We need to go 12-6 in ACC Play

[Eric15]

Is anyone else antsy in anticipation for this Clemson game? I feel like we haven’t played in a month.

 

[RF2044]

Is anyone else antsy in anticipation for this Clemson game? I feel like we haven’t played in a month.

We'll know a lot after this Clemson game about how the rest of the season will probably unfold, IMO.

 

[MSOrange]

Is anyone else antsy in anticipation for this Clemson game? I feel like we haven’t played in a month.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Is anyone else antsy in anticipation for this Clemson game? I feel like we haven’t played in a month.

We kind of haven't. Tennessee was Dec 2nd. Then it was a bunch of buy in games that were or should have been cakewalks but included the loss to Hofstra on Dec. 13th.

 

[Charbroil]

Is anyone else antsy in anticipation for this Clemson game? I feel like we haven’t played in a month.

The team hasn’t showed up in a month.

 

[Knicks411]

This is difficult to predict at this point because of the loss of Freeman early. They were killing teams with him, albeit against inferior competition.

Thet lost him for Vegas, but the only game that was not winnable was Iowa State, but then everybody realized that Iowa State was killing everyone they played.

Syracuse is shooting better from the free-throw line if they have him because he takes a large percentage of shots that are close to the basket, and will result in foul calls free throws. The two games that stick out to me that would be won if he played were Hofstra and probably Houston.

If you win those games what is your NET ranking? Top 40, easy.

If they handle Clemson with not a ton of difficulty I’ll be confident they can play with and beat many ACC teams. If they can play with teams, they could beat enough teams to make the tournament. There is hope this year.

We are 89th in the NET right now. If the NET is anything like Ken Pom (which it is, mostly?) then simply turning those 2 losses into wins would barely change our ranking at all. It's mostly scoring margin based; giving us a few extra points against Houston and Hofstra could give us 2 more wins but it wouldn't materially change our NET at all.

 

[MikeSU02]

We are 89th in the NET right now. If the NET is anything like Ken Pom (which it is, mostly?) then simply turning those 2 losses into wins would barely change our ranking at all. It's mostly scoring margin based; giving us a few extra points against Houston and Hofstra could give us 2 more wins but it wouldn't materially change our NET at all.

We just need to bank wins at this point. The ACC is good enough if we start claiming wins, we'll be fine if we can get to 12 or whatever.

Also, there may be an ability to win over voters with Donnie being out and take advantage of any human bias when they see us winning with him back.

Just bank the wins. Start with Clemson. Get Donnie fully back involved and have him making his FTs.

It's All American Donnie and we can make a legit run to get those dubs or Red is going to be packing his bags.

 

[RedtheGOB]

We just need to bank wins at this point. The ACC is good enough if we start claiming wins, we'll be fine if we can get to 12 or whatever.

Also, there may be an ability to win over voters with Donnie being out and take advantage of any human bias when they see us winning with him back.

Just bank the wins. Start with Clemson. Get Donnie fully back involved and have him making his FTs.

It's All American Donnie and we can make a legit run to get those dubs or Red is going to be packing his bags.

Well said. Seth Greenberg said it accurately that no one in D1 will play a 4 game stretch like we did a month ago. I think we weren’t mentally or physically prepared for those swings and especially not the staff. They’ve been sort of a mess since then.

All we can do is wait and watch what team shows up. They need to remember how they played against Houston and Tennessee.

 

[Fly Rodder]

It's mostly scoring margin based; giving us a few extra points against Houston and Hofstra could give us 2 more wins but it wouldn't materially change our NET at all.

Nope. But our offensive and defensive efficiency rankings are kind of why those games were single possession games. If SU was more efficient with scoring and defense, they probably wouldn't have been single possession games (which are basically expected to be 50/50) allowing for losses.

We had our most productive offensive games this season (by possession) against Houston, Hofstra(!), and Northeastern.
We had our best defensive games this season, by far, against Delaware and Tennessee (They also had their worst offensive game by far against Syracuse).
Worst defensive games were against, in descending order: Iowa St., Hofstra, and Northeastern

 

[DocAlKy]

He’s now been at two institutions where academics are a level down arguably a joke compared to many. Talented kid for sure but let’s not dismiss that reality either.

Talent was never an issue.

You have 13 players to watch. C’mon. Give him to Coach Fran to watch

 

[Orangezoo]

You have 13 players to watch. C’mon. Give him to Coach Fran to watch

Watching doesn’t ensure compliance.

 

[jncuse]

We are 89th in the NET right now. If the NET is anything like Ken Pom (which it is, mostly?) then simply turning those 2 losses into wins would barely change our ranking at all. It's mostly scoring margin based; giving us a few extra points against Houston and Hofstra could give us 2 more wins but it wouldn't materially change our NET at all.

I think you are mostly right -- I believed you were basically 100% right before this year. I have seen a few moves in NET this year that suggest straight W/L have some impact in their secret sauce at times, but I'm guessing. Efficiency (which i see margin as the "output" of) is certainly central to both KenPom and NET, but its more central to KP its 100% the basis for KP. It's hard to say with NET though because it can't be tracked easily like KP. My guess, and purely a guess is that our NET would have improved from its current 89 level to the high 50's or 60's (so say 20-30 spots) ... but that is purely speculative, and I can't prove it out. I do know NET values road wins more (and alternatively home losses) so I think that Hofstra game may have hurt us a fair bit more in NET than say KP.

In terms of KP - if we had won those 2 games by a total of 5 points, I calculated the move was about 10 spots... 78 to 68.

The most important impact of those 2 wins would have been on our resume, which we ultimately get selected on. We would be clearly in "as of now" if we had won those 2 games despite our NET.

 

[RedtheGOB]

I think you are mostly right -- I believed you were basically 100% right before this year. I have seen a few moves in NET this year that suggest straight W/L have some impact in their secret sauce at times, but I'm guessing. Efficiency (which i see margin as the "output" of) is certainly central to both KenPom and NET, but its more central to KP its 100% the basis for KP. It's hard to say with NET though because it can't be tracked easily like KP. My guess, and purely a guess is that our NET would have improved from its current 89 level to the high 50's or 60's (so say 20-30 spots) ... but that is purely speculative, and I can't prove it out. I do know NET values road wins more (and alternatively home losses) so I think that Hofstra game may have hurt us a fair bit more in NET than say KP.

In terms of KP - if we had won those 2 games by a total of 5 points, I calculated the move was about 10 spots... 78 to 68.

The most important impact of those 2 wins would have been on our resume, which we ultimately get selected on. We would be clearly in "as of now" if we had won those 2 games despite our NET.

What’s the prediction on our Net if we beat Clemson in a a close one?

Like you said the spread is prob close to 2 points yet Clemson sits 50+ spots higher in the Net.

I was thinking 75ish. A 10-15 spot boost is Not bad for one win at home when the spread is only a basket.

 

[orange79]

What’s the prediction on our Net if we beat Clemson in a a close one?

Like you said the spread is prob close to 2 points yet Clemson sits 50+ spots higher in the Net.

I was thinking 75ish. A 10-15 spot boost is Not bad for one win at home when the spread is only a basket.

That seems like a big leap for a close win over a Q2 team. But I'll let the expert answer.

 

[jncuse]

What’s the prediction on our Net if we beat Clemson in a a close one?

Like you said the spread is prob close to 2 points yet Clemson sits 50+ spots higher in the Net.

I was thinking 75ish. A 10-15 spot boost is Not bad for one win at home when the spread is only a basket.

It's hard to say with the NET, I don't fully understand their secret sauce, and unlike KP you can't visualize and try to quantify the gap from 79 to 89... we are at 89, so the gap between say 79-89 is much closer than say 49-59. So climbing 10 spots is possible, but I suspect that might be the max.

I do find road wins swing the NET much more than home wins, as they do use a 1.4 factor for road wins.

Most important is winning for our resume and not the NET.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Breakdown of the remaining games in ACC play

Sweep this
At Georgia Tech
At Pitt
Vs Florida State
At Boston College
Vs Notre Dame
Vs Pitt

Go at least 5-3 here
Vs Clemson
Vs Virginia Tech
Vs Miami
At NC State
Vs California
Vs SMU
Vs UNC
At Wake Forest

Win at least 1 of 4 here
At UNC
At Virginia
At Duke
At Louisville

The path to 12-6. I think all of the games in the go at least 5-3 here category are easier than Houston, Kansas, Iowa State, and Tennessee.

I think we actually have to win a game or two more than that, and at least 2 or 3 on the road.

 

[JonB]

We are 89th in the NET right now. If the NET is anything like Ken Pom (which it is, mostly?) then simply turning those 2 losses into wins would barely change our ranking at all. It's mostly scoring margin based; giving us a few extra points against Houston and Hofstra could give us 2 more wins but it wouldn't materially change our NET at all.

They would still be 11-2 with 2 quad 1 wins and no bad losses. Right about where all top teams are currently.

You’re neglecting the rest of my points…. that Syracuse was beating teams by a lot when they had Freeman. If they had Freeman, they would probably be 11 and two and have much better defensive and offensive metrics. You guys need to READ.

This stuff would entail Syracuse probably having a net ranking in the 40s. It doesn’t have to be all doom and gloom, if you close your eyes and imagine they kept a player of Freeman’s caliber for all those games they would probably be doing OK. It’s not rocket science.

 

[Dinkyspond]

We are 89th in the NET right now. If the NET is anything like Ken Pom (which it is, mostly?) then simply turning those 2 losses into wins would barely change our ranking at all. It's mostly scoring margin based; giving us a few extra points against Houston and Hofstra could give us 2 more wins but it wouldn't materially change our NET at all.

the loss vs. Hofstra was devastating and will haunt us all year long, it canceled out the Tennessee win. That loss could keep us out of the NCAAT alone

 

[RedtheGOB]

It's hard to say with the NET, I don't fully understand their secret sauce, and unlike KP you can't visualize and try to quantify the gap from 79 to 89... we are at 89, so the gap between say 79-89 is much closer than say 49-59. So climbing 10 spots is possible, but I suspect that might be the max.

I do find road wins swing the NET much more than home wins, as they do use a 1.4 factor for road wins.

Most important is winning for our resume and not the NET.

The Net really feels like a vibes and momentum thing sometimes. Almost like once a few wins stack against P5 teams it really can creep up quickly. Especially in conference play when teams tend to play a few road games back to back like you said it can really jump. Guess we either see consistency with Donnie or not and that will be that for the Autry era.

 

[blust2i3d4]

Maybe 12-6 is not enough. Might need 13-5. Or 12-6 plus one ACC tournament win.

 

[Dinkyspond]

Maybe 12-6 is not enough. Might need 13-5. Or 12-6 plus one ACC tournament win.

We have been in the ACC since 2013-2014. We have never won more than 1 game in the ACCT which is unfathomable (opted out in 2015, only 1 game was played in 2020 after Covid cancelation). That alone shows how much the program has fallen. 10 years and never won more than 1!

 

[jncuse]

Maybe 12-6 is not enough. Might need 13-5. Or 12-6 plus one ACC tournament win.

I think 12-6 will be fine, but won't defend it more then that until (if) we win tomorrow. Much more concerned about Syracuse ability to win 11+ ACC games.

I suppose it depends who we play in the ACC tournament. If a Q3 team finds a way to beat us in our first game, then that can certainly hurt us,

 

[Fat tire 13]

The latest Bracketology (yes take with a giant grain of salt) has 8 ACC teams making the dance. And California/VT just outside the bubble

Therefore we are no better than 11th in the conference in terms of resume.

If we go 12-6 that should be good for something in the range of 6th-8th in the conference. With Tenn win and Hofstra stinker cancelling each other out?

Maybe that’s the wrong way to look at it, but feel like 12-6 should be just enough…but would be sweating it out

 

[Scooch]

Sooo, the next 4 games are must wins, right? Seems unlikely that we can get to 12-6 if we drop one to any of Ga Tech, Pitt, FSU or BC.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Sooo, the next 4 games are must wins, right? Seems unlikely that we can get to 12-6 if we drop one to any of Ga Tech, Pitt, FSU or BC.

Next 6