This Week in the ACC: 11/16-11/22

[pfrduke]

So-so opening weekend for the conference. The top teams looked impressive against lesser competition, and Pitt put up a strong first half (against particularly adverse conditions) against the Zags, but State and Virginia Tech has disappointing home losses to open their seasons.

Pre-season tournaments begin in earnest this week. Last year, Virginia, Duke, and Miami won their (less than impressive, if we're being honest) fields while the rest of the ACC that played in a tournament suffered a defeat somewhere along the way. By the end of this week, all of last year's champions will have finished their fields and FSU will be well along its way (in a winnable Paradise Jam).

There's also some tasty non-tournament action this week, highlighted by Duke-Kentucky in Chicago and some tests for Virginia, Georgia Tech, Wake, and a trip to Cedar Falls for UNC. Let's take a look at all 34 games in a week full of basketball.

Monday
[77]Georgia Tech hosts [84]Tennessee (7:00, ESPNU)
[25]Miami hosts [104]Louisiana Lafayette (7:00, ESPN3)
[3]Virginia at [61]George Washington (7:30, ESPN2)

Tuesday
[24]Louisville hosts [307]Hartford (7:00, ESPN3)
[32]Syracuse hosts [105]St. Bonaventure (7:00, ESPN3)
[31]Pittsburgh hosts [NR]St. Josephs (Ind.) (7:00, ESPN3)
[13]Notre Dame hosts [136]Milwaukee (7:00, ESPN3)
[1]Duke vs. [2]Kentucky in Chicago (7:30, ESPN)
[33]Florida State hosts [288]Jacksonville (9:00, ESPN3)

Wednesday
[6]UNC hosts [172]Wofford (7:00, ESPN3)
[68]Wake Forest hosts [87]Richmond (7:00, ESPN3)
[63]NC State hosts [295]IUPUI (7:00, ESPN3)
[164]Virginia Tech hosts [322]Jacksonville State (7:00, ESPN3)

Thursday
[25]Miami vs. [113]Mississippi State in Puerto Rico (5:00, ESPN2)
[132]Boston College hosts [342]Central Connecticut State (6:00, ESPN3)
[40]Clemson hosts [271]Texas Southern (7:00, ESPN3)
[77]Georgia Tech hosts [134]Green Bay (7:00, ESPN3)
[3]Virginia vs. [269]Bradley in Charleston (9:30, ESPN2)

Friday
[33]Florida State vs. [98]Hofstra in St. Thomas (12:30, CBSSN)
[25]Miami vs. [20]Utah/[102]Texas Tech in Puerto Rico (5:00/7:00, ESPNU)
[1]Duke vs. [50]Virginia Commonwealth in New York (7:30, ESPN2)
[31]Pittsburgh vs. [171]Detroit (8:00, ESPN3)
[3]Virginia vs. [75]Seton Hall/[253]Long Beach State (7:00/9:30, ESPN3/ESPNU)

Saturday
[164]Virginia Tech hosts [207]VMI (TBD)
[24]Louisville hosts [103]North Florida (12:00)
[6]North Carolina at [71]Northern Iowa (2:00, ESPN3)
[13]Notre Dame hosts [329]UMass Lowell (2:00, ESPN3)
[32]Syracuse hosts [240]Elon (7:00, ESPN3)
[33]Florida State vs. [48]South Carolina/[117]Depaul (6:30/9:00, CBSSN)

Sunday
[132]Boston College hosts [173]Harvard (12:30, ESPNU)
[77]Georgia Tech hosts [272]East Tennessee State (2:00, ESPN3)
[1]Duke vs. [21]Wisconsin/[45]Georgetown in New York (TBD)
[3]Virginia vs. [52]Oklahoma State/[58]Mississippi/[185]Towson/[202]George Mason in Charleston (TBD)
[25]Miami vs. [30]Butler/[56]Minnesota/[79]Temple/[220]Missouri State in Puerto Rico (TBD)

ACC Non-Conf: 17-2
ACC vs. Power 6: 0-0
AAC: 1-0
AEC: 1-0
CAA: 0-1
CUSA: 1-0
Ivy: 1-0
MAAC: 2-0
MEAC: 2-0
NEC: 3-0
Patriot: 2-0
Southern: 1-0
Southland: 1-0
Sun Belt: 1-0
SWAC: 0-1
WAC: 1-0

[Bob Green]

Monday

[3]Virginia at [61]George Washington (7:30, ESPN2)



I'm looking forward to seeing Virginia play tonight. The Cavaliers under Tony Bennett are a quality program and will compete with Duke and North Carolina to win the ACC.

[Olympic Fan]

Interesting that Duke gets three top 50 opponents this week (whether we get Wisconsin or Georgetown Sunday).

The rest of the ACC combined might get three top 50 foes, depending on the outcome of certain tournament matchups.

[jhmoss1812]

I'm looking forward to seeing Virginia play tonight. The Cavaliers under Tony Bennett are a quality program and will compete with Duke and North Carolina to win the ACC.

Thanks! That's definitely the plan. This should be a tough game against a quality OOC foe in what will definitely be a very hostile gym. I like our team's talent, depth and experience this year though and I think we'll get the job done tonight.

[jhmoss1812]

Interesting that Duke gets three top 50 opponents this week (whether we get Wisconsin or Georgetown Sunday).

The rest of the ACC combined might get three top 50 foes, depending on the outcome of certain tournament matchups.

We'll find out a lot about Duke in these next few games.

Similarly, UVA's OOC schedule will ramp up considerably beginning in December.

We play @ Ohio State (ACC/B1G challenge), William & Mary (who crushed NCSU), West Virginia (in MSG), Villanova and California in successive games.

[Troublemaker]

UVA down by 3 at the half at GW.

[Troublemaker]

I don't want to start a No Jinx Alert thread, but UVA is in trouble at GW. Down 7, under 6 minutes left.

ESPN2

[ChillinDuke]

I don't want to start a No Jinx Alert thread, but UVA is in trouble at GW. Down 7, under 6 minutes left.

And perhaps more importantly they've been down almost the entire game, have looked largely lost, and havent flashed any semblance of being a Top-25 team.

-Chillin

[Ultrarunner]

I don't want to start a No Jinx Alert thread, but UVA is in trouble at GW. Down 7, under 6 minutes left.

ESPN2

I figured I'd restart a new thread in a couple of weeks. Too early yet. Until the teams have a few games under their belts, it's a bit of a free-for-all and surprises happen pretty often. Once you get 8-10 games in, you can start non-jinxing legitimate upsets.

[ChillinDuke]

What an atrocious final minute or two from UVA. Shocking, frankly, given what we've seen from them in the recent past.

- Chillin

[SCMatt33]

A few thoughts on UVA. They really did miss a ton of opportunities at the end, but overall, you can really see where UVA is going to need to adjust this year. First, Shayok is the only guy on their team who shot better than 35% last year from three and without a ton of guys who can score inside, their offense looked like it was simply 4 guys watching Brogdon at times. Now, Brogdon can and will take over some games, as he almost did tonight, but someone needs to step up if they take him away. Second, UVA will probably have a tougher time adjusting to the new freedom of movement calls as these changes were pretty specifically targeted at their style of defense. Without a guy like Darion Atkins to help clean up the boards, and with perimeter contact called tightly, GW was able to get to the rim in one on one situations and get some tap ins and put backs that your not used to seeing UVA give up. Third, you have to give GW a lot of credit. This is not Wisconsin losing to Western Illinois or Georgetown losing to Radford. This was a road game against a top 100 team from last year that won at Pitt in the NIT and plays in a very tough A10. This wasn't a fluke either. GW led UVA at the half last year in Charlottesville and kept the game close until the last 10 minutes. Who knows, this could jump start the Colonials towards a at-large bid in a league that's more than likely getting a few teams in the tourney.

[brevity]

What an atrocious final minute or two from UVA. Shocking, frankly, given what we've seen from them in the recent past.

- Chillin

1. Why did no one try a 2-pointer?
2. Why are they playing a true road game early in the season against a state-adjacent mid-major?
3. How long do UVA fans have to wait before their team embraces being a favorite and having a target on its back?

[NYBri]

This loss by UVA and the two games tomorrow night, the top ten will be scrambled.

[brlftz]

i'm not surprised by the UVA result, really. they looked like a different team last year without Anderson. I will give them respect for going TO gw, however, that's pretty cool.

[uh_no]

1. Why did no one try a 2-pointer?
2. Why are they playing a true road game early in the season against a state-adjacent mid-major?
3. How long do UVA fans have to wait before their team embraces being a favorite and having a target on its back?

are we really complaining about a team playing a good game in november? I'm glad SOMEONE is. the fewer cupcakes the better IMO.

[SCMatt33]

2. Why are they playing a true road game early in the season against a state-adjacent mid-major?


I just think Tony Bennett likes to test his team in road environments early. This isn't anything new for them. In the last four seasons they've play at George Mason, James Madison, and VCU. Outside of James Madison in the CAA, those aren't schools that are likely to give guarantee games to UVA, so you have to weigh the risk of losing on the road versus the relative benefit of playing a cupcake at home. They don't really have a convenient neutral court on which to schedule these kinds of games. The only one I can think of is the Verizon Center, but with three full time tenants, I doubt that is a viable option for them. It's pretty incredible when you think about it that Duke has gotten schools like Colorado St, Utah St, and St. Louis to come play guarantee games. Not every school can call up the United Center and ask for a date to play a one off against Iowa St (before they were good) and get it. Scheduling is tough, even for most Power 5 schools. I give Tony Bennett respect for playing those games instead of pulling the old Seth Greenberg and scratching your head on selection Sunday when you get left out with the 330th best non-conference SOS.

[jhmoss1812]

Thanks! That's definitely the plan. This should be a tough game against a quality OOC foe in what will definitely be a very hostile gym. I like our team's talent, depth and experience this year though and I think we'll get the job done tonight.

Well looks like I was wrong about us getting the job done tonight. Tough loss but hopefully one that we'll learn from and use down the road.

[Troublemaker]

GW's offense having their way with UVA's defense was probably the most interesting takeaway from the game. The Colonials were able to create gaps in UVA's defense with good ball movement and then drive the gaps with impunity, which was probably the most concerning thing from UVA's perspective. The Hoos have to hope that a rim protector like Darion Atkins or Akil Mitchell emerges, or else UVA might "only" have a very good but not great defense this season. UVA's offense would then have to make up for that defensive drop in order to be as strong a contender as they were the past two seasons, and it's not clear that they have the offensive talent to do so.

Give GW some credit, too. They have an experienced team with good size and good skill that made the tournament two seasons ago and will probably make it again this season. On postups, GW's bigs were able to handle UVA's vaunted double-teams to find open shooters, something that a good passer like Jahlil couldn't do last season, for example. Then, when UVA had to abandon the double-teams, GW's big men were able to score against single-coverage.

[Wander]

This is not a horrible loss for UVA - I agree with the above that this is in no way equivalent to Wisconsin losing to Western Illinois for example, and UVA can still contend for an ACC title. But maybe the multiple posters here who ranted it was a huge moral outrage that the preseason polls put UNC above UVA will come forth bearing gifts to GW.

[left_hook_lacey]

It's November 17th 2015 at 8:30 am. Remember me saying this, "UNC will not be in the top 15 by season's end."

I know they've only played 2 games, and many suspected they might be a little overrated, but I'm prepared to say they are severely overrated. I know Paige hasn't played yet, but one player cannot fix their problems.

They are supposed to have a lot of depth and experience, which they do, but the quality of the depth just isn't there. They have 2-3 role players at each position, but no real game-changing talent at any position(except possibly Paige, but he tends to disappear for stretches). I think a trip to the sweet 16 is the ceiling for this team. They are not a lock for the final four or championship game as some have predicted, and I think my sweet 16 prediction might be a little generous.

[Indoor66]

It's November 17th 2015 at 8:30 am. Remember me saying this, "UNC will not be in the top 15 by season's end."

I know they've only played 2 games, and many suspected they might be a little overrated, but I'm prepared to say they are severely overrated. I know Paige hasn't played yet, but one player cannot fix their problems.

They are supposed to have a lot of depth and experience, which they do, but the quality of the depth just isn't there. They have 2-3 role players at each position, but no real game-changing talent at any position(except possibly Paige, but he tends to disappear for stretches). I think a trip to the sweet 16 is the ceiling for this team. They are not a lock for the final four or championship game as some have predicted, and I think my sweet 16 prediction might be a little generous.

But, but, you must be wrong. It IS carowhina - practitioners of the carowhina way!

[left_hook_lacey]

But, but, you must be wrong. It IS Carolina - practitioners of the Carolina way!

Be prepared for some of the most epic IC meltdowns ever.

[Ichabod Drain]

It's November 17th 2015 at 8:30 am. Remember me saying this, "UNC will not be in the top 15 by season's end."

I know they've only played 2 games, and many suspected they might be a little overrated, but I'm prepared to say they are severely overrated. I know Paige hasn't played yet, but one player cannot fix their problems.

They are supposed to have a lot of depth and experience, which they do, but the quality of the depth just isn't there. They have 2-3 role players at each position, but no real game-changing talent at any position(except possibly Paige, but he tends to disappear for stretches). I think a trip to the sweet 16 is the ceiling for this team. They are not a lock for the final four or championship game as some have predicted, and I think my sweet 16 prediction might be a little generous.

Just so you know, they finished in the top 15 last year with pretty much the same team.

[left_hook_lacey]

Just so you know, they finished in the top 15 last year with pretty much the same team.

I realize that. I started to predict a finish outside the top 10, but that's not nearly as bold as outside top 15, but I stand by my prediction.

[Olympic Fan]

Just so you know, they finished in the top 15 last year with pretty much the same team.

Actually, they didn't.

UNC was No. 17 in the final AP poll last year.

[Ichabod Drain]

Actually, they didn't.

UNC was No. 17 in the final AP poll last year.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings/_/year/2015/week/4/seasontype/3

[Billy Dat]

1. Why did no one try a 2-pointer?
2. Why are they playing a true road game early in the season against a state-adjacent mid-major?
3. How long do UVA fans have to wait before their team embraces being a favorite and having a target on its back?

I only watched the final 5 minutes when Twitter alerted me that the GW fans were chanting "over-rated" and I assumed GW must have a huge lead. I really thought UVA would complete the comeback, especially when GW pulled the all time space-out of getting a T for having 6 men on the court. But, they managed that one inside hoop to stop the bleeding and keep the lead at 4, and UVA kind of froze up. I credit Bennett because he didn't over-manage the end of the game with timeouts, I think he wanted to see what his team was made of and they didn't quite answer the call. For your point #2 above, I agree with the others who favor this kind of aggressive scheduling. As it turned out, there were a lot of UVA fans in the house anyway. As for your point #3, that was the primary thought on my mind, that Bennett has built this program to the point where it is now a national powerhouse and beating them may result in court stormings - last night's was kind of a JV-level storm but that is probably better for everyone's safety (further tangent - did you notice how many of the court stormers were wearing Hawaiian shirts?). The team needs to be ready to be the hunted, not just the hunter. They'll get there.

[pfrduke]

Some nice tournament wins yesterday for Virginia and Miami. The Canes get a nice test today against a Utah team that Duke will see in a month; Virginia saw its already weak tournament slate get weaker when Long Beach State (led by Nick Faust, who people around these parts may remember as a former Terrapin) slipped by Seton Hall. Updated times/channels are below (rankings are still Monday's rankings)

Friday
[33]Florida State vs. [98]Hofstra in St. Thomas (12:30, CBSSN)
[25]Miami vs. [20]Utah in Puerto Rico (7:00, ESPNU)
[1]Duke vs. [50]Virginia Commonwealth in New York (7:30, ESPN2)
[31]Pittsburgh vs. [171]Detroit (8:00, ESPN3)
[3]Virginia vs. [253]Long Beach State in Charleston (9:30, ESPNU)

[Olympic Fan]

Some nice tournament wins yesterday for Virginia and Miami. The Canes get a nice test today against a Utah team that Duke will see in a month; Virginia saw its already weak tournament slate get weaker when Long Beach State (led by Nick Faust, who people around these parts may remember as a former Terrapin) slipped by Seton Hall. Updated times/channels are below (rankings are still Monday's rankings)

Friday
[33]Florida State vs. [98]Hofstra in St. Thomas (12:30, CBSSN)
[25]Miami vs. [20]Utah in Puerto Rico (7:00, ESPNU)
[1]Duke vs. [50]Virginia Commonwealth in New York (7:30, ESPN2)
[31]Pittsburgh vs. [171]Detroit (8:00, ESPN3)
[3]Virginia vs. [253]Long Beach State in Charleston (9:30, ESPNU)

Big game for Pitt -- as of the moment, they are the last team in the country that hasn't played a game yet -- at least according to the NCAA Tournament selection criteria.

Their opener against Gonzaga was canceled at halftime and their next game was against St. Joseph's of Indiana -- a Division II school and those don't count in the eyes of the committee.

So Pitt has a lot of work to do to put themselves in NCAA consideration. Of course, everybody does at this point.

By my count, the ACC is 32-5 going into Friday's game -- 2-1 against the power five conferences with all three games against the SEC. We get a Pac 12 matchup tonight (Miami-Utah) I think we should actually count the American Conference as a power conference in basketball -- UConn, Temple, Cincinnati, Marquette, Memphis, etc. -- which would make the ACC 3-1 against the other power conferences.

Again, too early to make firm conclusions, but it looks like the predictions that FSU and Miami would be strong NCAA contenders this year look accurate ... Georgia Tech and Boston College look better than expected (but that doesn't mean they are NCAA contenders -- especially not BC) .. I'll give Wake a pass on their Richmond loss -- playing without Miller-McIntyre had to hurt.

[CDu]

Actually, they didn't.

UNC was No. 17 in the final AP poll last year.


http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings/_/year/2015/week/4/seasontype/3

Also, they DID finish top-15 (15th) in the postseason AP poll too.

[pfrduke]

I think we should actually count the American Conference as a power conference in basketball -- UConn, Temple, Cincinnati, Marquette, Memphis, etc. -- which would make the ACC 3-1 against the other power conferences.

The bottom four teams in the AAC are worse than every other power conference team except Rutgers. I don't think there's a real meaningful difference between the AAC and the A-10 - both have good teams and both are likely to get multiple teams in the NCAA tournament, but they're not the same top to bottom. Plus, it's my list, so I get to count how I want to count. ;)

[CDu]

By my count, the ACC is 32-5 going into Friday's game -- 2-1 against the power five conferences with all three games against the SEC. We get a Pac 12 matchup tonight (Miami-Utah) I think we should actually count the American Conference as a power conference in basketball -- UConn, Temple, Cincinnati, Marquette, Memphis, etc. -- which would make the ACC 3-1 against the other power conferences.

You should be a politician, as you've spun nicely what is a pretty "meh" story for the ACC so far.

Firstly, the American has absolutely no business being considered a power conference. They have just a few good-to-decent teams. It remains to be seen if UConn remains good, and Marquette is not in the American (they're in the Big East). They are the definition of a mid-major conference. A UNC win over Temple isn't exactly something to scream about from the rooftops.

Right now, the ACC has just 2 wins against power conference opponents:
- Miami walloped a terrible Miss State team (who had just lost to Southern the day before)
- Georgia Tech barely beat Tennessee, who has beaten UNC Asheville by just 4 and Marshall by 10.

And that 32-5 means we have four losses to non-power conferences. That's not so hot. The losses include:
- NC State at home to William and Mary (by 17!)
- Va Tech at home to Alabama State
- Wake Forest at home to Richmond
- UVa at George Washington

Considering that most of those 32 wins are against absolute garbage (and note that Notre Dame and Syracuse both looked shaky in beating garbage), I'm not sure there's much to say about the conference yet. When your conferences best wins are against a terrible Mississippi State team, a winless Temple team, and a pretty bad Tennessee team, that's kind of the definition of "too early to say anything of value.

For comparison, the other major conference teams have the following records:
Big-10: 31-6
SEC: 26-9
Big-12: 15-4 (but no losses to non-power conferences and only one loss to an unranked team)
Pac-12: 25-4

I think we can say that the bottom of the SEC is hot garbage, but that's about it. The rest is just noise right now. Heck, the A-10 is 26-6 right now, because nobody has played anybody yet.


Again, too early to make firm conclusions, but it looks like the predictions that FSU and Miami would be strong NCAA contenders this year look accurate ... Georgia Tech and Boston College look better than expected (but that doesn't mean they are NCAA contenders -- especially not BC) .. I'll give Wake a pass on their Richmond loss -- playing without Miller-McIntyre had to hurt.

Not sure what about FSU's resume looks impressive. They beat up on two patsies (Nicholls State and Jacksonville). I'd hold off until they play an actual opponent before I sing their praises. Miami's resume looks a little better at first glance, until you realize that their one meaningful win was against a team that is 1-2 with a loss to Southern and a so-so win against Eastern Washington.

We'll learn a little something over the next two weeks with the holiday tournaments and the conference challenges. But right now, I don't think there's really anything to say about where the ACC is as a conference.

[jv001]

You should be a politician, as you've spun nicely what is a pretty "meh" story for the ACC so far.

Firstly, the American has absolutely no business being considered a power conference. They have just a few good-to-decent teams. It remains to be seen if UConn remains good, and Marquette is not in the American (they're in the Big East). They are the definition of a mid-major conference. A UNC win over Temple isn't exactly something to scream about from the rooftops.

Right now, the ACC has just 2 wins against power conference opponents:
- Miami walloped a terrible Miss State team (who had just lost to Southern the day before)
- Georgia Tech barely beat Tennessee, who has beaten UNC Asheville by just 4 and Marshall by 10.

And that 32-5 means we have four losses to non-power conferences. That's not so hot. The losses include:
- NC State at home to William and Mary (by 17!)
- Va Tech at home to Alabama State
- Wake Forest at home to Richmond
- UVa at George Washington

Considering that most of those 32 wins are against absolute garbage (and note that Notre Dame and Syracuse both looked shaky in beating garbage), I'm not sure there's much to say about the conference yet. When your conferences best wins are against a terrible Mississippi State team, a winless Temple team, and a pretty bad Tennessee team, that's kind of the definition of "too early to say anything of value.

For comparison, the other major conference teams have the following records:
Big-10: 31-6
SEC: 26-9
Big-12: 15-4 (but no losses to non-power conferences and only one loss to an unranked team)
Pac-12: 25-4

I think we can say that the bottom of the SEC is hot garbage, but that's about it. The rest is just noise right now. Heck, the A-10 is 26-6 right now, because nobody has played anybody yet.



Not sure what about FSU's resume looks impressive. They beat up on two patsies (Nicholls State and Jacksonville). I'd hold off until they play an actual opponent before I sing their praises. Miami's resume looks a little better at first glance, until you realize that their one meaningful win was against a team that is 1-2 with a loss to Southern and a so-so win against Eastern Washington.

We'll learn a little something over the next two weeks with the holiday tournaments and the conference challenges. But right now, I don't think there's really anything to say about where the ACC is as a conference.

Almost like some of us have been saying about our own Blue Devils so early into the 2015-2016 season. Good points on your post.
GoDuke!

[pfrduke]

Not sure what about FSU's resume looks impressive. They beat up on two patsies (Nicholls State and Jacksonville). I'd hold off until they play an actual opponent before I sing their praises.

That was unfortunately prescient: Hofstra 82, Florida State 77.

[CDu]

That was unfortunately prescient: Hofstra 82, Florida State 77.

I mean, I do hope the middle/bottom of the conference proves to be good. But I haven't seen much to suggest the conference will be good. Syracuse and Notre Dame lost a LOT to the NBA/graduation, and haven't looked good so far. Louisville and Pitt are unknowns. FSU looks like the same old, same old. Miami remains to be seen. State looked bad. I wouldn't say the first weeks of the season have gone well for the conference at all.

[Olympic Fan]

You should be a politician, as you've spun nicely what is a pretty "meh" story for the ACC so far.

Firstly, the American has absolutely no business being considered a power conference. They have just a few good-to-decent teams. It remains to be seen if UConn remains good, and Marquette is not in the American (they're in the Big East). They are the definition of a mid-major conference. A UNC win over Temple isn't exactly something to scream about from the rooftops.

Right now, the ACC has just 2 wins against power conference opponents:
- Miami walloped a terrible Miss State team (who had just lost to Southern the day before)
- Georgia Tech barely beat Tennessee, who has beaten UNC Asheville by just 4 and Marshall by 10.

And that 32-5 means we have four losses to non-power conferences. That's not so hot. The losses include:
- NC State at home to William and Mary (by 17!)
- Va Tech at home to Alabama State
- Wake Forest at home to Richmond
- UVa at George Washington

Considering that most of those 32 wins are against absolute garbage (and note that Notre Dame and Syracuse both looked shaky in beating garbage), I'm not sure there's much to say about the conference yet. When your conferences best wins are against a terrible Mississippi State team, a winless Temple team, and a pretty bad Tennessee team, that's kind of the definition of "too early to say anything of value.


It's amazing to me how negative some posters can see the world. Yes, its early -- too early to make firm conclusions (which I stated in the post that irritated you so much) and most of the ACC wins are drek ... plus we've had some disappointing losses. But, you know what? So do the other power conferences.

As of this minute, Pomeroy has the ACC as its top-rated conference. The ACC has the best non-conference winning percentage (85.7) of any power five conference. It has a 3-1 record against power five opponents after Miami's 24-point victory over No. 16 Utah last night.

Now, that's not nearly as significant as the ACC's 17-5 NCAA Tournament record a year ago or the ACC's 21 wins over ranked teams in 2015 (the ACC was 21-11 against ranked teams outside the conference -- no other power five league had a winning record against non-conference ranked opponents). Those are undeniable testaments to the league's strength last season.

But at this point in he season, we try to read the tea leaves ... and the early signs for the ACC are good. True, FSU stumbled Friday after two strong showings, but Miami stepped up against a quality opponent. That doesn't mean they are a powerhouse, any more the FSU's loss means they'll be an NIT team. It's like my comments about BC's two early wins. Sure, they routed two very weak teams ... but last year's BC team struggled to beat that kind of team. They didn't rout anybody. And many of us thought this BC team would be worse than a year ago. So while those first two easy wins don't suggest BC is a contender (even for the NIT) I does suggest that the Eagles are better than anybody expected ... maybe better than last year. We'll see.

But, pardon me if my take on the ACC's start is more positive than yours.

[Wander]

I mean, I do hope the middle/bottom of the conference proves to be good. But I haven't seen much to suggest the conference will be good. Syracuse and Notre Dame lost a LOT to the NBA/graduation, and haven't looked good so far. Louisville and Pitt are unknowns. FSU looks like the same old, same old. Miami remains to be seen. State looked bad. I wouldn't say the first weeks of the season have gone well for the conference at all.

I continue to agree with you about your overall assessment of the ACC (FSU's wins probably aren't worth mentioning at all... the fact that they were still tied with Jacksonville almost halfway through the game is a net negative if anything), but also continue to disagree about Miami. Even if Utah ends the season unranked, beating a team with an NBA center by that many points on a neutral floor is impressive, and it's not that surprising that Miami looks good based on what they returned from last year.

[CDu]

I continue to agree with you about your overall assessment of the ACC (FSU's wins probably aren't worth mentioning at all... the fact that they were still tied with Jacksonville almost halfway through the game is a net negative if anything), but also continue to disagree about Miami. Even if Utah ends the season unranked, beating a team with an NBA center by that many points on a neutral floor is impressive, and it's not that surprising that Miami looks good based on what they returned from last year.

Now that Miami has beaten Utah handily, I am happy to agree that they look legitimately solid. My previous post came prior to the Miami game. That game was certainly a positive turn of events and stands as the first truly impressive win for the conference. Happy to see it.

[CDu]

It's amazing to me how negative some posters can see the world. Yes, its early -- too early to make firm conclusions (which I stated in the post that irritated you so much) and most of the ACC wins are drek ... plus we've had some disappointing losses. But, you know what? So do the other power conferences.

As of this minute, Pomeroy has the ACC as its top-rated conference. The ACC has the best non-conference winning percentage (85.7) of any power five conference. It has a 3-1 record against power five opponents after Miami's 24-point victory over No. 16 Utah last night.

Now, that's not nearly as significant as the ACC's 17-5 NCAA Tournament record a year ago or the ACC's 21 wins over ranked teams in 2015 (the ACC was 21-11 against ranked teams outside the conference -- no other power five league had a winning record against non-conference ranked opponents). Those are undeniable testaments to the league's strength last season.

But at this point in he season, we try to read the tea leaves ... and the early signs for the ACC are good. True, FSU stumbled Friday after two strong showings, but Miami stepped up against a quality opponent. That doesn't mean they are a powerhouse, any more the FSU's loss means they'll be an NIT team. It's like my comments about BC's two early wins. Sure, they routed two very weak teams ... but last year's BC team struggled to beat that kind of team. They didn't rout anybody. And many of us thought this BC team would be worse than a year ago. So while those first two easy wins don't suggest BC is a contender (even for the NIT) I does suggest that the Eagles are better than anybody expected ... maybe better than last year. We'll see.

But, pardon me if my take on the ACC's start is more positive than yours.

Negative is not how I would label my views on the early season for the ACC prior to Miami's big win. Ambivalent is a better term. Just not nearly as positive as you.

The Pomeroy rankings are largely meaningless now, as they are still heavily influenced by his preseason ranks which also had us #1 based on historical data.

And I was not irritated by your post. Just a bit amused mixed with some confusion as to why you were so positive about FSU and to a lesser degree Miami.

I am pleased to see Miami get a big win. I am comfortable saying now that Miami looks promising for an NCAA bid at the moment. It was the second major conference clash among potential at-large tourney caliber teams, and they looked good in getting the conference's first meaningful win. Hopefully it continues in the next two weeks as we start getting more meaningful data and we see the ACC get some more big wins.

I still think there is a lot of "meh" in the conference this year along with the usual bad-but-maybe-not-quite-so-bad teams. Hopefully some of that "meh" surprises me like Miami did last night. But my point yesterday was more to say "let's hold off on the labels until we have real data", not "the ACC is awful." To illustrate my point, nothing FSU has done so far supports the argument that they look to be "strong NCAA contenders" yet. They will have chances to prove that eventually, but as of right now (and as of noon yesterday) they haven't differentiated themselves from the BC's of the world yet.

Again, I am not saying that to be negative - just taking a wait and see approach rather than rushing to confirm a label for them based on meaningless wins. The Hofstra loss isn't a death knell to their season obviously, but it should point out the folly in saying they look like strong NCAA contenders.

[freshmanjs]

I think we should actually count the American Conference as a power conference in basketball -- UConn, Temple, Cincinnati, Marquette, Memphis, etc. --

Marquette is not in that conference.

[Olympic Fan]

Marquette is not in that conference.

Okay ... you're the second guy in the last 10 posts to tell me that. I get it. My mistake, mea culpa.

Okay, looking ahead.

Obviously, the headliner is North Carolina's trip to Northern Iowa for Marcus Paige's homecoming game. The funny thing is, Paige won't be playing -- he's still out with a wrist injury.

Normally, this would be a very dangerous place for the Heels to play -- Northern Iowa is one of the nation's best mid-majors. They won 31 games a year ago and reached the third round of the NCAA. Five years ago, they knocked off No. 1 Kansas in the NCAA Tournament.

But UNI lost three starters off last year's Missouri Valley champs. They lost their opener (at home) to Colorado State. It's going to be a great atmosphere and solid program, but UNC is catching them at the right time and should win. Northern Iowa is really small, at least among their experienced players (they have some 6-7 to 6-9 guys, but none have played). Unless they have a great 3-point shooting night, hard to see how this is close.

Louisville, Notre Dame and Syracuse all have easy games. Virginia Tech should beat VMI, but after Jacksonville State, who knows? By losing yesterday, Florida State gets an easy game with DePail in the consolation bracket of the Paradise Jam (a win would have matched them with South Carolina).

Should be six more wins for the ACC ...

Sunday's lineup is a bit tougher (and more interesting) -- Duke-Georgetown, Harvard at BC, Virginia-George Mason -- and what should be a great matchup between No. 22 Butler and Miami in Puerto Rico.

[Olympic Fan]

Great win for BC, beating Harvard this afternoon. The ESPN announcers claimed it was BC's first win in the series in a long time ... it's not. BC snapped Harvard's winning streak in the series last year. So now two wins in a row for the Eagles against the Crimson.

I know Harvard is supposed to be down a bit this year, but this is still a good win for a team we all thought would be terrible. Not contenders or anything, but better than a year ago, despite losing four starters.

Tough home loss for Georgia Tech against East Tennessee State ... the Jackets had been playing well against outmatched opposition. Not so much today.

Two good ones coming up tonight -- Miami-No. 22 Butler and Virginia-George Mason.

[ChillinDuke]

Also, for whatever it's worth, Hofstra is not a terrible basketball team. #81 currently in Kenny P, albeit early.

FSU beat DePaul somewhat easily and they are also not a terrible basketball team.

FSU may be a good team this year.

- Chillin

[Wander]

Also, for whatever it's worth, Hofstra is not a terrible basketball team. #81 currently in Kenny P, albeit early.

FSU beat DePaul somewhat easily and they are also not a terrible basketball team.

FSU may be a good team this year.

- Chillin

Since when is Depaul not terrible? There's a very strange theme going on in this thread which I don't think I've ever seen on DBR, and that is giving non-Duke non-UNC ACC teams way too much credit for beating horrible teams at home.

[ChillinDuke]

Since when is Depaul not terrible? There's a very strange theme going on in this thread which I don't think I've ever seen on DBR, and that is giving non-Duke non-UNC ACC teams way too much credit for beating horrible teams at home.

DePaul finished last season #167 in KenPom. Currently, they're ranked #141, albeit "unconnected" still.

If you value KenPom's system, and many of us here do, then objectively, DePaul is not a terrible team. They're average to slightly above average.

Record aside, do you have reasons for believing DePaul is such a terrible basketball team?

- Chillin

ETA: Further, if we played Depaul, many would be happily commenting on how we scheduled/played a power conference team (Big East) which is better than scheduling a patsy South Texas or something. Why shouldn't Florida State be afforded the same logic we would likely be using ourselves?

[CDu]

DePaul finished last season #167 in KenPom. Currently, they're ranked #141, albeit "unconnected" still.

If you value KenPom's system, and many of us here do, then objectively, DePaul is not a terrible team. They're average to slightly above average.

Record aside, do you have reasons for believing DePaul is such a terrible basketball team?

- Chillin

ETA: Further, if we played Depaul, many would be happily commenting on how we scheduled/played a power conference team (Big East) which is better than scheduling a patsy South Texas or something. Why shouldn't Florida State be afforded the same logic we would likely be using ourselves?

Actually, a 141 KenPom for a power conference team is pretty terrible. That is among the dregs of the power conference teams.

Also, they didn't schedule DePaul - that is a tourney game.

But beyond that, basically it is a game not worthy of praise, which is what Wander is saying. Not a bad win, just a "whatever" win.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Is Miami really good? Or is Butler really bad?

[CDu]

Is Miami really good? Or is Butler really bad?

Miami appears to be legitimately good. Butler isn't great these days, but they are solid. Miami's talented veteran guards seem to finally be putting it together.

[ChillinDuke]

Actually, a 141 KenPom for a power conference team is pretty terrible. That is among the dregs of the power conference teams.

Also, they didn't schedule DePaul - that is a tourney game.

But beyond that, basically it is a game not worthy of praise, which is what Wander is saying. Not a bad win, just a "whatever" win.

Agreed on ranking relative to power conference teams. But objectively, 141 is 141. It's an average team in the realm of college ball. So a 16-point neutral court win over an average team that is in a power conference. That's not "whatever" in my eyes. Agree it's not something to be paraded. But if we had won that game in those circumstances I think most here would be fairly pleased.

Correct, it was a tourney game which is why I said "scheduled/planned."

You/Wander say "whatever." I say mostly pleasing. So it does get a bit to the core of the glass half empty or glass half full argument that Oly sort of referred to.

- Chillin

[Olympic Fan]

Miami just beat ranked teams in back-to-back games -- by fairly lopsided scores in both cases.

I'll be very surprised if the 'Canes don't crack the top 25 in Monday's polls. Heck, if we did it like the football playoff committee and ranked teams based solely on what they've accomplished so far, Miami would belong in the top 5. Who's got two better wins?

I'll be curious to see how far No. 1 UNC, No. 5 Duke and No. 6 Virginia fall after losing a game last week.

I'm pretty sure Kentucky will be the new No. 1 ... Michigan State 2? Maybe Maryland (they remained unbeaten last week, but didn't exactly roll)?

I'd guess UNC drops to No. 4 ... Duke to No. 7 ... Virginia to No. 10. FWIW, Kenpom has Virginia No. 3, Duke No. 4 and UNC No. 8. Miami is No. 10, Louisville No. 16 and Notre Dame No. 19 --that's four in the top 10, six in the top 20 and 10 ACC teams in the top 50!

So sue me, I'm a bit optimistic about how the ACC has started. But, yes, I know it's early and the competition has been spotty -- but better to start well in that situation than to start poorly. I do believe that when the rest of the ACC does well, it's good for Duke. I pretty much pull for our ACC rivals with the one obvious exception.

[Wander]

I'll be very surprised if the 'Canes don't crack the top 25 in Monday's polls. Heck, if we did it like the football playoff committee and ranked teams based solely on what they've accomplished so far, Miami would belong in the top 5. Who's got two better wins?


Of course, that is exactly why the committee doesn't rank teams after one or two weeks of the season. That said, I agree with this, and looking at Miami's schedule, they could very easily be one of the last undefeated teams in college basketball. Miami has dropped plenty of non-conference games over the years that they shouldn't have so I'm getting ahead of myself - I'm just saying there's an opportunity for Miami to climb very high in the polls over the next month.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Heck, if we did it like the football playoff committee and ranked teams based solely on what they've accomplished so far, Miami would belong in the top 5. Who's got two better wins?


Bah, if this was football,refs would have handed Miami one of their victories over a ranked team, so it wouldn't really resonate with the committee.

[CDu]

Miami just beat ranked teams in back-to-back games -- by fairly lopsided scores in both cases.

I'll be very surprised if the 'Canes don't crack the top 25 in Monday's polls. Heck, if we did it like the football playoff committee and ranked teams based solely on what they've accomplished so far, Miami would belong in the top 5. Who's got two better wins?

I'll be curious to see how far No. 1 UNC, No. 5 Duke and No. 6 Virginia fall after losing a game last week.

I'm pretty sure Kentucky will be the new No. 1 ... Michigan State 2? Maybe Maryland (they remained unbeaten last week, but didn't exactly roll)?

I'd guess UNC drops to No. 4 ... Duke to No. 7 ... Virginia to No. 10. FWIW, Kenpom has Virginia No. 3, Duke No. 4 and UNC No. 8. Miami is No. 10, Louisville No. 16 and Notre Dame No. 19 --that's four in the top 10, six in the top 20 and 10 ACC teams in the top 50!

So sue me, I'm a bit optimistic about how the ACC has started. But, yes, I know it's early and the competition has been spotty -- but better to start well in that situation than to start poorly. I do believe that when the rest of the ACC does well, it's good for Duke. I pretty much pull for our ACC rivals with the one obvious exception.

I must again point out that Pomeroy's rankings in November are meaningless. They are primarily based on historical data and not the current season. I expect Notre Dame to drop quite a bit once we get into the season. Others (Syracuse and Clemson, I am looking at you) could fall too.

That said, I do think you can be legitimately excited about Miami. They have looked very good so far. If they continue to play well, they could end up contending in the ACC.

[devildeac]

Bah, if this was football,refs would have handed Miami one of their victories over a ranked team, so it wouldn't really resonate with the committee.

Now, now, there's no kneed for a comment like that...

[DBFAN]

Great wins for Miami, but I'm still not sold on them yet. The reason being Rodriguez. Yes he has played very well thus far, but he did this last year as well. When he plays with a lot of emotion like he did in his home of Puerto Rico, or like he did in Cameron last year, he plays at a different level. When he doesn't, he is almost non existent. Not saying he hasn't learned from that, but he basically disappeared after the game at Duke last year

[wilson]

Bah, if this was football,refs would have handed Miami one of their victories over a ranked team, so it wouldn't really resonate with the committee.


Now, now, there's no kneed for a comment like that...Must we return to this topic?
Bad call, guys.

[devildeac]

Must we return to this topic?
Bad call, guys.

You can always go back and block my posts...

[Olympic Fan]

I must again point out that Pomeroy's rankings in November are meaningless. They are primarily based on historical data and not the current season. I expect Notre Dame to drop quite a bit once we get into the season. Others (Syracuse and Clemson, I am looking at you) could fall too.

Actually, the Pomeroy rankings are starting to factor in results so far -- Duke has dropped from No. 1 to No. 4 over the last week, for instance. Still not totally connected, but beginning to be.

I don't get your low opinion of Notre Dame. Brey returns a very nice core group -- a very talented, experienced point guard, a clutch wing and the best offensive post player in the ACC -- and has replaced Grant and Connaughton with two young guys who got some experience last year off the bench. He's had a pretty consistent program -- 2014 was the aberration; 2015 was closer (although a little better) to his normal seasons. I like Notre Dame to stay in or around the top 25 for awhile. The real test will come Friday in Orlando, when they face either Dayton or Iowa in the semifinals of the tournament they're in. Then they get probably Wichita State or Xavier Sunday in the finals (or consolation game). That tourney will tell is a lot more about them. They also have non-conference tests at Illinois (in the Challenge) and vs. Indiana in Indianapolis.

I understand your skepticism about Syracuse -- really hard to get a handle on how good they might be. And Clemson is going to be exposed when they play Michigan State Thanksgiving Day. Losing that one won't knock them out of the top 50, but the rest of that tournament and a Dec. 9 game at Providence might. I do think they wind up in the 50-100 range.

But even if they drop, I suspect NC State -- currently No. 56 -- will climb into the top 50 soon -- they have Arizona State tonight in Brooklyn, then get LSU or Marquette tomorrow night. The big one for them as far as getting in the top 50 will be Dec. 1 when Michigan visits Raleigh for the ACC-Big Ten matchup. I suspect they will end up a bubble team again, probably in the 35-50 range.

So not all that farfetched that will sustain the 10 teams in the top 50 theme.

[pfrduke]

And Clemson is going to be exposed when they play Michigan State Thanksgiving Day. Losing that one won't knock them out of the top 50, but the rest of that tournament and a Dec. 9 game at Providence might. I do think they wind up in the 50-100 range.

This game is not happening. Boston College plays MSU on Thanksgiving. Clemson plays UMASS tonight.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

You can always go back and block my posts...

Sorry, I will just blow the whistle on myself.

[CDu]

Actually, the Pomeroy rankings are starting to factor in results so far -- Duke has dropped from No. 1 to No. 4 over the last week, for instance. Still not totally connected, but beginning to be.

I didn't say they aren't factoring in results. I said they are still VERY heavily weighted by past years' data. Duke happened to fall because we have a meaningful data point. The others (aside from Miami) don't, hence not much movement.


I don't get your low opinion of Notre Dame. Brey returns a very nice core group -- a very talented, experienced point guard, a clutch wing and the best offensive post player in the ACC -- and has replaced Grant and Connaughton with two young guys who got some experience last year off the bench. He's had a pretty consistent program -- 2014 was the aberration; 2015 was closer (although a little better) to his normal seasons. I like Notre Dame to stay in or around the top 25 for awhile. The real test will come Friday in Orlando, when they face either Dayton or Iowa in the semifinals of the tournament they're in. Then they get probably Wichita State or Xavier Sunday in the finals (or consolation game). That tourney will tell is a lot more about them. They also have non-conference tests at Illinois (in the Challenge) and vs. Indiana in Indianapolis.

My low opinion of Notre Dame is because they lost two NBA draft picks on a not-very-deep team. Connaughton was a game-changing talent in his versatility (could play SG, SF, or PF), and Grant was one of the absolute best players in the country. I don't believe they've replaced those two with anything close to the talent that they lost. And the year prior, when they didn't have Grant, they were terrible. And that was with an All-ACC caliber PG in Atkins. And I don't think they've added substantial talent to the roster since then. And they haven't exactly looked great early, with a close win over Milwaukee at home. They were an incredibly shallow team last year, and they lost their two best players. Now, they have arguably 4 players ACC-starter worthy, and no bench to speak of.

I don't think they'll be quite as bad as they were in 2014. But I don't think they'll be very good. I will not be surprised by two losses in their tourney. I'd be more surprised by two wins, actually. Most likely a 1-1 record. I see them as, at best, a middle-of-the-pack ACC team. I think 2015 was the aberration, due to two outstanding talents in Connaughton and Grant.


But even if they drop, I suspect NC State -- currently No. 56 -- will climb into the top 50 soon -- they have Arizona State tonight in Brooklyn, then get LSU or Marquette tomorrow night. The big one for them as far as getting in the top 50 will be Dec. 1 when Michigan visits Raleigh for the ACC-Big Ten matchup. I suspect they will end up a bubble team again, probably in the 35-50 range.

So not all that farfetched that will sustain the 10 teams in the top 50 theme.

I'm not sold that NC State will be good, either. They got creamed by William and Mary at home. They lost their best two scorers from last year in Lacey and Turner, on a team that struggled to score. They did add a transfer (Henderson), but he tore ligaments in his ankle and will be out of action into January (and who knows if he'll be effective even then). They simply don't have anyone who can shoot the ball now: literally only two guys have even made a 3pt shot this year for them through 3 games, and those 3 games were some of the easiest on their schedule.

[devildeac]

Sorry, I will just blow the whistle on myself.

I'd better accept this penalty because I feel our efforts here are flagging...

[Olympic Fan]

My low opinion of Notre Dame is because they lost two NBA draft picks on a not-very-deep team. Connaughton was a game-changing talent in his versatility (could play SG, SF, or PF), and Grant was one of the absolute best players in the country. I don't believe they've replaced those two with anything close to the talent that they lost. And the year prior, when they didn't have Grant, they were terrible. And that was with an All-ACC caliber PG in Atkins. And I don't think they've added substantial talent to the roster since then. And they haven't exactly looked great early, with a close win over Milwaukee at home. They were an incredibly shallow team last year, and they lost their two best players. Now, they have arguably 4 players ACC-starter worthy, and no bench to speak of..

It's obvious that you and I have very different views of the basketball world ... especially the ACC.

You downgrade Notre Dame's remaining talent because of two years ago -- because they flopped back when Demetrius Jackson and Steve Vasturia were freshmen and Zack Auguste was a sophomore having major off-court issues. Players do get better -- Vasturia was a killer last year (he killed Duke in South Bend and killed UNC in the ACC title game). Auguste has gotten better and better -- who's better in the post in the ACC? Maybe Jekiri on the boards and defensively, but he doesn't have Auguste's offensive chops. Jackson is a pretty accomplished point guard -- a 2-to-1 assist to turnover ratio, a 43 percent 3-point shooter, 7th in the ACC in steals. You downgrade them for not bringing in top talent, but that's not the way Brey's program works. K replaces his losses with top 25 freshmen ... Brey has guys waiting and training in the wings -- last year we saw how effective Colson could be (he killed us in the tournament) and Bechem (another 40 percent 3-point shooter) has been waiting his turn a long time. And they do have a nice freshman in Flynn. I'd be curious to know which of his five starters you don't think is ACC quality?

We'll see in the long run. Notre Dame was a top 10 team last year. I don't think they'll be that good, but I think they'll hang around the top 25 most of the season. You see them as a middle-of-the-pack ACC team and think that's a negative. I think a middle-of-the-pack ACC team might be pretty good. You downgrade them because they "only" beat Milwaukee by eight ... of course they were up 20 late when Milwaukee hit some 3s (how often has that happened to Duke?) The game was never in doubt. And Milwaukee is not that bad -- picked second in the Horizon and off to a 5-3 start (with losses to Notre Dame, Wisconsin ad Murray State).


I'm not sold that NC State will be good, either. They got creamed by William and Mary at home. They lost their best two scorers from last year in Lacey and Turner, on a team that struggled to score. They did add a transfer (Henderson), but he tore ligaments in his ankle and will be out of action into January (and who knows if he'll be effective even then). They simply don't have anyone who can shoot the ball now: literally only two guys have even made a 3pt shot this year for them through 3 games, and those 3 games were some of the easiest on their schedule.

Reading a lot into one game .. I'm trying not to do that even when I get excited by some of the ACC's early wins. And your note about their 3-point shooting is true, but a bit of a fluke. Both Caleb Martin and Maverick Rowan have shot the three fairly well (Martin is actually tied for the ACC lead in 3-pointers made). But Cat Barber, who hit 38 percent on 3s last season (44 percent in ACC pay) has not hit one yet (he's 0-for-5 so far). Plus, Henderson will provide a fourth 3-point threat when he returns for the start of ACC play (and he hit 47 3sd two years ago at West Virginia).
They'll be okay. Gottfield's first four teams at State have all started slow ... over the last two years, they've lost home games to NCCU and Wofford. They've barely scraped out close wins at home over South Florida and Detroit and two years ago, barely edged UNC Greensboro in the Greensboro Coliseum.

Again, I don't expect State to be a top 10 or even top 25 team. But I'm confident they'll be in the NCAA mix at the end -- and probably on the right side of the bubble.

Now, excuse me while I go check out wake Forest-Indiana from Maui (and get to listen to more from Bill Walton).

[CDu]

It's obvious that you and I have very different views of the basketball world ... especially the ACC.

You downgrade Notre Dame's remaining talent because of two years ago -- because they flopped back when Demetrius Jackson and Steve Vasturia were freshmen and Zack Auguste was a sophomore having major off-court issues. Players do get better -- Vasturia was a killer last year (he killed Duke in South Bend and killed UNC in the ACC title game). Auguste has gotten better and better -- who's better in the post in the ACC? Maybe Jekiri on the boards and defensively, but he doesn't have Auguste's offensive chops. Jackson is a pretty accomplished point guard -- a 2-to-1 assist to turnover ratio, a 43 percent 3-point shooter, 7th in the ACC in steals. You downgrade them for not bringing in top talent, but that's not the way Brey's program works. K replaces his losses with top 25 freshmen ... Brey has guys waiting and training in the wings -- last year we saw how effective Colson could be (he killed us in the tournament) and Bechem (another 40 percent 3-point shooter) has been waiting his turn a long time. And they do have a nice freshman in Flynn. I'd be curious to know which of his five starters you don't think is ACC quality?

We'll see in the long run. Notre Dame was a top 10 team last year. I don't think they'll be that good, but I think they'll hang around the top 25 most of the season. You see them as a middle-of-the-pack ACC team and think that's a negative. I think a middle-of-the-pack ACC team might be pretty good. You downgrade them because they "only" beat Milwaukee by eight ... of course they were up 20 late when Milwaukee hit some 3s (how often has that happened to Duke?) The game was never in doubt. And Milwaukee is not that bad -- picked second in the Horizon and off to a 5-3 start (with losses to Notre Dame, Wisconsin ad Murray State).



Reading a lot into one game .. I'm trying not to do that even when I get excited by some of the ACC's early wins. And your note about their 3-point shooting is true, but a bit of a fluke. Both Caleb Martin and Maverick Rowan have shot the three fairly well (Martin is actually tied for the ACC lead in 3-pointers made). But Cat Barber, who hit 38 percent on 3s last season (44 percent in ACC pay) has not hit one yet (he's 0-for-5 so far). Plus, Henderson will provide a fourth 3-point threat when he returns for the start of ACC play (and he hit 47 3sd two years ago at West Virginia).
They'll be okay. Gottfield's first four teams at State have all started slow ... over the last two years, they've lost home games to NCCU and Wofford. They've barely scraped out close wins at home over South Florida and Detroit and two years ago, barely edged UNC Greensboro in the Greensboro Coliseum.

Again, I don't expect State to be a top 10 or even top 25 team. But I'm confident they'll be in the NCAA mix at the end -- and probably on the right side of the bubble.

Now, excuse me while I go check out wake Forest-Indiana from Maui (and get to listen to more from Bill Walton).

I referenced the 2014 season for Notre Dame because it is the closest comparison in talent I can find. That team had Atkins, Connaughton, and Sharman playing at All-ACC levels. They also had role players in Jackson, Beachem, Vasturia, Auguste, and Knight. Now, it is certainly true that Auguste, Beachem, Vasturia, and Jackson are better now than two years ago. But is Auguste better than Sharman was? Maybe by a little, but not likely by much. Is Jackson as good as Atkins? Maybe similar. Is either Beachem or Vasturia as good as Connaughton was? Absolutely not, nor is it close. Is Colson as good as Auguste was? Probably similar. I think you are letting Colson's monster game against us cloud your judgment. He is the reserve-quality player. Vasturia and Beachem are solid complementary players, but not go-to guys like Connaughton and Grant. And other than those five guys, what else is there? Ryan and Farrell both play around 11 mpg, and both shoot under 40% from the field. And nobody else is averaging even 5 mpg. I just don't see this group hanging in the top-50, and could see them outside the top-75. Not terrible, just "meh."

As for NC State, I am not sold on Martin's early-season shooting as he shot just 30% from 3 and 36% overall last year. And Rowan is shooting just 30% from 3 right now. And I am very wary of a guy coming back from torn ankle ligaments. Maybe Martin stays hot all year and/or Rowan starts hitting and/or Henderson recovers and is a big contributor. But I am skeptical. It feels like an RPI/KenPom 60-75 team to me. Worse if all three turn out on the downside. Again, not terrible, just "meh."

But, as you said, we will see in the coming weeks/months.

[Olympic Fan]

I referenced the 2014 season for Notre Dame because it is the closest comparison in talent I can find. That team had Atkins, Connaughton, and Sharman playing at All-ACC levels. They also had role players in Jackson, Beachem, Vasturia, Auguste, and Knight. Now, it is certainly true that Auguste, Beachem, Vasturia, and Jackson are better now than two years ago. But is Auguste better than Sharman was? Maybe by a little, but not likely by much. Is Jackson as good as Atkins? Maybe similar. Is either Beachem or Vasturia as good as Connaughton was? Absolutely not, nor is it close. Is Colson as good as Auguste was? Probably similar. I think you are letting Colson's monster game against us cloud your judgment. He is the reserve-quality player. Vasturia and Beachem are solid complementary players, but not go-to guys like Connaughton and Grant. And other than those five guys, what else is there? Ryan and Farrell both play around 11 mpg, and both shoot under 40% from the field. And nobody else is averaging even 5 mpg. I just don't see this group hanging in the top-50, and could see them outside the top-75. Not terrible, just "meh."

As for NC State, I am not sold on Martin's early-season shooting as he shot just 30% from 3 and 36% overall last year. And Rowan is shooting just 30% from 3 right now. And I am very wary of a guy coming back from torn ankle ligaments. Maybe Martin stays hot all year and/or Rowan starts hitting and/or Henderson recovers and is a big contributor. But I am skeptical. It feels like an RPI/KenPom 60-75 team to me. Worse if all three turn out on the downside. Again, not terrible, just "meh."

But, as you said, we will see in the coming weeks/months.

Do you mean Garrick Sherman? Or Maybe you're talking about Bill Sharman ...

Okay, I make that kind of mistake too (for instance, I just referenced Milwaukee as 5-3, when in fact, they are 4-2 with the loss to Notre Dame and a 3-point loss to Murray State when a game-tying 3-pointer at the buzzer was waved off).

But to answer your question, I do think Auguste and Jackson are better -- maybe significantly better than -- that Sherman and Akins. I also think a lot more of Vasturia than you do -- an 11 pg scorer as a soph who hit 41 percent from 3 and made more game-winning shots than anybody in the ACC last year not named Tyus Jones. As for Colson, I think the big game against Duke was only an example of his potential. He averaged 7.2 points and 3.6 rebounds in 14.3 minutes a game against ACC competition last year -- shooting 67.2 percent from the field. That was a freshman season that a player can build on. I know they are only going seven deep -- but they only went seven deep a year ago. That's the way Brey teams play ... and if he doesn't lose one of his top seven, that's fine.

PS Still trying to figure out which of Notre Dame's starters you think is "non-ACC quality"?

As for Martin's hot 3-point shooting, it's not that unusual for a perimeter player to up his 3-point percentage between his freshman and sophomore years. Quinn Cook did it, Matt Jones did it (from .143 to .376), Grayson Allen seems to be doing it (from 34.6 to over 50 percent!). Shane Battier did it. Kyle Singler did it. Jason Williams did it. Jonj Scheyer and Trajan Langdon did it to a lesser degree. It's not farfetched to think Martin's 3-point improvement is real and not just a hot streak.

[CDu]

Do you mean Garrick Sherman? Or Maybe you're talking about Bill Sharman ...

Okay, I make that kind of mistake too (for instance, I just referenced Milwaukee as 5-3, when in fact, they are 4-2 with the loss to Notre Dame and a 3-point loss to Murray State when a game-tying 3-pointer at the buzzer was waved off).

But to answer your question, I do think Auguste and Jackson are better -- maybe significantly better than -- that Sherman and Akins. I also think a lot more of Vasturia than you do -- an 11 pg scorer as a soph who hit 41 percent from 3 and made more game-winning shots than anybody in the ACC last year not named Tyus Jones. As for Colson, I think the big game against Duke was only an example of his potential. He averaged 7.2 points and 3.6 rebounds in 14.3 minutes a game against ACC competition last year -- shooting 67.2 percent from the field. That was a freshman season that a player can build on. I know they are only going seven deep -- but they only went seven deep a year ago. That's the way Brey teams play ... and if he doesn't lose one of his top seven, that's fine.

PS Still trying to figure out which of Notre Dame's starters you think is "non-ACC quality"?

As for Martin's hot 3-point shooting, it's not that unusual for a perimeter player to up his 3-point percentage between his freshman and sophomore years. Quinn Cook did it, Matt Jones did it (from .143 to .376), Grayson Allen seems to be doing it (from 34.6 to over 50 percent!). Shane Battier did it. Kyle Singler did it. Jason Williams did it. Jonj Scheyer and Trajan Langdon did it to a lesser degree. It's not farfetched to think Martin's 3-point improvement is real and not just a hot streak.

Obviously I meant Sherman. I was being nice earlier in not asking you who "Flynn" was (nobody by that name on the roster). But oh well.

And I already said that I think Colson is the one who isn't ACC-starter quality. And I think you are either overrating Jakson/Auguste or underrating Atkins/Sherman.

But, as you said, time will tell.

[Olympic Fan]

I think Colson is the one who isn't ACC-starter quality.

But, as you said, time will tell.

Wow ... just wow. It's obvious we're seeing two different basketball players.

The Bonzie Colson I see is very comparable to last year's Amile Jefferson -- except that Colson is a far more efficient offensive player.

In raw numbers, the sophomore Colson is averaging 8.7 points, 5.7 rebounds and shooting 61.5 percent in 22.0 minutes a game. The junior Jefferson averaged 6.1 points, 5.8 rebounds and shot 63.1 from the field in 23.1 minutes a game. Colson has a big edge from the foul line -- 80.0 percent to 55.4 percent for Amile.

Pomeroy gives Colson a 148.7 offensive efficiency rating (he was 126.1 last year). Amile was 119.0 last year (and is up to 123.3 this year).

I think it's safe to say that Amile is a better defender, although Colson has a better blocked shot rate and a better steal rate than Amile.

I know that this year's numbers are a small sample size, but even playing 14 minutes a game last year, Colson's numbers weren't that far off what Amile posted in 21 minutes a game -- and Colson was more efficient last year.

Now, I'm not suggesting that Colson is an all-ACC caliber player or even that he's as good as Jefferson (whose strength is his defense). But I can't see how you can look at what Colson has done and deny that he's ACC-starter quality. At worst he's a middle-of-the-pack ACC power forward.

[lotusland]

Collins played at Duke from 1992-96 and served there for 13 seasons as Mike Krzyzewski's assistant. The second-year Wildcats coach is excited to see how his underdog 3-0 squad will fare against one of the favorites to win the national title.

"It's going to be pretty challenging," Collins said. "From firsthand experience, I know, I've had the opportunity to compete against that program for a lot of lot of years and I have nothing but amazing respect for Coach (Roy) Williams and everything that Carolina basketball stands for."
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/northwestern-north-carolina-preview-224931963--ncaab.html

[Indoor66]

Collins played at Duke from 1992-96 and served there for 13 seasons as Mike Krzyzewski's assistant. The second-year Wildcats coach is excited to see how his underdog 3-0 squad will fare against one of the favorites to win the national title.

"It's going to be pretty challenging," Collins said. "From firsthand experience, I know, I've had the opportunity to compete against that program for a lot of lot of years and I have nothing but amazing respect for Coach (Roy) Williams and everything that Carolina basketball stands for."
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/northwestern-north-carolina-preview-224931963--ncaab.html

What do you expect him to say on the eve of playing carowhina! He ain't gonna give them bulletin board material! Get a grip.
:cool:

[arnie]

Collins played at Duke from 1992-96 and served there for 13 seasons as Mike Krzyzewski's assistant. The second-year Wildcats coach is excited to see how his underdog 3-0 squad will fare against one of the favorites to win the national title.

"It's going to be pretty challenging," Collins said. "From firsthand experience, I know, I've had the opportunity to compete against that program for a lot of lot of years and I have nothing but amazing respect for Coach (Roy) Williams and everything that Carolina basketball stands for."
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/northwestern-north-carolina-preview-224931963--ncaab.html

I agree, he's toast. Amazing respect? Come on.

[lotusland]

What do you expect him to say on the eve of playing Carolina! He ain't gonna give them bulletin board material! Get a grip.
:cool:

Well my post title was intended as tongue in cheek but "amazing respect" is excessive lathering of Ol' Huck's ego.