|
|
CLEMSON FLORIDA ST |
|
| 120 | 53 Final 49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
607 | CLEMSON | +250 | 608 | FLORIDA ST | -330 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 13-6 | -0.2 | 9-5 | 6-7 | 64.5 | 30.7 | 42.2% | 37.9 | 56.1 | 28.4 | 38.1% | 32.8 | Road Games | 4-5 | -2.4 | 5-4 | 5-4 | 63.0 | 29.0 | 40.8% | 35.7 | 64.3 | 32.2 | 43.3% | 33.4 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | +1.8 | 3-2 | 3-2 | 58.6 | 24.6 | 39.8% | 34.2 | 63.4 | 32.0 | 44.2% | 32.4 | Conference Games | 4-3 | +1.2 | 4-3 | 3-4 | 56.6 | 24.3 | 38.9% | 33.7 | 61.9 | 28.3 | 43.8% | 32.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 64.5 | 30.7 | 22-53 | 42.2% | 5-17 | 32.2% | 14-19 | 74.4% | 38 | 11 | 11 | 16 | 5 | 11 | 6 | vs opponents surrendering | 70.6 | 33 | 24-57 | 42.7% | 6-19 | 33.5% | 16-23 | 69.1% | 35 | 10 | 13 | 19 | 6 | 13 | 4 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 63.0 | 29.0 | 22-54 | 40.8% | 5-15 | 34.6% | 14-20 | 71.3% | 36 | 11 | 9 | 17 | 4 | 11 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 56.1 | 28.4 | 21-55 | 38.1% | 5-17 | 27.3% | 10-16 | 61.5% | 33 | 10 | 10 | 16 | 5 | 11 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 73.2 | 34.2 | 26-57 | 44.7% | 6-18 | 34.7% | 16-23 | 68.9% | 36 | 10 | 13 | 19 | 6 | 12 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 64.3 | 32.2 | 23-53 | 43.3% | 6-17 | 35.9% | 12-20 | 60.5% | 33 | 10 | 12 | 16 | 5 | 10 | 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 13-7 | +3.2 | 11-7 | 6-10 | 72.3 | 33.4 | 47.8% | 36.4 | 64.6 | 30.2 | 37.7% | 34.5 | Home Games | 7-1 | +1.4 | 4-2 | 3-1 | 80.1 | 37.9 | 50.7% | 35.7 | 62.4 | 27.0 | 37.4% | 31.9 | Last 5 Games | 2-3 | -1.6 | 1-4 | 3-2 | 66.2 | 29.8 | 48.3% | 31.6 | 71.4 | 37.6 | 41.7% | 34.0 | Conference Games | 4-4 | -0.8 | 3-5 | 4-4 | 65.2 | 28.6 | 46.2% | 32.9 | 65.1 | 32.0 | 38.3% | 34.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 72.3 | 33.4 | 26-54 | 47.8% | 5-14 | 36.9% | 16-23 | 69.9% | 36 | 10 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 15 | 6 | vs opponents surrendering | 67.2 | 31.3 | 24-55 | 43.0% | 6-18 | 33.6% | 14-20 | 69.1% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 13 | 4 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 80.1 | 37.9 | 27-54 | 50.7% | 8-18 | 42.4% | 17-24 | 71.8% | 36 | 9 | 15 | 19 | 7 | 15 | 6 | Stats Against (All Games) | 64.6 | 30.2 | 22-58 | 37.7% | 6-18 | 31.6% | 15-22 | 67.4% | 35 | 12 | 11 | 20 | 7 | 13 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 72.5 | 34.2 | 25-57 | 44.7% | 7-19 | 35.5% | 15-22 | 68.7% | 36 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 12 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 62.4 | 27.0 | 21-57 | 37.4% | 6-19 | 30.1% | 14-22 | 64.9% | 32 | 11 | 10 | 21 | 6 | 15 | 2 |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: CLEMSON 72.7, FLORIDA ST 77.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
12/14/2013 | FURMAN | 71-35 | W | -22 | W | 123 | U | 27-54 | 50.0% | 37 | 10 | 13-43 | 30.2% | 23 | 16 | 12/19/2013 | @ AUBURN | 64-66 | L | -5.5 | L | 127 | O | 22-50 | 44.0% | 32 | 7 | 26-55 | 47.3% | 35 | 10 | 12/30/2013 | VMI | 80-50 | W | | - | | - | 29-66 | 43.9% | 48 | 9 | 21-73 | 28.8% | 47 | 12 | 1/4/2014 | @ BOSTON COLLEGE | 62-60 | W | 1 | W | 126 | U | 22-51 | 43.1% | 31 | 9 | 15-41 | 36.6% | 33 | 13 | 1/9/2014 | FLORIDA ST | 41-56 | L | -3 | L | 122 | U | 15-50 | 30.0% | 34 | 18 | 26-55 | 47.3% | 33 | 11 | 1/11/2014 | DUKE | 72-59 | W | 5.5 | W | 130 | O | 25-53 | 47.2% | 48 | 10 | 20-59 | 33.9% | 30 | 5 | 1/15/2014 | @ VIRGINIA TECH | 56-49 | W | -1.5 | W | 122 | U | 19-47 | 40.4% | 33 | 8 | 20-48 | 41.7% | 30 | 9 | 1/18/2014 | WAKE FOREST | 61-53 | W | -7.5 | W | 119.5 | U | 20-43 | 46.5% | 31 | 9 | 21-58 | 36.2% | 32 | 10 | 1/21/2014 | @ PITTSBURGH | 43-76 | L | 11 | L | 118 | O | 16-50 | 32.0% | 28 | 14 | 27-48 | 56.2% | 33 | 10 | 1/26/2014 | @ N CAROLINA | 61-80 | L | 7 | L | 126.5 | O | 18-53 | 34.0% | 31 | 10 | 31-56 | 55.4% | 37 | 12 | 2/1/2014 | @ FLORIDA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/4/2014 | GEORGIA TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/9/2014 | @ SYRACUSE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/11/2014 | @ NOTRE DAME | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/15/2014 | VIRGINIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/18/2014 | NC STATE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/22/2014 | @ GEORGIA TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/17/2013 | CHARLOTTE | 106-62 | W | -9 | W | 146 | O | 39-72 | 54.2% | 45 | 9 | 21-60 | 35.0% | 33 | 19 | 12/21/2013 | *MASSACHUSETTS | 60-55 | W | -3 | W | 157 | U | 24-65 | 36.9% | 47 | 17 | 20-60 | 33.3% | 43 | 17 | 12/30/2013 | CHARLESTON SO | 67-59 | W | | - | | - | 26-56 | 46.4% | 36 | 14 | 18-50 | 36.0% | 30 | 17 | 1/4/2014 | VIRGINIA | 50-62 | L | -3.5 | L | 124 | U | 16-52 | 30.8% | 38 | 16 | 19-58 | 32.8% | 41 | 6 | 1/9/2014 | @ CLEMSON | 56-41 | W | 3 | W | 122 | U | 26-55 | 47.3% | 33 | 11 | 15-50 | 30.0% | 34 | 18 | 1/12/2014 | MARYLAND | 85-61 | W | -6.5 | W | 139.5 | O | 27-54 | 50.0% | 34 | 14 | 17-51 | 33.3% | 34 | 15 | 1/15/2014 | @ MIAMI | 63-53 | W | 1 | W | 124 | U | 21-46 | 45.7% | 37 | 9 | 21-59 | 35.6% | 29 | 4 | 1/18/2014 | @ VIRGINIA | 66-78 | L | 6 | L | 119.5 | O | 21-46 | 45.7% | 31 | 18 | 27-55 | 49.1% | 28 | 9 | 1/21/2014 | NOTRE DAME | 76-74 | W | -9.5 | L | 140 | O | 29-50 | 58.0% | 26 | 10 | 28-59 | 47.5% | 29 | 7 | 1/25/2014 | @ DUKE | 56-78 | L | 9 | L | 144 | U | 22-44 | 50.0% | 24 | 17 | 18-59 | 30.5% | 47 | 12 | 1/29/2014 | @ NC STATE | 70-74 | L | -3 | L | 136.5 | O | 24-56 | 42.9% | 40 | 11 | 31-68 | 45.6% | 37 | 9 | 2/1/2014 | CLEMSON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/5/2014 | VIRGINIA TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/8/2014 | @ MARYLAND | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/10/2014 | MIAMI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/15/2014 | @ WAKE FOREST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/17/2014 | N CAROLINA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/23/2014 | @ PITTSBURGH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| CLEMSON: Clemson struggled to compete last season, and the outlook is worse for the 2013-14 campaign with a dearth of talent in the post to replace the losses of Devin Booker and Milton Jennings. Shooting guards K.J. McDaniels (10.9 PPG, 5.0 RPG) and Jordan Roper (7.9 PPG, 41% 3-pt FG) will have to bear a heavy burden and put up a lot of shots for the offense to have any life, while junior point guard Rod Hall (5.7 PPG, 3.5 APG) will be the glue to this three-guard offense. This appears to be another rebuilding season for the Tigers and head coach Brad Brownell. | | FLORIDA ST: The Seminoles lose their best player from last year, Michael Snaer, but return a veteran crew that should be able to improve on a mediocre 2012-13 campaign. Okaro White (12.4 PPG, 5.9 RPG) may prove to be among the more dynamic big men in the ACC while Devon Bookert (6.5 PPG, 53% 3-pt FT) is an emerging star in the backcourt. Ian Miller (5.3 PPG in 18.8 MPG) should also play a big role in filling Snaer's wing position. The biggest question mark will be at the center position, but the team is hoping one of its three raw 7-footers (Kiel Turpin, Boris Bojanovsky and Michael Ojo) can provide a consistently strong presence in the paint. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 3/28/2024 8:30:43 PM EST. |
|
|