Teams › ACC · Compare Clemson with another team
Clemson
Clemson returns 42% of last season's minutes and rates #48 on offense and #37 on defense of 365 teams. 80% range: +5.2 to +19.9.
Why we have them here
Clemson's preseason projection of +12.7 (No. 46 of 365) starts from the roster: its players' ratings, weighted by projected minutes, add up to a roll-up worth +7.3, about the +7.8 typical of teams ranked near it. Last season's rating (No. 34 at the end of 2025-26) adds +2.5, about its neighbours' +2.2; the program's level two and three seasons back and the roster's experience and shape add +2.8. A stretch at the top of the scale adds +0.5, because a straight-line calibration shrinks elite teams. It returns 42% of last season's minutes, more than teams ranked near it (32%). The projection leans most on Dylan Faulkner (+4.4), Carter Welling (+2.8) and David Fuchs (+1.8); the newcomer who matters most is Dylan Faulkner, a transfer from Samford, at +4.4. Its 80% range, +5.2 to +19.9, is about as wide as that of teams ranked near it.
Generated from the published projection's own terms, not written by hand. "Teams ranked near it" are the thirty nearest in the preseason order. Preseason projection frozen 2026-10-23; how the projection is built.
Roster
Returning 41% · Transfer 47% · Freshman 11% · Other newcomer 2%
| Rank | Player | Pos | Ht | D1 yrs | Group | From | MPG | Rating | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 93 | Dylan Faulkner | F | 6-9 | 3 | Transfer | Samford | 25 | +6.9 | +4.4 |
| 252 | Carter Welling | F | 6-10 | 3 | Returning | Clemson | 23 | +4.9 | +2.8 |
| 506 | David Fuchs | F | 6-9 | 3 | Transfer | San Francisco | 22 | +3.3 | +1.8 |
| 552 | Ace Buckner | G | 6-3 | 1 | Returning | Clemson | 19 | +3.2 | +1.6 |
| 568 | Cole Certa | G | 6-5 | 2 | Transfer | Notre Dame | 25 | +2.8 | +1.8 |
| 763 | Liutauras Lelevicius | G | 6-7 | 2 | Transfer | TCU | 21 | +2.2 | +1.2 |
| 909 | Zac Foster | G | 6-4 | 1 | Returning | Clemson | 16 | +2.0 | +0.8 |
| 997 | Dallas Thomas | F | 6-9 | 1 | Returning | Clemson | 8 | +2.2 | +0.5 |
| 1711 | Chase Thompson | F | 6-8 | 1 | Returning | Clemson | 10 | -0.1 | +0.0 |
| 1725 | Trent Steinour | F | 6-10 | 1 | Returning | Clemson | 5 | -0.2 | +0.0 |
| 1789 | Will Stevens | C | 6-10 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 7 | -0.3 | +0.0 |
| 1984 | Blake Davidson | F | 6-9 | 0 | Other newcomer | 3 | -0.8 | -0.1 | |
| 1992 | Harris Reynolds | G | 6-4 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 9 | -0.5 | -0.1 |
| 3344 | Amare James | G | 6-6 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 6 | -2.1 | -0.3 |
A player's rating is points per 100 possessions better than an average Division I player while he is on the floor. Contribution weights it by the share of a rotation slot he is projected to play, so a star on the bench and a role player who never sits both read right. Rank is among all 5,249 rated players. MPG is the projected share of a rotation slot times 40. "From" is last season's team. The bars are contribution, the player's rating times his projected share; their sum is the roll-up the projection starts from.
Schedule
| Date | Opponent | Proj. margin | Win prob. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon Nov 02 | vs |  Stetson #311 | +19.1 | 94% | |
| Fri Nov 06 | vs |  American University #188 | +14.7 | 89% | |
| Mon Nov 09 | vs |  North Dakota #310 | +19.3 | 94% | |
| Fri Nov 13 | vs |  Georgetown #84 | +9.0 | 77% | |
| Mon Nov 16 | vs |  The Citadel #345 | +20.9 | 96% | |
| Mon Nov 23 | N |  Ole Miss #61 | +1.7 | 55% | |
| Tue Dec 01 | vs |  Auburn #16 | +1.2 | 54% | |
| Sun Dec 06 | vs |  Le Moyne #217 | +16.0 | 90% | |
| Sat Dec 12 | at |  TCU #51 | -6.1 | 31% | |
| Tue Dec 15 | at |  South Carolina #98 | -1.5 | 45% | |
| Sat Dec 19 | at |  Cincinnati #42 | -6.9 | 29% | |
| Tue Dec 22 | vs |  Colgate #197 | +15.4 | 90% | |
| Tue Dec 29 | vs |  Virginia #19 | conf | -1.1 | 46% |
| Sat Jan 02 | at |  NC State #36 | conf | -3.9 | 38% |
| Tue Jan 05 | at |  Boston College #114 | conf | +3.6 | 62% |
| Sat Jan 09 | vs |  Wake Forest #76 | conf | +5.9 | 69% |
| Tue Jan 12 | vs |  Georgia Tech #140 | conf | +10.7 | 81% |
| Sat Jan 16 | at |  Pittsburgh #68 | conf | -0.6 | 48% |
| Sat Jan 23 | vs |  Florida State #90 | conf | +7.0 | 72% |
| Wed Jan 27 | at |  Miami #18 | conf | -7.1 | 28% |
| Sat Jan 30 | vs |  Duke #2 | conf | -6.2 | 31% |
| Tue Feb 02 | at |  Virginia Tech #45 | conf | -3.4 | 39% |
| Sat Feb 06 | vs |  California #115 | conf | +9.2 | 77% |
| Wed Feb 10 | vs |  Syracuse #71 | conf | +5.4 | 67% |
| Sat Feb 13 | at | Florida State #90 | conf | +1.2 | 54% |
| Tue Feb 16 | at | Georgia Tech #140 | conf | +5.5 | 67% |
| Sat Feb 20 | vs |  Stanford #69 | conf | +5.3 | 67% |
| Tue Feb 23 | at |  SMU #53 | conf | -2.4 | 42% |
| Tue Mar 02 | vs |  Notre Dame #75 | conf | +5.5 | 67% |
| Sat Mar 06 | at |  Louisville #7 | conf | -9.1 | 23% |
Projected margin is from Clemson's side, with home court where the game is not neutral (N). Games are the schedule as posted; tournaments and late additions appear as they are listed. Predictions are as of 2026-10-26 and reflect the roster as the model has it on that date.