md, FSU, and Pitt might surprise and nudge downward a couple of the possible top tier [after Duke] teams.

Sounds like gumbomoop and I agree - we are high on having returning players. W Paige, McAdoo and all the bigs returning to improve that really helps in College. As I said elsewhere - look at how our Duke guys improved this year by Having a snr Mason, snr Curry etc. Yes, much improvement was due to having a psuedo-healthy Kelly and having a true PG in Cook but a lot was due the improvement of our Seniors. Look at Louisville as an example - Russ Smith, Siva, Dieng as upperclassmen who returned made them a far better team than the year before. Dont underestimate the diff in having returning guys.

I certainly see UNC in the top 4 of the league. Duke, UNC, Syracuse and ? Again, speaking of returning players what BC is doing is crazy. Playing all FR two years ago and then all FR and SOPH last year. Be interesting to see how they do this year. Maybe 8-10 in league or so. A decent team

Olympic Fan
05-07-2013, 03:24 PM
Big news today -- Tennessee point guard Trae Golden is going to graduate and play his final season somewhere else.

Why is that news in this thread?

I have no inside info, but from the outside, I think there is a very good chance he winds up at Georgia Tech. Why? One, he's from Powder Springs, Ga., a suburb of Atlanta. Two, he's played AAU basketball with a number of Georgia Tech players and, three, it's hard to think of a school where his arrival would have more impact.

Georgia Tech has a lot going for it next year. Three solid big men -- Daniel Miller, Robert Carter and Kammeon Hosley. A pair of promising young wings in Marcus Georges-Hunt and Chris Boldin, backed up by some experienced guys -- Jason Morris, Brandon Reed and Stacy Poole.

What they don't have is a point guard. They don't even have a first-rate PG prospect.

Golden would change that. He did have an injury plagued junior year, but as a soph, he was very good -- 13.6 ppg., 4.5 apg, .388 3-point shooting. At times he played excellent defense (although he was erratic in that regard). Still, a quality player.

I understand that I'm talking about two big IFs here -- IF Golden goes go Georgia Tech and IF he regains his sophomore form (aren't those very similar to the two big ifs so many Duke fans have about Tarik Black?) -- then I would elevate Georgia Tech from the lower of the middle pack in the ACC to the fringe of the upper pack. They could be a very solid team with Golden at point.

CDu
05-07-2013, 03:28 PM
Big news today -- Tennessee point guard Trae Golden is going to graduate and play his final season somewhere else.

Why is that news in this thread?

I have no inside info, but from the outside, I think there is a very good chance he winds up at Georgia Tech. Why? One, he's from Powder Springs, Ga., a suburb of Atlanta. Two, he's played AAU basketball with a number of Georgia Tech players and, three, it's hard to think of a school where his arrival would have more impact.

Georgia Tech has a lot going for it next year. Three solid big men -- Daniel Miller, Robert Carter and Kammeon Hosley. A pair of promising young wings in Marcus Georges-Hunt and Chris Boldin, backed up by some experienced guys -- Jason Morris, Brandon Reed and Stacy Poole.

What they don't have is a point guard. They don't even have a first-rate PG prospect.

Golden would change that. He did have an injury plagued junior year, but as a soph, he was very good -- 13.6 ppg., 4.5 apg, .388 3-point shooting. At times he played excellent defense (although he was erratic in that regard). Still, a quality player.

I understand that I'm talking about two big IFs here -- IF Golden goes go Georgia Tech and IF he regains his sophomore form (aren't those very similar to the two big ifs so many Duke fans have about Tarik Black?) -- then I would elevate Georgia Tech from the lower of the middle pack in the ACC to the fringe of the upper pack. They could be a very solid team with Golden at point.

Yeah, that would be a HUGE get for Tech if they got him. He'd instantly give them credibility. At the very least, he's a better version of Jontel Evans (i.e., one who can score). I'd easily put Tech ahead of Miami, State, and Va Tech, and probably ahead of Wake, BC, and FSU (without Wiggins) as well. Maybe Pittsburgh too, depending upon what sort of transfers Pitt adds.

CDu
05-07-2013, 03:39 PM
Without getting hung up on "elite," and instead thinking "top tier," I guess there still might be some real differences re UNC, and maybe ND and Syracuse, too. It probably comes down to this: I'm higher on UNC - even without Wiggins - than are many others. I anticipate real improvement from Paige, MCadoo, and Johnson. I thought Paige, in particular, had a strong final 1/3 of last season.

To some extent, my thinking UNC does "belong in the top tier conversation" is related to my view that Syracuse has to replace a whole lot, and is therefore not obviously superior to UNC, nor to UVa or ND. And really, it appears to me that Syracuse will depend very heavily on a strong year from (1) frosh PG Tyler Ennis, and (2) Michael Gbinije, who appears to be the SG.

So, I have enough questions about Syracuse's inexperienced backcourt, combined with admiration for the steadiness and experience of UVa and ND, to say that the top tier - probably after Duke, but maybe even including Duke - is pretty wide open.

Firstly, I have no problem putting UNC in the top-4 of the ACC even without Wiggins. My only disagreement was with the suggestion that they should be among only a handful of teams in the discussion for threatening UK for the national title.

Our disagreement on exactly where UNC should fall does seem to revolve around our opinions of Paige and McAdoo (and more specifically, how good they'll be next year). I think Paige will be solid at PG next year. But I don't think he'll be special. I think we'll have a clear advantage at PG. And I just have never seen any actual basketball skill from McAdoo. He's reasonably big (for a PF) and athletic. But he can't dribble, doesn't make good decisions, doesn't react to defense well, and is an atrocious shooter. If he can catch and finish uncontested, he looks fabulous. But when he's faced any defense at all, he looks lost. It's possible that he could suddenly figure out how to play next year. But that's a very big "if" in my opinion. And as such, I think we have a clear advantage at PF. I also think we have a clear advantage at SG. And while I think UNC has the edge at SF, I don't think it is nearly enough to offset our edge at the other three spots. And both teams are questionable at C, so that's a wash for me. As such, I don't see UNC (as they are currently constructed) as being on Duke's level.

As for UVa, I think they are better at SG, PF, and C than UNC. And their depth on the wings is better. They are far better defensively. Their only question mark is at PG, but they have lots of possible options for that spot. As for Syracuse, I think their frontcourt (which is VERY formidable) and their zone (new to the ACC) will put them ahead of UNC (unless UNC gets Wiggins). That could change if Ennis and Gbinije simply aren't good enough, but I think Ennis is good enough and Gbinije's length and athleticism (with a year to learn the system) will make him more valuable there than at Duke.

Olympic Fan
05-09-2013, 04:01 PM
More transfer news ... oft-injured power forward Terrance Shannon is going to graduate and play his final year at VCU as a grad student.

Shannon was a solid PF for the 'Noles, but he's missed significant time in each of the last three seasons due to injuries. He would have been a veteran presence for the 2013-14 FSU team.

On the other hand, his departure opens up the 13th scholarship spot that FSU is going to need if Andrew Wiggins wants to play in Tallahassee. Until the Shannon news, they didn't have a spot for him.

UrinalCake
05-10-2013, 11:43 AM
Wow, if I'm an FSU fan I've got to be pretty happy about my chances with Wiggins, especially with the circulating (unsubstantiated) rumors that an announcement may be coming next week.

matt1
05-10-2013, 11:22 PM
Wow, if I'm an FSU fan I've got to be pretty happy about my chances with Wiggins, especially with the circulating (unsubstantiated) rumors that an announcement may be coming next week.

I hope that you are right and that Wiggins goes to FSU over UNC, UK, and KU.

Olympic Fan
05-10-2013, 11:59 PM
The transfers keep coming ... Georgia Tech wing guard Brandon Reed will graduate and play his final year at another school.

This will be the third school for Reed, who started at Arkansas State, transferred to Georgia Tech, where he played two seasons ... and now moves on.

He started 15 games this season until replaced in the lineup (in the Duke game) by freshman Chris Bolden. He didn't figure to start next year, but he would have been a nice, experienced reserve. So a small loss ... but a loss.

BTW, I have been told that there is NO chance that Trae Golden, the veteran Tennessee point guard, will wind up at Georgia Tech. There's apparently ana academic issue that will preclude that happening.

Kedsy
05-14-2013, 06:47 PM
Now that Wiggins is settled, I wanted to take a deeper look into the ACC. The following table shows (a) how many returning players each team has who played 8 or more mpg in their last college season and had an oRtg of 100+; (b) the rank of each team's recruiting class according to the 24/7 composite (http://247sports.com/Season/2013-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings); and (c) last year's Pomeroy defensive efficiency ranking for each team. I tried to take into account early entry and transfers in and out, but it's very possible I missed something. So, here goes:



Team # of 8/100 returnees Recruiting class rank Last year's defensive rank
---- -------------------- -------------------- --------------------------
BC 7 #94 #174
Duke 6 #3 #27
Pitt 6 #36 #16
UVa 6 #61 #20
Syr 5 #8 #5
FSU 5 #35 #165
ND 4 #14 #81
Md 4 #39 #38
VaTech 4 #61 #258
UNC 3 #13 #44
GaTech 3 #65 #33
NCSU 2 #12 #113
Miami 2 #39 #28
Clem 1 #76 #57


Obviously some of these 100+ guys are really 120+ guys and others are 100.1. Obviously some teams had guys at 99. Obviously players can improve -- sometimes they can improve a lot. Obviously players who didn't play 8+ mpg might do so next year and may excel. And of course recruiting ranking is a very inexact science. And the biggest qualifier is last year's defensive rank may have little to do with next year's defensive rank.

Having said all that, look where UNC is. I could be wrong, but I suspect they're going to be closer to NC State than they are to Duke next season.

gumbomoop
05-16-2013, 02:13 PM
Obviously players can improve -- sometimes they can improve a lot. Obviously players who didn't play 8+ mpg might do so next year and may excel. And of course recruiting ranking is a very inexact science. And the biggest qualifier is last year's defensive rank may have little to do with next year's defensive rank.

Having said all that, look where UNC is. I could be wrong, but I suspect they're going to be closer to NC State than they are to Duke next season.


It's not like [Roy] has a choice. What are the options [other than McDonald at SG] - Nate Britt? Luke Davis? Move Hairston to guard and play Tokoto at small forward?

There are just a lot of unappealing options on UNC's 2013-2014 roster.

I enter a mild dissent to the view here expressed by Kedsy and Duvall, and what I infer is the consensus on EK, now that UNC has whiffed on Wiggins. [And let me acknowledge that a month ago Kedsy and maybe others insisted that Wiggins was at best a long shot to come to UNC.] That consensus seems to be that, re top tier, UNC is only borderllne.

I think the consensus is that Duke is clear, solid, "logical" preseason ACC #1, even without Black. Even clearer, more solid, and totally logical with Black. I agree with that view.

I think consensus #2 is Syracuse, but IMO 'Cuse isn't as "clear, solid, logical" #2 as is Duke at #1. Several posters have rightly pointed to 'Cuse's D as the key to their team, and I can't disagree with that. But it does seem to me that incoming Fr Tyler Ennis as their only PG is a much bigger question-mark than, say, Paige for the Heels. It appears that Michael Gbinije is the starting SG and possibly the back-up PG. The Orange appear very strong inside, but less certain at guard spots.

Although not a clear #2 for me, they're certainly one of several teams that seem likely to fight for that finish, along with UVa, UNC, and ND. I'm inclined to put both UVa and UNC ahead of 'Cuse.

A thought on UNC and Duvall's good question about Roy's options: If none of the Heel 5s [Hubert, James, Meeks] is good enough to play big minutes, maybe Roy will play, not "small ball," but, like Duke, "medium ball." It seems clear that Hairston, McAdoo, and Paige will play most minutes. So who else? McDonald, not because he's excellent, but he is experienced, might become a solid perimeter defender, and an ok 3-bomber. But Maybe Roy will go a lot with McAdoo, Johnson, Hicks, Hairston, and Paige. No real center there, but those 4 should give them plenty of active rebounders: "medium ball." Replacing 6'7" Bullock and 6'3" Strickland with two 6'8" guys might well give them enough size to compensate for no real 5 for most of game. [We can appreciate that problem, yes?] Hubert for D/rebounding sub, Tokoto and McDonald for wing subs, Britt as PG backup.

I'll hope Roy has to experiment a lot, trial with lots of errors, confusion and uncertainty [esp. by Paige]. I don't expect all that, but maybe there's sort of a consensus to that effect, and toward the view - hinted at by Kedsy - that UNC is logically the #4 ACC finisher, but at any rate rather more likely to wind up ACC #6-7 than #2-3.

CDu
05-16-2013, 02:28 PM
I enter a mild dissent to the view here expressed by Kedsy and Duvall, and what I infer is the consensus on EK, now that UNC has whiffed on Wiggins. [And let me acknowledge that a month ago Kedsy and maybe others insisted that Wiggins was at best a long shot to come to UNC.] That consensus seems to be that, re top tier, UNC is only borderllne.

I think the consensus is that Duke is clear, solid, "logical" preseason ACC #1, even without Black. Even clearer, more solid, and totally logical with Black. I agree with that view.

I think consensus #2 is Syracuse, but IMO 'Cuse isn't as "clear, solid, logical" #2 as is Duke at #1. Several posters have rightly pointed to 'Cuse's D as the key to their team, and I can't disagree with that. But it does seem to me that incoming Fr Tyler Ennis as their only PG is a much bigger question-mark than, say, Paige for the Heels. It appears that Michael Gbinije is the starting SG and possibly the back-up PG. The Orange appear very strong inside, but less certain at guard spots.

Although not a clear #2 for me, they're certainly one of several teams that seem likely to fight for that finish, along with UVa, UNC, and ND. I'm inclined to put both UVa and UNC ahead of 'Cuse.

I think you are underestimating Ennis. Ennis is considered by many to be the best pure PG in the coming class. He probably won't score as much as Paige, but I think he'll run the offense better than Paige. And physically, he's more ready than Paige (who is rail thin) to play defense.

But more importantly, I think you're underestimating the advantage Syracuse will have with their zone. The ACC simply hasn't seen it enough. They are almost certainly going to struggle with it. I think that's worth 2-3 extra wins, even with uncertainty at guard.

And of course I think you're overvaluing McAdoo and Paige, but we've been through that before.


A thought on UNC and Duvall's good question about Roy's options: If none of the Heel 5s [Hubert, James, Meeks] is good enough to play big minutes, maybe Roy will play, not "small ball," but, like Duke, "medium ball." It seems clear that Hairston, McAdoo, and Paige will play most minutes. So who else? McDonald, not because he's excellent, but he is experienced, might become a solid perimeter defender, and an ok 3-bomber. But Maybe Roy will go a lot with McAdoo, Johnson, Hicks, Hairston, and Paige. No real center there, but those 4 should give them plenty of active rebounders: "medium ball." Replacing 6'7" Bullock and 6'3" Strickland with two 6'8" guys might well give them enough size to compensate for no real 5 for most of game. [We can appreciate that problem, yes?] Hubert for D/rebounding sub, Tokoto and McDonald for wing subs, Britt as PG backup.

I would be thrilled if Roy played Hicks at SF. Mainly because he simply doesn't have SF skills. It'd be sort of like the experiment with Henson at SF. It's also a bit like when we tried Jefferson at SF this year. It's just not a good position for Hicks.

It also hurts UNC defensively. Hairston is better-suited guarding bigger, less quick guys. So if you push him to SG and push Hicks to SF, you have 2 guys who aren't quick enough to excel at their defensive assignment.

I actually think UNC's best lineup would be McAdoo, Hicks/Johnson, Hairston, McDonald, and Paige. It's not great, but at least everyone is physically able to play the position that they'd be playing. They'd be a little undersized in the frontcourt, but big on the wings. I think it's probably the best they can do. Of course, given Roy's unwillingness to play without a "true C", he may balk at going with this lineup until midseason.


I'll hope Roy has to experiment a lot, trial with lots of errors, confusion and uncertainty [esp. by Paige]. I don't expect all that, but maybe there's sort of a consensus to that effect, and toward the view - hinted at by Kedsy - that UNC is logically the #4 ACC finisher, but at any rate rather more likely to wind up ACC #6-7 than #2-3.

I tend to agree with this: I think that the expectation should be 4th. There is certainly a chance that they could finish #2 or #3 if all goes right. But they could just as easily end up in the middle of the pack.

Des Esseintes
05-16-2013, 03:38 PM
I tend to agree with this: I think that the expectation should be 4th. There is certainly a chance that they could finish #2 or #3 if all goes right. But they could just as easily end up in the middle of the pack.

To piggyback on what you're saying, a high finish for Carolina is pretty much contingent upon McAdoo becoming a significantly more efficient player. I'm asking this question seriously and not rhetorically: how often does that happen? How often does a a guy play bad, inefficient offense for two seasons, then suddenly right the ship for his junior campaign? I know it happens. Louisville would not be champion this season if Russ Smith hadn't made a vast leap in his decision-making. But I do wonder just how reasonable an expectation it is to count on such growth. I'd have to guess failure is far more common than success on this score. At some point, you are what your numbers say you are, to paraphrase the Tuna.

CDu
05-16-2013, 04:05 PM
To piggyback on what you're saying, a high finish for Carolina is pretty much contingent upon McAdoo becoming a significantly more efficient player. I'm asking this question seriously and not rhetorically: how often does that happen? How often does a a guy play bad, inefficient offense for two seasons, then suddenly right the ship for his junior campaign? I know it happens. Louisville would not be champion this season if Russ Smith hadn't made a vast leap in his decision-making. But I do wonder just how reasonable an expectation it is to count on such growth. I'd have to guess failure is far more common than success on this score. At some point, you are what your numbers say you are, to paraphrase the Tuna.

I agree. There has always been a huge disconnect between what the scouts/media/general fans think of McAdoo and his actual ability/performance. He has not shown any basketball skills, either at the high school or college level. He's a high-energy guy who got away with being bigger and a better athlete than his competition in high school, and he benefited by having literally no responsibility offensively as a freshman. As a sophomore, in his first year as a critical player at the college level, he showed quite clearly that his basketball skills were insufficient. He had no dribbling ability, no shooting ability, poor passing, and poor court awareness. It's certainly possible that he improves enough in some of these areas to be an effective player. But I wouldn't consider that the expectation.

My expectation is that he gets a little better as a shooter, but remains fairly inefficient (less so, but still inefficient). I suspect he'll again put up great count stats thanks to again taking a high volume of shots. But I just don't see him improving enough to make this UNC team significantly better than it was this year. If UNC is going to be better than just decent, then at least 2 of Paige, McAdoo, Hicks/Johnson/James/Meeks are going to have to be better than expected.

Newton_14
05-16-2013, 10:34 PM
I think you are underestimating Ennis. Ennis is considered by many to be the best pure PG in the coming class. He probably won't score as much as Paige, but I think he'll run the offense better than Paige. And physically, he's more ready than Paige (who is rail thin) to play defense.

But more importantly, I think you're underestimating the advantage Syracuse will have with their zone. The ACC simply hasn't seen it enough. They are almost certainly going to struggle with it. I think that's worth 2-3 extra wins, even with uncertainty at guard.

And of course I think you're overvaluing McAdoo and Paige, but we've been through that before.



I would be thrilled if Roy played Hicks at SF. Mainly because he simply doesn't have SF skills. It'd be sort of like the experiment with Henson at SF. It's also a bit like when we tried Jefferson at SF this year. It's just not a good position for Hicks.

It also hurts UNC defensively. Hairston is better-suited guarding bigger, less quick guys. So if you push him to SG and push Hicks to SF, you have 2 guys who aren't quick enough to excel at their defensive assignment.

I actually think UNC's best lineup would be McAdoo, Hicks/Johnson, Hairston, McDonald, and Paige. It's not great, but at least everyone is physically able to play the position that they'd be playing. They'd be a little undersized in the frontcourt, but big on the wings. I think it's probably the best they can do. Of course, given Roy's unwillingness to play without a "true C", he may balk at going with this lineup until midseason.



I tend to agree with this: I think that the expectation should be 4th. There is certainly a chance that they could finish #2 or #3 if all goes right. But they could just as easily end up in the middle of the pack.

Agree with everything except for Hicks. You are way off on that kid. He may, possibly, need one year to adjust and add strength, but may not. Kid is a baller. He will have an impact sooner than later and can certainly do so at SF.

I would not sleep on him.