šŸ€ 2024/25 Virginia Men's Hoops In-Season Thread

Caffaro was pretty rough when he got run that year. IMO it was as simple as you just always needed one of Dunn or Shedrick to pair with BVP or Gardner. BVP and Gardner were defensively bad for us but ALSO didn’t compliment each other offensively. BVP was best with Dunn in Inside Triangle (we played Dunn on the wing and teams didn’t realize how badly they could cheat off of him yet) but he offered the ability to defend bigs or roam to help BVP. And Gardner was best with Shedrick in Sides.

They found playing small ball against UNC who had neither Bacot nor Nance available to them and they sat both Gardner and Shedrick to do so - and that somehow turned into playing Gardner and BVP together as a primary fixture which didn’t work.

2 Likes

Offense, last seven games (the guys are playing much better on that end of the floor):

PPG: 72.9
PPS: 1.37
FG: 183-371 49.3%
3FG: 72-170 42.5%
2FG%: 109-201 54.2%
3PA/FGA: 45.8%
EFG%: 59.0%
A/FG%: 71.0%
FT%: 70-92 76.1%

3 Likes

Much better. 25th on an adjusted basis over that stretch.

The caveat is only one defense was in the top 100; GT at 79.

I joked in the early season that we needed to find some teams that play nice, chill defense, and we have and have taken advantage. Need to keep it going against more athletic defenses.

1 Like

So if we go 3-2 with a 1st round ACCT loss to finish 16-16. Would we get an NIT bid? Would we want/accept an NIT bid?

I see us finishing 2-3 at best, so maybe all moot anyway.

1 Like

No, doubt that would get us in

2 Likes

Yeah, the best shot would be to make it as one of the ACC’s 2 auto-bids, but that would require finishing like 6th? Maybe a little lower if a team or two declines. Though I don’t know if the ACC gets to just roll their auto bids down if they decline, or if it gets released to the next best at-large. It would be a very bad look for the conference to have bargained for these auto bids and then have teams not want them.

2 Likes

I would like to decline an NIT invite. I just want this to be over with.

5 Likes

Per Torvik, we have roughly a 25% chance in each of our next 3, then small favorites against FSU and a coin flip at Cuse. I think we get 2 wins out of it, but 1 is more likely than 3. If we get 2, we’d have to go 2-1 in the ACCT just to get to 500. I guess that might be possible if we’re like the 10 seed playing the 15 seed and then the 7 seed.

2-22 A 55 • UNC +8.3, 74-66 20%
2-26 A 70 • Wake +6.2, 65-59 24%
3-01 H 25 • Clem +5.6, 66-60 27%
3-04 H 94 • FSU -2.6, 68-65 61%
3-08 A 142 • Cuse +0.1, 68-67 49%

I don’t think the team would be particularly motivated to play in the NIT, but we’ll be done before the portal opens and it shouldn’t delay our coaching search anyway.

1 Like

Ugh this was mean, so good poll (sincerely)

2 Likes

I think the more relevant poll is just who do you want back. For me, that’s everyone except TJ Power, and maybe Bliss depending on exactly what his injury situation has been and he’s been doing to team morale.

Ames, Saunders, and Lang: I don’t want them to leave like I want TJP to leave, but if they did, I wouldn’t be bothered.

The rest I actively want back.

2 Likes

We’re being a little harsh on Saunders as he’s returning from missing a few games and is clearly rusty, but he’s just too much of a tweener at the 4. Still would love to retain him if possible, but think he’s more of a role player than key piece.

11 Likes

Yeah, we played our best ball of the season when Saunders was out. Surprising to me too, as he was up there as our best front court player. But it shone a bright light on his lack of rebounding and desire to play more on the perimeter.

2 Likes

Did a hard look at NIT scenarios this morning.

  1. Really only think Duke, Clemson, and Louisville are effective locks for the NCAAT right now, meaning Wake, SMU, and UNC are the teams you need to ā€œroot forā€.

1a. SMU looks good with computers but their resume lacks a single Q1 win; they play Clemson this week for their last ā€œstatement winā€ opportunity before the ACCT.

1b. Wake is hated by the metrics but they do have two Q1 wins and a solid 7-6 record against Q1 and Q2, plus just beat fellow bubbler SMU. They get a shot at Duke as well for another Q1 win in a couple of weeks.

1c. UNC’s not in as of today, but could be if they run the table to close the season which means beating Duke in 3 weeks as well as avoiding ā€œbad lossesā€ to us, State, VT, Miami, and FSU. Anything less and I think they’re out.

  1. So let’s say one of SMU or Wake makes it, the ACC gets four teams in the Dance. The ā€œnext tierā€ of ACC teams right now ahead of us for NIT bids would be Wake/SMU, UNC, Pitt (15-10, 6-8), Stanford (16-10, 8-7)), and FSU (15-10, 6-8). I think the Wake/SMU loser would accept an NIT bid, as would Pitt and Stanford.

UNC has already declined the NIT once in recent years and could see it as ā€œbeneath themā€ again, especially if it means Hubie’s on his way out.

FSU would be an intriguing case, as to whether they’re okay with the NIT being Leonard’s retirement tour. Zero clue which way they’d lean, but I don’t think they look down on the NIT they way UNC would.

  1. The ACC gets two auto-bids, but isn’t limited to two overall. Keep in mind the Big East, Big XII, and B1G have their own postseason tournament this year, the College Basketball Crown in Las Vegas, that will siphon 16 teams away. That could mean more spots for the ACC and SEC, so maybe the ACC sees 4 teams? If so, UVA, with a strong finish, could grab that 4th spot if UNC skips.

  2. About that strong finish, we’re 13-13 (6-9). Three wins of the remaining five plus a win in the ACCT are all bare minimums just to finish with a winning record, which I believe the NIT still wants. Means we have to beat at least one of Wake/Clemson/UNC. We also have to compete with GT who’s also sitting at .500 overall and could make a similar run for NIT competition.

All in all, I say our shot at the NIT, hinging on so much (ACC gets 4+ teams in the Dance, the CBC opening up extra NIT spots for the ACC, UVA finishing strong enough to get in the discussion, and teams ā€œaheadā€ of us declining an NIT invite), makes the whole proposition maybe 10% at best. Much more likely our season ends in the ACCT.

5 Likes

FTFY

2 Likes

Yeah, same. I was absolutely in love with Saunders coming into the season, 100% thought he was going to be our best player. Hasn’t worked out that way, clearly.

I’d love for us to hang onto ARob, Cofie, Sharma, Gertrude, All-ACC PG Rohde, and iMac. Dai Dai is kinda on the edge, another good game and I’d add him to the list. To be clear, I doubt we even hang onto half those guys (if we keep Ron, which I don’t think we should but its not up to me, we’ll do well to keep 30-50 mpg off the current roster. Less if we get someone else), but that’s who I’d like to keep.

2 Likes

I really, really want to bring back Gertrude. Guy’s been here 3 years, we’ve got to at least get him a UVA degree.

6 Likes

This is Gertrude’s second year here.

My bad. Still want him to graduate from UVA!

Same. I think thats what he wants as well

We shall see if if happens

4 Likes

Maybe, but Saunders (and, to a lesser extent, Sharma) really stands out in our player stats from the past eight games:

Player FG-FGA 3P-3PA FT-FTA Pts R A

Buchanan 20-34 0-0 9-18 49 56 10
Cofie 18-42 1-4 10-12 47 34 6
Ames 40-72 12-30 6-8 98 11 24
McKneely 48-99 34-76 14-16 144 14 23
Rohde 23-53 14-28 13-14 73 29 47
Robinson 18-25 0-0 16-24 51 30 3
Saunders 11-37 6-18 6-7 34 24 5
Murray 18-34 8-14 0-0 44 13 19
Sharma 7-25 5-18 8-8 27 7 2
Power 0-4 0-4 2-2 2 3 3