Page 5 of 50 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 998
  1. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    If Duke is #25 in the net, shouldn't Duke be considered a "good win" for Clemson and also for Wake Forest?
    Yep, you are right. At one point in my data gathering Duke was 27th, and at another point it was 25. I updated the Net ranking but missed the Good Wins column.

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedog View Post
    Thanks. Interesting that we're considered "better" than Clemson according to the ranks, yet our projected ACC record is so much worse (15-5 vs. 12-8).
    The stains on your resume from a bad loss (bad performances against bad teams in general) are one of the biggest differences in how the rankings perceive Duke & Clemson. It is also why I think the key thing Duke needs to do to ensure our tourney position is to avoid bad losses.

    That's why I say that as long as we win against Wake (H), Notre Dame (H), and Louisville (H), we are going to be OK. The Away game at GA Tech could also be a potential bad loss, if they slip in the rankings.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by dlmzzz View Post
    I thought this would be a good time to post what the resumes of the top conference teams (no, I don't know why I am including Syracuse in this list) looked like at this point in the season.
    Amending your excellent chart to add Torvik's "Tourney Cast" estimates for the likelihood each team makes the tourney and their projected seed.

    Duke with a 93.1% chance of making the tourney seems about right to me. Probably pretty close to 100% if Roach returns soon (and plays well) and probably a bit lower if he doesn't.

    Team Net KenPom Quad 1 Quad 2 Good Wins (Top 25) Bad Losses (Quad 3 & 4) ACC Projection NCAA
    Tourney %
    Projected
    Seed
    UVA 15 12 3-3 2-0 Baylor (19 N),
    Illinois (23 N)
    None 15-5 99.9% 4.3
    Duke 25 29 3-4 1-1 Xavier (17 N),
    Ohio State (22 H)
    None 12-8 93.1% 6.8
    NC State 29 36 1-3 5-1 None None 12-8 97.3% 6.8
    UNC 33 22 1-6 1-0 Ohio State (22 N) None 13-7 90.2% 7
    Miami 39 39 4-2 2-1 Rutgers (16 H),
    Virginia (15 H)
    Georgia Tech (155 A) 13-7 93.2% 7.3
    Clemson 49 54 2-1 4-0 None South Carolina (272 A),
    Loyola Chicago (283 N)
    15-5 67.9% 9.4
    VA Tech 55 45 2-1 2-4 None Boston College (226 A) 9-11 50.2% 9.3
    Pitt 58 62 3-1 3-5 Virginia (15 H) None 14-6 54.8% 9.3
    Wake 76 74 1-3 2-1 None Loyola Marymount (99 N) 11-9 25.7% 10.3
    Syracuse 114 86 0-2 3-2 None Colgate (122 H),
    Bryant (160 H)
    11-9 0.4% 12.3

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by House P View Post
    Amending your excellent chart to add Torvik's "Tourney Cast" estimates for the likelihood each team makes the tourney and their projected seed.

    Duke with a 93.1% chance of making the tourney seems about right to me. Probably pretty close to 100% if Roach returns soon (and plays well) and probably a bit lower if he doesn't.

    Team Net KenPom Quad 1 Quad 2 Good Wins (Top 25) Bad Losses (Quad 3 & 4) ACC Projection NCAA
    Tourney %
    Projected
    Seed
    UVA 15 12 3-3 2-0 Baylor (19 N),
    Illinois (23 N)
    None 15-5 99.9% 4.3
    Duke 25 29 3-4 1-1 Xavier (17 N),
    Ohio State (22 H)
    None 12-8 93.1% 6.8
    NC State 29 36 1-3 5-1 None None 12-8 97.3% 6.8
    UNC 33 22 1-6 1-0 Ohio State (22 N) None 13-7 90.2% 7
    Miami 39 39 4-2 2-1 Rutgers (16 H),
    Virginia (15 H)
    Georgia Tech (155 A) 13-7 93.2% 7.3
    Clemson 49 54 2-1 4-0 None South Carolina (272 A),
    Loyola Chicago (283 N)
    15-5 67.9% 9.4
    VA Tech 55 45 2-1 2-4 None Boston College (226 A) 9-11 50.2% 9.3
    Pitt 58 62 3-1 3-5 Virginia (15 H) None 14-6 54.8% 9.3
    Wake 76 74 1-3 2-1 None Loyola Marymount (99 N) 11-9 25.7% 10.3
    Syracuse 114 86 0-2 3-2 None Colgate (122 H),
    Bryant (160 H)
    11-9 0.4% 12.3
    Agreed. Both in terms of current likelihood and in terms of the likelihood depending somewhat on Roach’s return.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by dlmzzz View Post
    The stains on your resume from a bad loss (bad performances against bad teams in general) are one of the biggest differences in how the rankings perceive Duke & Clemson. It is also why I think the key thing Duke needs to do to ensure our tourney position is to avoid bad losses.

    That's why I say that as long as we win against Wake (H), Notre Dame (H), and Louisville (H), we are going to be OK. The Away game at GA Tech could also be a potential bad loss, if they slip in the rankings.
    This is the Duke schedule for the rest of the season:
    Home games: Miami, Wake, Cheats, ND, Louisville, VT, NC State.
    Away games: VT, GT, Miami, VA, Cuse, Cheats.

    Our record in the ACC 4-3 and the projections that have been listed here, project Duke to end the regular season at 12-8. Looking at the remaining games it seems this is the way they think the games will go, Wins= Louisville (H), Wake (H), VT (H), NC State (H), GT (A), VT (A), Cuse (A) and ND. Thats 8 wins.

    Losses: Virginia (A), Miami (H) Cheats (H), Miami (A) and Cheats (A). That's 5 losses and leaves us with a 12-8 record.

    We could beat Miami at home and the Cheats at home. But the Miami game is 2 days after the Cheats game in Miami. Then the next game is against Virginia away. Tough stretch there.

    Looking at the Virginia schedule they could do better than the projections of 15-5. Another year the Cheats get Clemson in Cheatville.

    GoDuke!

  6. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    This is the Duke schedule for the rest of the season:
    Home games: Miami, Wake, Cheats, ND, Louisville, VT, NC State.
    Away games: VT, GT, Miami, VA, Cuse, Cheats.

    Our record in the ACC 4-3 and the projections that have been listed here, project Duke to end the regular season at 12-8. Looking at the remaining games it seems this is the way they think the games will go, Wins= Louisville (H), Wake (H), VT (H), NC State (H), GT (A), VT (A), Cuse (A) and ND. Thats 8 wins.

    Losses: Virginia (A), Miami (H) Cheats (H), Miami (A) and Cheats (A). That's 5 losses and leaves us with a 12-8 record.

    We could beat Miami at home and the Cheats at home. But the Miami game is 2 days after the Cheats game in Miami. Then the next game is against Virginia away. Tough stretch there.

    Looking at the Virginia schedule they could do better than the projections of 15-5. Another year the Cheats get Clemson in Cheatville.

    GoDuke!
    Except the issue with these projections is that this team has shown no propensity to win on the road, outside of a near-collapse win in Chestnut Hill.

    It is more than conceivable, and based solely on results we've seen thus far, could be called probable, that we lose at VT, at Cuse and even at GT. Let alone the road games at Miami, UVA and Carolina, which are looking like sure losses.

    The issue with the metrics is that they don't consider trajectory of a team. We needed a herculean 2nd half to beat Pitt at home. Our trajectory isnt...great IMO.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by bshrader View Post
    Except the issue with these projections is that this team has shown no propensity to win on the road, outside of a near-collapse win in Chestnut Hill.

    It is more than conceivable, and based solely on results we've seen thus far, could be called probable, that we lose at VT, at Cuse and even at GT. Let alone the road games at Miami, UVA and Carolina, which are looking like sure losses.

    The issue with the metrics is that they don't consider trajectory of a team. We needed a herculean 2nd half to beat Pitt at home. Our trajectory isnt...great IMO.
    I bet it rains on you every day. No rainbows. You should root for Gonzaga because they usually have easy schedules.

    GoDuke!

  8. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    I bet it rains on you every day. No rainbows. You should root for Gonzaga because they usually have easy schedules.

    GoDuke!
    What's a rainbow?? 🤣🤣

  9. #89
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is offline Moderator, Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Storrs, CT
    With the usual caveats about Joe Lunardi taken under consideration, I find it interesting that he has 7 ACC teams in his current field, the third most amongst conferences: https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...ld-predictions

    If this holds, it's a pretty strong indication that the metrics are significantly less down on the ACC than last year (when only five teams made it), which would give us more wiggle room down the stretch: we'll have more chances for impressive wins and fewer opportunities for really bad losses. Something to keep an eye on.
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

  10. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    With the usual caveats about Joe Lunardi taken under consideration, I find it interesting that he has 7 ACC teams in his current field, the third most amongst conferences: https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...ld-predictions

    If this holds, it's a pretty strong indication that the metrics are significantly less down on the ACC than last year (when only five teams made it), which would give us more wiggle room down the stretch: we'll have more chances for impressive wins and fewer opportunities for really bad losses. Something to keep an eye on.
    I've endeavored to not comment on this thread until I had something positive to say, and here we are! I won't credit Lunardi for his analysis, but I absolutely agree that having nine teams in the mix in late January (liberal interpretation of "late") is an empirically good thing for both Duke and the conference. Especially given how the generationally good Louisville is laying turds across their schedule. Of course, I wholly expect the Cardinals to put up a surprising performance on February 20th.

  11. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    Our record in the ACC 4-3 and the projections that have been listed here, project Duke to end the regular season at 12-8. Looking at the remaining games it seems this is the way they think the games will go, Wins= Louisville (H), Wake (H), VT (H), NC State (H), GT (A), VT (A), Cuse (A) and ND. Thats 8 wins.

    Losses: Virginia (A), Miami (H) Cheats (H), Miami (A) and Cheats (A). That's 5 losses and leaves us with a 12-8 record.
    You're not entirely correct about the way the computers think this will go. They think we're likely to lose @Virginia, @Miami, @Va Tech, and @UNC. They think we're likely to win all of the other individual games, but because the likelihood (per Torvik) of Duke winning those games ranges from 58% (NCSU) to 97% (Louisville), that we'll probably drop one game in which we're favored to win.

    Torvik has us as a 5.4 point favorite (70% chance of win) in our home game against Miami and a 3.4 point favorite (63% chance of win) in our home game against UNC.

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    This is the Duke schedule for the rest of the season:
    Home games: Miami, Wake, Cheats, ND, Louisville, VT, NC State.
    Away games: VT, GT, Miami, VA, Cuse, Cheats.

    Our record in the ACC 4-3 and the projections that have been listed here, project Duke to end the regular season at 12-8. Looking at the remaining games it seems this is the way they think the games will go, Wins= Louisville (H), Wake (H), VT (H), NC State (H), GT (A), VT (A), Cuse (A) and ND. Thats 8 wins.

    Losses: Virginia (A), Miami (H) Cheats (H), Miami (A) and Cheats (A). That's 5 losses and leaves us with a 12-8 record.

    We could beat Miami at home and the Cheats at home. But the Miami game is 2 days after the Cheats game in Miami. Then the next game is against Virginia away. Tough stretch there.

    Looking at the Virginia schedule they could do better than the projections of 15-5. Another year the Cheats get Clemson in Cheatville.

    GoDuke!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    You're not entirely correct about the way the computers think this will go. They think we're likely to lose @Virginia, @Miami, @Va Tech, and @UNC. They think we're likely to win all of the other individual games, but because the likelihood (per Torvik) of Duke winning those games ranges from 58% (NCSU) to 97% (Louisville), that we'll probably drop one game in which we're favored to win.

    Torvik has us as a 5.4 point favorite (70% chance of win) in our home game against Miami and a 3.4 point favorite (63% chance of win) in our home game against UNC.
    Not to pile on, but said another way, the individual game predctions/likelihood cannot be looked at in a vaccum when projecting "total record." If a team has an 80% chance of beating EVERY opponent for 5 games, there's still only a 32.8% chance (.8^5) they get through that stretch undefeated even though they are HEAVY favorites in each individual game. So, the computer models would likely predict 4-1 for a team even if they're given an 80% chance to win each of those games (and thus the computers/model still projects the team to win each game at the individual level).

  13. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    With the usual caveats about Joe Lunardi taken under consideration, I find it interesting that he has 7 ACC teams in his current field, the third most amongst conferences: https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...ld-predictions

    If this holds, it's a pretty strong indication that the metrics are significantly less down on the ACC than last year (when only five teams made it), which would give us more wiggle room down the stretch: we'll have more chances for impressive wins and fewer opportunities for really bad losses. Something to keep an eye on.
    Would be kinda nuts if both UNC and Duke are too "down" to be seeded in Greensboro. Also if UNC is at Greensboro then I want nothing to do with that site.

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    With the usual caveats about Joe Lunardi taken under consideration, I find it interesting that he has 7 ACC teams in his current field, the third most amongst conferences: https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...ld-predictions

    If this holds, it's a pretty strong indication that the metrics are significantly less down on the ACC than last year (when only five teams made it), which would give us more wiggle room down the stretch: we'll have more chances for impressive wins and fewer opportunities for really bad losses. Something to keep an eye on.
    Maybe it's just that some have learned that Nov-Dec upsets may not mean much. Moreover, it's actually a big deal that the ACC best the Big Ten.

  15. #95
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Maybe it's just that some have learned that Nov-Dec upsets may not mean much. Moreover, it's actually a big deal that the ACC best the Big Ten.
    These two sentences feel somewhat contradictory, as the ACC beat the Big Ten... in December.

  16. #96
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Maybe it's just that some have learned that Nov-Dec upsets may not mean much. Moreover, it's actually a big deal that the ACC best the Big Ten.
    I don't think the fact that the ACC beat the Big 10 in the Challenge means a rat's pattooie to the committee. They look at the credentials of individual teams, their records, strength of schedule, good wins, bad losses, etc. Why should the outcome of the Nebraska-Boston College game or the Iowa-Georgia Tech game, from November no less, matter to Duke's resume? They don't.

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    These two sentences feel somewhat contradictory, as the ACC beat the Big Ten... in December.
    Only somewhat. I would downgrade big upsets -- as, CL by SC and Loy Chi; wake by Loy Marymount; Syracuse by Bryant -- or, at least, limit their overall weight. And their "weight" spreads throughout the conference, not just affecting a single team.

  18. #98

    Conference Resumes Update

    Hi. I wanted to post an updated version of the conference resumes after the weekend's games. I am including the info House P added (thank you!) that shows Torvik's projections of likelihood fo making the tourney, and current projected seed.

    Pre-weekend results, Palm projects Wake as one of the last teams in the field, so that kind of resume is where the cut line is. His projection says that 8 ACC teams would make the field, with VA Tech and Syracuse being left out.
    Lunardi (I know, I know) projects Wake in the Next Four Out (#7 below the cut line), with 7 ACC teams in the field.


    Team Net KenPom Quad 1 Quad 2 Good Wins (Top 25) Bad Losses (Quad 3 & 4) ACC Projection NCAA Tourney % Projected Seed
    UVA 13 11 4-3 3-0 Baylor (14 N), UNC (24 N) None 15-5 100.0% 3.8
    Duke 29 31 3-5 2-0 Xavier (23 N), Ohio State (19 H) None 12-8 96.0% 6.8
    UNC 32 24 1-6 2-0 Ohio State (19 N) None 13-7 92.8% 7.4
    NC State 36 39 1-4 5-1 None None 12-8 93.7% 7.9
    Miami 44 41 4-3 1-0 Rutgers (20 H), Virginia (11 H) Georgia Tech (155 A) 13-7 86.7% 8.5
    VA Tech 55 48 2-5 2-2 None Boston College (183A) 9-11 29.8% 9.8
    Clemson 59 60 2-2 4-0 None South Carolina (244 A), Loyola Chicago (237 N) 15-5 51.0% 10.2
    Pitt 65 69 4-1 1-5 Virginia (11 H) Florida State (142 H) 13-7 36.5% 10.2
    Wake 71 76 1-4 3-1 None LSU (116 N) 12-8 21.2% 10.5
    Syracuse 100 80 0-3 1-2 None Colgate (129 H), Bryant (187 H) 11-9 0.7% 12
    Last edited by dlmzzz; 01-22-2023 at 02:52 PM.

  19. #99
    I've been steering mostly clear of this thread, but I can't tell you the joy it gives me to see "Lunardi (I know, I know)" in this conversation.

    If Duke can take care of business, we could be anywhere from a 2 seed to an 4 seed. If we struggle, I could see us as low as 6 or 7.

  20. #100
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is offline Moderator, Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Storrs, CT
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I've been steering mostly clear of this thread, but I can't tell you the joy it gives me to see "Lunardi (I know, I know)" in this conversation.

    If Duke can take care of business, we could be anywhere from a 2 seed to an 4 seed. If we struggle, I could see us as low as 6 or 7.
    Agreed. The landscape is so muddled that we can certainly still put ourselves in a nice position come March. A lot of work to do, but it’s within reach.
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

Similar Threads

  1. ACC Basketball Discussion: 2022-23 Season
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 11-16-2022, 11:31 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-24-2022, 11:14 AM
  3. 2022 MBB ACC Awards Discussion Thread
    By CDu in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 03-13-2022, 07:28 PM
  4. 2022 ACC Tournament Discussion
    By Bob Green in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 585
    Last Post: 03-13-2022, 11:41 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
  •