Heels vs Pack
North Carolina | NC State | |
Record | 15-2 | 10-7 |
ACC Record | 4-0 | 0-4 |
KenPom Rank | #8 | #88 |
Points per game | 87.5 | 75.0 |
Adj. Off. Efficiency(Rank) | 122.5(1st) | 108.8(65th) |
Ad. Def. Efficiency(Rank) | 97.8(65th) | 100.9(134th) |
Tempo(Rank) | 74.0(25th) | 67.4(275th) |
Offensive eFG% | 54.5% | 46.0% |
Defensive eFG% | 49.5% | 48.4% |
Field Goal % | 50.2% | 41.3% |
2P FG% | 56.2% | 45.3% |
3P FG% | 33.2% | 31.6% |
FT% | 75.3% | 67.5% |
Offensive Reb Rate | 38.6% | 38.5% |
Defensive Reb Rate | 73.1% | 70.1% |
TO Rate | 14.9% | 15.1% |
FT Rate | 34.5% | 43.3% |
3PA% | 26.2% | 29.8% |
UNC's offensive efficiency rating is presently 122.5. That is higher than 2009's final rating of 122.4. What's remarkable about 2016 is the current Tar Heel team isn't anywhere near the same level as 2009 in terms of three point shooting. 2009 shot 38.5% from three, over 5% better than 2016. The 2009 national champions were adept at getting to the free throw line with a free throw rate of nearly 40% versus just 34.5% for this year's team.
If this version of the Tar Heels starts hitting threes and gets more chances at the free throw line, there might not be a limit to what this team can do offensively.
The question is whether some of that will be put on display versus NC State's porous defense. The Wolfpack are over 100 in adjusted defensive efficiency. In ACC play it is at 112.9 with opponents shooting 42.6% from three, the worst 3P% defense in league play.
Still, NC State has some areas the Wolfpack could give the Tar Heels some trouble. NC State has size and a comparable offensive rebounding rate. Despite a solid defensive rebounding rate, there have been games UNC has been susceptible to giving up second chance points(Texas and Syracuse.) Wolfpack point guard Cat Barber will be tough to keep out of the lane, knows how to finish at the rim and gets to the line at a high rate. Despite some poor three point shooting at times, Maverick Rowan and Caleb Martin are capable of knocking perimeter shots down though not consistently.