#5 In Both Polls

[airowe]

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

[roywhite]

On the fairly near horizon....a ranked opponent on the road...@Ga Tech this Saturday 1/9.

Tech is ranked #17 and #20 (interestingly, the team we lost to on the road, Wisconsin, is ranked #20 and #17) with some NBA talent in the frontcourt. Should be a good test.

[hurleyfor3]

So we're the highest unundefeated team.

I think everyone in the 4-8 range (Purdue, us, Cuse, Nova, WV) is of equal ability, then you step down starting with unc.

[NYDukie]

So we're the highest unundefeated team.

I think everyone in the 4-8 range (Purdue, us, Cuse, Nova, WV) is of equal ability, then you step down starting with unc.

It will be interesting because it seems, according to most pundits, and I have to agree at the moment, that KU, UK and Texas have separated themselves from the rest of the pack right now. The jury is still out on Purdue as whether they are part of the "considered" elite like the aforementioned three teams or if they are in the next tier with Duke, WVU, Nova, etc. In either case, every year there seems to be 2-4 teams that are above the rest during the season and rolling into the tourney. Of those teams, I would hazard a guess that half make the Final 4 in general terms with variations year to year. I'm sure someone would know the a more accurate assesment or actually do the legwork to get a better idea of the last 15 years or so.

[FerryFor50]

I am still annoyed at how Carolina and Mich St (with 3 losses) are ranked ahead of Georgetown (with 1 loss).

[mr. synellinden]

It will be interesting because it seems, according to most pundits, and I have to agree at the moment, that KU, UK and Texas have separated themselves from the rest of the pack right now. The jury is still out on Purdue as whether they are part of the "considered" elite like the aforementioned three teams or if they are in the next tier with Duke, WVU, Nova, etc. In either case, every year there seems to be 2-4 teams that are above the rest during the season and rolling into the tourney. Of those teams, I would hazard a guess that half make the Final 4 in general terms with variations year to year. I'm sure someone would know the a more accurate assesment or actually do the legwork to get a better idea of the last 15 years or so.

KenPom (http://kenpom.com/rate.php) would disagree - Duke is ranked #2, and is #1 overall in offensive efficiency rating.

Kansas - 1
Duke - 2
Texas - 3
Kentucky - 12
UNC - 37

[NYDukie]

KenPom (http://kenpom.com/rate.php) would disagree - Duke is ranked #2, and is #1 overall in offensive efficiency rating.

Kansas - 1
Duke - 2
Texas - 3
Kentucky - 12
UNC - 37

I won't dispute using KenPom as a tool to determine the participant's in the Final 4 as just looking over the ratings since 2004, I would say about 21-22 of the 24 participants since 2004 were in KenPom's top 10 and those outside were barely outside it and I think all within the top 16 or so. In fact, it's a great source of info to help predict Final 4 participant's (mental note for the tourney pool later on...LOL) I do think by year's end all of the above said teams, except UNC (UNC will prob be in 15-20 range I'm guessing), will be top 10 at mininum and I do think UK will rise up.

Putting aside the KenPom ratings and going by what I have saw and what the so-called "experts" have seen (the proverbial "eye-ball" test I say in jest) and said, I think it is reasonable to say KU, UK and UT are the 3 who have separated themselves at the moment. Can that change, of course it can and IMO probably UT is the one who may fall out of favor with Purdue, Duke, WVU and SU possibly lurking to join KU and UK. However, I don't think anyone will make a big enough surge to join KU and UK though as I see each losing no more than 2, maybe 3 games. KU I think is that good and UK is very good but will have the assistance of the SEC being not as tough at the Big 12, ACC or some of the other conferneces.

At the end of the day, I think our Dukies will float between #3 and #8 most of the year.

[juise]

I am still annoyed at how Carolina and Mich St (with 3 losses) are ranked ahead of Georgetown (with 1 loss).

I'm sure most of us would agree that ranking don't really matter in the grand scheme of things... they are just a meter of national perception. I too would like the national perception to be that UNC is not a top 10 team. Having said that, I think it's actually kind of refreshing that voters are actually paying attention to details (quality of win/loss) and not just blindly sliding teams up and down based on wins and losses.

I think that Georgetown could be ranked above UNC and Michigan State, but let's compare notable wins/losses. I would say that Georgetown has more quality wins, but none were dominating performances. Only Goergetown has lost to a team that was never ranked (Florida is close to being ranked if they haven't been already) and only Goergetown has lost at home. An argument could be made either way, I think.

(I'm not trying to be argumentative... just thought it would be an interesting comparison.)


Georgetown
Temple - won by 1 at home
Butler - won by 7 neutral
Washington - won by 8 neutral
Old Dominion - lost by 4 at home

Michigan State
Gonzaga - won by 4 at home
Florida - lost by 3 nuetral
UNC - lost by 7 on the road
Texas - lost by 7 on the road
Utah - won by 19 at home

UNC
Ohio State - won by 4 neutral
Syracuse - lost by 16 neutral
Michigan State - won by 7 at home
Kentucky - lost by 2 on the road
Texas - lost by 13 neutral (road?)

[mickeysgotagun]

It will be interesting because it seems, according to most pundits, and I have to agree at the moment, that KU, UK and Texas have separated themselves from the rest of the pack right now. The jury is still out on Purdue as whether they are part of the "considered" elite like the aforementioned three teams or if they are in the next tier with Duke, WVU, Nova, etc. In either case, every year there seems to be 2-4 teams that are above the rest during the season and rolling into the tourney. Of those teams, I would hazard a guess that half make the Final 4 in general terms with variations year to year. I'm sure someone would know the a more accurate assesment or actually do the legwork to get a better idea of the last 15 years or so.

I felt that way with Purdue as well. However though, did you see the WVU game? They steamrolled them, and easily looked better than Kentucky and perhaps even Texas.

[NYDukie]

I felt that way with Purdue as well. However though, did you see the WVU game? They steamrolled them, and easily looked better than Kentucky and perhaps even Texas.

I didn't see the WVU game and based on record and that game they are a legitimate #4 team in waiting to move up. I will think that Purdue's "hard nose" look along with not being a sexy team, offensive juggernaut or the like will be held against them and hold them back from national prominence most of the year. To me, they are Wisconsin on steriods with better overall talent for lack of better description. Again, I plead ignorance because I have yet to really watch them aside from a 5 minuteslook in once when they were on and from highlights on ESPN. In the end, I think their problem will ultimately be not being able to put the ball in the basket on a consistent basis and could be exposed a bit against a top team that can score and hold its own on the boards.

I do think a Purdue-UK matchup would be very interesting b/c I don't think Purdue would be punked by them and would actually take it to UK physically.

[IBleedBlue]

The difference between Purdue and UK, KU & Texas is that Purdue plays suffocating defense compared to UK, KU & Texas. I am not quoting any stats here but just from watching their respective games, the top 3 teams are definitely vulnerable defensively while Purdue's defense is solid.

[Kedsy]

I won't dispute using KenPom as a tool to determine the participant's in the Final 4 as just looking over the ratings since 2004, I would say about 21-22 of the 24 participants since 2004 were in KenPom's top 10 and those outside were barely outside it and I think all within the top 16 or so. In fact, it's a great source of info to help predict Final 4 participant's (mental note for the tourney pool later on...LOL)

Unfortunately, the historical KenPom ratings include the teams' performances in the NCAAT, so it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. KenPom's "record" in predicting Final Four participants is not nearly so good if you use the ratings as they were before the NCAAT was played.

Last year, for example, Pomeroy's historical numbers show Villanova at #14 and Michigan State as #8, but going into the tournament they were actually #19 and #13. Still pretty good, but I don't think it's going to win your pool for you.

[uh_no]

Unfortunately, the historical KenPom ratings include the teams' performances in the NCAAT, so it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. KenPom's "record" in predicting Final Four participants is not nearly so good if you use the ratings as they were before the NCAAT was played.

Last year, for example, Pomeroy's historical numbers show Villanova at #14 and Michigan State as #8, but going into the tournament they were actually #19 and #13. Still pretty good, but I don't think it's going to win your pool for you.

Yup.

so much of it depends on matchups and seedings

for instance does anyone think if oklahoma had been in our bracket they wouldn't have beat villanova? just saying

or if unc was the 1 seed in our bracket and oklahoma was the 1 seed in their bracket....its just too difficult to accurately determine final four teams before brackets come out

[NYDukie]

Unfortunately, the historical KenPom ratings include the teams' performances in the NCAAT, so it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. KenPom's "record" in predicting Final Four participants is not nearly so good if you use the ratings as they were before the NCAAT was played.

Last year, for example, Pomeroy's historical numbers show Villanova at #14 and Michigan State as #8, but going into the tournament they were actually #19 and #13. Still pretty good, but I don't think it's going to win your pool for you.

That clears that up. With that said, let's throw the KenPom ratings out the door then...just kidding. Still a helpful tool, just not as helpful as I initially thought....thanks for info!!!

[mapei]

I think that Georgetown could be ranked above UNC and Michigan State, but let's compare notable wins/losses. I would say that Georgetown has more quality wins, but none were dominating performances. Only Goergetown has lost to a team that was never ranked (Florida is close to being ranked if they haven't been already) and only Goergetown has lost at home. An argument could be made either way, I think.

Georgetown
Temple - won by 1 at home
Butler - won by 7 neutral
Washington - won by 8 neutral
Old Dominion - lost by 4 at home

Michigan State
Gonzaga - won by 4 at home
Florida - lost by 3 nuetral
UNC - lost by 7 on the road
Texas - lost by 7 on the road
Utah - won by 19 at home

UNC
Ohio State - won by 4 neutral
Syracuse - lost by 16 neutral
Michigan State - won by 7 at home
Kentucky - lost by 2 on the road
Texas - lost by 13 neutral (road?)

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your basic point, but FWIW the wins over Butler & Washington were more dominating than the scores. Those games weren't in doubt and were led by wider margins before garbage time. OTOH, the Temple win was a genuine squeaker that GU was very lucky to win, and the ODU loss was embarrassingly awful. I think the Hoyas' ranking is about right for now and will probably drop some once teams start beating each other up in the Big East - at Marquette Wednesday night will be tough, for example, and UConn Saturday will be even tougher.