Wake Forest Recap

Wake Forest 70, Clemson 65

Not much time here, but thought I would chime in quickly. Clemson's season just took its latest frustrating turn at the worst possible time. Wake Forest was definitely a team we were capable of beating, and I came away thinking if only we had performed up to the median ability we have shown this season we would have squeaked out a five point win. The fact we only lost be five underscores Wake's weakness as a team. Instead, we're stuck in the first round of the tournament. Assuming we can avoid the "we shouldn't be forced to play in round one" attitude that sunk us last year and beat NC State, we will be saddled with a bruising round 2 game against FSU with tired legs.

How did we manage to lose? I think it was a combination of underperformance in key areas and poor in-game decision-making.

• We were outworked on the boards. I was particularly frustrated with our seeming inability to grab offensive rebounds in the second half despite numerous chances. We needed to perform well in an area that Wake Forest has struggled in this year and we couldn't come up with a strong enough performance.
• Our halfcourt defense was lax all night and the full court press wasn't much better, although I give Wake some credit for handling the ball well behind the halfcourt line.
• Tanner Smith should not be taking shots down the stretch if the game is even remotely close.

I still think Clemson is in the NCAA tournament. It would be a ridiculous snub if they were left off. Unfortunately, we are likely bound for the 8/9 seed of death. The odds of getting Oliver Purnell's first NCAA win stand at around 50%, and the odds of getting into the sweet sixteen will be somewhere between 0.5 and 2.0%.

Wake Forest Preview

Clemson vs. Wake Forest, 03/07, 6:00pm, Lawrence Joel Veterans Memorial Coliseum

Yesterday's results make this an all-or-nothing event for the Tigers. A win gives us the three seed by merit of a better combined head-to-head record (2-1) in the tiebreaker with Virginia Tech (1-1) and FSU (1-2). A loss drops us all the way to the six seed, as we would be tied alone with the Wake Forest team that just beat us. I don't think anyone can understate the importance of this game. I honestly don't think Clemson has much of a chance at an ACC tournament run given that we match up so poorly this season with the league's best teams, Maryland and Duke. But a couple of wins and a good showing in a third game has the potential to vault us into a six seed in the NCAA tournament--as semi-arbitrary as the ACC tie-breaking system is, don't underestimate the value of the tag "third-best team in the ACC".

About the actual game. As I've mentioned in the last previews, Clemson closes out three straight games against opponents with a strikingly similar general profile: turnover-prone, reasonably-poor shooting, and offensive-glass dominant on offense with a well above-average defense driven by effective FG% against numbers that are the envy of teams across the nation. In fact, Wake ranks #1 in the country in effective FG% against percentage. This is why I generally feel that WF poses the toughest matchup for the Tigers out of the final three teams--unlike FSU they defend the 2- and 3-point shot equally well and they are also better at holding onto the ball relative to both FSU and GT. Despite this, it's fair to see Clemson as the mild favorite given their performance in the last two games, and their additional victory over FSU earlier this season.

Clemson also has other factors working in their favor in this game. On defense, WF does not defend against the offensive rebound very well. They also, unlike FSU or to a lesser extent GT, do not force turnovers. Finally, Wake Forest is considerably worse than either FSU or GT at shooting the ball on offense. I think this game will come down to who does a better job keeping the other team off the offensive glass and who converts more second-chance opportunities around the rim.

I'm hopeful that Wake, mathematically eliminated from the first-round bye and on the tail of a four game losing streak now starting to threaten their NCAA tournament plans, will come out dispirited. Unfortunately, senior night has a way of reinvigorating teams. Clemson will need to absorb the emotional high that Wake runs out, calmly reminding themselves they are the better team. I expect they can then start slowly asserting their will on the Demon Deacons, hopefully aided by the voluntary unraveling of Dino's squad as they see their post-season start slipping away...

GO TIGERS!!

ACC Tourney Byes, on the Line Today

Haven't written anything since last Wednesday, but the ACC tournament picture is a lot clearer now. If FSU loses today (regardless of what VT does) we can punch our ACC first round bye without hitting the floor on Sunday. Unfortunately, I fully expect FSU to grab a road win at Miami. I think UNC's dramatic single-season fall (as an aside, why didn't anyone see this coming? Everyone just expected the freshmen to fill in and play like the UNC freshmen we're accustomed to seeing?) is the only reason why people aren't talking about Miami failing to live up to expectations once again.

The argument for an FSU win is that it will motivate Clemson to get out on the floor and beat Wake Forest, which will help our NCAA seeding (really quickly: 8/9 right now, 7/8 with a win). I can see the rationale for this; there's certainly a non-zero chance that Clemson suffers a letdown and gets handed a beatdown on Senior Night in Winston-Salem in the event of an FSU loss (Wake's not a bad team, after all...) On the other hand, to paraphrase wise man, "De-fault" are the two sweetest words in the English language. I won't be losing any sleep tonight worrying about a letdown if FSU falters in Miami.

On that note, for one day only, let's go 'Canes!

Georgia Tech Recap 2

Clemson 91, Georgia Tech 80

Congratulations to Oliver Purnell and his staff for securing a third consecutive NCAA birth. I can't imagine this season went as planned, but through several shrewd coaching adjustments and incremental player improvement we have gotten gradually better, and just in the nick of time. I questioned whether we were really a better offensive team after running off three straight wins at home in February, but decent-to-strong performances against good defenses like Maryland, GT, and yes, even FSU have me convinced that execution (if not necessarily gameplan) has improved at least slightly. Also, give credit to the conditioning of Clemson. We've heard about Clemson's superior conditioning over the years, but I've been largely unconvinced. But last night, despite working on a day's fewer rest and playing a third game in seven days, we actually looked less tired than GT during key stretched in the second half. If this carries over to the ACC Tournament it could serve as a significant advantage.

Now, time to rain a little on everyone's parade. Not to belittle great performances on Senior Night by Trevor Booker and David Potter, but I would be careful to read Clemson's performance as a true indicator of their current ability. While GT is a solid defensive team and anytime you put 91 points on an ACC team its reason to celebrate, GT didn't bring their 'A' defensive game last night. I haven't seen that many good three-point looks since maybe the Presbyterian game. We also didn't look sharp on defense, giving up way too many good looks after penetration that was coming way to easy for GT. To their credit, GT also knocked down tough shots all night long. The first half was a nightmare on the boards for Clemson, but one of the reasons we pulled away in the second half was because we turned the tables, closing down the offensive rebounds for GT while picking up a few of our own. We've got to do a better job against Wake Forest.

I'll wait until tonight's games are over before commenting on our chances for an ACC Tournament first-round bye, but in tonight's games I'll be rooting for NC State and Wake Forest.

FSU Recap 2

Clemson 53, Florida St. 50

I said at the end of the preview that if we didn't make our three-point shots, couldn't force turnovers at a reasonable clip, and couldn't get offensive rebounds we'd be in for a slog. If anyone was confused about the definition of a "slog", that was not only a prototypical slog, it was something close to the paragon of a slog. Check out the rate of scoring (or lack thereof) in the chart:

College Basketball

And we managed to win. I'm still not sure how. It's strange, but I didn't think the defense was anything special. They were solid, but not spectacular. A lot of times FSU looked as lost running their halfcourt offense as we did, they missed makeable shots, and a lot of their turnovers were of the unforced variety. No, I think the game was somehow won on the offensive side of the ball. I don't often applaud individual efforts, mainly 'cause the college game ain't the same as the NBA game, but tonight I'll give big helpings of credit to Trevor Booker for finding ways to get close to the basket and to Andre Young for finding ways to get open at key points in the game (and draining a halfcourt jumper). It's particularly impressive because FSU stuck to more or less the same strategy as game 1, collapsing on Trevor Booker. In this game they seemed to be rolling over a man from the basket side to double team instead of collapsing in on Booker from the three-point line. This lessened the number of good looks we got around the perimeter. Normally Booker is still good at finding the open man in those situations, but against FSU's inside height he fired quite a few errant passes, particularly in the early going. But he settled down and ended played one of the best offensive games of his career against one of the better defenses in the country.

This win also opens the door to a first-round ACC bye, something no one in their right mind was talking about a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, and I hate to be the bearer of bad news here ClemBen, Clemson basically still needs to win both of their remaining games or hope for a bunch of other things to happen if they split their final two games. FSU has the upper hand right now with the easiest schedule by far of the five teams vying for the last two spots. If they were to win out, they would finish 10-6 and leave four teams vying for one slot.

The way I see it now, barring any strange upsets (like VT losing at home to NC State or something), if we win both of the final two games we grab the three seed (if VT loses to GT) or the four seed (if VT beats GT). If we finish 9-7, I only see two longshot scenarios. If we beat GT instead of WF, we also need FSU to beat WF and lose to Miami and GT to beat VT. That would give us the four seed. If we beat WF instead of GT, we need WF to beat FSU, FSU to beat Miami, and VT to beat GT. That would also give us the four seed.

There's probably a few other wild scenarios in there, but those are the most realistic I'm seeing right now. Simply put, Clemson still needs to win out. Lots of strange things could still happen, but the losses to VT and GT coupled with FSU's likely 10-6 finish put us in a relatively weak position because our two victories over FSU don't mean anything in any tie-breakers if they finish above us.

Lastly, it's time to update the list from the beginning of yesterday's post:

Number of games Clemson has led by 10 or more points and lost this season: 2 (Illinois, Maryland)

Number of games Clemson has trailed by 10 or more points and won this season: 2 (Butler, FSU)

I don't know if a team that can rally as often as "collapse" can really be labeled as a team prone to the collapse, but just so everyone is on the same page with the numbers...

GO TIGERS!!

Ron Morris Is Barely a Journalist

**UPDATED BELOW**

Ron Morris produces another winner article today that needs a response. How this man is able to cover Clemson sports when he clearly can't be an objective journalist is beyond me. The State just loves its Gamecocks, if your listening editors--reel in all this constant cock loving. Maybe it is time for a letter writing campaign or something.

The article's title says Clemson is squarely on the bubble. This is true but with a couple weeks to go thats not such a bad place to be. Bracketology and all leading publications on the NCAA tourney have us in with a 9 or 10 seed. We are on the bubble, it's true, but if the season ends today we are in(unlike another team from this state).

Ron goes on to provide this rational, "Let's break it down and determine how many games Clemson needs to win. Clemson is 7-6 in the ACC and 19-8 overall. Its remaining games are at Florida State, at home against Georgia Tech and at Wake Forest. In all likelihood, Clemson will finish 8-8 in the league and 20-10 overall. That will not get Clemson in the tournament, unless the Tigers win at least two games in the ACC tournament." Ron I am still waiting for the breakdown--all you got is your measly opinion so far. How do you somehow predict that Clemson needs to win TWO games in the tourney if we go 8-8. I can understand ONE but TWO?? What is your rationale??

He stupidly says, "Clemson's resume is not the greatest. Its RPI is 36, and its strength of schedule is 34. Its best wins are against Butler on a neutral court and against Maryland and Florida State at home. Its only road win in the league is at last-place N.C. State." While its true we struggle on the road an RPI of 36 is golden and a SOS of 34 helps our cause. That Butler win really stands out and we have a chance to beat either FSU or Wake to improve our road record. Plus we only have one bad loss to BC and they just crawled into the top 100, meaning we have no really bad losses. Pomeroy has us at #17. Lets not forget the fact that we play one of the toughest ACC Conference schedules. With single games against NC, NC State, and Miami.

Oh but about that ACC?? "Breaking even in the ACC will not help Clemson's cause because the league is not considered among the elite this season. Only Duke is considered a national title contender, and no other team in the league has elevated itself from good to great." First relying solely on conference strength to gauge a teams probability for the NCAA tourney is shaky reasoning and its a big assumption to think that a .500 record is going to hurt your resume.

So the Big East is the best conference. Followed usually by the Big 12, Big 10 and then the ACC. (We don't need to get into a debate about whether or not the Atlantic 10 is better than the SEC) The problem with this is that the Big 12 is top heavy and has some really bad cellar dwellars, as well as the Big Ten. The ACC has ZERO teams under .500 and the team at .500 beat Michigan State. In our Big Ten match-up we basically split (not all teams played as well) and I am confident if we played that tourney challenge again we would win going away. Of the Big Ten's 11 teams 4 have losing records. The ACC has more parity than the Big 12 and certainly the Big 10. So I think 8-8 in conference isn't as bad as Ron Morris makes it out to be.

Another contributing factor to remember is never before in the history of the selection committee since I was alive has the Pac 10 only produced one team for the tourney, maybe two. Thats a good 3-4 slots automatically up for grabs. Not to mention that the SEC is pretty pathetic too. Now the Atlantic 10 will push for slots but they won't chose a 19-8 Charlotte or 18-9 Dayton over Clemson.

Then Ron Morris finishes by contradicting himself, "Purnell might also want to knock on wood that Clemson wins on Sunday at Florida State or the following Sunday at Wake Forest. A win in either game will propel Clemson into the NCAA tournament." Wait you said before that 8-8 requires TWO wins in the tourney. Oh so if we only win the home game we need two ACC tourney wins. I understand your opinion but it's just that Ron. Its like me saying we need one win in the tourney with an 8-8 record. Look your just like a blogger in pajamas...

Ultimately if Clemson goes 8-8 and flames out of the ACC tourney it will have more to do with how the rest of the teams on the bubble finish the regular season. If a Gonzaga were to lose its tourney and still get an at-large or another Big East team like Louisville or UConn keep winning. We are on the bubble but it's not time to panic, it is certainly not time to listen to Ron Morris.

UPDATE by TigerMax:

I'm glad ClemBen did the dirty work of actually reading a Ron Morris article, much less spending the time to take it apart. Look, it's no secret Clemson needs two wins to assure itself a spot in the tournament, but an 8-8 record absolutely should put us in. I'm getting real, real tired of this crazy national perception that the ACC is weak. Check out Kenpom.com's conference rankings, which are based on the tempo-independent offensive and defensive numbers for all teams in the conference. The ACC tops the list, pretty much neck-and-neck with the Big12. There's a fairly sizeable gap between those two conferences and the Big East and Big10. (To its "credit", the SEC is up to #5 after two straight years at #6). (Also, if you took the top 8-10 teams in the Big East I have no doubt they would form the strongest conference, but that's not how objective rankings work, you play the teams in your conference--even the crappy ones at the bottom of the league, and that is reflected in the strength of your schedule.) Now, Kenpom rankings aren't the gospel, and they are subject to being skewed due to a small thirty game sample. But give me a break.

Make no mistake about it, 6 teams from the ACC will get in. As I mentioned a week or so ago (welcome to the party, Ron Morris!), Clemson can't afford to get into a tie with another team for sixth place. For instance, if GT and Clemson both end up at 8-8, GT gets the nod because of a much stronger SOS. But an 8-8 finish by Clemson and a 7-9 finish by GT (an outside possibility) gives us a slot.

Thoughts on the Baseball Tourneys

Quick thoughts after digesting the events of the weekend:

• Lot of talk about a flop over in Durham this past weekend. Tough loss to Virginia, to be sure, but I'm not too concerned about a 1-run loss. Studies for games in the majors have shown teams tend to win 1-run games at the rate of their win percentage, but there's a lot of variation in the numbers. This leads to a kind of "luck" for in 1-run outcomes. I imagine these studies more or less hold true for top-shelf college competition (like the ACC variety) and by my count, Clemson is now 7-5 in 1-run games: more or less where we'd expect them to be and nothing to complain about, really.
• The loss to Duke was another story. While Duke got into Dwyer and later McKinney, our balls in play weren't falling against Andrew Wolcott. That's the way Clemson is constructed this year, though. While the pitching staff is far from a bunch of slackers, the offense is the strongest unit--we're out there to put runs on the board, not necessarily prevent them from coming in.
• A lot of people will say that's not a great recipe for post-season success, and the road to Omaha is paved in solid pitching performance. I buy that to an extent, but the good news is Clemson has done just as well, if not better, on weekend games against the best the opposition throws at us. We're not just punishing poor pitchers, but good pitchers as well.
• Regionals should be up in a couple of hours. Here's to praying that Stephen Strasburg, his 103mph fastball, and San Diego State don't land in our regional, and pitying the host team that gets SDSU. They might as well not show up.

Update: haha Virginia!