2008-09 Bracketology

[mr. synellinden]

For those interested in the ridiculous, here is Joe Lundardi's first bracketology.

Somehow, Duke already has a down arrow. They are pegged as a #2 seed in the East with UConn as the #1. If I recall correctly, he had us as a #1 sometime during the off-season. Apparently he wasn't impressed by our first two outings.

Here is what he said in today's ESPN.com chat:

Dave (Columbus, OH: Do you think Duke has enough to win it all this year? They seem to be more athletic than the last few years.

Joe Lunardi: (4:42 PM ET ) Dave, I'm not even convinced Duke is the second-best team in the ACC.


I agree. We are the best team in the ACC.

[RainingThrees]

Than who else is 2nd?? Overated Miami?

[Kedsy]

Than who else is 2nd?? Overated Miami?

I would have thought he was referring to Wake, but he only gives them a 7 seed, so my new theory is he just couldn't resist the one-liner.

[Wander]

How can any team be rising or falling right now? And Wisconsin as a 2 seed? Not gonna happen.

He also has Miami overrated, but everyone does.

[BlueintheFace]

In Lunardi's chat wrap somebody asked him if he thought Duke was a title contender and he said he isn't even sure Duke is the second best team in the ACC... ouch

[Turk]

Good gravy, don't take it personally. Lunardi is the first to admit that November bracketology is like April batting averages - pretty much meaningless but you have to start counting somewhere...

When January and February come rolling around, I'm a big fan of his. He sees enough games with his own eyeballs to know who's good or not, and he knows the NCAA arcana inside and out.

Let's see if he gets enough WTF? mail where he has to explain the "not 2nd best" remark.

[CameronCrazy'11]

I'm sure he meant that we were actually the best team in the ACC!

[SMO]

Then why does he have Duke as a 2 seed and the next best ACC team is a 5??? I suppose he disagrees with himself.

[RainingThrees]

I never get a lot of Lunardi's seadings, he seems to disagree with from time to time with guys like Bilas and Katz who know what they are talking about.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

As one poster stated earlier, during the offseason Lunardi had Duke as a steady 1 seed. Since then, Duke lost King and added Plumlee. I am not so much puzzled by his dropping us from 1 to 2, however I AM suprised that he gave us the down arrow. Perhaps he does that simply by default when a team loses a spot. Doesn't matter til March, anyway.

[Diddy]

For Duke to be a high seed a couple of things have to happen. And those things are still up in the air after blowing out two overmatched opponents.

Duke has to get at least competent play from the post. Singler is great, but the rest of the low post is a question mark. Singler is at his most dangerous when he is not the sole post player. We don't know if the other guys will give us the competant play we need to really advance come march.

Second, for Duke to do well, our Big Three have to play at a very high level. Hendo, Singler, and Scheyer all have to play at high levels. Singler has done so after two games. Scheyer has played very well, and is nipping high level play. Hendo has looked shakey.

It is early, but the first games were not dominant from top to bottom. Last season's disasterous end left a bad taste in the mouths of the national media. The primary source of that bad taste was Duke woeful low post play. After two games, that remains a glaring question mark.

I would argue that Duke did not look like a top 4 team the last 2 nights. Top 8 or so, sure. But not top 4.

[Edouble]

Second, for Duke to do well, our Big Three have to play at a very high level. Hendo, Singler, and Scheyer all have to play at high levels. Singler has done so after two games. Scheyer has played very well, and is nipping high level play. Hendo has looked shakey.

My thoughts too. G has not looked like a First Team All-ACC, yet. This is a reasonable explanation for the down arrow.

[CameronCrazy'11]

For Duke to be a high seed a couple of things have to happen. And those things are still up in the air after blowing out two overmatched opponents.

Duke has to get at least competent play from the post. Singler is great, but the rest of the low post is a question mark. Singler is at his most dangerous when he is not the sole post player. We don't know if the other guys will give us the competant play we need to really advance come march.

Second, for Duke to do well, our Big Three have to play at a very high level. Hendo, Singler, and Scheyer all have to play at high levels. Singler has done so after two games. Scheyer has played very well, and is nipping high level play. Hendo has looked shakey.

It is early, but the first games were not dominant from top to bottom. Last season's disasterous end left a bad taste in the mouths of the national media. The primary source of that bad taste was Duke woeful low post play. After two games, that remains a glaring question mark.

I would argue that Duke did not look like a top 4 team the last 2 nights. Top 8 or so, sure. But not top 4.

True, but every team needs lots of things to go right to be a one-seed. Only UConn flamed out in the first round last year, and they too need to prove that they can go that far. Even UNC has question marks. There's no reason yet to suspect that we'll fall short. The UCLA game in the finals of Coach vs. Cancer could give us a hint of what our might be like.

[Diddy]

True, but every team needs lots of things to go right to be a one-seed. Only UConn flamed out in the first round last year, and they too need to prove that they can go that far. Even UNC has question marks. There's no reason yet to suspect that we'll fall short. The UCLA game in the finals of Coach vs. Cancer could give us a hint of what our might be like.

The UCLA game will be the bellweather for early season success. If we win that game then we are a top 5 team.

But this is a snapshot. The brackets represent his opinion of the seedings if the tourney started today. He is not projecting out to March, it is just a snapshot.

As for UCONN, they did lose in the first round last year, but they returned all their best players, AND their starting PG, who was lost to serious knee injury has returned. Based on talent, they are one of the top 4 teams until their play proves otherwise.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Instead of starting a new thread, I'll post here. This is Fox Sports' prediction, which has us a 3 seed, ultimately losing to UCONN in the sweet 16.

[Olympic Fan]

I have no problem with Lunardi's projection of Duke as a No. 2 seed or even Fox Sports' prediction of a No. 3 seed. I do find Lunardi's comment about Duke not being the second best team in the ACC strange ... I wish he had elaborated. I'd love to know his reasoning ... or was it just a snarky remark?

I'm finding it hard to understand all the love for UConn in preason. Look, I'm not saying they aren't a candidate to be a top 10 team, but what makes them such a solid pick -- and what makes them better than Duke on paper?

True, last year's first-round NCAA flameout can be blamed on the injury point guard AJ Price suffered in the early moments of that game. Fair enough. I think we can all agree that they're not the same team without Price.

But the fact is that UConn wasn't all that great before Price got hurt. This is a team that was swept by Providence, finished 4th in the Big East (a weaker league than the ACC last season) and lost in its opening game of the Big East Tournament (to the same West Virginia team that Duke) -- before Price was injured.

UConn finished 24-9 and 18th in the RPI (compared to Duke at 28-7 and No. 7 in the RPI). A year ago, Duke started the season at No. 13, climbed as high as No. 2 in the AP poll and finished No. 9. UConn spent most of the year unranked and never got higher than 13, finishing at No. 16.

My point is that Duke was better than UConn last year (and the year before, when UConn missed the NCAA Tournament). I know Duke is a better, stronger team this season. How much better will UConn be?

Well, a year ago, they were a very poor perimeter shooting team -- have they addressed that? (Actually, one of their losses was Doug Wiggins, their second best long-range shooter last season). I keep hearing talk that freshman Nate Miles is another Rip Hamilton ... maybe, but they only averaged 7.6 points a game last year in either high school or community college (I know his numbers, but I can't tell where he played last ... he's attended five high schools and two community colleges in the last four seasons). Kemba Walker is a big-time recruit at point guard -- a super-quick jet ... but shooting is supposed to be the flaw in his game.

And what's the status of forward Stanley Robinson, who is currently out of school due to "personal issues"? What about big man recruit Ater Majok, who hasn't graduated from high school yet? Calhoun said he expects both to enter school and join the team in December, but aren't those a couple of question marks that need to be answered?

Then there's Price. That injury that sidelined him in the NCAA Tournament opener turned out to be a torn ACL that required reconstructive surgery. He was on crutches all spring and limited in his workout all summer. Has anybody got an update on his progress -- that's an injury that usually requires a year for full recovery?

Now, I know I'm putting a negative spin on a lot of issues. I'm just saying that I don't see what's happened to suddenly make UConn a top 5 team. Yes, they have a lot of big, strong players (especially if Robinson and Majok come back). Price is a primetime player at the point -- if he's healthy. They'll block a bunch of shots. Thabeet and Adrien are a formidable post pair. But I would think that even the off-court issues resolve themselves, this is a team that has to prove it can come up with the outside firepower to balance its inside strength.

UConn could do that and end up being a great team ... even a national championship contender. But until they prove they've solved that problem, I don't think they're a top 5 or even a top 10 team on paper.

And, prejudiced as I am, I don't see what makes them a better preseason team than Duke.

[Huh?]

I'm not even going to begin to read all that.

[-jk]

I'm not even going to begin to read all that.

Your loss. OF is one of our most esteemed posters (and historians).

I think part of the pass the press is giving UConn is Calhoun's ability to get and keep players eligible in the face of adversity.

-jk

[CameronBornAndBred]

I'm not even going to begin to read all that.

Agreeing with -JK there, it's a good read with good arguments. Beats the purpose of a message board if you don't read the messages.

It will be interesting to see how much respect vs. expectation Duke gets this year. I think everyone with any knowledge give us the respect, but will be leary with the expectation. We have a lot to prove.

[nyr484]

Yes, this is mostly meaningless, but... I still find it interesting that Lunardi has 8 ACC teams in the field and only 7 Big East teams. I wasn't a math major, but 8 is more than 7, and 8 out of 12 is better than 7 out of 16.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology


So does it bother anyone else when the "experts" say the Big East is "clearly" the country's best conference? (see, e.g. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bubblewatch?id=84)