ACC tournament seeding

[Troublemaker]

Thanks Olympic Fan for the analysis. Good stuff.

I have conceded the Reg ACC Championship to UVa. And it's not cus I think the field will lose a few more games. Rather, UVa is the best coached team in the ACC. They aren't going to lose gimmies (unlike every other ACC team this season). Without Anderson, they aren't as good, but they make up for it with their insanely effective defense and "boring" offense.

@Cuse and @Lville aren't gimmes though. @Wake might not be either.

If Duke can finish 15-3 (big if but doable), we have a shot.

[Olympic Fan]

@Cuse and @Lville aren't gimmes though. @Wake might not be either.

If Duke can finish 15-3 (big if but doable), we have a shot.

And just to be clear -- IF Duke and Virginia both end up 15-3,they would be co-champs -- but Duke would get the No. 1 seed in the tournament.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

And just to be clear -- IF Duke and Virginia both end up 15-3,they would be co-champs -- but Duke would get the No. 1 seed in the tournament.

It's crazy to think Duke hasn't won an outright regular season title since 2006.

I imagine the unbalanced schedule and the one-and-done era have alot to do with it.

[flyingdutchdevil]

@Cuse and @Lville aren't gimmes though. @Wake might not be either.

If Duke can finish 15-3 (big if but doable), we have a shot.

You're right they aren't gimmes. But UVa is the most consistent team in the ACC. Can they lose? Of course they can. But I don't really see it, because this UVa team is like the poised Duke teams of the past.

Also, if @Lville is tough for UVa, do you think @UNC is less tough for Duke?

The chances of Duke losing 1 is significantly higher than the chance of UVa losing 2. I think that UVa is just that good about non top-10 talent.

[Duvall]

It's crazy to think Duke hasn't won an outright regular season title since 2006.

I imagine the unbalanced schedule and the one-and-done era have alot to do with it.

Not really. It's more injuries than anything else, but mostly it's just that Duke has only had a real shot at having the best team in the league in a handful of years - 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015 - during that span.

[Olympic Fan]

Not really. It's more injuries than anything else, but mostly it's just that Duke has only had a real shot at having the best team in the league in a handful of years - 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015 - during that span.

Not to hijack the thread but, I agree -- from 2007-09, UNC was clearly the best team in the league.

In 2010, Duke developed as the best team, but only after struggling through January -- it was the move of Zoubek to the starting lineup in February that changed that. Still tied for the title.

In 2011, the Kyrie injury changed everything. Lost by one game.

In 2012, we just weren't quite good enough with a young team built around a freshman guard (and even then, we go to the last day with a chance to win the title).

In 2013, it was a combination of Kelly's injury and the unbalanced schedule (against the same opponents, Duke was one game better than Miami)

In 2014, again, we weren't good enough with a young team built around a freshman forward

In 2015 -- that one will be disappointing ... but again, it's with the youngest Duke team in 32 years.

As for the projections for Virginia and Duke ... I never said it likely that Duke catches Virginia. Only that it's not unreasonable ... yes, at UNC is tougher for Duke than at Louisville is for Virginia, but it wouldn't be the biggest shocker in the world if Duke won and Virginia lost.

I'm not predicting that Duke will catch Virginia, just saying it's too early to concede ... maybe a 30 percent change of that happening?

PS But I should note that we have won three ACC championships in this span -- 2009-10-11. Some of you may disparage the tournament, but it does determine the official ACC champion. I'd rather win that than the unbalanced ACC regular season.

[Troublemaker]

You're right they aren't gimmes. But UVa is the most consistent team in the ACC. Can they lose? Of course they can. But I don't really see it, because this UVa team is like the poised Duke teams of the past.

Are you predicting 17-1 then for this depleted UVA team? I think 16-2 or 15-3 is more likely.

The chances of Duke losing 1 is significantly higher than the chance of UVa losing 2.

Well, I would agree that Duke catching UVA is < 50/50. But we're talking about concession, so I think we just have different standards for when to concede. It is probably more mentally healthy your way, though, to just concede that we will not catch UVA and be pleasantly surprised if we do.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Are you predicting 17-1 then for this depleted UVA team? I think 16-2 or 15-3 is more likely.

Well, I would agree that Duke catching UVA is < 50/50. But we're talking about concession, so I think we just have different standards for when to concede. It is probably more mentally healthy your way, though, to just concede that we will not catch UVA and be pleasantly surprised if we do.

I do think UVa ends up at 16-2, as the Louisville game is a dangerous one.

Also, you're partially right about the mental aspect of this. I'd rather be pleasantly surprised than disappointed. For instance, I have convinced myself that the Oak and Justise are long gone and Tyus has a 2/3 chance of going after this season. If they come back, wow! But that's a different topic.

But I do think UVa has been the better team in the ACC. Duke is better right now, but we certainly weren't when the ACC started. And UVa will capitalize on the consistency.

[CDu]

I'm not predicting that Duke will catch Virginia, just saying it's too early to concede ... maybe a 30 percent change of that happening?

Well, I would agree that Duke catching UVA is < 50/50. But we're talking about concession, so I think we just have different standards for when to concede. It is probably more mentally healthy your way, though, to just concede that we will not catch UVA and be pleasantly surprised if we do.

I'd say there is less than a 30% chance that UVa loses twice more, so I'd say the chances of us catching UVa are much less than 30% (since the chances we win in Chapel Hill are not close to 100%). I'd guesstimate that we have less than a 10% chance of catching UVa. Not no chance, but I'm certainly not holding my breath.

[azzefkram]

I'd say there is less than a 30% chance that UVa loses twice more, so I'd say the chances of us catching UVa are much less than 30% (since the chances we win in Chapel Hill are not close to 100%). I'd guesstimate that we have less than a 10% chance of catching UVa. Not no chance, but I'm certainly not holding my breath.

Me neither. Losing Anderson hurts, but UVa is still a really good team. Expecting us to win out and UVa to drop 2 seems like a super longshot. We can dream though.

[Newton_14]

PS But I should note that we have won three ACC championships in this span -- 2009-10-11. Some of you may disparage the tournament, but it does determine the official ACC champion. I'd rather win that than the unbalanced ACC regular season.

This all day long and twice on Sunday. THE ACC Champion is the tourney winner. The unbalanced schedule makes it impossible to determine a fair winner. That is nothing at all against UVA either. I love their team and they may very well be the best team at full health. Not sure. But the regular season just can't tell us who the best team is.

Even with so many teams, I wish they would go round robin and cut out several cupcake games early in the year.

I want to win the tourney far worse than I want to finish first with an unbalanced schedule.

[Wander]

It's crazy to think Duke hasn't won an outright regular season title since 2006.

Sure, but this line of thinking has always been silly to me. Does our win last night count for less because it came in overtime, which is essentially a tiebreaker? We won the ACC regular season in 2010, IMO no need for any qualifiers about it being "outright."

[Troublemaker]

Me neither. Losing Anderson hurts, but UVa is still a really good team. Expecting us to win out and UVa to drop 2 seems like a super longshot. We can dream though.

Based on the 3.5 games they've played without Anderson so far, I would downgrade them to merely "good." And good teams can easily lose 2 out of the 3 road games they have remaining.

What may happen, of course, is that they will raise their level of play as they become more accustomed to playing without Anderson. (Also, maybe Anderson makes a miracle recovery and returns much sooner than has been reported.) But if they remain the "mediocre offense, but still great defense" team that they've been of late, they're vulnerable to losing twice.

[bluedev_92]

Me neither. Losing Anderson hurts, but UVa is still a really good team. Expecting us to win out and UVa to drop 2 seems like a super longshot. We can dream though.

A super longshot? I don't think so. Virginia squeaked by Wake, beat Louisville by 5 @ home (Louisville outscored them by 6 in the second half - after J.A. got hurt). They will be away & w/o their best player the next time they meet. Syracuse away - a tough game. They've also had a few close ones (Wolfpack & VT) I don't think its far fetched for them to lose 2 games. It's not like they are the 89-91 Runnin' Rebels. I wouldn't sleep on FSU either - any given night... FSU lost by a few @UNC, beat Miami & gave us a hard time...

[flyingdutchdevil]

Based on the 3.5 games they've played without Anderson so far, I would downgrade them to merely "good." And good teams can easily lose 2 out of the 3 road games they have remaining.

What may happen, of course, is that they will raise their level of play as they become more accustomed to playing without Anderson. (Also, maybe Anderson makes a miracle recovery and returns much sooner than has been reported.) But if they remain the "mediocre offense, but still great defense" team that they've been of late, they're vulnerable to losing twice.

Trouble - I know we had this discussion pre-season (and bet on it), but isn't Duke a "mediocre defense, but still great offense" team? Our D is getting better, and we've shown to play really good D once in a while, but it's inconsistent and still porous in some areas.

I would call our defense "mediocre," but I hope it becomes "good" by tourney time.

[Troublemaker]

Trouble - I know we had this discussion pre-season (and bet on it), but isn't Duke a "mediocre defense, but still great offense" team? Our D is getting better, and we've shown to play really good D once in a while, but it's inconsistent and still porous in some areas.

I would call our defense "mediocre," but I hope it becomes "good" by tourney time.

Yep, tough to argue with your description, FDD. You're looking good on our bet, which I think was whether Duke would be top 30 in KenPom on D? I definitely still have a chance because it seems KenPom's numbers can move quite a bit even late in the season, especially if a team has a nice tournament run. I probably lose if Duke loses first weekend. But it might get interesting if Duke makes the Final Four.

[azzefkram]

Based on the 3.5 games they've played without Anderson so far, I would downgrade them to merely "good." And good teams can easily lose 2 out of the 3 road games they have remaining.

What may happen, of course, is that they will raise their level of play as they become more accustomed to playing without Anderson. (Also, maybe Anderson makes a miracle recovery and returns much sooner than has been reported.) But if they remain the "mediocre offense, but still great defense" team that they've been of late, they're vulnerable to losing twice.

A super longshot? I don't think so. Virginia squeaked by Wake, beat Louisville by 5 @ home (Louisville outscored them by 6 in the second half - after J.A. got hurt). They will be away & w/o their best player the next time they meet. Syracuse away - a tough game. They've also had a few close ones (Wolfpack & VT) I don't think its far fetched for them to lose 2 games. It's not like they are the 89-91 Runnin' Rebels. I wouldn't sleep on FSU either - any given night... FSU lost by a few @UNC, beat Miami & gave us a hard time...

You both are ignoring the fact that we have to win out for UVa's possible losses to matter. We are two games back with five left and no head to head remaining. I really like our chances in the remaining games but would not be overly surprised if we stubbed our toe. I am always a bit leery when I have to use "if" 2 or more times.

[Troublemaker]

You both are ignoring the fact that we have to win out for UVa's possible losses to matter. We are two games back with five left and no head to head remaining. I really like our chances in the remaining games but would not be overly surprised if we stubbed our toe. I am always a bit leery when I have to use "if" 2 or more times.

Oh I'm aware of what needs to happen. I've been thinking about it a bunch. (Like I said earlier to FDD, probably healthier to just concede.)

Anyway, this back-and-forth on Duke's chances to catch UVA has become probably the most boring thing to read on DBR because nothing's been thrown down. If someone wants to bet $1000 to my $100 that super-longshot Duke can't catch UVA in the standings (thus instantly making the thread not as boring anymore), then let's do it.

Otherwise, we should all just agree to disagree (without really disagreeing all that much) and stop boring everyone who's reading.

Oh, and we should probably take it to PM if somebody likes that offer, haha. (C'mon! It's a free $100 for you guys!)

[rasputin]

Sure, but this line of thinking has always been silly to me. Does our win last night count for less because it came in overtime, which is essentially a tiebreaker? We won the ACC regular season in 2010, IMO no need for any qualifiers about it being "outright."

Well, there are tiebreakers and there are tiebreakers. The first one for tournament seeding, head-to-head, is the most logical, since it seems to help identify which wins are "better" than others. The further down the list you go, the more arbitrary--from things like your record against the first-place team, second-place team, and so on, to the ultimate arbitrary coin flip. Even head-to-head has some arbitrariness to it, if you have only played the team once, and you lost to them in their building but didn't have a chance at a rematch. (Yes, I realize that we overcame that obstacle to hold the tiebreak advantages over Louisville and Virginia.)

Anyway, these tiebreakers are on a different plane from settling the matter on the court immediately at the end of a game tied in regulation.

[azzefkram]

Oh I'm aware of what needs to happen. I've been thinking about it a bunch. (Like I said earlier to FDD, probably healthier to just concede.)

Anyway, this back-and-forth on Duke's chances to catch UVA has become probably the most boring thing to read on DBR because nothing's been thrown down. If someone wants to bet $1000 to my $100 that super-longshot Duke can't catch UVA in the standings (thus instantly making the thread not as boring anymore), then let's do it.

Otherwise, we should all just agree to disagree (without really disagreeing all that much) and stop boring everyone who's reading.

Oh, and we should probably take it to PM if somebody likes that offer, haha. (C'mon! It's a free $100 for you guys!)

You are a troublemaker, aren't you? As happy as it would make me to lose that bet, my immensely better half would have me sleeping in the basement for a month so I must decline your kind offer.