Page 1 of 32 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 634
  1. #1

    The bid for a No. 1 seed

    If the NCAA selection were made today, Duke would almost certainly be a No. 2 seed. But I think some commentators have been too quick to dismiss our chances of earning a No. 1 seed.

    I know that didn't look likely after our blowout loss at Georgetown, but should a blowout loss to the Hoyas Saturday eliminate Villanova? Look at the presumed No. 1 seeds -- even Kansas is floundering -- in their last three games they've won twice in OT and trailed mediocre Nebraska by four in the second half at home (before pulling away to win). Two weeks ago, Texas looked like a lock No. 1 seed -- now they are in free fall.

    I'm not saying Kansas or even Texas won't be a No. 1 seed. And I'm not saying Duke is a favorite to move up a line. I'm just saying the possibility is out there.

    Right now, Duke is No. 2 in the Pomery ratings, No. 3 in the RPI and No. 3 in Sagarin. Our SOS is 4-8-5 in the three big computer rankings.

    More important -- in terms of predicting seedings -- are the rankings in the AP (tied for 10th) and Coaches polls (9th). While I'm sure we'll move up in Monday's rankings, we won't be in the top five -- not yet.

    To vie for a No. 1 seed, Duke obviously will have to finish strong -- maybe a 7-1 record in our final eight regular season games, PLUS an ACC Tournament title. That would be 29-5 ... Tough, but not nearly impossible. And even if we do that, it will still depend a good deal on what other people do -- Kansas and Kentucky (despite their lousy SOS) appear to be pretty solid No. 1s. The schedule appears to favor Syracuse -- after today's game at Cincinnati, they have only Providence and Louisville left on the road.

    Certainly today, Georgetown, Villanova and West Virginia would be ahead of us, but they are all in the Big East, so they'll beat each other up. We're in a mix with Michigan State, Texas and Purdue.

    This entire situation remainds me of 2005 -- Duke was 18-4 after losing back-to-back games to Maryland and Virginia Tech, but finished 4-1 in the regular season, then won the ACC Tournament, while most of the other contenders faltered in their tournaments ... and Duke got a No. 1 seed.

    Not saying it will happen ... only that it's not farfetched.

    (I won't go into the scenario that would drop us from our current No. 2 seed to a No. 3 or 4 seed -- but that's a reasonable possibility too).

  2. #2
    I think we would have to run the table. I don't think we can get in 5 losses. Although I think the toughest part of our schedule is behind us (2xGT, 2xClemson, @Georgetown), I still think we will drop at least one more. A 2-seed is probably the most likely outcome.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    To vie for a No. 1 seed, Duke obviously will have to finish strong -- maybe a 7-1 record in our final eight regular season games, PLUS an ACC Tournament title. That would be 29-5 ... Tough, but not nearly impossible.
    This scenario would definitely put us in contention for a #1 seed. If we end the season 29-5 and ACCT Champions, a #1 seed would be appropriate. As you stated, the Big East teams are going to beat each other up down the stretch.

    We need to win out at home and go 3-1 on the road with tough road matchups at UNC, Miami, Virginia, and Maryland. Ending up 2-2 over those four games wouldn't be shabby, but would most likely end our quest for a #1 seed. We absolutely must win all our remaining home games.

    It is going to be an exciting stretch run, and the one factor which keeps my excitement level peaked is the hypothesis that this Duke team is a team that still has their best basketball in front of them. We are simultaneously an experienced team and a young team and we are an improving team, which bodes well for March/April.
    Bob Green
    United States Navy (Retired)
    @JBobGreen

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Green View Post
    This scenario would definitely put us in contention for a #1 seed. If we end the season 29-5 and ACCT Champions, a #1 seed would be appropriate.
    I don't think you can determine it that way. At this point its looking like kansas and UK are shoe ins for 1 seeds. Villanova and Syracuse have 2 and 1 losses and each are currently above us, and at the moment, villanova's losses have each come to ranked teams....something we can't say. Its quite possible that each of those teams finish with 4 losses, and both are #1 seeds....the acc championship won't mean as much this year with the incredible weakness of the conference (relatively).

    If MSU wins the big 10, they might also get the nod over us, becuase even though they have 4 losses at the moment, their last one was with a broken kailen lucas....thus will not be factored in. They also have 1 'blowout' to a good wisconsin teams.....ours to NCST will not be looked upon lightly. The juxtaposition of our home and away play will also not be looked upon favorably.

    I would also like to point out that currently we are ranked 9/10 in the polls, which would make a 3 seed much more likely at the moment than a two seed, especially with our wins over uconn and clemson looking much less impressive of late. At this point, for us to move up into the top 4 in the ranking will necessitate us to win out, which is obviously not out of the question with our immensely easy rest of the season, but we can't let down. We also will need a lot of help from the teams in front of us, and needing 6 other teams in front of us to lose 1 or 2 more games than us is a very tough call, especially with how good teams like villanova and syracuse are.

    I say, even if we run the table, we get a 2.
    usa

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Texas/NC
    I don't want a #1 seed, no joke. I want a #2 seed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Baltimore
    I think too much is made of #1 seed. Its all about matchups, If we're a #2, the question is, which #1 would you want in our bracket. I don't want Cuse, I dont want Kansas (well I rather have them over Cuse), I may want Kentucky.....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    We are not one of the top 4 teams in the country. I would assume the seeding committee sees that as well.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    We are not one of the top 4 teams in the country. I would assume the seeding committee sees that as well.
    Well the computer rankings disagree with you as evidenced in Olympic Fan's original post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Right now, Duke is No. 2 in the Pomery ratings, No. 3 in the RPI and No. 3 in Sagarin. Our SOS is 4-8-5 in the three big computer rankings.
    And the discussion is not about which are the best four teams in the country right now, but rather which four teams will be the best in the middle of March. There is a lot of basketball left to be played prior to the selection committee making their decisions and I do not believe it is unreasonable that Duke could end up a #1 seed.
    Bob Green
    United States Navy (Retired)
    @JBobGreen

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    iowa
    even if we win out the rest of the regular season and acc tourney i don't think we'd get a 1 seed unless there were a lot of losses for the teams above us.
    I think we have a very good shot at being a 2 seed if we play well down the stretch. potentially even the top 2 seed, but i don't think a 1 is in duke's cards this year and i don't think they deserve it at this point. I think they are 3 clear number one's: Syracuse, Kansas, and Kentucky. I'm also going to assume that the 4th number one will come from either: Nova, G'town, or WV.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love
    Even if Duke finishes strong and wins the ACC tournament, I suspect the mediocre performances in the Big Dance in recent years, including the last 2 times Duke was a # 1, will influence the Committee and all but eliminates any chance of a # 1 seed this year.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by strawbs View Post
    even if we win out the rest of the regular season and acc tourney i don't think we'd get a 1 seed unless there were a lot of losses for the teams above us.
    Not to get too far ahead of ourselves as winning out is a tall order, but a lot of the teams above us are going to lose.

    For example, Syracuse, Villanova, Georgetown, and West Virginia are all in the Big East. All but one are guaranteed to lose in the Big East tournament, plus Syracuse has regular season games left with Villanova and Georgetown.

    Kansas, Kansas State, and Texas will face off in the Big 12. Michigan State and Purdue in the Big 10.

    Only Duke and Kentucky are in a situation where they are the only highly ranked team in their conference....of course, that doesn't guarantee any wins.
    Bob Green
    United States Navy (Retired)
    @JBobGreen

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    Even if Duke finishes strong and wins the ACC tournament, I suspect the mediocre performances in the Big Dance in recent years, including the last 2 times Duke was a # 1, will influence the Committee and all but eliminates any chance of a # 1 seed this year.
    Unlike sports commentators and fans, the committee doesn't consider previous years' performance when seeding. Especially tournament performance 4 and 5 years ago.

    They seed based on the current year's accomplishments. That's it.
    Now I'm 33, my back hurts, and I just don't care who does what in Cameron. - Throatybeard

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Exiled_Devil View Post
    Unlike sports commentators and fans, the committee doesn't consider previous years' performance when seeding. Especially tournament performance 4 and 5 years ago.

    They seed based on the current year's accomplishments. That's it.
    But it would be folley to say that name doesn't have any effect....you could see it with arizona last year, uk the year before....
    usa

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    OK so we have a chance to dominate our conference. But we likely wont by a whole lot and we likely will come from the 3rd best conference.

    Even if our outcomes are 8-3, 9-2, 10-2, 7-4, 9-1 etc, we have a lot in January to answer for.

    So likely scenario is two to three more losses, which is fine. But not #1 territory and not a runaway team.

    Hmmmmmm

    Super ''Im hoping for team improvement from week to week over stats/milestones" Daaaaaaave.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    If MSU wins the big 10, they might also get the nod over us, becuase even though they have 4 losses at the moment, their last one was with a broken kailen lucas....thus will not be factored in.
    I don't know if anyone knows for sure, because I've never seen it in writing, but I was wondering if anyone knows for sure about how injuries are handled by the committee. I was always under the impression that games without a key injured player were given less, but not zero, weight provided that said player returned and the team re-established its pre-injury level. There are a few other questions that I have no idea about.

    1) Are injuries to role players (a Lance Thomas type) given any consideration at all?
    2) How are short term injuries considered? For example, the Kalin Lucas thing. He was out for the loss against Illinois, but there likely won't be a string of games (like OSU with Evan Turner) to prove that the team was worse because he was gone and not just a bad night for everyone else. If they do give less weight, this would seem to unnecessarily punish a team like Clemson for trying to play a guy like Stitt when he was injured.
    3) Are teams given more credit for wins when a player is in or out (ex: Will UNC get more credit for beating OSU than Butler)?

    I've never seen anything in writing about this. It may be just discretion of the committee, but I thought I'd ask anyway.
    Pratt '09
    GO DUKE!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by SCMatt33 View Post
    I don't know if anyone knows for sure, because I've never seen it in writing, but I was wondering if anyone knows for sure about how injuries are handled by the committee. I was always under the impression that games without a key injured player were given less, but not zero, weight provided that said player returned and the team re-established its pre-injury level. There are a few other questions that I have no idea about.

    1) Are injuries to role players (a Lance Thomas type) given any consideration at all?
    2) How are short term injuries considered? For example, the Kalin Lucas thing. He was out for the loss against Illinois, but there likely won't be a string of games (like OSU with Evan Turner) to prove that the team was worse because he was gone and not just a bad night for everyone else. If they do give less weight, this would seem to unnecessarily punish a team like Clemson for trying to play a guy like Stitt when he was injured.
    3) Are teams given more credit for wins when a player is in or out (ex: Will UNC get more credit for beating OSU than Butler)?

    I've never seen anything in writing about this. It may be just discretion of the committee, but I thought I'd ask anyway.
    Everything is very subjective.....if lance was out, and we lost played markedly different, this would be brought up by the committee

    if kailin only misses this game, it will likely be mentioned that he was not there, especially if they don't lose as many similar games

    i don't think you get more credit....there are two instances here....that the player is still injured come tourney time, then the commitee would devalue wins when the player WAS there because they're not there anymore, or if the player had returned, then they will look harder at games when teh player was there and not consider as much what happened when he wasn't....I'm not an expert...i don't pretend to be....I do read a bit about the committee and how the process works, and what it sounds like is that its all very subjective.....it goes on a case by case basis....they look at your 'body of work' and pick the better teams....i don't think you can say there are set rules, becuase it really all depends
    usa

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    I'm not sure why you seem to think analysts are "writing Duke off" for a #1 seed. Last week -- right after the Georgetown loss -- Joe Lunardi still gave Duke a 30% chance of earning a #1 seed through whatever historical formula he uses -- ahead of Purdue, Texas, Georgetown and Villanova.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Boston by way of North Carolina
    Here's MY Top 12:

    1 seeds:
    1. Syracuse
    2. Kansas
    3. Villanova
    4. Kentucky

    2 seeds:
    5. West Virginia
    6. Georgetown
    7. DUKE
    8. Purdue

    3 seeds:
    9. Michigan State
    10. Kansas State
    11. Tennessee
    12. Ohio State

    If you ask me, there is a LARGE talent gap between the top line and the rest of those teams. The Big East teams will suffer losses at each others' hands, sure, but the fact is we do not have a single ranked opponent left on our schedule. Don't get me wrong - teams like Maryland and UVA are certainly good and tournament-caliber. But those four teams at the top have clearly outclassed the rest of the field so far this year.

    We need to lose no more than one more game, win the ACCT, and hope one of those teams at the top stumbles a little bit if we want a 1 seed. (If it happens, my guess is Kansas.)

    Would I like a 1 seed? Yes. Not for the prestige, but for the practicality...the difference between facing a 3 and a 4 seed in the Sweet Sixteen can be rather large.

    But, honestly, it is, of course, about matchups. Duke can play with anyone when we execute well. I'm not awfully worried about whether we get a 1 or a 2.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO

    Talking Win the ACC, Get a #1 Seed

    Quote Originally Posted by CameronCrazy'11 View Post
    I think we would have to run the table. I don't think we can get in 5 losses. Although I think the toughest part of our schedule is behind us (2xGT, 2xClemson, @Georgetown), I still think we will drop at least one more. A 2-seed is probably the most likely outcome.
    The most important thing for a number one seed in any of the power conferences is to win the conference tournament. Yeah, I know. UNC lost the ACC last year and got a #1, but they were a dominant team nationally.

    If Duke wins the regular season ACC and then wins the tournament, we stand a pretty good chance for a #1 seed. In both 2002 and 2005, we were not first in the regular season but won the ACC tourney and got a #1 seed.

    The fact is, most everyone in the top ten is going to lose games, especially the four Big East teams ahead of Duke, who will play each other in a number of games. Perhaps Kentucky can waltz through unscathed, although I doubt it. Kansas has looked shaky at times. Those two teams are probably the surest bets for #1 seeds. In the Big East, it will be fratricide, and they may not get two #1 seeds. If they don't, and Duke comes through in the ACC, who is better positioned for a #1? I think we would look better than any of the Big Ten teams. The PAC 10 and Atlantic 10 are not factors. And I doubt that a second place team in the Big 12 (Texas?) would merit a #1

    sagegrouse
    Rereading this, it sounds like I think I know what I am talking about, which of course is total nonsense'
    Last edited by sagegrouse; 02-08-2010 at 12:43 AM. Reason: Added postscript

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    The fact is, most everyone in the top ten is going to lose games, especially the four Big East teams ahead of Duke, who will play each other in a number of games. Perhaps Kentucky can waltz through unscathed, although I doubt it. Kansas has looked shaky at times. Those two teams are probably the surest bets for #1 seeds. In the Big East, it will be fratricide, and they may not get two #1 seeds. If they don't, and Duke comes through in the ACC, who is better positioned for a #1? I think we would look better than any of the Big Ten teams. The PAC 10 and Atlantic 10 are not factors. And I doubt that a second place team in the Big 12 (Texas?) would merit a #1
    I think our main problem right now is losing two of three out-of-conference games against the current top 25. We will not have a chance to improve that record before the NCAA tourney (unless UCon sneaks back into the top 25).

Similar Threads

  1. And the fourth and last #1 seed goes to?
    By houstondukie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 03-15-2009, 01:02 PM
  2. Can we still get a #1 seed?
    By Johnny B in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 10:31 PM
  3. #6 Seed against VCU
    By drion97 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 147
    Last Post: 03-12-2007, 11:48 PM
  4. I love our #7 seed!
    By ccCrazie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-05-2007, 10:58 AM
  5. What will our NCAA seed be?
    By hurleyfor3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-27-2007, 10:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •