Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27
  1. #1

    2022-23 MBB ACC Preseason Predictions

    We have a thread on Ď22-Ď23 MBB national preseason rankings, way-too-early stuff. And recently the transfer portal thread has included discussion especially of where UNC should/will be ranked next preseason.

    I hope itís not jumping the gun to offer a thread on our MBB ACC standings predictions. Hereís a start. I am not entirely confident about these predictions, as it appears a few transfer portal guys are yet to decide. More important, I just donít know much about incoming transfers on many ACC teams who may be expected to play major minutes; I think some of you do know about some of these guys.

    So mine are at best semi-educated guesses. More than willing to be educated, told Iíve got team X or Y way in the wrong tier. I guess what follows is a vague #1-15 guess, but for now Iím more interested in whether these tiers are approximately correct, plausible. Are UL and Cuse likely to fall that much? Should UNC be in its own top tier? [NOOOO!] Should the top tier be 2 teams? Four? Might both Pitt and BC be sneaky dangerous?

    That said:

    Top tier
    UNC
    Duke
    UVa

    Challengers for top tier, and ACCT double-bye
    FSU
    Miami
    ND
    VT

    Middle tier
    Clemson
    NCSt
    Pitt
    BC

    Bottom tier
    UL
    Cuse
    Wake
    GT

  2. #2
    David Lowder of howtheyplay.com believes Duke will finish third behind kerolina and UVA during the regular season, but then advance to the Final Four.

    https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/...etball-Preview

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    So...What am I missing about UVA? I'd have had them at the bottom of the second tier in the ACC. I think they are getting the benefit of the doubt from their great recent run. But they haven't been powers in the ACC for the last few years, their returning players are guys who didn't set the world on fire, and a solid group of incoming recruits would be the first frosh that Bennet has had to make an immediate impact. We joke about UNCheat burying recruits, but the Cheats are like UK compared to UVA.

    That Traudt recruit would seem to be an immediate fix at PF, but kids at UVA don't play until they pick up the D, and his profile screams: I DON'T LOVE PLAYING D. Beekman is a player, no doubt, and probably the current number two preseason CPOY. But Clark's negatives are pretty known at this point. I don't see a lot of other talent that scares me.

    I think UVA, and Bennet, is/are getting the benefit of the doubt based on past results. Well, I'll throw a name out there: Gary Williams. Sweating Gary was a guy who was a solid coach until he had a team with 3 kids SIGNIFICANTLY outplay their rankings. While almost everyone else on the team played at or very near (or slightly above) their rankings. After that, UMD steadily went down as Gary was unable to replicate his strategy of finding hidden gems (or in his case, finding guys that are significantly better than their rankings)

    Ditto Bennet at UVA. Their conf run came at a time when they got lucky scheduling wise, often getting the stronger teams in FSU, Duke, and UNC only 1 time a season, or getting the other guys 2 times in a bad year. Outside of that, their title was because of the lost 1 v 16 game. Hunter, who was on his way to playing into the middle (or possibly tail end of the lottery) got hurt right before the NCAAT, which is why they lost that game. If his injury had been known fully, they'd have been a 3-4 seed. But with Hunter, they'd have won that opening round game, stumbled past the second round, probably, and have gone out in the S16. But Hunter would have gone pro, and UVA would have finished 3rd or 4th in the ACC the next season without him, and probably lost in the second round of the NCAAT. With Hunter, it required the refs to make a call in a situation where refs NEVER make a call (and it was iffy even then), for UVA to win. Plus, it took Duke to faceplant int he Elite 8. Because we would have dog walked them in the FF or Title game.

    So, luck. Both in Hunter, and that PG significantly outplaying their rankings, and that lone McDs AA playing to his ranking, and their supporting players outplaying, even if in a small way, their own rankings (which were pretty modest to begin with).

    That isn't all skill by Bennet. It is a lot of luck, and I'll just flat out ignore how UVA's vaunted defense is founded upon hip checking ball handlers to sideline while the refs just ignore it.

    I see a team with one good player. But that is at SG, which is the most loaded position in American Sports. I see a team that is under-athletic, that lacks top tier skill. Their best recruit, Traudt, would the first frosh to play a big role at UVA in years.

    I just don't see it.

    I think the ACC will be Duke and UNCheat, in some order, and possibly FSU being closer to them than to the rest of the second tier.

    Also, though it brings me zero pleasure to say it, I think NCSU will be at or near the bottom of the bottom tier.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by HayYou View Post
    So...What am I missing about UVA?
    I was driving the "UVa is mediocre" bandwagon this past year. But not so much this coming year.

    They return basically their entire team from last year, but upgrade their backup PF/C spot with Vander Plas and a talented freshman Troudt, and they upgraded their backup wing spots with talented freshmen McNeely and Bond.

    They return a super senior former All-ACC PG (Clark), super senior All-ACC PF (Gardner), a junior All-defense and fringe All-ACC PG/SG who led the ACC in assists (Beekman), a multi-year double-digit scoring wing (Franklin), and both of their centers: one a bruising big in the Jack Salt mold (Caffaro); the other a very athletic shotblocker (Shedrick).

    But most importantly, they have the thing that is manna to Bennett: experience and continuity. They return their entire starting 5 plus their sixth man, and they added a 4th big with a ton of experience to an already experienced big man rotation. It's an old team with experience together, and that's usually worked out well for Bennett.

    As far as the players themselves, they'll be lightning quick on the perimeter with Clark, Beekman, and Franklin. They'll be bruising and experienced and deep inside with Caffaro, Gardner, Shedrick, and Vander Plas. And they have talented young wings that they can sprinkle in as necessary in Murray, McKneely, Bond, and Dunn.

    In general, Bennett's teams have tended to overperform in conference play. Even in recent years, when they've finished 1st in the ACC in 2021 and 4th in 2020; last year with an inexperienced team they finished 6th. Combine that with a talented and experienced team, and you have a recipe for a team that overachieves in conference. I'd be fairly surprised if they aren't a top-4 team in the ACC. And #2 is definitely not out of the question as Duke will likely hit some conference play speed bumps.

    To be clear, I think Duke will be the better team by season's end, and will most likely be a higher seeded team in the NCAA tournament. But I could certainly see a scenario in which UVa eeks out a better conference record. They will be notably better than last year, and the ACC looks like it might take a step back.

    I'm not sure what you see in FSU; they were bad this past year and lose Osborne, Evans, Polite, Butler, and (not that he was great but he played a lot) Wilkes. Maybe Baba Miller turns out to be an impact player, but more likely he plays less than 20 mpg in Hamilton's system. They should have good guards/wings, but they'll be really questionable up front (which was their undoing this past year). I would definitely rate FSU behind UVa at this point.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I was driving the "UVa is mediocre" bandwagon this past year. But not so much this coming year.

    They return basically their entire team from last year, but upgrade their backup PF/C spot with Vander Plas and a talented freshman Troudt, and they upgraded their backup wing spots with talented freshmen McNeely and Bond.

    They return a super senior former All-ACC PG (Clark), super senior All-ACC PF (Gardner), a junior All-defense and fringe All-ACC PG/SG who led the ACC in assists (Beekman), a multi-year double-digit scoring wing (Franklin), and both of their centers: one a bruising big in the Jack Salt mold (Caffaro); the other a very athletic shotblocker (Shedrick).

    But most importantly, they have the thing that is manna to Bennett: experience and continuity. They return their entire starting 5 plus their sixth man, and they added a 4th big with a ton of experience to an already experienced big man rotation. It's an old team with experience together, and that's usually worked out well for Bennett.

    As far as the players themselves, they'll be lightning quick on the perimeter with Clark, Beekman, and Franklin. They'll be bruising and experienced and deep inside with Caffaro, Gardner, Shedrick, and Vander Plas. And they have talented young wings that they can sprinkle in as necessary in Murray, McKneely, Bond, and Dunn.

    In general, Bennett's teams have tended to overperform in conference play. Even in recent years, when they've finished 1st in the ACC in 2021 and 4th in 2020; last year with an inexperienced team they finished 6th. Combine that with a talented and experienced team, and you have a recipe for a team that overachieves in conference. I'd be fairly surprised if they aren't a top-4 team in the ACC. And #2 is definitely not out of the question as Duke will likely hit some conference play speed bumps.

    To be clear, I think Duke will be the better team by season's end, and will most likely be a higher seeded team in the NCAA tournament. But I could certainly see a scenario in which UVa eeks out a better conference record. They will be notably better than last year, and the ACC looks like it might take a step back.

    I'm not sure what you see in FSU; they were bad this past year and lose Osborne, Evans, Polite, Butler, and (not that he was great but he played a lot) Wilkes. Maybe Baba Miller turns out to be an impact player, but more likely he plays less than 20 mpg in Hamilton's system. They should have good guards/wings, but they'll be really questionable up front (which was their undoing this past year). I would definitely rate FSU behind UVa at this point.
    Another step? Let's hope not. I know we had some terrific results in the tournament, but as we all have discussed many times, that is something from which it is problematic to draw firm conclusions about a conference's strength. I sure hope last season as a whole was the anomaly for the league and this year the conference will return to top tier status. The conference's reputation can't really stand experiencing another really down year.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by TywinBlue View Post
    David Lowder of howtheyplay.com believes Duke will finish third behind kerolina and UVA during the regular season, but then advance to the Final Four.

    https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/...etball-Preview
    Thanks for this link. This guy knows more than I about ACC rosters. Mostly. Not sure why he omits any mention of the return of Miami RS-Jr Harlond Beverly, Ď19 RSCI #56, who played starter minutes his first 2 years. Lousy 3-pt shooter, but surely solidly in the Canesí rotation in Ď22-Ď23, Iíd think.

    Also, this writer says new UL coach Kenny Payne ďis stepping into a strong roster.Ē Huh? Do they have 10 recruited scholarship guys? Do they have more than 2 guards, period?

    Still, I do have to say that this writerís analysis suggests Iíve got VT too low, UL and Cuse a little low, Pitt and BC a little high, and NCSt way way too high. Pack to finish last, he thinks. Really?

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I was driving the "UVa is mediocre" bandwagon this past year. But not so much this coming year.

    They return basically their entire team from last year, but upgrade their backup PF/C spot with Vander Plas and a talented freshman Troudt, and they upgraded their backup wing spots with talented freshmen McNeely and Bond.

    They return a super senior former All-ACC PG (Clark), super senior All-ACC PF (Gardner), a junior All-defense and fringe All-ACC PG/SG who led the ACC in assists (Beekman), a multi-year double-digit scoring wing (Franklin), and both of their centers: one a bruising big in the Jack Salt mold (Caffaro); the other a very athletic shotblocker (Shedrick).

    But most importantly, they have the thing that is manna to Bennett: experience and continuity. They return their entire starting 5 plus their sixth man, and they added a 4th big with a ton of experience to an already experienced big man rotation. It's an old team with experience together, and that's usually worked out well for Bennett.

    As far as the players themselves, they'll be lightning quick on the perimeter with Clark, Beekman, and Franklin. They'll be bruising and experienced and deep inside with Caffaro, Gardner, Shedrick, and Vander Plas. And they have talented young wings that they can sprinkle in as necessary in Murray, McKneely, Bond, and Dunn.

    In general, Bennett's teams have tended to overperform in conference play. Even in recent years, when they've finished 1st in the ACC in 2021 and 4th in 2020; last year with an inexperienced team they finished 6th. Combine that with a talented and experienced team, and you have a recipe for a team that overachieves in conference. I'd be fairly surprised if they aren't a top-4 team in the ACC. And #2 is definitely not out of the question as Duke will likely hit some conference play speed bumps.

    To be clear, I think Duke will be the better team by season's end, and will most likely be a higher seeded team in the NCAA tournament. But I could certainly see a scenario in which UVa eeks out a better conference record. They will be notably better than last year, and the ACC looks like it might take a step back.

    I'm not sure what you see in FSU; they were bad this past year and lose Osborne, Evans, Polite, Butler, and (not that he was great but he played a lot) Wilkes. Maybe Baba Miller turns out to be an impact player, but more likely he plays less than 20 mpg in Hamilton's system. They should have good guards/wings, but they'll be really questionable up front (which was their undoing this past year). I would definitely rate FSU behind UVa at this point.
    Great analysis. This year's UVa team is built like the ones that always finish at the top of the ACC standings. Clark is a key returnee. Last years team beat FF bound Duke in Cameron and only lost by 4 in Charlottesville. They will be a tough out for most of the ACC.

  8. #8
    The link provided a couple weeks back ^ by TywinBlue to early ACC Ď22-Ď23 predictions is the only such preview posted so far in this thread.

    https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/...etball-Preview

    As Iíve said before, this guy has compiled good info about next seasonís ACC rosters, but some of his predictions donít make sense to me.

    If the ACC is expected to be generally stronger, I donít see Wake, having lost Williams and LaRavia, up at #8.

    More puzzling still is the characterization of ULís roster as ďstrong.Ē I expect them to be bottom tier, below, for example, improving Pitt and BC. The Cards are probably set on the interior with 4 bigs. But 3 of those 4 in Ď21-Ď22 played sparingly, and not one of them averaged more than 7 ppg. UL seems to have but a single PG on next seasonís roster, no SGís at all. Its nominal wing/SFs are 2 frosh, Ď22 RSCI-ranked 59 (2 spots above our Jaden Schutt) and 80; plus a RS-Fr, Ď21 RSCI-ranked 76. I donít doubt that 2 of these 3 SFís will probably have ďbetterĒ frosh seasons than Schutt, but thatís mostly because theyíll likely play meaningful minutes.

    This UL depth chart is not impressive on paper. Doesnít strike me as better than Pittís or BCís.

    https://www.si.com/college/louisvill...ter-outlook-30

  9. #9
    Clemson loses top player, P.J. Hall for awhile. Tough break for him and them.

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...165002734.html

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    Clemson loses top player, P.J. Hall for awhile. Tough break for him and them.

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...165002734.html
    That sux big time.
    "This is the best of all possible worlds."
    Dr. Pangloss - Candide

  11. #11

    Highest ppg on this team?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Do people really think nobody on this year's team will score 17 ppg...?
    [Imported from the Jacksonville pregame thread, and the discussion of who might be this team’s “alpha.”]

    I’ve no interest in the “alpha” issue, but I am intrigued by Kedsy’s comment and the the specific issue of expectations of who might lead us in scoring this season and at what ppg. I hope that extracting Kedsy’s question out of context does not delegitimize it as an issue worth considering.

    I infer from the way Kedsy has phrased his question that he does think our scoring leader will hit 17 ppg. My answer to his question is: I don’t think anyone on this team will average 17 ppg. I’ll guess, and hope, that we have multiple double-digit scorers (ppg over the full season). I’m not looking for pie bets. Just wondering how others would answer Kedsy’s question, which I see as just offering a generally good beginning-of-season prediction-question, rather than a let’s-argue-with-Kedsy-question.

    I’ll guess we’ll have a core 8 (including Young), with Blakes as the 9th. Don’t expect Blakes to score much, but among the other 8, maybe the top 5 will be between 10 and 15 each? But no one reaches 17 ppg by season’s end.

    Ah, and here’s SkyBrickey’s answer, also imported from the Jacksonville pregame thread...

    Quote Originally Posted by SkyBrickey View Post
    I don’t think anyone on this team will score 17+ ppg. But I do think we could have 7 players that score 9+ ppg which would, I believe, be our most balanced scoring team in over 30 years.

    If that sounds like a crazy prediction, which of our top 7 guys won’t score 9 ppg? Flip, Grandison, Mitchell? It’s tough to imagine….
    [Mods — Maybe this issue should be a new thread, something like “Highest PPG this season?” HELP!]
    Last edited by gumbomoop; 11-05-2022 at 12:52 AM.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    [Imported from the Jacksonville pregame thread, and the discussion of who might be this team’s “alpha.”]

    I’ve no interest in the “alpha” issue, but I am intrigued by Kedsy’s comment and the the specific issue of expectations of who might lead us in scoring this season and at what ppg. I hope that extracting Kedsy’s question out of context does not delegitimize it as an issue worth considering.

    I infer from the way Kedsy has phrased his question that he does think our scoring leader will hit 17 ppg. My answer to his question is: I don’t think anyone on this team will average 17 ppg. I’ll guess, and hope, that we have multiple double-digit scorers (ppg over the full season). I’m not looking for pie bets. Just wondering how others would answer Kedsy’s question, which I see as just offering a generally good beginning-of-season prediction-question, rather than a let’s-argue-with-Kedsy-question.

    I’ll guess we’ll have a core 8 (including Young), with Blakes as the 9th. Don’t expect Blakes to score much, but among the other 8, maybe the top 5 will be between 10 and 15 each? But no one reaches 17 ppg by season’s end.
    I admit it never occurred to me that nobody would reach 17 ppg on this year's team. I still assume Dariq Whitehead will reach that plateau, but he only scored 17.1 ppg his senior year of high school, so that assumption might not be correct. Also, it's possible Coach Scheyer will limit Dariq's minutes his first few games back from injury, which will make it harder to score 17+ on average.

    I went back 40 years, and in that time, Duke never failed to have multiple double-digit scorers, though in 2006 we only had two (and in 2021 we had two if you don't count Jalen Johnson and if you don't round up from Matthew Hurt's 9.7; and in 2011 we had two if you don't count Kyrie Irving). In 14 seasons we had three double-digit scorers (including 2020 and 2011), in 15 seasons we had four double-digit scorers (including 2016, not counting Amile Jefferson, who was also a double-digit scorer in his 9 games), and in 10 seasons we had five double-digit scorers (not counting 2016).

    In eight seasons, we had five double-digit scorers including a 17+ppg scorer (2022, 2018, 2017, 2013*, 2001*, 2000, 1992, 1991)(nine seasons if you count Amile Jefferson in 2016*).

    * - in 2001, 2013, and 2016; we had two 17+ppg scorers among our five double-digit scorers


    Over the last 40 seasons, we've had 44 guys who scored 17+ ppg (45 if you count Kyrie in 2011), with at least one 17+ppg scorer in 31 of the 40 seasons:

    zero 17+ scorers: 9 (2012, 2009 (though we had two guys with 16.5), 2008, 2007, 2004, 1998, 1997, 1996, 1987) (note that Coach Scheyer played on three of these nine teams)

    one 17+ scorer: 20 (note that in 2017, we only had one 17+ scorer, but had a second guy score 16.8; and in 2011 we had one plus a second guy who scored 16.9 plus KI who scored 17+ but only played 11 games)

    two 17+ scorers: 9 (2019, 2016, 2013, 2006, 2001, 1999, 1993, 1986, 1984)

    thee 17+ scorers: 2 (2002, 2010 (including Coach Scheyer))


    I guess overall offense would affect this (in 2001, we scored 90.7 ppg, so five double-digit scorers including two 17+ guys makes sense); but not entirely (in 2013, we scored 77.2 ppg, had five double-digit scorers including two 17+ guys; in 2012 we scored 77.3 ppg and had just four double-digit scorers and zero 17+ guys). Another factor would presumably be minute distribution.

    Quote Originally Posted by SkyBrickey View Post
    I don’t think anyone on this team will score 17+ ppg. But I do think we could have 7 players that score 9+ ppg which would, I believe, be our most balanced scoring team in over 30 years.

    If that sounds like a crazy prediction, which of our top 7 guys won’t score 9 ppg? Flip, Grandison, Mitchell? It’s tough to imagine….
    This is indeed a bold prediction. In the past 40 seasons, we've only had as many as six 9+ ppg guys twice (1999 and 2000). Also last season we had five 10+ guys plus a guy who scored 8.6.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Mechanicsburg, PA
    Like Kedsy, I was penciling Whitehead in for 17 PPG but now with the injury and loss of important preseason reps Iím far less confident. Of the remaining players, I see plenty of players who can score 17+ on a given night but none who seem like scorers who can create enough for themselves. I think Duke is more likely to have three players around 13-16 PPG.

  14. #14
    As the season approaches, I am buying the following ACC teams:

    Miami
    Virginia Tech

    I am selling the following ACC teams:

    Georgia Tech
    Louisville

    I am not sure what the following ACC teams will look like:

    Boston College
    FSU
    Pitt
    Wake Forest

    Most of the other teams are sort of set in my mind. Duke, UNC, and Virginia will probably finish atop the conference, though Miami and VT might crash the party. Clemson is, if PJ Hall gets healthy, the median ACC team and probably going to jockey with Syracuse and FSU for the NCAAT bubble. Here are my tiers (in alpha order):

    Top tier (NCAAT locks):
    Duke, Miami, UNC, UVA, VT

    Middle tier (NCAAT bubble teams):
    Notre Dame, Florida State, Wake Forest

    Syracuse tier (embarrassing early season losses, somehow works itself into bubble discussion during ACC play):
    Syracuse

    Not good but not that bad tier (no NCAAT hopes, but might win a game against the top and/or middle tier teams):
    Boston College, Clemson, Pitt

    Bad tier (Coach on the hot seat after the season or fired):
    Georgia Tech, NC State

    Louisville tier (At least the NCAA clouds are gone...):
    Louisville

    Seriously, Louisville might lose all 18 games in conference this year. Woof, they are going to be bad. If Baba Miller comes back and looks good for FSU, I think they make the NCAAT. The ACC should get 7 teams and might get 8 into the tournament this year. The middle is stronger than it has been for the past few years.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva
    The ACC should get 7 teams and might get 8 into the tournament this year. The middle is stronger than it has been for the past few years.
    I believe the ACC will get at least one "atonememt bid" in 2023 for having been disrespected last year.
    Last edited by -jk; 11-05-2022 at 11:28 AM. Reason: fix quote tag

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    I believe the ACC will get at least one "atonememt bid" in 2023 for having been disrespected last year.
    The vibes are not in the favor of the ACC, unfortunately. According to KenPom, there is a considerable gap between the Big 12, SEC, and B1G and then the ACC. That even factors in a relatively strong bottom to the league. Louisville, for instance, is 91st in the preseason rankings and a projected 7-13 conference record. I think they might flirt with the 200th ranking by the end of the season and will be fortunate to win 3 games.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    I'm not sure we'll have a 17ppg scorer this season. I know it's early, but I had these players/ppg for this season.

    Whitehead= 14
    Roach= 13
    Lively= 12
    Proctor= 12
    Grandison= 10
    Mitchell= 10
    Flip= 5
    Blakes= 4
    Young= 4
    Total= 84 ppg.
    Last season we had 5 players in double figures with Paolo at 17.2 ppg. Roach had 8.6 ppg and the team averaged 80 ppg. There's so much that can come into play. How much time will Whitehead miss, and will he be 100% when he does play. Will he play a lot of minutes when he does return to action. Same for Lively. If Flip can't play college defense, will his minutes go to someone else. Will Young get more minute's relieving Lively at times? Of all the players I think Whitehead has the best chance at getting close to 17ppg.

    GoDuke!

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    Flip= 5
    Young= 4
    Total= 84 ppg.

    Last season we had 5 players in double figures with Paolo at 17.2 ppg. Roach had 8.6 ppg and the team averaged 80 ppg. There's so much that can come into play. How much time will Whitehead miss, and will he be 100% when he does play. Will he play a lot of minutes when he does return to action. Same for Lively. If Flip can't play college defense, will his minutes go to someone else. Will Young get more minute's relieving Lively at times? Of all the players I think Whitehead has the best chance at getting close to 17ppg.

    GoDuke!
    Yeah, none of us have seen Whitehead play a college game, and his injury recovery is a big wild card. So we just don't know.

    If Flipowski and Young combine for just 9 ppg, I'll be surprised. But I guess it would be possible if (as you seem to predict) Filipowski is 7th in the rotation and Young is 9th.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    I'm not sure we'll have a 17ppg scorer this season. I know it's early, but I had these players/ppg for this season.

    Whitehead= 14
    Roach= 13
    Lively= 12
    Proctor= 12
    Grandison= 10
    Mitchell= 10
    Flip= 5
    Blakes= 4
    Young= 4
    Total= 84 ppg.
    Last season we had 5 players in double figures with Paolo at 17.2 ppg. Roach had 8.6 ppg and the team averaged 80 ppg. There's so much that can come into play. How much time will Whitehead miss, and will he be 100% when he does play. Will he play a lot of minutes when he does return to action. Same for Lively. If Flip can't play college defense, will his minutes go to someone else. Will Young get more minute's relieving Lively at times? Of all the players I think Whitehead has the best chance at getting close to 17ppg.

    GoDuke!
    I said itís possible we could have 7 players at 9+ ppg, but I do think itís unlikely. Somebody is not going to get the minutes and the shots.

    In your scenario jv, itís Flip. I think thatís the best guess at this point seeing all the other things Mitchell and Grandison bring to the court.

    I might steal a point from Roach and a point from Grandison and give them to Flip, but that still leaves our 7th scorer at 7 ppg. Still, quite a balanced attack that will be a lot of fun to watch with hopefully a lot of easy assisted baskets and less late clock iso ball than in some prior seasons.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    I’ll guess we’ll have a core 8 (including Young), with Blakes as the 9th. Don’t expect Blakes to score much, but among the other 8, maybe the top 5 will be between 10 and 15 each? But no one reaches 17 ppg by season’s end.
    Another thing worth noting is that even if we don't have a 17ppg scorer, that's not necessarily a bad thing for our offense. Four of the last five teams we've had that didn't have a 17+ppg scorer were nonetheless pretty good at offense:

    2012: #8 rated KenPom offense;
    2009: #7
    2008: #13
    2007: #44
    2004: #2

    If we manage a top 10 or 15 offense and combine it with a strong (top 15 or even top 20) defense, this team could conceivably be better than last year's team (#1/#49)

Similar Threads

  1. 2022-23 MBB Preseason rankings
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 06-30-2022, 06:53 PM
  2. Preseason All American predictions
    By gumbomoop in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-09-2012, 11:47 PM
  3. ACC Predictions
    By The Gordog in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-04-2010, 08:54 AM
  4. Hoopdoctors Preseason Predictions
    By BlueDster in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 09-29-2009, 10:37 PM

Posting Permissions

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