• 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!

2023-24 Wake Forest Basketball Season - 21-14 (11-9) - KP#29 / NET#43

cville deac said:
It feels like Catoor has been at VT as long as Kihei Clark was at UVA. But I kinda like Catoor, and I like the job Young is doing at VT, and that's 1 of the few nights I'm not pulling for them.
Click to expand...
Fair. Big fan of Young - everything else VT related, though…not a fan at all.
 
VT's PG Sean Pedulla, is key to everything VT does, and Pedulla suffered a foot injury in early December. He has only played in two of VT's last four games, and his minutes were limited in the two games Pedulla did play (last year, 4th in the ACC in minutes). If Pedulla is not 100% against WF (understanding he will have time off, but foot injuries often linger), VT may be in trouble, as they will have to rely on frosh Brandon Reichsteiner, making his first ACC conference game start).
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Delaware State has avoided finishing in the bottom 15 of the 363 teams in the NCAA exactly one time in five years. We should never play them
Click to expand...
I agree but I wish that was not the case. The message is that power conference teams should not schedule teams from conferences like the MEAC and SWAC.

Any good rating system is going to take quality of competition into account. I hate it when someone on TV says something like they are rated 38th, but their strength of schedule is only 278th.

So you tell Delaware State they cannot play any teams who are traditionally good (along with a lot who are not even traditionally good). Delaware State makes money off these games and, as we unfortunately know, sometimes even wins those games. They are part of division 1 basketball after all.
 
That's an entirely fair counter. Ideally, local schools are scheduling these teams for the buy games. So Maryland/Georgetown toss Delaware State/Coppin State on as their "300+" games. Wake can toss in Elon, Upstate, Presbyterian, whoever. I guess the bottom line is, schedule a couple if you want but don't schedule 5 of them.

And yeah all the (good) rating systems do take into account quality of competition (NET, Torvik, KP, Miya, etc.). I'd be in favor of the OOC SOS not even appearing on team sheets because this is already baked into the ratings to start with.
 
I agree in general with the "don't play the 350th ranked team" thing, but also think Forbes has a decent handle on it now. First, I wouldn't be surprised to see d-state and presby both move up through the year a bit. Forbes seems to pick games based on coaching staffs as much as anything, he certainly thinks those teams played better than their current number and I tend to agree. Also, if you go for a middle-ground game and lose, you get double-fucked. Quad 1 team and keep it close? Great. The metrics component is positive even if you get nothing for losing in the results side of the NET. One thing we've been screwing up in recent years has been hitting our target efficiencies against bad teams, Forbes now openly discusses the fact that we're watching those numbers throughout our games now. Sure, the result win portion is fairly worthless, but as long as we don't take a metrics hit it's not that bad. The dagger early is losing at home to a mediocre team. You get killed on metrics AND result, plus it's not a Q1 either. With a team that we knew wouldn't be at full strength until 2024, and with how we've performed (and having a couple games where our only center was Keller) - can't say I hate the schedule THAT much. Needed that Utah win but we head into ACC play in decent shape.

There are only 3 ACC teams with any real distance in front of us in Kenpom (which the NET will likely converge to), and the ACC isn't as weak as it has been previously. You tell me no Monsanto, maybe no Reid, new guys in Boopie/Sallis/Friedrichson/Marion coming in when planning this season... I don't mind the softer easy games since we had some good opportunities teed up if we played well enough to get Houston or whoever. Look at FSU - tough schedule but dropped the "easy" middle game to South Florida during a 4 game losing streak. Bet they wish they'd had another cupcake or two instead, as long as they covered... If they split their final 2 games versus mid-100's no-names that's going to be a really tough climb back to relevancy.

Clemson/Duke/UNC clearly in their own tier of the ACC, but we're positioned just fine to be the next team in.
 
The main issue with all the deep Q4 teams is that OOC SOS shows up on the team sheet (unless this changed in the last year) that the committee looks at. It doesn't matter if you beat them by 100 in the five games you played, that doesn't change that number.
 
DCDeac said:
I agree in general with the "don't play the 350th ranked team" thing, but also think Forbes has a decent handle on it now. First, I wouldn't be surprised to see d-state and presby both move up through the year a bit. Forbes seems to pick games based on coaching staffs as much as anything, he certainly thinks those teams played better than their current number and I tend to agree. Also, if you go for a middle-ground game and lose, you get double-fucked. Quad 1 team and keep it close? Great. The metrics component is positive even if you get nothing for losing in the results side of the NET. One thing we've been screwing up in recent years has been hitting our target efficiencies against bad teams, Forbes now openly discusses the fact that we're watching those numbers throughout our games now. Sure, the result win portion is fairly worthless, but as long as we don't take a metrics hit it's not that bad. The dagger early is losing at home to a mediocre team. You get killed on metrics AND result, plus it's not a Q1 either. With a team that we knew wouldn't be at full strength until 2024, and with how we've performed (and having a couple games where our only center was Keller) - can't say I hate the schedule THAT much. Needed that Utah win but we head into ACC play in decent shape.

There are only 3 ACC teams with any real distance in front of us in Kenpom (which the NET will likely converge to), and the ACC isn't as weak as it has been previously. You tell me no Monsanto, maybe no Reid, new guys in Boopie/Sallis/Friedrichson/Marion coming in when planning this season... I don't mind the softer easy games since we had some good opportunities teed up if we played well enough to get Houston or whoever. Look at FSU - tough schedule but dropped the "easy" middle game to South Florida during a 4 game losing streak. Bet they wish they'd had another cupcake or two instead, as long as they covered... If they split their final 2 games versus mid-100's no-names that's going to be a really tough climb back to relevancy.

Clemson/Duke/UNC clearly in their own tier of the ACC, but we're positioned just fine to be the next team in.
Click to expand...
I’m just not convinced that Clemson/Duke/UNC is genuinely a tier above us. Duke and UNC have looked like shit at times this season.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
The main issue with all the deep Q4 teams is that OOC SOS shows up on the team sheet (unless this changed in the last year) that the committee looks at. It doesn't matter if you beat them by 100 in the five games you played, that doesn't change that number.
Click to expand...

Yep. It showed up for Clemson last year, they were left out because of it, and they fixed the problem this year, upgrading the OOC schedule significantly.
 
awakegirl said:
I’m just not convinced that Clemson/Duke/UNC is genuinely a tier above us. Duke and UNC have looked like shit at times this season.
Click to expand...
I worry if my expectations are too high as I feel the same. I am expecting this team to defend the Joel for the entire season. There goes 10 ACC wins… not sure how many they can add on the road, but that will be what determines whether they make it or not.
 
daaberry said:
I worry if my expectations are too high as I feel the same. I am expecting this team to defend the Joel for the entire season. There goes 10 ACC wins… not sure how many they can add on the road, but that will be what determines whether they make it or not.
Click to expand...
Ha- I actually hesitate every time I post something mildly confident so I understand! Such is the life of a Wake fan!
 
I feel pretty confident (not being a downer just realistic I think) that UNC and Duke are a tier above us. Just with their recruiting ability and talent level - their ceiling and floor are both higher. Thats not a sleight. Clemson has shown that they’ve got high potential as well. Beyond that. Go get it young fellas
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I feel pretty confident (not being a downer just realistic I think) that UNC and Duke are a tier above us. Just with their recruiting ability and talent level - their ceiling and floor are both higher. Thats not a sleight. Clemson has shown that they’ve got high potential as well. Beyond that. Go get it young fellas
Click to expand...
But poor Hubert seems like a nice man but a shit coach.
 
In case anyone is curious, in 2022, we started the season at #105 in KenPom, and ended up at #35.

In back-to-back games on 11/20 and 11/23 (games 4 and 5), we beat #289 NCA&T by 24 and #223 Kennesaw St by 31. Those two games moved us up from #106 to #90.

By far, the most dramatic swing of the season came in our ACC opener, 12/4 at #17 VPI. We absolutely pummeled them, winning by 19, and vaulted from #89 to #59.

At this point in the season, following a lackluster neutral-court win over #201 Charlotte, we were ranked #66. We proceeded to lose our first game out of Christmas break, at #127 Louisville, by 4. This game actually moved us up in the rankings, as Louisville was much higher-ranked at the time of our game, before the bottom fell out and they lost 14 of their last 16 games. In retrospect, this loss was a killer.

We lost again at Miami, dipped to 66, and then shot up 12 spots after whipping #105 FSU at home, 76-54.

We got another solid boost a few games later by winning at #72 UVA by 8. After this game, we were 14-4 (4-3) and #48 in KenPom.

The rise continued as we rattled off three more wins to complete a four-game winning streak, @ #156 GT by 16, vs. #16 UNC by 22, and @ #114 BC by 30. We reached #31 at this point.

We capped that stretch by getting crushed @ #69 Syracuse, 94-72, and dropped 13 spots to #44.

Road wins @ #105 FSU by 8 and #128 State by 18 pushed us to our season-best ranking of #29.

A home loss to #41 Miami by 4 dropped us 8 spots. A home win against #38 ND by 5 gained us 6 spots. The at #71 Clemson bed-crapping cost us 8 spots, down to #38, and none of our remaining games moved us more than four spots the rest of the way.


So far this year, we started at #73 and have moved up 16 spots to #57 through non-conference play. LSU hurt the most (down 9), while Rutgers helped the most (up 14).

Two years ago, we did most of our moving in conference play, as a result of road wins against VPI, FSU, UVA, GT, BC, and NCSU. We beat comparable teams on the road and blew out inferior ones. Home losses and a couple of road stinkers cost us. There's nothing ground-breaking in that analysis, but I was surprised at just how little the '22 team moved up in the OOC and how much room for improvement there was in the conference schedule. If this team can put together a similar performance in conference play, we won't need to worry about our KP ranking at the end of the year.
 
The OOC issue isn't that Wake can't move up in ACC play. The issue is that the OOC puts a ceiling on how far Wake can move up with a reasonable ACC record.

The 21-22 team moved from #89 to #35 with a 13-7 record. Wake is #57 right now. Could this team move up into the top 30 with a 13-7 record? Or would they need to get to 14-6?
 
To add parallels to the above:
1) early on we didn’t have Monsanto, didn’t know what we had in Sy, played 2 games without Laravia and one without Mucius, and were so starved for depth that we were relying on Carter Whitt playing 6th man type minutes until Damari’s return. Whitt’s minutes finally declined to the single digits after the Syracuse debacle noted above, and when the most notable surge took place. It looks like we may still struggle to be deeper than 6 guys you can really trust at this point, so very similar at the same point in the season — though we likely still have room to move higher just by having Efton.
2) to put the ACC in context, it is about 0.8 points/100 possessions per team better this year than 2 years ago. #71 would be projected to go .500 this year vs #79 a couple years ago. 6th instead of 5th though. So close to a wash.

3) Maybe most important - the composition of our ACC schedule is different. We played 4 of the bottom 6 teams twice each in getting to 13-7. 21 ACC games only got us 6 quad 1 (3 wins) opportunities and 6 quad 2 (2 wins). One of those Q1 wins only became so after selection Sunday (UNC). This year we will have likely 8/8 or something like it. Meaning 9 conference wins in the top 2 quads assuming 13-7 and no bad losses.
4) As much as we haven’t helped ourselves so far, wins over Florida and maybe Rutgers will still be more than what we had in 2022. Which was 0 of note.

All that to say, if we go 13-7 and into the 30s again, I think I will feel decent as long as say 3 of those wins come from Q1.
 
PhDeac said:
The OOC issue isn't that Wake can't move up in ACC play. The issue is that the OOC puts a ceiling on how far Wake can move up with a reasonable ACC record.

The 21-22 team moved from #89 to #35 with a 13-7 record. Wake is #57 right now. Could this team move up into the top 30 with a 13-7 record? Or would they need to get to 14-6?
Click to expand...

I think the devil's in the details here. As Forbes would say, it's about winning the "right" games, not just record. If we lose by two on the road at, say UVA and VaTech, but put up a win a Cameron or beat UNC - that's tremendously better in the current system than having home losses against a couple bad teams but getting to 13-7 by beating all the mid-tier folks. The ACC is strong enough this year (barely) that we have ample opportunity to move up. Just need to keep pressing to "win" the efficiency games when the win has no value. Luckily we only play Notre Dame and Louisville once each (and one on the road) so that helps.

Side note, my comment about tiers in the ACC was 100% just about rankings. UNC has played a murder schedule, Duke almost the same, Clemson a signature Bama win and a 2 point Memphis loss on the road which is lovely metrics-wise. We have a long road ahead to chase any of those 3 down, but everyone else is a stone's throw from where we are. I absolutely think this team can beat all 3 on a good day. Hell, if GaTech can beat Duke we sure as hell can.

Oh and Clemson last year was barely top 70 Kenpom. The lost half of their closing games including every chance they had against a ranked opponent (they had 1 ranked win, Duke, for the entire year). Not at all the same as how strong the Manman/LaRavia team was and got snubbed, and definitely wasn't due primarily to OOC scheduling. That team had 4 losses on the last day of January and then fell apart. Even in this new metrics age the committee hates that.
 
Haros said:
I get that better opponents may want return games. So do a 2-for-1 or 3-for-1 with Furman or UNCW (or whoever). One away game against this set of options per year if it also gets 2 better home games.

I can’t imagine we would be losing so much money by losing a weekday home game against Presbyterian or NJIT that there would be a financial reason not to make the switch. I’m certain season ticket holders wouldn’t care if there’s one less home game to go to.
Click to expand...
So, any idea what the actual numbers currently would be for that?
 
Doing a 2-for-1 with UNCG in Greensboro Coliseum is a no-brainer. Here are some other 2-for-1s that make a lot of sense:

WCU - Help out JGray
Winthrop - Get Wake back into the Skip Prosser Classic
Davidson - Great road atmosphere and a short drive
HPU - Never been to a game there but even a shorter drive

Potential neutral site games:
Furman in Greenville, SC at the Bon Secours Wellness Arena (had to look up what they're calling the Bi-LO Center now)
Davidson or UNCC in Charlotte at the Spectrum Center
NC A&T at Greensboro Coliseum
 
Pilchard said:
VT's PG Sean Pedulla, is key to everything VT does, and Pedulla suffered a foot injury in early December. He has only played in two of VT's last four games, and his minutes were limited in the two games Pedulla did play (last year, 4th in the ACC in minutes). If Pedulla is not 100% against WF (understanding he will have time off, but foot injuries often linger), VT may be in trouble, as they will have to rely on frosh Brandon Reichsteiner, making his first ACC conference game start).
Click to expand...
Agree about Pedulla. Their 3 most important guys are him, Catoor and Kidd. But I've also been happy that semi-local Tyler Nickel has earned some decent run for them and is contributing (and glad he left UNC - Young's offense is perfect for him).

Also agree with numbers on his tier thing. UNC and Duke fart around a lot with opponents but are still more talented than the tier below, and Clemson is with them. Outside of @Duke and @UNC, any other game is gettable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top