• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2021-22 Wake Forest Basketball Season - 25-9 (13-7), KP#33

I hate UNC as much as the next WF fan, but they played a much tougher OOC schedule than WF. That matters because that is controllable. If a school plays a tough schedule, even if you lose games, it helps more than playing all home games against teams in the bottom quarter of college basketball; those results are essentially ignored by the committee as every team under at-large consideration would sweep Charleston Southern, William and Mary, Western Carolina and USC Upstate. I get why WF scheduled they way it did given WF recent awful history. WF needed a winning season, and even the most optimistic WF people didn't forsee WF as a top team in the ACC. Forbes has already said that WF would've scheduled differently in retrospect.
 
Pilchard said:
I hate UNC as much as the next WF fan, but they played a much tougher OOC schedule than WF. That matters because that is controllable. If a school plays a tough schedule, even if you lose games, it helps more than playing all home games against teams in the bottom quarter of college basketball; those results are essentially ignored by the committee as every team under at-large consideration would sweep Charleston Southern, William and Mary, Western Carolina and USC Upstate. I get why WF scheduled they way it did given WF recent awful history. WF needed a winning season, and even the most optimistic WF people didn't forsee WF as a top team in the ACC. Forbes has already said that WF would've scheduled differently in retrospect.
Click to expand...

You should have to win at least one of them. They lost all of them. Maybe the got a bit unlucky that Michigan ended up not being better. And they have a Quad 4 loss at home.

WF has the same Q1 W (@VT), no bad losses, and a H2H smackdown. If it ended today, no sane person who seed UNC better than WF.
 
PaddyWF said:
You should have to win at least one of them. They lost all of them. Maybe the got a bit unlucky that Michigan ended up not being better. And they have a Quad 4 loss at home.

WF has the same Q1 W (@VT), no bad losses, and a H2H smackdown. If it ended today, no sane person who seed UNC better than WF.
Click to expand...

except for maybe the AD of UNC, who is on the committee
 
LCDeacon said:
Quick question on the NET rankings...the focus is on quadrant wins, but how can Iowa be #18 and Wake at #42? Their profile looks very similar to Wake's so I was just curious what would cause them to be so much higher. If they have played 15 Q1 & Q2 games, and Wake has played 13, then I wouldn't think the SOS we be so drastically different to put them so high. I don't think Wake should be higher, but from the profile think Iowa should be more in the 30-40 range, and wasn't sure what I am missing.
Click to expand...

Nothing sticks out to me expect that they have two more Q2 wins than WF does. I also was surprised to see their OOC is just as weak as WF. They played a ton of crap teams at home to start the season. I am assuming margin of victory in their losses is better.
 
PaddyWF said:
You should have to win at least one of them. They lost all of them. Maybe the got a bit unlucky that Michigan ended up not being better. And they have a Quad 4 loss at home.

WF has the same Q1 W (@VT), no bad losses, and a H2H smackdown. If it ended today, no sane person who seed UNC better than WF.
Click to expand...

Good post. Unfortunately, I think Forbes is right...it's going to take time for us to regain the respect we once had. If we win tonight and get one win in the ACCT, I think we're locks. We make a run in the ACCT, though and I could easily see us sliding up two spots to an 8 seed or something like that. A Pitt-Miami-Duke stretch is possible and winnable, IMHO.
 
PaddyWF said:
You should have to win at least one of them. They lost all of them. Maybe the got a bit unlucky that Michigan ended up not being better. And they have a Quad 4 loss at home.

WF has the same Q1 W (@VT), no bad losses, and a H2H smackdown. If it ended today, no sane person who seed UNC better than WF.
Click to expand...

Just to test that premise, I looked at the most up to date Bracket Project compilation. 34 brackets have UNC at least a seed ahead of Wake. I didn’t count how many were the same seed (a lot). UNC is in 129 to Wake’s 128 (out of 137). And Wake’s about a half seed better on average.

On metrics, I’ve got a composite ranking that tries to combine quality and resume similar to what Torvik’s site does on Net, KenPom, BPI, and SoR. Not perfect, but a good starting point. UNC is 34th, Wake 38th because UNC is slightly higher in all of those but KenPom (37 v 38). Basically, it’s close and at least up for debate with the one thing we have on them being the beat down we gave them head to head.
 
LCDeacon said:
Quick question on the NET rankings...the focus is on quadrant wins, but how can Iowa be #18 and Wake at #42? Their profile looks very similar to Wake's so I was just curious what would cause them to be so much higher. If they have played 15 Q1 & Q2 games, and Wake has played 13, then I wouldn't think the SOS we be so drastically different to put them so high. I don't think Wake should be higher, but from the profile think Iowa should be more in the 30-40 range, and wasn't sure what I am missing.
Click to expand...

I can’t figure out the weightings, but basically Net is a combination of resume-based metrics (quad wins, strength of record, etc) and Quality metrics (Think Kenpom and items like it). Iowa’s Strength of Record is #32, and they look pretty similar to Wake there (37). On the other hand, they are 14/16 in Kenpom and BPI, so it’s got to be the quality metrics that boost them up to 18 in NET.
 
If VT beats Clemson in their reg season finale, then wins 2 games in the ACCT, are they in?

Would probably knock out Miami or UNC (assuming they are going to be 3/4 seed). If both UNC and Miami gets to 14 conference wins, are they really going to keep them out based on an extra Q1 L?
 
Haros said:
Just to test that premise, I looked at the most up to date Bracket Project compilation. 34 brackets have UNC at least a seed ahead of Wake. I didn’t count how many were the same seed (a lot). UNC is in 129 to Wake’s 128 (out of 137). And Wake’s about a half seed better on average.

On metrics, I’ve got a composite ranking that tries to combine quality and resume similar to what Torvik’s site does on Net, KenPom, BPI, and SoR. Not perfect, but a good starting point. UNC is 34th, Wake 38th because UNC is slightly higher in all of those but KenPom (37 v 38). Basically, it’s close and at least up for debate with the one thing we have on them being the beat down we gave them head to head.
Click to expand...

Yes, its close. But if a H2H mathcup plus the Q4 L doesn't settle it, then what is the argument for UNC? They lost more games to good teams? They had a higher MOV against some teams? That seems weak af, but guess its a possibility.

The fact that it's even a discussion shows how important SOS is and I doubt we have this issue in the rest of the Forbes era.
 
For what its worth I looked at the five bracket sites that are ranked the best overall on average over the past five years per Bracket Matrix and all five have Wake as a 10 or 11 and ahead of the First Four play-in teams.
 
Haros said:
They’ll finish top 4 with the double bye?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the only clear thing they could point to that I can see. 1 more conference win. I also found it interesting they have the weakest conference schedule of any ACC team (accordion to KP). WF is 7th.

I looked up margin of victory, we are more than double UNC, but that doesn't count for strength of opponent.
 
PaddyWF said:
Yes, that's the only clear thing they could point to that I can see. 1 more conference win. I also found it interesting they have the weakest conference schedule of any ACC team (accordion to KP). WF is 7th.

I looked up margin of victory, we are more than double UNC, but that doesn't count for strength of opponent.
Click to expand...

looking at KP's top 100, UNC will be 7-8 against the top 100 assuming a loss to Duke; WF will be 6-7

If we lose to UNC or Miami in the quarters we will be 6-8 against the top 100.

UNC won't have the weakest ACC schedule after they play Duke on Saturday. WF will not be 7th after playing NC State

and again...UNC's AD is on the committee
 
Last edited:
thatguy2016 said:
looking at KP's top 100, UNC will be 7-8 against the top 100 assuming a loss to Duke; WF will be 6-7

If we lose to UNC or Miami in the quarters we will be 6-8 against the top 100.

UNC won't have the weakest ACC schedule after they play Duke on Saturday. WF will not be 7th after playing NC State

and again...UNC's AD is on the committee
Click to expand...

my understanding of how it works is if someone tied to the school is on the committee, they leave the room when that school is discussed.
 
They do. But the other committee members still have to look that one in the face when he comes back and they probably don’t want to make enemies. Over and over again it has been a help whether it should be or not.
 
Haros said:
They do. But the other committee members still have to look that one in the face when he comes back and they probably don’t want to make enemies. Over and over again it has been a help whether it should be or not.
Click to expand...

If history has taught us anything having a rep on the committee is invaluable.
 
Daivien Williamson is currently shooting 47.8% on all shot attempts (including 2's and 3's), 41.8% on 3's, and 89% on FT's

If his next two games are identical to his last two, with one additional FT attempted and made, his season averages will hit: 50.0% / 43.7% / 90.0%

The 50/40/90 club of major college basketball players is a pretty short list.
 
thatguy2016 said:
Daivien Williamson is currently shooting 47.8% on all shot attempts (including 2's and 3's), 41.8% on 3's, and 89% on FT's

If his next two games are identical to his last two, with one additional FT attempted and made, his season averages will hit: 50.0% / 43.7% / 90.0%

The 50/40/90 club of major college basketball players is a pretty short list.
Click to expand...

Only 11 in the NCAAs since 93, and only 5 at power 5 schools.

Impressive.


https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...member-di-mens-basketballs-50-40-90-club-1993
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top