Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC

    MBB Dork Polls 2021-22 Edition

    We're obviously not yet to the start of the season, but it appears that the first of the dork polls as put their preseason rankings up. Duke sits at #10 on Bart Torvik's (aka KenPom but free) 2021-22 rankings: https://barttorvik.com/?&conlimit=

    Torvik predicts we'll have a top-10 (just barely) offense and a top-30 defense, with an overall adjusted efficiency margin of 19.3.

    Of interest in the ACC:
    UNC #21
    Louisville #23
    FSU #27
    Notre Dame #29 (returning almost their entire rotation from last year)
    Va Tech #46
    Clemson #50
    Syracuse #64
    UVa #69 (he's REALLY not a fan of their offense, and thinks their defense will again be less than elite like last year)
    NC State #74
    Ga Tech #77 (losing Alvarado and Wright is a big loss)
    Miami #86
    Wake #102
    BC #133
    Pitt #157

    In general, I think these are pretty spot on with the notable question mark of UVa. I agree with Torvik that they should be worse offensively (losing 3 unbelievably efficient frontcourt players and with little shooting coming in/returning), but dropping all the way to 162nd in offense feels a bit too steep for me.
    I guess it comes down to how good Gardner and Franklin and Shedrick can be. But I feel like something more in the 50-100 range offensively makes more sense, which would probably push them back up into the top 30-50 (depending on whether the offense is closer to #50 or closer to #100).

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We're obviously not yet to the start of the season, but it appears that the first of the dork polls as put their preseason rankings up. Duke sits at #10 on Bart Torvik's (aka KenPom but free) 2021-22 rankings: https://barttorvik.com/?&conlimit=

    Torvik predicts we'll have a top-10 (just barely) offense and a top-30 defense, with an overall adjusted efficiency margin of 19.3.

    Of interest in the ACC:
    UNC #21
    Louisville #23
    FSU #27
    Notre Dame #29 (returning almost their entire rotation from last year)
    Va Tech #46
    Clemson #50
    Syracuse #64
    UVa #69 (he's REALLY not a fan of their offense, and thinks their defense will again be less than elite like last year)
    NC State #74
    Ga Tech #77 (losing Alvarado and Wright is a big loss)
    Miami #86
    Wake #102
    BC #133
    Pitt #157

    In general, I think these are pretty spot on with the notable question mark of UVa. I agree with Torvik that they should be worse offensively (losing 3 unbelievably efficient frontcourt players and with little shooting coming in/returning), but dropping all the way to 162nd in offense feels a bit too steep for me.
    I guess it comes down to how good Gardner and Franklin and Shedrick can be. But I feel like something more in the 50-100 range offensively makes more sense, which would probably push them back up into the top 30-50 (depending on whether the offense is closer to #50 or closer to #100).
    Ouch. If Pitt is really that bad, how much more rope does Capel get?

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We're obviously not yet to the start of the season, but it appears that the first of the dork polls as put their preseason rankings up. Duke sits at #10 on Bart Torvik's (aka KenPom but free) 2021-22 rankings: https://barttorvik.com/?&conlimit=

    Torvik predicts we'll have a top-10 (just barely) offense and a top-30 defense, with an overall adjusted efficiency margin of 19.3.

    Of interest in the ACC:
    UNC #21
    Louisville #23
    FSU #27
    Notre Dame #29 (returning almost their entire rotation from last year)
    Va Tech #46
    Clemson #50
    Syracuse #64
    UVa #69 (he's REALLY not a fan of their offense, and thinks their defense will again be less than elite like last year)
    NC State #74
    Ga Tech #77 (losing Alvarado and Wright is a big loss)
    Miami #86
    Wake #102
    BC #133
    Pitt #157

    In general, I think these are pretty spot on with the notable question mark of UVa. I agree with Torvik that they should be worse offensively (losing 3 unbelievably efficient frontcourt players and with little shooting coming in/returning), but dropping all the way to 162nd in offense feels a bit too steep for me.
    I guess it comes down to how good Gardner and Franklin and Shedrick can be. But I feel like something more in the 50-100 range offensively makes more sense, which would probably push them back up into the top 30-50 (depending on whether the offense is closer to #50 or closer to #100).
    Wow, that would be a pretty poor ACC...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Poor Jeff Capel.
    "This is the best of all possible worlds."
    Dr. Pangloss - Candide

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    Ouch. If Pitt is really that bad, how much more rope does Capel get?
    Yeah, things have not gone well for Capel at Pitt. He lost three starters to transfer and another to the NBA, and the guys he brought in to replace them were a grad transfer backup from Texas Tech, a solid but unspectacular JuCo transfer, and two bigs from Oakland and Stony Brook. And they weren't good last year, even with way more talent. So it definitely feels like it could be a brutal year for him.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedog View Post
    Wow, that would be a pretty poor ACC...
    Yeah, I don't expect the ACC to be terribly good. The rest of the conference hasn't recruited well for a few years now, and they lost a LOT of the top-end talent from last year.

  7. #7
    Torvik has had these numbers up for a while. I don't see any of the other stats sites up, like KenPom, Sagarin, or ESPN's BPI.

    I like T-Rank because it gives you so much more depth of information than KenPom. I also think we'll see some wild movement from the Dork Polls early in the season. My rationale has to do with Theo John.

    In the Projected Contributors section, he has Paolo Banchero projected at 17.4 pts/7.6 reb/1.6 ast. That is the highest scoring average in the ACC, FWIW. That's fairly similar to where he had Zion if memory serves. I believe he uses a formula for incoming freshmen that is based on RSCI recruiting ranking and position. Chet Holmgren, for example, has slightly higher scoring. My guess is Paolo ends up with more points and rebounds per game than Chet due to playing with a high usage player in Drew Timme while Paolo will be a featured scorer for Duke.

    At any rate, Theo John is currently 4th in the Projected Contributors section, right behind Jeremy Roach and ahead of AJ Griffin. John is a good player and has proven capable of contributing at a high major. It's just that we all know that Theo John is not going to get 26 minutes per game, which is what he is currently projected to play on the Duke page. I think it is safe to say that John will be the 7th or 8th man on the team, after Keels/Griffn and maybe Baker.

    If we extrapolate this out, I think we're seeing a lot of wonky stuff due to all those transfers. So many teams have guys that moved from one team to another this offseason. Once the rotations are more stable, the Dork Polls like T-Rank are going to settle in, right around mid-December or so. IIRC, KenPom takes about 10-12 games to remove last year's data from the database before being primarily filled with the current year. That backlog of last year's data is going to do some interesting things with so much player turnover.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We're obviously not yet to the start of the season, but it appears that the first of the dork polls as put their preseason rankings up. Duke sits at #10 on Bart Torvik's (aka KenPom but free) 2021-22 rankings: https://barttorvik.com/?&conlimit=

    Torvik predicts we'll have a top-10 (just barely) offense and a top-30 defense, with an overall adjusted efficiency margin of 19.3.

    Of interest in the ACC:
    UNC #21
    Louisville #23
    FSU #27
    Notre Dame #29 (returning almost their entire rotation from last year)
    Va Tech #46
    Clemson #50
    Syracuse #64
    UVa #69 (he's REALLY not a fan of their offense, and thinks their defense will again be less than elite like last year)
    NC State #74
    Ga Tech #77 (losing Alvarado and Wright is a big loss)
    Miami #86
    Wake #102
    BC #133
    Pitt #157

    In general, I think these are pretty spot on with the notable question mark of UVa. I agree with Torvik that they should be worse offensively (losing 3 unbelievably efficient frontcourt players and with little shooting coming in/returning), but dropping all the way to 162nd in offense feels a bit too steep for me.
    I guess it comes down to how good Gardner and Franklin and Shedrick can be. But I feel like something more in the 50-100 range offensively makes more sense, which would probably push them back up into the top 30-50 (depending on whether the offense is closer to #50 or closer to #100).
    That's six teams in the tournament, roughly? Ouch.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    That's six teams in the tournament, roughly? Ouch.
    Oh I think it'll go up as someone will win conference games. But unless we do well in pre-conference play, yeah I could see a scenario where only 6 or 7 teams make it.

    But I suspect UVa will end up in the field. Whether it's as 5/6 seed, an 8/9 seed, or a true bubble team? I don't know. And one other team not in the "top-50" group could make a jump upwards (Syracuse seeming the most plausible).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    Torvik has had these numbers up for a while. I don't see any of the other stats sites up, like KenPom, Sagarin, or ESPN's BPI.

    I like T-Rank because it gives you so much more depth of information than KenPom. I also think we'll see some wild movement from the Dork Polls early in the season. My rationale has to do with Theo John.

    In the Projected Contributors section, he has Paolo Banchero projected at 17.4 pts/7.6 reb/1.6 ast. That is the highest scoring average in the ACC, FWIW. That's fairly similar to where he had Zion if memory serves. I believe he uses a formula for incoming freshmen that is based on RSCI recruiting ranking and position. Chet Holmgren, for example, has slightly higher scoring. My guess is Paolo ends up with more points and rebounds per game than Chet due to playing with a high usage player in Drew Timme while Paolo will be a featured scorer for Duke.

    At any rate, Theo John is currently 4th in the Projected Contributors section, right behind Jeremy Roach and ahead of AJ Griffin. John is a good player and has proven capable of contributing at a high major. It's just that we all know that Theo John is not going to get 26 minutes per game, which is what he is currently projected to play on the Duke page. I think it is safe to say that John will be the 7th or 8th man on the team, after Keels/Griffn and maybe Baker.

    If we extrapolate this out, I think we're seeing a lot of wonky stuff due to all those transfers. So many teams have guys that moved from one team to another this offseason. Once the rotations are more stable, the Dork Polls like T-Rank are going to settle in, right around mid-December or so. IIRC, KenPom takes about 10-12 games to remove last year's data from the database before being primarily filled with the current year. That backlog of last year's data is going to do some interesting things with so much player turnover.
    Oh for SURE there will be a ton of movement. There is every year. It's just an initial snapshot of course. I suspect it's reasonable for scale (i.e., I don't anticipate Duke being outside the top-20, and I don't anticipate UNC being outside the top-40), but there will surely be fluctuation. I do think UVa will be better than Torvik has them currently rated, and probably will be a back-end tourney team. And there could always be other surprises.

  11. #11
    The ranking for Virginia Tech is weirdly low. Sure, they lost Tyrese Radford, but replacing Wabissa Bede with Storm Murphy is worth a significant upgrade to the offense. Other than that, they bring back their best player, Keve Aluma as well as 5 of their top 8 players overall. I guess T-Rank had them at #50 at the end of last season so it doesn't see much improvement this year. Still, that team ended up at 9-4 in the ACC, good for 3rd in the conference before COVID wrecked them at the end.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    The ranking for Virginia Tech is weirdly low. Sure, they lost Tyrese Radford, but replacing Wabissa Bede with Storm Murphy is worth a significant upgrade to the offense. Other than that, they bring back their best player, Keve Aluma as well as 5 of their top 8 players overall. I guess T-Rank had them at #50 at the end of last season so it doesn't see much improvement this year. Still, that team ended up at 9-4 in the ACC, good for 3rd in the conference before COVID wrecked them at the end.
    I actually feel like that Va Tech ranking is about right. Yes, they were 9-4 in conference last year. But that was in part due to not a tough schedule. They had one reasonably nice win at UVa, but other than that they beat Clemson at home when Clemson was reeling from COVID, Duke at home early while we were still trying to figure out the Jalen Johnson thing and the season in general, Miami twice, Wake twice, and Notre Dame twice. They didn't face UNC or FSU in the regular season at all, and got hammered by Syracuse, Pitt, and Ga Tech along with a close loss to Louisville.

    And they lost Radford, Bede, and Jalen Cone (who was a key part of those early-season wins). So I don't think the addition of Murphy offsets the losses of Radford, Bede, and Cone. And they played a REALLY short rotation last year, so right now they only appear to have about 5, maybe 6 ACC level players.

    Now, one of those guys is Keve Aluma, who is awesome. And Nahiem Alleyne is pretty solid too. But after that? It looks pretty shaky. And for a team whose record exceeded its quality of play last year (#50 in Torvik, #52 in KenPom), they seem like a W/L regression candidate this year.

Similar Threads

  1. 2021-22 Dork polls
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: Yesterday, 11:07 AM
  2. MBB: Dork Polls 2019-20 Edition
    By dukelion in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 01-18-2020, 04:17 PM
  3. MBB Dork Polls/Stats: 2017-18 Edition
    By Troublemaker in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 03-14-2018, 12:07 AM
  4. MBB Dork Polls/Stats: 2016-17 Edition
    By Troublemaker in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 155
    Last Post: 03-07-2017, 04:04 PM
  5. Dork Polls: Men's Bball 2013-14 Edition
    By Troublemaker in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 196
    Last Post: 03-23-2014, 12:59 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •