UNC Men’s Basketball 2025-2026

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 455
  • Views: 10K
  • UNC Sports 
I think it's safe to say Carolina has better horses to run a race this season than last. Perhaps as good or better than the Cormac/Harrison/Bacot team. That team won the ACC reg. season championship and made a Sweet 16 run. 29-8; 17-3. Similar numbers and outcomes are possible this year. I'm looking forward to it.
 
sringwal said:
I agree that Hubert Davis hasn't always properly used the talent he had, but I'm highly suspicious of any metric that placed our talent level that high.
Click to expand...
I was surprised at how high those numbers were, but not overwhelmingly so.

On paper, we've had highly-rated players all 4 years of HD's tenure and a good number of them. If you look at the 5-star & very high 4-star recruits we've gotten that have been on these teams, we've had quite a lot over HD's time. And we've traditionally brought in highly respected transfers.

You can make the case for things like fit or certain players not working out like expected, but the raw talent has been there.
 
SnoopRob said:
BartTorvik "Talent Rating" Under HD

2024 - 2025: 6th in the nation
2023 - 2024: 2nd in the nation
2022 - 2023: 1st in the nation
2021 - 2022: 3rd in the nation

(Note: We're 13th in this year's "talent rating", meaning that in Torvik's view we'll have the overall least talented roster in HD's tenure this year.)
Click to expand...

Are these numbers determined pre-season or post-season? Is it just looking at HS recruiting rankings?

I think his first 2 years definitely had the most talent, with a drop the 2 years following. Next year seems more in line with the previous 2 years.

Most surprising perhaps, even though they ended up being good is 23-24 at #2
 
Heelsandeers said:
Are these numbers determined pre-season or post-season? Is it just looking at HS recruiting rankings?

I think his first 2 years definitely had the most talent, with a drop the 2 years following. Next year seems more in line with the previous 2 years.

Most surprising perhaps, even though they ended up being good is 23-24 at #2
Click to expand...
Preseason and based on combined player ratings using his model.
 
SnoopRob said:
I'm quoting myself to bring forward one data set as evidence for my claim. I learned today that Bart Torvik, as part of his preseason prediction model, assigns each team a "talent rating" as part of his computation. A caveat as this is just one model, but it strikes me that given the numbers that follow, it should be a significant evidence point that talent (aka, the Jimmies and Joes) ain't the issue.

BartTorvik "Talent Rating" Under HD

2024 - 2025: 6th in the nation
2023 - 2024: 2nd in the nation
2022 - 2023: 1st in the nation
2021 - 2022: 3rd in the nation

(Note: We're 13th in this year's "talent rating", meaning that in Torvik's view we'll have the overall least talented roster in HD's tenure this year.)

As I said above, it ain't the Jimmies and Joes that's the issue.
Click to expand...
All right, that's just nonsense. Straight up nonsense. When was the last time we had an NBA player on the roster? I guess Harrison Ingram is getting a cup of coffee in the league. Pete Nance is on a two-way contract. Before Drake, we hadn't had a first round pick for a while (Sharpe, I think).

Let's look at 2022-23 more closely. Multiple teams that year had 2 first rounders on their roster. That is, 2023 first rounders. I'm not going to look into it, but they probably had future first rounders too. Like Flip, who wasn't quite a first rounder the next year, but was the #32 pick, which is considerably higher than ANY Heel he competed against.

Our roster in 22-23 featured Caleb Love, Styles, Puff, RJ, freshman Seth, Mondo, Leaky, freshman Jalen Washington, D'Marco Dunn, etc. That is nowhere near "first in talent."

If Hubert had done such a poor job with that talent, surely we'd expect the players who departed to have success elsewhere. Let's see: Dunn was like the 6th man for a bad PSU team as a senior. Puff was also on that team, as a part-time starter. He did hit 10 ppg finally in his fifth season. That team was near last in the Big 10.

Styles has been an ACC caliber player, but he's at best average for the league as a senior. At best. Caleb was the same guy at UA as he was at UNC.

That methodology is BADLY flawed and is thus useless. If it had said we were 15th in talent, maybe I could accept it as optimistic. But first is just stupid.
 
That stat also has 2025-26 Florida rated at around 35, so going to go out on a limb and say it is indeed as garbage/useless as it originally appeared
 
SnoopRob said:
I was surprised at how high those numbers were, but not overwhelmingly so.

On paper, we've had highly-rated players all 4 years of HD's tenure and a good number of them. If you look at the 5-star & very high 4-star recruits we've gotten that have been on these teams, we've had quite a lot over HD's time. And we've traditionally brought in highly respected transfers.

You can make the case for things like fit or certain players not working out like expected, but the raw talent has been there.
Click to expand...
I get that, but we haven't had a lot of first round picks. Experienced talent, I'd agree. But raw talent? There are still several one-and-done factories out there who have had a lot more than us.
 
superrific said:
All right, that's just nonsense. Straight up nonsense. When was the last time we had an NBA player on the roster? I guess Harrison Ingram is getting a cup of coffee in the league. Pete Nance is on a two-way contract. Before Drake, we hadn't had a first round pick for a while (Sharpe, I think).

Let's look at 2022-23 more closely. Multiple teams that year had 2 first rounders on their roster. That is, 2023 first rounders. I'm not going to look into it, but they probably had future first rounders too. Like Flip, who wasn't quite a first rounder the next year, but was the #32 pick, which is considerably higher than ANY Heel he competed against.

Our roster in 22-23 featured Caleb Love, Styles, Puff, RJ, freshman Seth, Mondo, Leaky, freshman Jalen Washington, D'Marco Dunn, etc. That is nowhere near "first in talent."

If Hubert had done such a poor job with that talent, surely we'd expect the players who departed to have success elsewhere. Let's see: Dunn was like the 6th man for a bad PSU team as a senior. Puff was also on that team, as a part-time starter. He did hit 10 ppg finally in his fifth season. That team was near last in the Big 10.

Styles has been an ACC caliber player, but he's at best average for the league as a senior. At best. Caleb was the same guy at UA as he was at UNC.

That methodology is BADLY flawed and is thus useless. If it had said we were 15th in talent, maybe I could accept it as optimistic. But first is just stupid.
Click to expand...
No methodology should be criticized solely because you disagree with one of its outputs. I don't know what his methodology is, but I would suggest that we should try to figure that out before we declare it stupid.

Also, UNC was preseason #1 that season. So it's not like torvik is the only one who thought it was, on paper. likely to be a great team.
 
You can critique the x's and o's of last season all you want but that roster as constructed was never going to get it done

Love-RJ-Leaky-Nance-Bacot was a talented and balanced lineup and didn't beat anyone of note. Missing the NCAAT completely with that team is wild and entirely falls on coaching

You can say he overachieved with Cadeau-RJ-Cormac-Ingram-Bacot

Overall, it's fair to say HD underachieved given the level of talent he's had to work with. But I think that still mostly falls on the disastrous 22-23 season
 
rodoheel said:
No methodology should be criticized solely because you disagree with one of its outputs. I don't know what his methodology is, but I would suggest that we should try to figure that out before we declare it stupid.

Also, UNC was preseason #1 that season. So it's not like torvik is the only one who thought it was, on paper. likely to be a great team.
Click to expand...
1. Yes, but a large part of that ranking was the idea that the team was experienced and cohesive. Not that it was super talented. Also, it came from people with selective attention to the team the year before.

2. I agree that mere disagreement with one of its outputs isn't usually itself cause to jettison a theory, but I don't think this is mere disagreement. It is preposterousness. And since it was repeated multiple years in a row, that really, really calls the methodology into question.

3. It is a HUGE RED FLAG that he doesn't explain his methodology anywhere. I looked at his website -- nothing. I looked at a youtube video talking about his ratings -- they didn't know how it was calculated. So if it produces absurd results and its maker won't disclose the method, isn't that enough to write it off?
 
Heelsandeers said:
Love-RJ-Leaky-Nance-Bacot was a talented and balanced lineup and didn't beat anyone of note. Missing the NCAAT completely with that team is wild and entirely falls on coaching
Click to expand...
Talented and balanced? Let's just get this out of the way: Caleb Love was not a talented basketball player when measured against UNC standards. BB IQ is an important talent and Caleb was abysmal in that regard. Again, if HD was the problem, one should have expected him to take off at U of A. He was the same guy. He was a little better in most categories, because he got a couple of years older and more experienced. Players should improve. His improvement was modest at best, and considerably smaller than RJ's improvement.

Leaky Black? I mean, seriously? The guy played defense well, but his offense was atrocious and everyone knows it. If he was Jackie Manuel playing alongside Felton, McCants and May, then he could be really helpful. But that was the problem: Caleb, RJ and Mondo were not nearly in that category.

Bacot was a good player but his body and game were never suited to being the best player on a good team. He was a good complimentary piece, a glue guy. George Lynch type (though not as good). Valuable guy. Not the best player.

And that team had no depth.
 
superrific said:
1. Yes, but a large part of that ranking was the idea that the team was experienced and cohesive. Not that it was super talented. Also, it came from people with selective attention to the team the year before.

2. I agree that mere disagreement with one of its outputs isn't usually itself cause to jettison a theory, but I don't think this is mere disagreement. It is preposterousness. And since it was repeated multiple years in a row, that really, really calls the methodology into question.

3. It is a HUGE RED FLAG that he doesn't explain his methodology anywhere. I looked at his website -- nothing. I looked at a youtube video talking about his ratings -- they didn't know how it was calculated. So if it produces absurd results and its maker won't disclose the method, isn't that enough to write it off?
Click to expand...
Candidly I don't find this to be any sort of meaningful explanation, but in the FAQ for his rankings generally he says it "is based on composite recruiting ranks weighted for minutes played."

T-Rank FAQ

Adam Chorlton and Bart Torvik discuss Wisconsin sports, mostly the Badgers.
adamcwisports.blogspot.com adamcwisports.blogspot.com

We have certainly had plenty of "talent" during the Hubert era from a recruiting standpoint. Have many of those guys failed to live up to their rankings? Sure. But most coaches would have loved to start their career coaching a team that featured a sophomore Love and Davis, a junior Bacot, and one of the top-rated transfers in the country in Dawson Garcia, among others. Most coaches would have loved to bring in Cadeau, Powell, and Jackson, all of whom were top 10 recruits or close to it.

Even acknowledging the relative lack of true NBA talent, I think it's really difficult to argue that lack of talent has been Hubert's problem. Lack of roster balance maybe - too many undersized guards and whiffs on a lot of big men to complement or replace Bacot have hurt. But not overall lack of talent. And NBA talent is not everything in college. Houston has had two consecutive elite seasons with exactly one draft pick the last two years, Jabal Shead (who went in the mid-2nd round). Alabama has had two good seasons in a row with no NBA draft picks, playing in a much tougher league than we do. Purdue has had one player drafted since 2023 - Edey. Great college coaches can build great college teams without NBA talent when they have to. If Hubert is a great coach - the caliber of coach we should expect at UNC - he needs to figure it out. There is, and has been, enough talent to not have any excuses in that regard.
 
superrific said:
Talented and balanced? Let's just get this out of the way: Caleb Love was not a talented basketball player when measured against UNC standards. BB IQ is an important talent and Caleb was abysmal in that regard. Again, if HD was the problem, one should have expected him to take off at U of A. He was the same guy. He was a little better in most categories, because he got a couple of years older and more experienced. Players should improve. His improvement was modest at best, and considerably smaller than RJ's improvement.

Leaky Black? I mean, seriously? The guy played defense well, but his offense was atrocious and everyone knows it. If he was Jackie Manuel playing alongside Felton, McCants and May, then he could be really helpful. But that was the problem: Caleb, RJ and Mondo were not nearly in that category.

Bacot was a good player but his body and game were never suited to being the best player on a good team. He was a good complimentary piece, a glue guy. George Lynch type (though not as good). Valuable guy. Not the best player.

And that team had no depth.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure who you’re going to convince that a college team, with a starting lineup of 5 fringe-NBA/G-league players, 2 of which were future All-Americans, and one of the leading rebounders in college bball history, was in fact not talented. But it’s certainly not me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top