Georgia Tech 57, NC State 54
| Four Factors | NC State | Ga Tech |
| eFG% | 35.5 | 46.3 |
| Turnover Rate | 9.3 | 24.8 |
| Off Reb Rate | 27.1 | 23.3 |
| FT Rate | 30.6 | 78.0 |
| Pts | Poss | OFF_EFF | DEF_EFF | |
| GT | 57 | 64.6 | 88.2 | 83.6 |
| NCSU | 54 | 64.6 | 83.6 | 88.2 |
When Javi hit a three to pull us even with 14:44 to go, after such a terrible first half, it felt like our day. "In control" would be the wrong phrase, but from then on, it seemed at least manageable, which was a refreshing change from the first half. They never did seize it, and that's the story.
God, the opportunities. All those missed, wide open three-pointers. The occasions where we'd force a turnover with the press and then give it right back with a dumb shot or a rushed play that resulted in a reciprocal turnover. It was there. It was so, so there.
The main thing we needed to do today, we did: Tech finished -10 in the turnover category. We also rebounded the ball a lot better in the second half. The damned shots just did not fall.
5 comments | 0 recs |
NC State 58, Florida State 52
| Four Factors | NC State | Florida St. |
| eFG% | 52.3 | 41.4 |
| Turnover Rate | 25.4 | 31.7 |
| Off Reb Rate | 20.7 | 50.0 |
| FT Rate | 46.5 | 32.7 |
| Pts | Poss | OFF_EFF | DEF_EFF | |
| FSU | 52 | 63 | 82.5 | 92.0 |
| NCSU | 58 | 63 | 92.0 | 82.5 |
I figured our run would end here, because with the way FSU defends the paint, I thought we'd need a repeat three-point explosion from Scott Wood...and what were the odds of that happening again? Not bad, apparently. Florida State must be wondering what it is about them that Wood likes so much. He's made 13 threes against the Noles and 22 against the rest of the ACC.
NC State made just 42.9% of its twos against the Noles' tough interior defense, and FSU controlled the glass at both ends. Florida State couldn't hit anything from outside, though, and they turned the ball over in bunches, which is typical of them but maybe a bit surprising coming as it did against a relatively weak defense.
Javi led the defensive charge with five steals, none bigger than the one that came with about 2 minutes to go and led to a Macrowave slam that pushed the lead to six. Great effort by Javi on a bum ankle.
5 comments | 0 recs |
NC State 59, Clemson 57
| Four Factors | NC State | Clemson |
| eFG% | 55.7 | 46.1 |
| Turnover Rate | 30.7 | 24.3 |
| Off Reb Rate | 41.7 | 31.4 |
| FT Rate | 34.1 | 35.3 |
| Pts | Poss | OFF_EFF | DEF_EFF | |
| BC | 57 | 62 | 92.2 | 95.4 |
| NCSU | 59 | 62 | 95.4 | 92.2 |
NC State shot 67% and grabbed two-thirds of its missed shots in the second half, two things that proved just enough to overcome a bunch of turnovers and some interesting officiating.
Still livin'!
7 comments | 0 recs |
Let The Madness Begin
Here's how the Predict-O-Meter sees Thursday:
BC 64, Virginia 63
Wake 72, Miami 67
Georgia Tech 75, UNC 70
Clemson 70, NC State 63
No Landesberg for UVA, probably no Dwayne Collins for Miami. Boston College and Wake Forest are probably the safest bets today, but who the hell knows.
9 comments | 0 recs |
Beer Summit I: Talking ACC Tournament
Wolfpack Beer Summit from James Curle on Vimeo.
James, Derek, and I got together at Players' Retreat last night to talk about the ACC tournament. Then we were viciously attacked by territorial dart leaguers. Just kidding. But seriously, we're joining that league and we are going to crush those guys.
5 comments | 0 recs |
It's Tourney Time
Offensively, there's not a lot that separates Clemson and NC State. Both rely on an outstanding interior scorer, both just kind of hope for the best from the guys that surround them. Clemson gets slightly better guard play on the whole, and they're more balanced.
The difference is defense; Clemson plays it, while we you know it's whatever. There are a couple of drawbacks to Clemson's pressure D, drawbacks that persist year-to-year: opponents make plenty of twos and get to the line often.
Notes:
-- Clemson got off to a quick start in the first meeting and scored 1.4 points per possession in the first half. They averaged less than a point per trip against ACC teams this season, so that's slightly aberrant. Clemson managed to be that successful because they made 68% of their twos and only turned the ball over a handful of times. I kinda doubt that's repeatable.
-- If there's something positive to take away from the first meeting, it's that State only turned the ball over 16.8% of the time. The Pack took great care of the ball in the second half, which was a big part of their rally. We've been routinely baffled by the Clemson press, but that was an exception. It's also consistent with what we've seen from the Wolfpack all year--they're far less careless with the basketball.
-- Keys: (1) don't let the Tigers make 60+% of their twos (duh). (2) Don't take so many threes. Twenty-one of State's 54 field goal attempts were threes, a Princeton-esque proportion. Again, there is nothing special about Clemson's interior D. (3) Turnovers. If you take care of the ball against Clemson, you open up all sorts of opportunities. In addition to their blah interior defense, they foul a lot, and their defensive rebounding is average. While they've managed to diversify a bit, Purnell's teams still make a living on turnovers.
3 comments | 0 recs |
Doctors have cleared him to join the team for spring practice, which starts today. But even eight months after the crash, he plans to take his return to the field cautiously, seeing how much his body will allow him to do.
Irving's plan ("Lord willing," he said) is to be at full strength by the beginning of the season. He still faces many unknowns on the football field, though.
He's not as strong or fast as he was before the crash, but he hopes to exceed his previous physical benchmarks by the time the season starts.
4 days ago
Akula Wolf
0 comments
0 recs
Final Adjusted Conference Standings
Expanding on this a bit...
| In-Conf | OFF_EFF (rk) | DEF_EFF (rk) | Eff_Margin | ExpW | ActualW |
| Duke | 111.6 (1) | 94.0 (1) | 17.6 | 14 | 13 |
| Maryland | 111.3 (2) | 100.6 (6) | 10.7 | 12 | 13 |
| Clemson | 99.1 (7) | 95.9 (3) | 3.2 | 9 | 9 |
| FSU | 97.8 (10) | 95.4 (2) | 2.4 | 9 | 10 |
| Va Tech | 101.0 (3) | 99.0 (5) | 2.0 | 9 | 10 |
| Wake | 98.6 (8) | 98.8 (4) | -0.2 | 8 | 9 |
| Ga Tech | 100.2 (6) | 101.4 (7) | -1.2 | 7 | 7 |
| BC | 100.7 (4) | 105.6 (11) | -4.9 | 6 | 6 |
| NC State | 98.1 (9) | 105.0 (10) | -6.9 | 5 | 5 |
| Virginia | 96.6 (11) | 103.9 (8) | -7.3 | 5 | 5 |
| Miami | 100.5 (5) | 108.2 (12) | -7.7 | 5 | 4 |
| UNC | 95.9 (12) | 103.9 (9) | -8.0 | 5 | 5 |
Yep, Carolina's dismantling at the hands of Duke last Saturday pushed their efficiency margin all the way to the bottom. But there is very little difference between the Heels and the three teams ahead of them. Not much difference between teams 3-7, either. Could be a really chaotic weekend in Greensboro, and I'm all for that.
As far as expected wins vs. actual wins goes, there are no surprises. Nobody over/underachieved by more than a game. Considering how little separation there is between a lot of teams, I thought we might see some significantly lucky or unlucky results. Didn't work out that way. Pretty much, they are who we thought they were.
Pomeroy's predictions for Thursday's games are available here. No team is expected to win by more than seven points; if it works out that way, it's going to be a fun (if ugly) day.
6 comments | 0 recs |


























