The ACC – Entering the Home Stretch

As I watch the waning minutes of the pivotal Wake/Miami contest (late update – Wake holds on), I think it’s time to evaluate the position of our ACC brethren, with post-season play just around the corner:

Category One – Mortal Locks:

Wake Forest (10-2, #3 RPI, #5 Sagarin)

UNC (8-2, #8 RPI, #1 Sagarin)

Duke (8-3, #6 RPI, #8 Sagarin)

Not only could these powerhouse teams lose out and still dance (about as likely as me growing a third eye), they are also looking at – realistically – no worse than a #3 seed. In fact, I will go on record and predict TWO #1 seeds from the ACC (Wake, UNC), with Duke getting a #2. Duke has questionable depth, but I think Wake and UNC each have as good a shot as any team to win it all. The Wal-Mart crowd will have justification to turn in their usual blue-tinged pool entries, for a change.

Category Two – On Solid Ground:

Maryland (6-5, #22 RPI, #22 Sagarin); Magic Number – 1

After watching the helpless Pack demolish the Terps in College Park, I had my doubts. While I was certain that Georgia Tech would bounce back (more later), I thought Maryland might need another miracle ACC tourney run to avoid the dreaded NIT. Despite a brief relapse in sultry Miami, the 2004-05 Terps have proven to be as stubborn and resolute as their sweat-drenched head coach. I think they would dance at 7-9 in the ACC, and if everything plays out as predicted, Maryland will be a very solid #5 or #6 seed.

Category Three – Pure Bubble:

Georgia Tech (5-6, #40 RPI, #24 Sagarin); Magic Number – 3

Miami (6-6, #48 RPI, #44 Sagarin); Magic Number – 2

The numbers seem to indicate that Tech could sneak in at 7-9, but I wouldn’t count on it – not without a win in the ACC tourney. The Bees have played very poorly of late, even with Elder playing at Clemson and in a terrible home loss to NC State. When you really only have one guy (a gimpy Elder) who can shoot, it’s hard to win consistently. Take this team out of an open court game, and they are mediocre at best. Teams that lose at home to miracle-hoping squads like VT and NC State usually find themselves in the NIT. Miami, on the other hand, has kept up its pesky play, beating Maryland and extending Wake to the limit. They will need 8-8, but only need 2 more wins to get there. GT may be more likely to win 3 than Miami is to win 2, however. The schedule is everything for the bubble-bound.

Category Four – Distant Bubble:

Virginia (4-7, #44 RPI, #71 Sagarin); Magic Number – 3.5

Virginia would be the toughest case to call at 7-9. They played a tough out-of-league schedule, with decent results. They would be 6-2 in the second half of ACC play. Unlike GT and NC State, they benefit from the committee’s use of RPI over Sagarin data. But the Cavaliers are so bad – in my admittedly subjective judgment – that I don’t see it happening anyway. At 8-8, or 7-9 with a tourney win, UVA would be a lock. Don’t hold your breath. And don’t worry, Wahoo fans – Gillen will still be fired.

Category Five – All I Need Is A Miracle:

NC State (4-7, #96 RPI, #42 Sagarin); Magic Number – 5

Virginia Tech (5-6, #135 RPI, #101 Sagarin); Magic Number – 5

Please forgive the Mike + The Mechanics reference, but these teams don’t need to win the ACC tournament, but they really need to catch fire. Unfortunately for Coach Sendek, Georgia Tech isn’t on the remaining schedule, but all remaining games are THEORETICALLY winnable (although nobody expects a home sweep of UNC and Wake). State’s poor non-conference performance means 8-8 won’t be enough without an ACC tourney win (maybe two, if the first is on Thursday). Virginia Tech was so bad in December (first ACC team to ever lose to VMI) that even 9-7 woin’t punch their dance ticket. 10-6 would be hard to deny – but it’s also realistically impossible. When the RPI and Sagarin agree you’re in the triple digits, you hope to have the athletic department print NIT tickets. Still, if they get to 7 wins, Seth Greenberg gets my vote for ACC Coach of the Year.

Category Six – Need the Automatic Berth:

Florida State (3-8, #115 RPI, #87 Sagarin)

Clemson (2-9, #103 RPI, #73 Sagarin)

Familiar territory for these two, despite pre-season hopes of Miami and Virginia Tech occupying the cellar. I suppose stranger things have happened, but Vegas would give you pretty good odds if you think either one of these plodding sqauds can win 4 ACC games in 4 days.

The Toughest Call – First Team All-ACC:

C. Paul, Wake (POY)

R. Felton, UNC

J. Hodge, NCSU

S. Williams, Duke

S. May, UNC

I won’t list a second team, but instead note that these 3 get honorable mention for first team:

J. Redick, Duke

J. Jack, GT

E. Williams, Wake

NOTE: RPI data from collegerpi.com

About BJD95

1995 NC State graduate, sufferer of Les and MOC during my entire student tenure. An equal-opportunity objective critic and analyst of Wolfpack sports.

General NCS Basketball

11 Responses to The ACC – Entering the Home Stretch

  1. Trout 02/16/2005 at 8:08 AM #

    Hodge over Redick for 1st team All-ACC? I dont see that. I think many vote on All-ACC by how that player helped his team, and Hodge will be penalized for the State’s poor performance this year.

    Does the NCAA look at Sagarin at all? I’ve never seen the talking heads discuss Sagarin rankings when discussing “bubble” teams, only RPI.

    Right now, I think the ACC gets 5 teams, with 6 possible. UNC, Wake, Duke and MD all get in. GT has the inside track on #5, with Miami on the bubble for #6.

    No need to discuss NC State until after tonight’s game with MD.

  2. Dave 02/16/2005 at 9:32 AM #

    First team all conference is extremely difficult to pick this year – the hardest I can ever remember. It would be hard to leave Redick off that team.

    I guess McCants, Jawad Williams, Gray and Caner-Medley have all cooled off enough that it’s easy to leave them off now, but all had pretty good arguments just a few weeks ago. Well, maybe not Gray, but he made it last year, so that always gets you attention.

  3. BJD95 02/16/2005 at 10:13 AM #

    It is hard to leave Redick off, but I really think State could be 0-11 without Hodge. I just haven’t seen Redick pull Duke to victory that many times this season.

    Honestly, I thought Felton would be more controversial, even though I probably have him 2nd in my own personal POY vote (Paul, Felton, Sheldon W.).

  4. BJD95 02/16/2005 at 10:14 AM #

    Oh, and I agree that the committee doesn’t use Sagarin, but I find it both interesting and more accurate than RPI data, so I wanted to add it to the mix.

  5. Hal 02/16/2005 at 12:18 PM #

    My vote is that Redick deserves to be listed above Hodge, if for nothing else, the effectiveness of his contribution.

  6. Trout 02/16/2005 at 2:40 PM #

    Can anyone explain why the difference between our RPI and Sagarin is so large? We have a 54 point gap between those 2, while the next biggest gap is 34.

    RPI is really all that matters, just wondering if perhaps you know why.

    I wonder how much our RPI would jump with a win over #22 RPI Maryland?

  7. DavidH 02/16/2005 at 3:13 PM #

    Trout – The link through my name is to an article that quotes Doug Elgin, MVC Commissioner, who has served on the selection committee in the past. He says the committee uses the RPI, Sagarin, and it’s own rating (whatever that means):

    “Elgin, who has served on the NCAA Tournament selection committee, said that group uses both the RPI and Sagarin rankings when selecting teams for at-large berths.

    “I personally put more stock in the RPI report when I was on the committee,” continued Elgin, who also said the NCAA has its own ranking system much like the RPI and Sagarin ratings.

  8. DavidH 02/16/2005 at 3:14 PM #

    Hmm, this didn’t seem to work the first time, lemme try again…

    Trout, BJD95 – The link through my name is to an article that quotes Doug Elgin, MVC Commissioner, who has served on the selection committee in the past. He says the committee uses the RPI, Sagarin, and it’s own rating (whatever that means):

    “Elgin, who has served on the NCAA Tournament selection committee, said that group uses both the RPI and Sagarin rankings when selecting teams for at-large berths.

    “I personally put more stock in the RPI report when I was on the committee,” continued Elgin, who also said the NCAA has its own ranking system much like the RPI and Sagarin ratings.

  9. DavidH 02/16/2005 at 3:16 PM #

    Hmm, this didn’t seem to work the first time, lemme try again…

    Trout, BJD95 – http://www.pantagraph.com/stories/021305/spo_20050213052.shtml … This is article that quotes Doug Elgin, MVC Commissioner, who has served on the selection committee in the past. He says the committee uses the RPI, Sagarin, and it’s own rating (whatever that means):

    “Elgin, who has served on the NCAA Tournament selection committee, said that group uses both the RPI and Sagarin rankings when selecting teams for at-large berths.

    “I personally put more stock in the RPI report when I was on the committee,” continued Elgin, who also said the NCAA has its own ranking system much like the RPI and Sagarin ratings.

  10. gambling 06/27/2005 at 6:26 PM #

    I am happy to see this site so much. It is always nice to hear such good news as your site.

  11. blackjack 06/27/2005 at 7:34 PM #

    Very exceptional pieces of information. Very nice webpage though. I applaud

Leave a Reply