University of North Carolina Athletics
Lucas: UNC Basketball Mailbag Feb. 7
February 7, 2006 | Men's Basketball
Feb. 7, 2006
By Adam Lucas
Thanks for all the great input on last week's Mailbag topics of home court advantage and rebounding. We're still sorting through all the responses and will have more in a future column.
A quick public service announcement: if you're looking for a great memento of the 2005 national championship, there's a quality new option. Renowned artist Steve Parson (you might have seen his Michael Jordan pieces, which are terrific) has created a one-of-a-kind figurative honoring the 2005 champs. The work will be auctioned to benefit the North Carolina Children's Hospital, with the final bids placed at a wine and cheese event on Feb. 25 at Governor's Club. For more information or to place a bid, call the North Carolina Children's Promise office at 919-843-4155. Tar Heel Monthly subscribers will get a first look at the work in our upcoming issue.
Our first question isn't really a question. But it seemed like something Carolina fans would appreciate.
I've been a Tar Heel fan for a long time. My wife and I have season tickets and have had them for several years. We've always thought there was something special about the team that was different from other programs, though it is sometimes tough to put a finger on it.
We put a finger on it tonight. We took two young kids to the game tonight against Clemson. They're family friends of ours, and the kids (James and Ellie) are great. After the game, we took them as close to the court as we could get to take some pictures, and it was suggested to us by the security guard that it might be a treat for James and Ellie to see the players exit the tunnel after leaving the locker room.
This isn't anything that we've ever done before. I guess it never occurred to us, nor did we want to feel like a bother to the players. ut we took the kids anyway, thinking they would get a kick out of it.
Little did we know how much of a treat it would be. Every player that left the stadium in our direction signed an autograph for everyone that was waiting for them, took pictures with everyone that wanted one, and were terribly nice to James and Ellie: kneeling patiently as I took a picture. James and Ellie loved it, and my wife and I were taken by how nice all of the guys were.
I like to think that this is the type of thing that can be difficult to put finger on until you see it for yourself.
Jake Kathman
Jake also enclosed a photo of his family friends with Quentin Thomas. It's not included here because those friends didn't ask to be plastered all over the internet, but the smiles of all three people in the picture--Quentin Thomas, James, and Ellie--light up the evening. It's worth remembering that the players that are so much fun to watch throughout basketball season are actually closer in age to folks like James and Ellie than to many of us who live and die on their every move. Nice to know they still have time for tomorrow's biggest Tar Heel fans--and gestures like this one go a long way towards ensuring that next generation will be as rabid as this one.
I feel that I should know this, but does it count against a player's field goal percentage if they are fouled in the act of shooting and miss the shot? If they are fouled in the act and their shot is blocked, does the defender get credit for a blocked shot?
Marshall Benbow, Greensboro, NC
One day I'm going to put together a CD called "Tar Heel Sports Network Outtakes." It is going to go platinum within 10 days (It will also include the late great "Ma-ma-ma-ma-Mailbag!" intro that was used for a couple games earlier this year). On that CD will be a conversation Eric Montross, Jones Angell and I had recently during a commercial break about this exact question (maybe Marshall was listening to the in-arena feed and that's what prompted the question). You'll have to buy the CD to get the full comedic value, but the ultimate answer is that it does not count as a field goal attempt if a player is fouled in the act of shooting and misses the shot. Therefore, it also wouldn't count as a block, because it's as if the shot never happened.
I would be interested to know more about the selection proccess within the ACC for such accomplishments as "ACC Rookie of the week", or "ACC rookie of the season." Who is involved in casting their votes for eligible players?
What are the criteria? Is it just a matter of most points scored, most rebounds? most assists etc.,? If a player scores
a career high number of points but his teams loses that game does that hurt his chances for being selected ACC rookie of the week?
Bill Pekari, Madison, Wisconsin
This became a relevant question last week when Tyler Hansbrough wasn't awarded Rookie of the Week despite posting 26 points and 8 rebounds against Boston College and 21 points and 11 rebounds against Arizona. That's a pretty fair week, but he lost the honor to Virginia Tech forward A.D. Vassallo, who had a terrific game against Wake Forest (29 points and 10 rebounds) and a mediocre one (0 points and 1 rebound in 5 minutes) against Duke. Vassallo also won the honor this week for averaging 13.5 points and 4.5 rebounds in two games while his squad went 1-1 last week; Hansbrough, for the record, averaged 14.5 points and 7.5 rebounds in two games while his team went 2-0.
As you noted, it's called ACC Rookie of the "Week," which most people at UNC interpreted to mean the entire week, not just one game. After all, if merely having an outstanding game was the criteria, then Bobby Frasor should have been considered for his performance against NC State.
ACC Rookie of the Week and ACC Rookie of the Year are two separate honors. The weekly awards (both Rookie and Player) work like this: the sports information staff at each school nominate the players from their team they feel are deserving. A panel of eight ACSMA members makes the final decision. Hansbrough, of course, has already won the award six times this year, but spreading the honor around isn't supposed to be a consideration.
ACC Rookie (and Player) of the Year are voted on by the full group of ACC sportswriters (who take the time to join ACSMA). As you might remember, I'm a voting member of that group and try to post my final votes every year. Last year's ballot can be found here.
In considering how many wins it will take UNC to get into the NCAA Tournament with an at-large bid, I noticed a discrepancy in how our schedule compared to at-large teams from last year.
It is common knowledge that teams from the "major" conferences have good odds of getting into the tournament with 18 or 19 wins (whereas 20-win teams from major and mid-major conferences are virtually assured of receiving a bid). In 2005, there were 5 teams accepted with less than 20 wins:
Georgia Tech (19-11) - 30 games
Iowa State (18-11) - 29 games
NC State (19-13) - 32 games
Stanford (18-12) - 30 games
UCLA (18-10) - 28 games
The minimum number of games played for these teams is 28 (UCLA). This year, UNC will play a minimum of 28 games. Obviously, in the ACC, it will be more difficult for UNC to reach the 18 win mark having played only 28 games. Do you know whether this fact will be given consideration by the selection committee should UNC go, say, 17-11 (which would compare favorably to Georgia Tech and Iowa State from last year)?
William C. Ballard, Charleston, WV
To be honest, I'm a little surprised that the, "What does Carolina have to do to make the NCAA Tournament?" question hasn't popped up more frequently. It might be because many fans assume a bid is a foregone conclusion, even though it's not. Keep in mind that the remaining eight league games are tougher than the eight that have already been played and the Tar Heels arguably have the toughest remaining ACC schedule of any team in the top half of the conference.
The NCAA-mandated limit for regular season games is 27. The exception is for teams playing in an exempt event--if you're looking for an explanation of how that works, check out this archived Mailbag.
With that said, the sheer number of wins is less important than the much-discussed RPI. Teams in the top 40 of that formula are generally considered "safe" for an at-large NCAA bid. This probably didn't receive as much attention as it should have, but for the first time ever the NCAA is releasing their official RPI ratings weekly during the season. The first release came last week and Carolina checked in at number 38. That sounds dangerously close to the borderline, but take heart--according to CollegeRPI.com, which is the gold standard in this field, the Tar Heels' rating jumped to 24 after games this past week against Maryland and Clemson. The NCAA plans to release its figures every Wednesday, so more information will be available tomorrow.
I'm not a bracketologist, but my uneducated guess is that 9-7 in the ACC would make Carolina a dead solid lock, 8-8 would be fairly comfortable, and even 7-9 might do the trick. Remember that 8-8 in the modern ACC is not the same as 8-8 in the good old double-roundrobin ACC and Carolina has to play four of the top six teams in the league--Duke, NC State, Maryland, and Miami--twice apiece. It's going to be very interesting to see how the new ACC Tournament format impacts at-large bids this year. Teams in the middle of the league have a chance to get an extra win against a lower-seeded team on the first day under the new format. That could be good because it could help the cumulative win total, or it could be bad because it could hurt their RPI.
I have often fantasized about owning an NBA team
composed exclusively of former UNC players and
coaches. 1)What NBA teams had the greatest numbers of
former UNC players on their rosters at one time?
2)What fantasy NBA/UNC teams could have existed down
through the years based on players who were active in
the NBA at the same time?
Paul Irving, Durham, NC
See, this is what we love about our readers. Other people fantasize about, uh, other things. Our readers fantasize about owning an NBA team made up exclusively of former Tar Heels. I'm just as guilty as Paul, though. During my college years there was a video game that allowed players to draft an NBA fantasy team. My squad was always made up entirely of Tar Heels. Needless to say, we were really good--despite the inept coaching.
There are numerous examples of two Tar Heels on the same NBA team--Perkins and Worthy on the early-90s Lakers, Jordan and Scott Williams on the Bulls of the same era, and Jordan and Brendan Haywood with the Wizards just to name a few. For the all-time Tar Heel-heavy team, though, it would be hard to beat the 2004-05 Detroit Pistons. Rasheed Wallace played for that squad, which also featured Larry Brown, Phil Ford, Dave Hanners, and Pat Sullivan on the bench.
As for a time period with the best Carolina connection, it has to be an era that includes Michael Jordan, because then you've got the best player of all time on your team. How about the early 1990s? That squad could include Jordan, Worthy, Perkins, Kenny Smith, Scott Williams, J.R. Reid, Brad Daugherty, Hubert Davis, Rick Fox, Pete Chilcutt, Joe Wolf, Dave Popson, and Walter Davis. Move forward a couple of years and you'd lose Worthy, Popson, and Walter Davis but could add Stackhouse, Wallace, George Lynch, and Eric Montross.
I loved watching the Tar Heels the past three years with Felton, May, McCants and company, but realize they didn't really win on the road until last year. My question is what is the best road record for a freshman Tar Heel team?
John Landen, Morrisville, North Carolina
There are really only three teams that could compare to this year's squad in terms of youth: the 1995-96 team that included freshmen Vince Carter, Antawn Jamison, and Ademola Okulaja; the 1998-99 team that started Kris Lang and Jason Capel in most games; the 2001-02 team that saw Jawad Williams, Melvin Scott, and Jackie Manuel start numerous games; and the 2002-03 team that included May, McCants, Felton, Byron Sanders, and David Noel. The ACC road records of those teams look like this:
1995-96: 5-3
1998-99: 4-4
2001-02: 1-7
2002-03: 1-7
This year's squad--which is more dependent on youth than any of the above teams--currently stands at 3-1.
Brownlow's Down Low
With the team committing so many turnovers this year, who is actually committing the most, the freshmen or the rest of the team? Also, has there been a comparable UNC team to turnovers and how did they do?
Lee Scott, Knightdale, NC
You're right to notice that, despite what the announcers are saying, the freshmen are not committing most of the turnovers, though Tyler Hansbrough's eight-turnover game against Maryland definitely helped to even things up a bit. In Carolina's nine-man rotation, the turnover rankings look like this:
David Noel - 65 (2.74/game, 0.09/minute)
Reyshawn Terry - 53 (2.79/game, 0.12/minute)
Tyler Hansbrough - 52 (3.42/game, 0.10/minute)
Bobby Frasor - 50 (1.32/game, 0.08/minute)
Marcus Ginyard - 27 (1.42/game, 0.07/minute)
Quentin Thomas - 26 (in 16 games - 1.63/game, 0.14/minute)
Danny Green - 25 (1.32/game, 0.08/minute)
Byron Sanders - 18 (0.95/game, 0.07/minute)
Wes Miller - 15 (0.80/game, 0.04/minute)
Combining the turnovers of the upperclassmen - Noel, Terry, Thomas, Sanders and Miller - you have 177 of Carolina's 343 turnovers this year, which comes out to about 52%. Hansbrough, Frasor, Ginyard and Green combine for 154 turnovers, or about 45%.
Though many attribute the turnover bug to youth and inexperience, Carolina did not have its first game exceeding 20 turnovers until Dec. 21 against USC, eight games into the season and after facing at least two quality opponents in Illinois and Kentucky. Since the loss at USC, they've only had two games with fewer than 15 turnovers, and counting that loss they have been averaging 19.9 turnovers a game. (The season average is 18.1.)
Turnovers weren't kept as a statistic until the 1981-82 season. That national championship team had 438 turnovers, an average of just 12.9 a game. The low number for a season is the 1995-96 team's 429 turnovers in 32 games, but the lowest average is the 1994-95 season with 12.8. The high number for a season and highest average is the 1988-89 team with 634 turnovers in 37 games (17.1 a game). That year's team finished 29-8, tied for second place in the ACC regular season. They won the ACC Tournament and got to the Sweet 16 in the NCAA Tournament.
This year, ironically, in the six games that Carolina has exceeded 20 turnovers, they have only lost one of those games (USC). While their 25 turnovers in that game tied their season high, they got 25 turnovers to Virginia Tech's 12 and still managed to escape with that win. In the loss to Illinois, Carolina actually won the turnover battle, turning it over 16 times to the Illini's 18. Three out of the five opponents to beat Carolina have managed to hold their turnovers to 10 or fewer (Miami and Virginia with 10, BC with 9).
The lesson in that is simply that with this year's team, anything goes. It's hard to really pick out a trend that will translate to winning and losing. It used to be that if Reyshawn Terry scores in double figures, we win. But he broke that trend when he scored 18 in the Miami loss, 11 in the Virginia loss, and 10 in the BC loss. Most would say that any team that exceeds 20 turnovers is bound to lose, but the Heels have already done that and won five times. So Carolina fans are better off in sticking to their superstitions, like wearing a certain T-shirt or hat on game day then trusting statistics to predict wins and losses.
Adam Lucas is the publisher of Tar Heel Monthly and can be reached at alucas@tarheelmonthly.com. He is the coauthor of the official book of the 2005 championship season, Led By Their Dreams, and his book on Roy Williams's first season at Carolina, Going Home Again, is now available in bookstores. To subscribe to Tar Heel Monthly or learn more about Going Home Again, click here.
