PDA

View Full Version : South/Atlanta region discussion (Kentucky #1)



Pages : [1] 2

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 06:04 PM
Discuss the South region here. Kentucky is the 1 seed.

pfrduke
03-11-2012, 06:07 PM
Discuss the South region here. Kentucky is the 1 seed.

I'll add a poll as soon as the region is fully announced.

pfrduke
03-11-2012, 06:11 PM
Discuss and vote.

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 06:11 PM
Ha ha! Ky and uconn can't both make the sweet 16!

Acymetric
03-11-2012, 06:13 PM
Wow set up for a potential matchup with Brey in the 2nd round.

OldPhiKap
03-11-2012, 06:13 PM
Ha ha! Ky and uconn can't both make the sweet 16!

Neither can make the FF since we're there!

uh_no
03-11-2012, 06:14 PM
Neither can make the FF since we're there!

well going ND then Baylor......

pretty sure we're the #8 overall seed with baylor and ND in there

OldPhiKap
03-11-2012, 06:15 PM
well going ND then Baylor......

pretty sure we're the #8 overall seed with baylor and ND in there

Win the opener.

Beat Brey.

Beat Vegas.

Beat KY

Beat Michigan State.

Beat Carolina.



Retire.

nmduke2001
03-11-2012, 06:16 PM
pretty sure we're the #8 overall seed with baylor and ND in there

We'd have to be since Kentucky was number 1 overall, right?

gotoguy
03-11-2012, 06:16 PM
Go Duke!

uh_no
03-11-2012, 06:16 PM
We'd have to be since Kentucky was number 1 overall, right?

they can fudge it for geographic reasons....plus with two ACC, and Big 10 teams, they can't match them together as 1/2 combos...so it gets fudged....but if we were a higher #2 seed, baylor wouldn't be in our region

Newton_14
03-11-2012, 06:17 PM
Tough draw for our guys. Man that regional is loaded.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 06:18 PM
Tough draw for our guys. Man that regional is loaded.

CJ Mccollum up at lehigh is no joke either.....he's a really good player and could give our guards fits

OldPhiKap
03-11-2012, 06:19 PM
Tough draw for our guys. Man that regional is loaded.

We may not have the most athletic squad in that draw, but we have the best tournament coach.

Bring it on.

SharkD
03-11-2012, 06:20 PM
I'm surprised they didn't wedge Harvard in there, too, to go along with Notre Dame, UNLV, UCONN and Kentucky.

nmduke2001
03-11-2012, 06:21 PM
Duke v. Kentucky - 20 years later...

Duke31122
03-11-2012, 06:25 PM
Duke has legit shot to win the title. We have all the pieces to the puzzle, it is just the matter of all of them coming together.

coldriver10
03-11-2012, 06:27 PM
Any idea when we'll find out what time we're playing on Friday?

loran16
03-11-2012, 06:44 PM
Let's face it, any S16 team would be a tough matchup for Duke. But Duke actually has an easy first two rounds compared to some other teams - certainly easier than MSU.

Notre Dame (#41 Pomeroy) or #51 Pomeroy Ranked Xavier in the 2nd round? Even Kentucky's ISU-UConn matchup is tougher!

After that, either UNLV-Baylor is a toss up, and UK is the best in the country, but really, this bracket gives us no excuse for not getting to the S16.

Duke31122
03-11-2012, 06:48 PM
Let's face it, any S16 team would be a tough matchup for Duke. But Duke actually has an easy first two rounds compared to some other teams - certainly easier than MSU.

Notre Dame (#41 Pomeroy) or #51 Pomeroy Ranked Xavier in the 2nd round? Even Kentucky's ISU-UConn matchup is tougher!

After that, either UNLV-Baylor is a toss up, and UK is the best in the country, but really, this bracket gives us no excuse for not getting to the S16.

I agree completely. As last year showed it is all about getting hot at the right time. At this point I think we are due.

Chris Randolph
03-11-2012, 06:49 PM
I'm kind of surprised Duke is the overall #8 seed but it does make geographic sense as stated earlier...

My thoughts on the region: I don't look at efficiency/rpi/sos when it comes to tourney. It is all about the matchup and I don't like our matchups.... Assuming Duke can beat Lehigh (don't feel as confident as I did in previous years about the first game, could see an '08 kind of game, you never know), I don't feel too good about it for Duke IF they have to play Xavier/Baylor/UNLV. All of those teams have multiple guys who can break you down off the dribble, which has shown to give Duke quite a bit of trouble.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 06:51 PM
I'm kind of surprised Duke is the overall #8 seed but it does make geographic sense as stated earlier...

My thoughts on the region: I don't look at efficiency/rpi/sos when it comes to tourney. It is all about the matchup and I don't like our matchups.... Assuming Duke can beat Lehigh (don't feel as confident as I did in previous years about the first game, could see an '08 kind of game, you never know), I don't feel too good about it for Duke IF they have to play Xavier/Baylor/UNLV. All of those teams have multiple guys who can break you down off the dribble, which has shown to give Duke quite a bit of trouble.

We'll have to see when the S curve is released in a few minutes, but they said OSU lost out on a 1 seed because of the title game there, I'd have to imagine KU and likely Missouri were in front of us, so I think an 8 overall makes sense, but we'll see.

turnandburn55
03-11-2012, 06:53 PM
We'll have to see when the S curve is released in a few minutes, but they said OSU lost out on a 1 seed because of the title game there, I'd have to imagine KU and likely Missouri were in front of us, so I think an 8 overall makes sense, but we'll see.

Just said on CBS that we were #6, Mizzou was #8. How the F were we not sent to the East with Syracuse then??

Newton_14
03-11-2012, 06:54 PM
We'll have to see when the S curve is released in a few minutes, but they said OSU lost out on a 1 seed because of the title game there, I'd have to imagine KU and likely Missouri were in front of us, so I think an 8 overall makes sense, but we'll see.

They just said that Duke is the Number 6 overall seed, with OSU 7, and Missouri 8. Missouri's strength of non-conference schedule did them in.

mgtr
03-11-2012, 06:55 PM
I think we are in pretty good shape for the first weekend. Just have to see who else survives after that. I am happy we are not in Syracuse region.

1 24 90
03-11-2012, 06:55 PM
Just said on CBS that we were #6, Mizzou was #8. How the F were we not sent to the East with Syracuse then??

Because Atlanta is our more "natural" region. Isn't there a significant mileage diff between Boston & Atlanta? I don't like it either.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 06:55 PM
Just said on CBS that we were #6, Mizzou was #8. How the F were we not sent to the East with Syracuse then??

geography.


our most preferred site is atlanta, and it was available.

thats how they seed the 1 and 2 teams

NashvilleDevil
03-11-2012, 06:56 PM
Just said on CBS that we were #6, Mizzou was #8. How the F were we not sent to the East with Syracuse then??

Because 20 years ago Christian Laettner hit the greatest shot in tournament history against Kentucky.

Greg_Newton
03-11-2012, 06:58 PM
We may have a game on our hands next Friday. Lehigh's is rated roughly equivalent to Clemson/VT, and lost away games to St. John's and MSU earlier this season by a combined 14 points. Obviously we should win, but it might not be a cakewalk.

turnandburn55
03-11-2012, 06:58 PM
Because Atlanta is our more "natural" region. Isn't there a significant mileage diff between Boston & Atlanta? I don't like it either.

I guess... but then loading the South up with Baylor and Indiana as well? Not exactly their "natural" regions.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 06:59 PM
I guess... but then loading the South up with Baylor and Indiana as well? Not exactly their "natural" regions.

After the 1 and 2 seeds they use 3 and 4 to balance the top 4 across the regions, and then the rest is by s-curve/wherever they fit

we'll have to wait and see where Baylor is in the s curve to see if we really got screwed

we had the 1 and 6 overall seeds, which means that the sum of the 3 and 4 seeds in our bracket should be 27 (ie 11 and 16 overall) to make the total as close to 34 as possible.

we'll see

KandG
03-11-2012, 06:59 PM
I'm more worried about the Lehigh game than the game after, assuming we make it to that point. Lehigh is very underrated. This Duke team is ripe to be taken out early, especially if Ryan is still out.

DukeGirl4ever
03-11-2012, 07:00 PM
Because 20 years ago Christian Laettner hit the greatest shot in tournament history against Kentucky.
:D
This is exactly right.

I thought we were a lock for the East.

I also saw a graphic earlier that said we were the 5 seed, but then again, I saw a lot of goofs on the graphics they displayed.
They had K St.'s record listed as 32-2.

Hmmm....

SharkD
03-11-2012, 07:01 PM
Because 20 years ago Christian Laettner hit the greatest shot in tournament history against Kentucky.

And, as UPS points out in their new commercial, it was fed by the greatest inbounds pass in tournament history. :cool:

davekay1971
03-11-2012, 07:02 PM
Bingo. As much as the NCAA loves geographical selection and RPI, they love potential stories even more. It would be a hype dream to have Duke and KY rematch as 1/2 with a trip to the Final Four on the line, 20 years after The Shot to win The Game, etc.

I like our half of the bracket...except for Baylor. They are a tough, athletic team. They're a legit 3 seed, so it's not like we got hosed, they're just a tough team. I'll worry about KY if we make it to the Elite Eight and they're still standing, too.

Greg_Newton
03-11-2012, 07:03 PM
"Hardcore Brackets" on TruTV right now, aka the revealing of what went down, featuring Charles Barkley being hilarious and knowing nothing about college basketball. I'll be interested to see how UK/Duke/Baylor happened.

NashvilleDevil
03-11-2012, 07:03 PM
I'm more worried about the Lehigh game than the game after, assuming we make it to that point. Lehigh is very underrated. This Duke team is ripe to be taken out early, especially if Ryan is still out.

Duke will win by close to 20.

CLW
03-11-2012, 07:03 PM
Baylor could easily go down in Round 1 that kid from SD St. can really play.

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 07:04 PM
And, as UPS points out in their new commercial, it was fed by the greatest inbounds pass in tournament history. :cool:

Wait, there's another commercial about The Shot? That's like the fourth one now.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:05 PM
Bingo. As much as the NCAA loves geographical selection and RPI, they love potential stories even more. It would be a hype dream to have Duke and KY rematch as 1/2 with a trip to the Final Four on the line, 20 years after The Shot to win The Game, etc.

I like our half of the bracket...except for Baylor. They are a tough, athletic team. They're a legit 3 seed, so it's not like we got hosed, they're just a tough team. I'll worry about KY if we make it to the Elite Eight and they're still standing, too.

I still hate how the 1/2 seeds go down. The fact that we are the #6 overall seed and somehow they justify that by letting UK get the easiest 4 seed and that makes our bracket weighted correctly even though you probably have the #2 2 seed and #1 3 seed. Someone will have to update the S-curve but I would assume they are #9 or else I'd much wather face Marquette.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:07 PM
I still hate how the 1/2 seeds go down. The fact that we are the #6 overall seed and somehow they justify that by letting UK get the easiest 4 seed and that makes our bracket weighted correctly even though you probably have the #2 2 seed and #1 3 seed. Someone will have to update the S-curve but I would assume they are #9 or else I'd much wather face Marquette.

we don't kow whether baylor is the #1 3 seed. If the committee thought they were #11 or 13 overall, it would make the brackets even.

It would mean we theoretically have an easier road to the elite 8 and a harder road to the final 4.

SCMatt33
03-11-2012, 07:08 PM
Here's the thing with the region. They send teams to the preferred region if it's available. Apparently, the member schools, AD's, and Coaches all like it that way. Duke certainly can't complain about travel or turnaround (they get to go Sunday-Friday instead of Sunday-Thursday, which the East wouldn't give us).

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:09 PM
Here's the thing with the region. They send teams to the preferred region if it's available. Apparently, the member schools, AD's, and Coaches all like it that way. Duke certainly can't complain about travel or turnaround (they get to go Sunday-Friday instead of Sunday-Thursday, which the East wouldn't give us).

We'll also get plenty of fans down in atlanta, not as many as UK, but perhaps more than we'd get in boston.

mapei
03-11-2012, 07:09 PM
Can anybody with DirecTV tell me where to find Tru?

Greg_Newton
03-11-2012, 07:10 PM
UK: #1 overall
Duke: #6 overall
Baylor: #9 overall

Uhhhh?

ETA: TruTV ch. 246

Bluedog
03-11-2012, 07:10 PM
Baylor was the #1 three seed...what?!

jamos14
03-11-2012, 07:10 PM
Channel 246

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:11 PM
we don't kow whether baylor is the #1 3 seed. If the committee thought they were #11 or 13 overall, it would make the brackets even.

It would mean we theoretically have an easier road to the elite 8 and a harder road to the final 4.

I know I was waiting for someone watching the S-curve to update where Baylor fell on the S-curve but I find it hard to believe they aren't #9. FSU didn't jump that high with a tourney win, and I'd have them higher than Gtown or Marquette. Hopefully, they get caught looking ahead b/c I see no way Duke beats Baylor with their size and athleticism. Although I like our chances to get to Atlanta, missed out on both Memphis and Uconn as well as Florida.

mapei
03-11-2012, 07:12 PM
Thanks, guys.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:12 PM
Baylor was the #1 three seed...what?!

yeah we got hosed....

our sum is 32....it should be 34....

1 24 90
03-11-2012, 07:12 PM
So Duke, as the 2nd best #2 seed, gets the best #1, the best #3 and the best #7 according to their seeds list they are going over right now. Oh well, at least they gift wrapped us a title 2 years ago.

Kfanarmy
03-11-2012, 07:13 PM
OK, I can see someone with a moniker of "KYtotheCore" picking UK, (making a big assumption that KY there is for Kentucky and the term doesn't indicate a backbone made of personal lubricant), but am really hoping no Duke fan is picking them!!!!

Greg_Newton
03-11-2012, 07:13 PM
LOL... Duke, the #2 two seed, has

The #1 7-seed, then
The #1 3-seed, then
The #1 1-seed.

Makes sense.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:13 PM
UK: #1 overall
Duke: #6 overall
Baylor: #9 overall

Uhhhh?

ETA: TruTV ch. 246

And Indiana was the worst 4 seed I'm sure. So in reality, we should have had either Gtown or Marquette but both KU and Mizzou probably screwed that up.

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 07:17 PM
Well, according to Pomeroy, we're the weakest 2. By far.

Also, with all the talk about the ncaa "grooving" the matchups, no one has mentioned ky/uconn in the round of 32. They absolutely set that one up. Reminds me of when they threw Georgetown at unlv in 1991.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:21 PM
Well, according to Pomeroy, we're the weakest 2. By far.

Also, with all the talk about the ncaa "grooving" the matchups, no one has mentioned ky/uconn in the round of 32. They absolutely set that one up. Reminds me of when they threw Georgetown at unlv in 1991.

They just said again that they don't have time to worry about things like that. They're in such a rush to put the thing together that they don't think "oh UK/Uconn/VCU in the same bracket" or "UK/Duke 20 years later"

people love to come up with conspiracy theories...but they're just not there.....we'd be saying the same thing if Uconn was playing Syracuse, or Uconn was playing Duke.....they had to play SOME big name program, and it happened to be UK when they finished the bracket.

With 63 games and billions of permutations....there's going to be "matchups that they ABSOLUTELY set up" regardless of how you put the bracket together

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:25 PM
Once again the Pac12 screws everything up. It still boggles my mind that teams get better draws by being the worst 1 or worst 2 b/c of geography. Give me MSU and Marquette over Ky and Baylor anyday. I know upsets happen and chalk probably won't happen but from a principle standpoint, I'd much rather face the worst 1 and mediocre 3 as the 2nd best 2 seed and be out West. Heck, we'll have all of Atlanta rooting against us wearing the wrong shade of Royal Blue. I guess its nitpicking but the difference between 9 and 10 on the S-curve this year is fairly big and the geography preference just isn't working.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:27 PM
Once again the Pac12 screws everything up. It still boggles my mind that teams get better draws by being the worst 1 or worst 2 b/c of geography. Give me MSU and Marquette over Ky and Baylor anyday. I know upsets happen and chalk probably won't happen but from a principle standpoint, I'd much rather face the worst 1 and mediocre 3 as the 2nd best 2 seed and be out West. Heck, we'll have all of Atlanta rooting against us wearing the wrong shade of Royal Blue. I guess its nitpicking but the difference between 9 and 10 on the S-curve this year is fairly big and the geography preference just isn't working.

Its been said that the AD's and schools prefer geography over seeding....That's just hearsay though....

The committee can't win here at DBR though...either we go out west and people complain, or we stay in the east and have a harder bracket and people complain.

Bluedog
03-11-2012, 07:28 PM
Overall, while Baylor and Kentucky seem like really tough #1 and #3 seeds, respectively, I think this bracket is okay for us. If we were in the East with 'Cuse, we'd have a potential matchup with WVU in the second round which seems tougher to me than Notre Dame (of course, it's possible those won't materialize). Our second round could be much worse (or the new "third round", I guess.) Baylor could easily get upset by UNLV as well. And if we get to the Elite 8, Coach K is like 8-1 in those situations so I like our chances and at that point, everything would be considered gravy. It's fun and easy to complain. The only second round matchup I'd prefer to ours is Kansas with Purdue/St. Mary's. Florida is no cupcake for Mizzou and WVU could be a tough out for OSU. So, the late games might be more difficult if we get there, but by then, the brackets may be something we'd never expect as upsets happen.

JNort
03-11-2012, 07:28 PM
Well I would like to apologize everyone but I picked.... Kentucky :(

I really think they make it to the championship again this year. Not sure whether I think they will win or not yet.

SCMatt33
03-11-2012, 07:29 PM
yeah we got hosed....

our sum is 32....it should be 34....

It could actually be worse. The rules say that the separation between the best and the worst region must be 5 or less. You can actually have a region with 31. That's the problem with no good teams out west. You end up with hard regions in the East. Baylor couldn't go to the Midwest or the West because KU and Mizzou were there and Atlanta's closer to Waco than Boston, and the overall balance wasn't violated so there they are. It happens, If they had released seeds from other years, Duke was probably in one of the easier regions. The really unfortunate part is that not only does Duke have the hardest region, they have terrible matchups too. There aren't many smaller teams in this region, and that's who Duke can beat easiest.

The other thing I'm wondering is how the crowd in Albuquerque will play out. It's Waco is a little farther than Vegas, but neither is that close. I wonder if New Mexico fans will root for or against their conference-mate.

1 24 90
03-11-2012, 07:29 PM
Overall, while Baylor and Kentucky seem like really tough #1 and #3 seeds, respectively, I think this bracket is okay for us. If we were in the East with 'Cuse, we'd have a potential matchup with WVU in the second round which seems tougher to me than Notre Dame (of course, it's possible those won't materialize). Our second round could be much worse (or the new "third round", I guess.) Baylor could easily get upset by UNLV as well. And if we get to the Elite 8, Coach K is like 8-1 in those situations so I like our chances and at that point, everything would be considered gravy. It's fun and easy to complain. The only second round matchup I'd prefer to ours is Kansas with Purdue/St. Mary's. Florida is no cupcake for Mizzou and WVU could be a tough out for OSU. So, the late games might be more difficult if we get there, but by then, the brackets may be something we'd never expect as upsets happen.

Cmon bluedog, I know you know that Coach K is 11-1 in regional finals! :)

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 07:30 PM
They just said again that they don't have time to worry about things like that. They're in such a rush to put the thing together that they don't think "oh UK/Uconn/VCU in the same bracket" or "UK/Duke 20 years later"

people love to come up with conspiracy theories...but they're just not there.....we'd be saying the same thing if Uconn was playing Syracuse, or Uconn was playing Duke.....they had to play SOME big name program, and it happened to be UK when they finished the bracket.

With 63 games and billions of permutations....there's going to be "matchups that they ABSOLUTELY set up" regardless of how you put the bracket together

I realize that, but they could have slotted Uconn into any of the 8/9 or 7/10 games other than Syracuse's. And they chose Ky's fork. And it's not just that Uconn fits the "high-profile program with lots of talent that has gone through rough patches during the year" mold. They played Ky in the Final Four LAST YEAR. I had always heard the committee tries to avoid matchups from the previous year's tourney in the first few rounds, although this is more of a "guideline" than a "rule".

DU82
03-11-2012, 07:31 PM
What's the official source for game times and an ETA on that decision? I'm guessing we'll play in the afternoon, because UNC's opponent will play Wednesday night, and the chair of the committee stated that they're trying to get them a little extra time (unlike Clemson last year.)

Bluedog
03-11-2012, 07:32 PM
Cmon bluedog, I know you know that Coach K is 11-1 in regional finals! :)

You're right, I do know how many Final Fours he's been to. Don't know what I was thinking! I clearly wasn't...

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:32 PM
Overall, while Baylor and Kentucky seem like really tough #1 and #3 seeds, respectively, I think this bracket is okay for us. If we were in the East with 'Cuse, we'd have a potential matchup with WVU in the second round which seems tougher to me than Notre Dame (of course, it's possible those won't materialize). Our second round could be much worse (or the new "third round", I guess.) Baylor could easily get upset by UNLV as well. And if we get to the Elite 8, Coach K is like 8-1 in those situations so I like our chances and at that point, everything would be considered gravy. It's fun and easy to complain. The only second round matchup I'd prefer to ours is Kansas with Purdue/St. Mary's. Florida is no cupcake for Mizzou and WVU could be a tough out for OSU. So, the late games might be more difficult if we get there, but by then, the brackets may be something we'd never expect as upsets happen.

I agree that we lucked out with third round avoiding Memphis, Uconn, and Florida. The rest of the 7-10's seem to be a dime a dozen and see minimal difference between WVU or ND. Xavier has been underachieving and are probably high to be a 10 seed but they have a guard who could burn us. Luckily, I see TT being able to shut down Tu if it gets that way.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:33 PM
I realize that, but they could have slotted Uconn into any of the 8/9 or 7/10 games other than Syracuse's. And they chose Ky's fork. And it's not just that Uconn fits the "high-profile program with lots of talent that has gone through rough patches during the year" mold. They played Ky in the Final Four LAST YEAR. I had always heard the committee tries to avoid matchups from the previous year's tourney in the first few rounds, although this is more of a "guideline" than a "rule".

I mean everything you read or hear would lead you to believe the committee doesn't think about such things and doesn't have the time to.

The only people who think the committee does such things is the fans.

I'm not sure there is any reason to believe otherwise. As I said, there were three places they could have slotted them. They happened to put them with UK. If it wasn't UK and Uconn, it would be two other teams.....people will always find a story.

ncexnyc
03-11-2012, 07:34 PM
Why all the crying about the draw? I seem to recall hearing about parity in college basketball, so I don't believe there is that big a difference between who is number x and who is number y. The games are won on the court and it will come down to heart, desire, and execution.

Oh yeah, all this whining about Baylor, isn't that the same Baylor team which was light years beyond us athletically just 2 years ago?

loran16
03-11-2012, 07:36 PM
The committee seeds based upon S-Curve. But there's no reason their assessments are better than say Pomeroy's system.

Duke's bracket isn't that bad compared to the West by Pomeroy. But the committee might think otherwise, perhaps because the better teams in the West aren't as big names. That's an obvious bias of the committee, but you're accepting it as legitimate.

We were going to have problems with any top 16 team. We got a good 2nd round game. Why are you complaining?

OldSchool
03-11-2012, 07:38 PM
Ryan's foot is my biggest concern.

We need him to be fluid and feeling comfortable shooting by the time we see Notre Dame or Xavier. His ability to pull a big away from the basket is a key to our high pick-and-roll game and opportunities for offensive rebounding.

If Ryan is healthy and feeling good, I like our chances. If Miles and Mason can avoid the senseless fouls and our guards shoot reasonably well, we can get through this bracket.

DukieTiger
03-11-2012, 07:41 PM
I'm very tempted to look at the "big picture" of the bracket and all the names in the bracket, but here is a Pomeroy-centric breakdown of how our match ups line up with the other 2 seeds.

First round: We absolutely drew the toughest 15 seed. Lehigh is ranked 83rd in KenPom, while Detroit (KU's draw) is 115, Loyola (OSU) is 128, and Norfolk (Mizzou- remember, they were the lowest 2 seed) is 213- lower than multiple 16 seeds, btw. Hopefully it won't matter, but we definitely got a less favorable draw than "8th overall" Mizzou, which is weird because the 15th seed is like the one thing that the committee can totally control for the 2 seeds according to the S-curve.

Second round matchup: We would face either Notre Dame or Xavier (51 or 41.) KU draws either 42 or 24, OSU draws either 32 or 43, Mizzou draws either 19 or 26. The only team that really has a 2nd round matchup that stands above the others- again, according to KenPom- would be Mizzou. I wouldn't want Florida as our 7 seed, personally.

Sweet Sixteen matchup: Obviously, a lot of variables at this point, but I'll give it my shot. Duke would either face Baylor (14), UNLV (33), South Dakota St (55) or Colorado (76).

Kansas potentially would get Georgetown (12), Belmont (22), SD State (52), or NC State (44). I think we got the tougher draw of the 3 and 6 seed, and the lower seeds in Kansas' side are more likely to pull the upset. So that actually works to KU's advantage.

OSU would draw Gonzaga (32), WVU (43), St. Bonaventure (59), or FSU (23). I think they got a favorable draw in the regional semis, all around.

Mizzou would play Marquette (18), BYU/Iona (50/56), Murray St. (45) or Colorado St. (75). I also think that Mizzou got a favorable draw in their half of their region.

So interestingly, according to KenPom and my own humble opinion it looks like the lower 2-seeds, OSU and Mizzou, got tougher draws in the first 2 rounds, but easier draws for potential Sweet 16 matchups, than did KU and Duke. I would also extend that to the Regional Finals as well, because I think UNC/UK are the two best teams in the field, and they got stuck with the top two, 2-seeds. Interesting. I don't think our region is as tough as it seems (other than UK) but I definitely think we got the toughest 3 seed. But by the time you get to the Sweet 16, you have to beat a pretty darn good team to advance. I'm glad we don't play Florida, UConn, or Memphis in the 2nd round though.

Delaware
03-11-2012, 07:41 PM
Lehigh.... high scoring team (28th in the country at 76.2 per game).
We will need to score, something we have not done the past few weeks.

If we get by them, I am certainly hoping for ND, a slower and less offensive minded team... the Xavier guards will go 100 miles and hour and see this is as their NCAA championship game.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:43 PM
Why all the crying about the draw? I seem to recall hearing about parity in college basketball, so I don't believe there is that big a difference between who is number x and who is number y. The games are won on the court and it will come down to heart, desire, and execution.

Oh yeah, all this whining about Baylor, isn't that the same Baylor team which was light years beyond us athletically just 2 years ago?

Yes, and two years ago our defense was light years beyond this year. We sagged off prevented penetration. And oh yeah, we had a beast in the middle who rebounded everything. Have fun getting this team to rebound versus a team with Jones at 6'11, Miller at 6'9 and Acy at 6'7. Not to mention, we have no SF to cover one with size. And we probably won't be able to keep Pierre Jackson out of the lane. Hopefully, someone else takes care of them but I'll certainly eat my crow if Duke wins but its a tough matchup and I'd much rather see Marquette who have a lot less size and K seemed to bottle up Crowder and DJ Odom last year.

Greg_Newton
03-11-2012, 07:44 PM
Well, according to Pomeroy, we're the weakest 2. By far.

Also, with all the talk about the ncaa "grooving" the matchups, no one has mentioned ky/uconn in the round of 32. They absolutely set that one up. Reminds me of when they threw Georgetown at unlv in 1991.

Not according to the Selection Committee, though, which is what matters in terms of seeding. We were given the #2 15 seed (who is really, by far, the best #15), the #1 7-seed, the #1 3-seed, and the #1-seed, which is absurd for the supposed #6 overall team.

Now statistically and practically, ND is a very weak 7-seed and good matchup for us. However, that's irrelevant to where it was placed relative to its s-curve ranking assigned by the committee

uh_no
03-11-2012, 07:46 PM
Not according to the Selection Committee, though, which is what matters in terms of seeding. We were given the #2 15 seed (who is really, by far, the best #15), the #1 7-seed, the #1 3-seed, and the #1-seed, which is absurd for the supposed #6 overall team.

Now statistically and practically, ND is a very weak 7-seed and good matchup for us. However, that's irrelevant to where it was placed relative to its s-curve ranking assigned by the committee

uirghhhh....have they posted the full s curve online yet?

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:46 PM
So interestingly, according to KenPom and my own humble opinion it looks like the lower 2-seeds, OSU and Mizzou, got tougher draws in the first 2 rounds, but easier draws for potential Sweet 16 matchups, than did KU and Duke. I would also extend that to the Regional Finals as well, because I think UNC/UK are the two best teams in the field, and they got stuck with the top two, 2-seeds. Interesting. I don't think our region is as tough as it seems (other than UK) but I definitely think we got the toughest 3 seed. But by the time you get to the Sweet 16, you have to beat a pretty darn good team to advance. I'm glad we don't play Florida, UConn, or Memphis in the 2nd round though.

This brings up a good question in would you rather face a tougher 7-10 team and get an easier 3-6 seed or vice-versa. Personally, I'll take the tougher 7-10 and easier 3-6 seed. First off, the 7-10 would be coming off normally a tougher first round game as opposed to us versus a 15 seed and this year while I still like K given 5 days to prepare, think that Duke can be game planned for so I'd much rather see an easier team come the second weekend.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 07:49 PM
Not according to the Selection Committee, though, which is what matters in terms of seeding. We were given the #2 15 seed (who is really, by far, the best #15), the #1 7-seed, the #1 3-seed, and the #1-seed, which is absurd for the supposed #6 overall team.

Now statistically and practically, ND is a very weak 7-seed and good matchup for us. However, that's irrelevant to where it was placed relative to its s-curve ranking assigned by the committee

Well I think the committee is only concerned with the S-curve to make sure 1-4 in each bracket is relatively equal (which we drew the short straw this year). The rest of the bracket is guided more by conference and rematch potential that the S-curve is more used secondly. And yes we might have a tough #15, but if we are that worried about losing to Lehigh (not that we should take them lightly) then we shouldn't be too concerned about the S16 matchups or beyond.

Gthoma2a
03-11-2012, 08:00 PM
I am a little scared for a strange reason. I don't feel TOO worried about a lot of this bracket. I know that I should fear teams like UNLV and Notre Dame, but I don't. Indiana doesn't scare me because of us playing a Zeller so many times in the past. Then, you have Baylor. Baylor is very good, but I think we are a little better. I fear Kentucky, but Elite 8 would be an amazing surprise compared to what I have been expecting for a while.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 08:05 PM
I don't like our chances if Duke has to play Baylor or UNLV. Here's hoping they choke early!

stixof96
03-11-2012, 08:19 PM
I'm more worried about the Lehigh game than the game after, assuming we make it to that point. Lehigh is very underrated. This Duke team is ripe to be taken out early, especially if Ryan is still out.

Xavier would be a tough challenge......

uh_no
03-11-2012, 08:20 PM
Xavier would be a tough challenge......

yeah....you gotta watch they don't punch one of our guys out behind our backs

Bluedog
03-11-2012, 08:20 PM
In a weird way, I could see some UK fans almost rooting for Duke in a potential Sweet Sixteen matchup vs. Baylor/UNLV (if we get that far) in Atlanta. They think VERY little of Duke and want to destroy us. So, while they hate Duke, they may feel more confident going up against Duke and want to pummel us. But that may be delusional thinking on my part since I would never cheer for UNC to win in order to play us, for example, no matter how "weak" I perceived them to be....

slower
03-11-2012, 08:23 PM
Luckily, I see TT being able to shut down Tu if it gets that way.

Don't be so sure about that. I seem to remember similar woofing about how TT was the "Kendall Marshall stopper" or some nonsense. We'll see how it all plays out.

JasonEvans
03-11-2012, 08:28 PM
A Newton has been pointing out, our bracket is crazy hard.

Here are the full rankings of all the teams... according to the NCAA committee.

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000429/seedlist1_1.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000437/seedlist2_1.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000445/20120311181818.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000449/20120311181934.jpg

Our region has: The top #1 seed, the second best #2 seed, the best #3 seed, the third best #4, the third best #5, the best #6, the best #7, the second best #8.

None of our region's teams are the lowest team on their seed line. 4 of our top 8 seeds are the best team on their seed line. The average should be 2.

Oh, and our #9 seed is the defending national champs who struggled this year but probably have one of the 5 most talented rosters in the nation.

I don't think there has ever been a region over-stacked like this. It is preposterous.

And the team that is punished the most... you guessed it. After playing our game against the #15 seed, in theory we would get the best #7, followed by the best #3, followed by the best #1. Talk about a gauntlet!!!

-Jason "of course, this only means our region will be full of upsets and all these stud teams won't advance very far ;) " Evans

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 08:31 PM
Don't be so sure about that. I seem to remember similar woofing about how TT was the "Kendall Marshall stopper" or some nonsense. We'll see how it all plays out.

Tu is a headcase (as shown by the brawl) and he will get his but I think TT will contain him. Its who do we put on Mark Lyons who could hurt us as well but they just don't have the size. They have Frease who is a load for a 7' but can't move well. I'll take our bigs over him when we are chucking up 3's and the rebounds are longer and higher. I think we can also get him in foul trouble. They also don't have much depth behind Frease which in the A-10 they can get away with but not against Duke who can throw (hopefully) 3 guys 6'10 or bigger at them.

I'd say we should handle X especially since they will only have a day to implement a game plan against us. If Lyons has under 20, we should be fine and its also a game we can sneak Dre in for 20 minutes and won't be a huge defensive liability.

wilko
03-11-2012, 08:32 PM
I guess the silver lining is these games are not at Cameron. We ARE good on the road....

JasonEvans
03-11-2012, 08:32 PM
A Newton has been pointing out, our bracket is crazy hard.

Here are the full rankings of all the teams... according to the NCAA committee.

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000429/seedlist1_1.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000437/seedlist2_1.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000445/20120311181818.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000449/20120311181934.jpg

Our region has: The top #1 seed, the second best #2 seed, the best #3 seed, the third best #4, the third best #5, the best #6, the best #7, the second best #8.

None of our region's teams are the lowest team on their seed line. 4 of our top 8 seeds are the best team on their seed line. The average should be 2.

Oh, and our #9 seed is the defending national champs who struggled this year but probably have one of the 5 most talented rosters in the nation.

I don't think there has ever been a region over-stacked like this. It is preposterous.

And the team that is punished the most... you guessed it. After playing our game against the #15 seed, in theory we would get the best #7, followed by the best #3, followed by the best #1. Talk about a gauntlet!!!

-Jason "of course, this only means our region will be full of upsets and all these stud teams won't advance very far ;) " Evans

By the way, the West got the worst #1, #2, #3, and #4. That is insane. How can the guys who made up this bracket sleep at night after releasing these overall rankings and showing us how absurdly this all worked out.

-Jason "of course, all of this would carry a lot more weight if anyone actually believed the selcom knew what it was doing when it ranked the teams" Evans

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 08:34 PM
By the way, the West got the worst #1, #2, #3, and #4. That is insane. How can the guys who made up this bracket sleep at night after releasing these overall rankings and showing us how absurdly this all worked out.

-Jason "of course, all of this would carry a lot more weight if anyone actually believed the selcom knew what it was doing when it ranked the teams" Evans

I think they absolutely knew what they were doing... so much for integrity.

1 24 90
03-11-2012, 08:34 PM
A Newton has been pointing out, our bracket is crazy hard.

Here are the full rankings of all the teams... according to the NCAA committee.

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000429/seedlist1_1.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000437/seedlist2_1.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000445/20120311181818.jpg
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1000449/20120311181934.jpg

Our region has: The top #1 seed, the second best #2 seed, the best #3 seed, the third best #4, the third best #5, the best #6, the best #7, the second best #8.

None of our region's teams are the lowest team on their seed line. 4 of our top 8 seeds are the best team on their seed line. The average should be 2.

Oh, and our #9 seed is the defending national champs who struggled this year but probably have one of the 5 most talented rosters in the nation.

I don't think there has ever been a region over-stacked like this. It is preposterous.

And the team that is punished the most... you guessed it. After playing our game against the #15 seed, in theory we would get the best #7, followed by the best #3, followed by the best #1. Talk about a gauntlet!!!

-Jason "of course, this only means our region will be full of upsets and all these stud teams won't advance very far ;) " Evans

In 2010, #1 seed Kansas had the toughest region and they lost 2nd round, the 3 seed Georgetown lost the first round and the 2 seed OSU lost in the sweet sixteen and Michigan St came out of it as the 5 seed. Who knows what will happen? I guess we have to root for Uconn to make the sweet sixteen?

Bluedog
03-11-2012, 08:38 PM
By the way, the West got the worst #1, #2, #3, and #4. That is insane. How can the guys who made up this bracket sleep at night after releasing these overall rankings and showing us how absurdly this all worked out.

-Jason "of course, all of this would carry a lot more weight if anyone actually believed the selcom knew what it was doing when it ranked the teams" Evans

Marquette was ranked as the second best #3.

roywhite
03-11-2012, 08:38 PM
Pleased to see we open in Greensboro on Friday. Couldn't ask for more than that in terms of rest, travel, familiarity, and fan access.

Tough region? No doubt, but we don't have to play them all, just the ones we run into.
All in all, we have a great chance to make a good run. And maybe a good chance to make a great run (FF and beyond).

CDu
03-11-2012, 08:57 PM
I'm happy with our first weekend opponents. Lehigh is good for a #15, but they are still a huge underdog and we match up well with them. We match up really well with Notre Dame. Xavier can be dangerous, but they just haven't been the same since the Cincy game. They've gone just 13-11 since that game, with very few wins of any significance (probably the two wins over Dayton being their best).

I'm not thrilled with our second weekend possibilities if we make it that far. Likely either Baylor or UNLV in the Sweet 16, and if we get past that we're likely to face the #1 overall team. But, I'll worry about that if/when we get there. Gotta handle our business first.

BlueHeaven
03-11-2012, 09:05 PM
I'm more worried about the Lehigh game than the game after, assuming we make it to that point. Lehigh is very underrated. This Duke team is ripe to be taken out early, especially if Ryan is still out.

Ryan was walking around the hotel in Atlanta without crutches this morning.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 09:06 PM
By the way, the West got the worst #1, #2, #3, and #4. That is insane. How can the guys who made up this bracket sleep at night after releasing these overall rankings and showing us how absurdly this all worked out.

-Jason "of course, all of this would carry a lot more weight if anyone actually believed the selcom knew what it was doing when it ranked the teams" Evans

Untrue. Marquette was the overall #10 seed.

The worst number 3 was georgetown who is in the midwest with UNC.

Still ridiculous.

ncexnyc
03-11-2012, 09:08 PM
Yes, and two years ago our defense was light years beyond this year. We sagged off prevented penetration. And oh yeah, we had a beast in the middle who rebounded everything. Have fun getting this team to rebound versus a team with Jones at 6'11, Miller at 6'9 and Acy at 6'7. Not to mention, we have no SF to cover one with size. And we probably won't be able to keep Pierre Jackson out of the lane. Hopefully, someone else takes care of them but I'll certainly eat my crow if Duke wins but its a tough matchup and I'd much rather see Marquette who have a lot less size and K seemed to bottle up Crowder and DJ Odom last year.

So that means you won't be watching when we play them, which is good so we won't have to read your over the top in game comments.;)

rthomas
03-11-2012, 09:12 PM
Win the opener.

Beat Brey.

Beat Vegas.

Beat KY

Beat Michigan State.

Beat Carolina.



Retire.

love it. We win, we deserve it.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 09:17 PM
So that means you won't be watching when we play them, which is good so we won't have to read your over the top in game comments.;)

I never understood this board in this respect. First off, I hardly post during games and haven't really been one of the guys saying this is a terrible team. I've said this isn't a traditional Duke team that we have grown used to in terms of their defensive and offensive efficiencies. Even in recent down years, our kenpom is usually great b/c we are an efficient team. But I really don't have too many inflammatory, if any comments.

And of course I'll watch and be crushed if we lose but I'm realistic. After the FSU game, many people were almost resigned to saying that us getting to the E8 or even S16 would be a successful year. They said that many of us should lower our expectations and in reality after the FSU/UNC game it was more about FSU being good than it was Duke being bad yesterday. But this Baylor team is just a match-up nightmare. So I'm told I need a wake up call with expectations, I get that and now someone pretty much accuses me of being a bandwagon of sorts.

GoDukeDevils
03-11-2012, 09:57 PM
I'd love see ND in 2nd rd: ND is a poor rebounding team, don't score a ton of points, and don't have overly quick guards.

JasonEvans
03-11-2012, 10:07 PM
Untrue. Marquette was the overall #10 seed.

The worst number 3 was georgetown who is in the midwest with UNC.

Still ridiculous.

Sorry, my bad. I posted too hastily.

-JE

JasonEvans
03-11-2012, 10:09 PM
Win the opener.

Beat Brey.

Beat Vegas.

Beat KY

Beat Michigan State.

Beat Carolina.



Retire.

RETIRE?!?!? No way. I think Miles will find a career in pro ball. If not in the NBA, then in Europe.

-Jason "that is what you were talking about, right?" Evans

jacone21
03-11-2012, 10:32 PM
I'm pretty cool with the bracket. Heck you gotta beat the team in front of you. That's the tournament.

However, I'm not looking forward to the baby blue fans cheering against us in G'boro. I was hoping to be done with them for a while.

-bdbd
03-11-2012, 10:36 PM
UK: #1 overall
Duke: #6 overall
Baylor: #9 overall

Uhhhh?

ETA: TruTV ch. 246


So Duke, as the 2nd best #2 seed, gets the best #1, the best #3 and the best #7 according to their seeds list they are going over right now. Oh well, at least they gift wrapped us a title 2 years ago.

Yes, in a word, we got hosed. But Baylor is in the right region, per the S-curve. The South Region (or whatever region they put the overall #1) should get the overall #8 and overall #9 and the overall #16. I'm guessing KY isn't thrilled either. By the S-curve, as the #6 overall, per the head of the committee, we should be in the same region as the #3 overall. When asked, the committee chairman said that "We try to keep those (top seed) teams in their 'natural regions.'" Frankly, I'd much rather be in any of the UNC*, MSU or Syracuse regions, even if it meant more traveling for the team and fans. Apparently Shane Battier was tweeting about the 'conspiracy' as well during the show (as they mentioned his tweet later in the ESPN show I believe). :mad:
That said, given Ryan's foot, I do like that we are not playing until Friday and playing only an hour from home rest, bab, rest!

But, yes, I have no doubt the draw of the 20th-anniversary of "The Shot" was too much for them to resist. But as we saw in the SEC tournament, KY is susceptible to a good outside shooting team... :rolleyes:

Let's just win our little 4-team mini-tournament this weekend in Greensboro first. Obviously we SHOULD win w/o a lot of late drama on Fri., and then the Sunday match-up vs Brey and the Fighting Irisish in Greensboro, or a tough Xavier squad. BTW, a couple of the talking heeads on TV are already picking Xavier over ND. So don't be surprised if we don't get to see the anticipated mentor-deciple pairing between K and Brey. (If we do, I think we actually match up with ND fairly well.) A Sweet-Sixteen match-up vs Baylor, who we beat two years ago in a classic in Houston (right?) on our way to the 2010 National Championship. I wonder what the crowd would be like in Atlanta if, for example, the top four seeds in the region make it there? I'm thinking there'd be a lot of KY-blue loudly rooting against Duke (vs Baylor or whoever in the Sweet-16) around the 23rd and 24th.... :(

I think NC@ch got pretty lucky with their road, except that it is a nice storyline if we get to see a KA and NC match-up in the Elite-8, given the history between those two schools (including ole Huck migrating eastward from there). Many will pick KA over NC.

Let the fun begin!!!
(Here's our chance to devastate another whole generation of Wildcat fans!!!! ) :p




*........ Obviously the committee would never put NC and Duke in the same region, as 1 and 2 seeds from the same conference.

kmspeaks
03-11-2012, 10:45 PM
In a weird way, I could see some UK fans almost rooting for Duke in a potential Sweet Sixteen matchup vs. Baylor/UNLV (if we get that far) in Atlanta. They think VERY little of Duke and want to destroy us. So, while they hate Duke, they may feel more confident going up against Duke and want to pummel us. But that may be delusional thinking on my part since I would never cheer for UNC to win in order to play us, for example, no matter how "weak" I perceived them to be....

Didn't Cal say two years ago that his team lost to WVU because they were looking ahead to playing Duke? I think Kentucky absolutely wants a piece of us and I'd be really happy if we get a shot at them this year.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 11:03 PM
Yes, in a word, we got hosed. But Baylor is in the right region, per the S-curve. The South Region (or whatever region they put the overall #1) should get the overall #8 and overall #9 and the overall #16. I'm guessing KY isn't thrilled either. By the S-curve, as the #6 overall, per the head of the committee, we should be in the same region as the #3 overall. When asked, the committee chairman said that "We try to keep those (top seed) teams in their 'natural regions.'" Frankly, I'd much rather be in any of the UNC*, MSU or Syracuse regions, even if it meant more traveling for the team and fans. Apparently Shane Battier was tweeting about the 'conspiracy' as well during the show (as they mentioned his tweet later in the ESPN show I believe). :mad:
That said, given Ryan's foot, I do like that we are not playing until Friday and playing only an hour from home rest, bab, rest!

But, yes, I have no doubt the draw of the 20th-anniversary of "The Shot" was too much for them to resist. But as we saw in the SEC tournament, KY is susceptible to a good outside shooting team... :rolleyes:

Let's just win our little 4-team mini-tournament this weekend in Greensboro first. Obviously we SHOULD win w/o a lot of late drama on Fri., and then the Sunday match-up vs Brey and the Fighting Irisish in Greensboro, or a tough Xavier squad. BTW, a couple of the talking heeads on TV are already picking Xavier over ND. So don't be surprised if we don't get to see the anticipated mentor-deciple pairing between K and Brey. (If we do, I think we actually match up with ND fairly well.) A Sweet-Sixteen match-up vs Baylor, who we beat two years ago in a classic in Houston (right?) on our way to the 2010 National Championship. I wonder what the crowd would be like in Atlanta if, for example, the top four seeds in the region make it there? I'm thinking there'd be a lot of KY-blue loudly rooting against Duke (vs Baylor or whoever in the Sweet-16) around the 23rd and 24th.... :(

I think NC@ch got pretty lucky with their road, except that it is a nice storyline if we get to see a KA and NC match-up in the Elite-8, given the history between those two schools (including ole Huck migrating eastward from there). Many will pick KA over NC.

Let the fun begin!!!
(Here's our chance to devastate another whole generation of Wildcat fans!!!! ) :p




*........ Obviously the committee would never put NC and Duke in the same region, as 1 and 2 seeds from the same conference.


The problem is that the committee didn't follow the S curve even remotely. A grand total of 11 teams in the entire tournament (through 12 seeds when you get into play in game shenanigans) follow the s curve....11...so pointing out that baylor is where they're "supposed" to be is more the exception rather than the rule.They didn't go down thinking "this is where the belong because of the s curve"....the rest of the bracket is evidence that they didn't think about that at all....I don't know why they put baylor there....no clue.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:06 PM
The problem is that the committee didn't follow the S curve even remotely. A grand total of 11 teams in the entire tournament (through 12 seeds when you get into play in game shenanigans) follow the s curve....11...so pointing out that baylor is where they're "supposed" to be is more the exception rather than the rule.They didn't go down thinking "this is where the belong because of the s curve"....the rest of the bracket is evidence that they didn't think about that at all....I don't know why they put baylor there....no clue.

Same reason they put Duke in the Kentucky bracket along with ND, UNLV and UConn - sub-plots.

Would be nice if they didn't pretend they weren't playing to the ratings.

Dukeface88
03-11-2012, 11:12 PM
It seems to me that the selection committee got a bit carried away with creating storylines rather than seeding. It isn't just the Shot rematch - there's also setting up K against Brey in the second round Michigan-Ohio and the potential UNC-Creigton and UNC-Kansas matchups in the Midwest, possible (though not especially likely) St. Louis-Missouri game in the West. I'm knida surprised they didn't put Indianna in UNCs bracket.

Edit: Semi-ninja'd by FerryFor50

uh_no
03-11-2012, 11:16 PM
Same reason they put Duke in the Kentucky bracket along with ND, UNLV and UConn - sub-plots.

Would be nice if they didn't pretend they weren't playing to the ratings.

They're clearly not. You have 63 games, no matter how you set the bracket up, there are going to be coincidences. If it wasn't uconn/UK it would be someone else.

There is zero evidence that the committee brackets based on sub plots....none...

Humans love to make order out of chaos, to find patterns when there are none. No matter what the bracket was people would find stories. Heck I could take the seedings and generate brackets randomly and every time you'd find some subplots....teams who have histories that play in the first couple rounds or are in the same region. This might even be an exercise to try on this board....generate random brackets based on the given seed lines and have people on DBR find the subplots. I suppose my random number generator would have planned the Virginia VCU matchup in the first round that might have come up....or the memphis UK matchup in the second round.


Now, if a committee member ever hinted that they had thought about such things, then yeah, maybe I would feel differently, but the fact of the matter is ther has never been such a claim. They are very clear that they only use a team's performance. Occams razor states that the simplest explanation is usually correct, and I believe that fully applies in this case. "sub plots" are just statistically likely to occur with so many teams and so many connections between them. Its the shared birthday problem in action....it only takes ~26 people in one room for it to become likely that two share a birthday. We have 64 teams....how likely is it that some pairing has a subplot that appears to be planned? pretty darn high.

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 11:18 PM
uh_no, you may be correct but you're fighting a losing battle. Even Shane Battier twittered that he saw through the whole Duke-is-kentuckys-2-seed thing.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 11:20 PM
The problem is that the committee didn't follow the S curve even remotely. A grand total of 11 teams in the entire tournament (through 12 seeds when you get into play in game shenanigans) follow the s curve....11...so pointing out that baylor is where they're "supposed" to be is more the exception rather than the rule.They didn't go down thinking "this is where the belong because of the s curve"....the rest of the bracket is evidence that they didn't think about that at all....I don't know why they put baylor there....no clue.

Well they can't put Baylor in either KU or Mizzou's bracket. They also can't put FSU in Duke or UNC's bracket. They also can't put Marquette or Georgetown in Syracuse's bracket. And OSU and MSU have to be separated. It appears they put the 1's and 2's based solely off location. They wanted to keep all B10 teams away from MSU so they gave them Louisville as their 4 seed who just happens to be 16. Since they already had Mizzou out West b/c of regional preference (Duke-South, Kansas-Midwest, and OSU-East) they couldn't give them Baylor so they gave them next best 3 seed in Marquette to make it as difficult as possible. Since you already have Duke and UNC in the other two brackets, it sort of locks FSU into the East. Since KU is in the Midwest, Baylor must go in the South. And then the 4 seeds were just used to even out the brackets as best as possible. (I know some of the rules with putting intra-conference teams against each other have become more suggestions but they seemed to take them to heart)

As I predicted, an unusual amount placed on regional preference for the 1 and 2 seeds.

Starter
03-11-2012, 11:23 PM
They're clearly not. You have 63 games, no matter how you set the bracket up, there are going to be coincidences. If it wasn't uconn/UK it would be someone else.

There is zero evidence that the committee brackets based on sub plots....none...

Humans love to make order out of chaos, to find patterns when there are none. No matter what the bracket was people would find stories. Heck I could take the seedings and generate brackets randomly and every time you'd find some subplots....teams who have histories that play in the first couple rounds or are in the same region. This might even be an exercise to try on this board....generate random brackets based on the given seed lines and have people on DBR find the subplots. I suppose my random number generator would have planned the Virginia VCU matchup in the first round that might have come up....or the memphis UK matchup in the second round.


Now, if a committee member ever hinted that they had thought about such things, then yeah, maybe I would feel differently, but the fact of the matter is ther has never been such a claim. They are very clear that they only use a team's performance. Occams razor states that the simplest explanation is usually correct, and I believe that fully applies in this case. "sub plots" are just statistically likely to occur with so many teams and so many connections between them. Its the shared birthday problem in action....it only takes ~26 people in one room for it to become likely that two share a birthday. We have 64 teams....how likely is it that some pairing has a subplot that appears to be planned? pretty darn high.

What you're saying does make a lot of sense, but I'd assume that if they were seeding games to create juicy matchups and subplots, they wouldn't admit that for obvious reasons.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 11:27 PM
uh_no, you may be correct but you're fighting a losing battle. Even Shane Battier twittered that he saw through the whole Duke-is-kentuckys-2-seed thing.

Yeah

I'm done trying to ruin everybody's fun.

Finding subplots is exciting, like bracketing, it causes people to be vested in games which they wouldn't normally pay any attention to.

speaking of which...where's the DBR pool????

Sgt. Dingleberry
03-11-2012, 11:28 PM
They're clearly not. You have 63 games, no matter how you set the bracket up, there are going to be coincidences. If it wasn't uconn/UK it would be someone else.

There is zero evidence that the committee brackets based on sub plots....none...

You're probably right, but, this committee represents the organization that still supports the bowl system. :confused:

The NCAA has shown a clear preference for dollars and cents over fairness and parity in other areas.....It would not be unprecedented.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 11:29 PM
I would have to agree with uh_no that I really don't think the committee puts too much into match-ups. They will get ratings regardless and the chances of 1's getting to 2's is so remote nowadays that it isn't realistic. I think you just have so many blue blood programs that of course there will be history of some sorts. Rematch with Baylor but we were looking at a rematch with Michigan otherwise. We avoided a rematch with WVU who we have history with in the 7/10 slot (forget what they were). What about putting Memphis against Kansas for the second round for rematch of the title game? Nobody brought up the NC State-Georgetown rematch waiting. I just think there are so many teams, coaches, players with history and with the media being so in-depth nowadays looking for story lines this is what you get.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:29 PM
They're clearly not. You have 63 games, no matter how you set the bracket up, there are going to be coincidences. If it wasn't uconn/UK it would be someone else.

There is zero evidence that the committee brackets based on sub plots....none...

Humans love to make order out of chaos, to find patterns when there are none. No matter what the bracket was people would find stories. Heck I could take the seedings and generate brackets randomly and every time you'd find some subplots....teams who have histories that play in the first couple rounds or are in the same region. This might even be an exercise to try on this board....generate random brackets based on the given seed lines and have people on DBR find the subplots. I suppose my random number generator would have planned the Virginia VCU matchup in the first round that might have come up....or the memphis UK matchup in the second round.


Now, if a committee member ever hinted that they had thought about such things, then yeah, maybe I would feel differently, but the fact of the matter is ther has never been such a claim. They are very clear that they only use a team's performance. Occams razor states that the simplest explanation is usually correct, and I believe that fully applies in this case. "sub plots" are just statistically likely to occur with so many teams and so many connections between them. Its the shared birthday problem in action....it only takes ~26 people in one room for it to become likely that two share a birthday. We have 64 teams....how likely is it that some pairing has a subplot that appears to be planned? pretty darn high.

Of course there isn't going to be proof, but if you look at the other brackets, you see a lot of the same stuff...

- UNC has Kansas, Georgetown, NCSU, Creighton (with Harrison Barnes' old HS teammate), Michigan
- Mich St has Florida
- Kentucky has Duke, UConn, Indiana
- Duke has Kentucky, Baylor, UConn, Indiana, ND

If you swapped around the teams mentioned above with teams in other brackets and the same seeding, you don't get NEARLY the subplot.

What if UNC had Missouri, Marquette, Colorado St, Memphis, Louisville? Yawn

And if Mich St had St Mary's?

Kentucky had OSU, Southern Miss, Wisconsin?

Duke had Syracuse, FSU, Kansas St, Wisconisn, Gonzaga?

Doesn't seem as interesting, eh?

The committee's job is to get the right teams in and create intriguing matchups, but they usually seem to honor the second part of that more often. That's why you see so much weirdness in seeding and brackets every year.

hurleyfor3
03-11-2012, 11:30 PM
speaking of which...where's the DBR pool????

Closed for the season, doesn't open until Memorial Day. But the DBR sauna and steam room are quite nice.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:31 PM
Well they can't put Baylor in either KU or Mizzou's bracket. They also can't put FSU in Duke or UNC's bracket. They also can't put Marquette or Georgetown in Syracuse's bracket. And OSU and MSU have to be separated. It appears they put the 1's and 2's based solely off location. They wanted to keep all B10 teams away from MSU so they gave them Louisville as their 4 seed who just happens to be 16. Since they already had Mizzou out West b/c of regional preference (Duke-South, Kansas-Midwest, and OSU-East) they couldn't give them Baylor so they gave them next best 3 seed in Marquette to make it as difficult as possible. Since you already have Duke and UNC in the other two brackets, it sort of locks FSU into the East. Since KU is in the Midwest, Baylor must go in the South. And then the 4 seeds were just used to even out the brackets as best as possible. (I know some of the rules with putting intra-conference teams against each other have become more suggestions but they seemed to take them to heart)

As I predicted, an unusual amount placed on regional preference for the 1 and 2 seeds.

Why can't they put FSU in Duke's bracket? NCSU ended up in UNC's.... what is the rule for that sort of thing?

uh_no
03-11-2012, 11:35 PM
Of course there isn't going to be proof, but if you look at the other brackets, you see a lot of the same stuff...

- UNC has Kansas, Georgetown, NCSU, Creighton (with Harrison Barnes' old HS teammate), Michigan
- Mich St has Florida
- Kentucky has Duke, UConn, Indiana
- Duke has Kentucky, Baylor, UConn, Indiana, ND

If you swapped around the teams mentioned above with teams in other brackets and the same seeding, you don't get NEARLY the subplot.

What if UNC had Missouri, Marquette, Colorado St, Memphis, Louisville? Yawn

And if Mich St had St Mary's?

Kentucky had OSU, Southern Miss, Wisconsin?

Duke had Syracuse, FSU, Kansas St, Wisconisn, Gonzaga?

Doesn't seem as interesting, eh?

The committee's job is to get the right teams in and create intriguing matchups, but they usually seem to honor the second part of that more often. That's why you see so much weirdness in seeding and brackets every year.

duke and syracuse: two most winningest active coaches...and the coaches of the national team
louisville and marquette with memphis: C-usa rematches
duke and fsu: part 4....
kentucky and memphis: calipari rematch
temple vs any big east team: prove they belong in the big east

there are potential stories everywhere.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 11:35 PM
Why can't they put FSU in Duke's bracket? NCSU ended up in UNC's.... what is the rule for that sort of thing?

The first three teams are to be placed in different brackets and when conferences have more than that, they are supposed to try their hardest to avoid a match-up before the E8. UNC wouldn't see NC State till the regional final and they usually care less about this with seeds above 6 or so.

gep
03-11-2012, 11:36 PM
I'm pretty cool with the bracket. Heck you gotta beat the team in front of you. That's the tournament.

...






...

Let's just win our little 4-team mini-tournament this weekend in Greensboro first. Obviously we SHOULD win w/o a lot of late drama on Fri., and then the Sunday match-up vs Brey and the Fighting Irisish in Greensboro, or a tough Xavier squad. BTW, a couple of the talking heeads on TV are already picking Xavier over ND. So don't be surprised if we don't get to see the anticipated mentor-deciple pairing between K and Brey. (If we do, I think we actually match up with ND fairly well.) A Sweet-Sixteen match-up vs Baylor, who we beat two years ago in a classic in Houston (right?) on our way to the 2010 National Championship. I wonder what the crowd would be like in Atlanta if, for example, the top four seeds in the region make it there? I'm thinking there'd be a lot of KY-blue loudly rooting against Duke (vs Baylor or whoever in the Sweet-16) around the 23rd and 24th.... :(

...

Let the fun begin!!!
(Here's our chance to devastate another whole generation of Wildcat fans!!!! ) :p




*........ Obviously the committee would never put NC and Duke in the same region, as 1 and 2 seeds from the same conference.

As I've heard Coach K say, just concentrate on the first 4-team tournament. That's all that matters. If you get past that, then look at the next 4-team tournament... etc...

You never have to beat all 67 teams to get the NC :cool:

GO DUKE!!!

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:38 PM
duke and syracuse: two most winningest active coaches...and the coaches of the national team
louisville and marquette with memphis: C-usa rematches
duke and fsu: part 4....
kentucky and memphis: calipari rematch
temple vs any big east team: prove they belong in the big east

there are potential stories everywhere.

Duke and FSU isn't really that intriguing. The Temple story line is a stretch, as is the C-USA angle.

I get what you're saying... but your own numbers break the logic. The matchups don't make much sense at all, unless you start looking at storylines.

uh_no
03-11-2012, 11:38 PM
As I've heard Coach K say, just concentrate on the first 4-team tournament. That's all that matters. If you get past that, then look at the next 4-team tournament... etc...

You never have to beat all 67 teams to get the NC :cool:

GO DUKE!!!

I could go for a 67 game round robin for the title...heck, it'd still be shorter than the NBA playoff-apalooza that lasts 4 months.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 11:38 PM
duke and syracuse: two most winningest active coaches...and the coaches of the national team
louisville and marquette with memphis: C-usa rematches
duke and fsu: part 4....
kentucky and memphis: calipari rematch
temple vs any big east team: prove they belong in the big east

there are potential stories everywhere.

He also left off St. Louis in the UNC pool which would be a rematch of Majerus who ousted UNC in 1998 F4. Committee missed a big subplot there.

College basketball just has so many coaches that have been around forever, former players sitting on benches, and the same programs consistently there that it is inevitable that some story exists.

A-Tex Devil
03-11-2012, 11:41 PM
Thoughts:

As good a second round possibility as we could ask for. Not a guarantee but I Like this 7-10 game better than the others. BPI didn't have either Notre Dame or Xavier in the tourney.

Baylor is as talented as any team in the country not named UNC or Kentucky, but led by a far, far inferior coach. Unfortunately the dimwitted Scott Drew has decided to let them play more man to man defense on occasion and that was one of the big reasons they beat KU. He went back to a ton of wannabe 'Cuse zone against Mizzou and lost. If we get them in the Sweet 16, they could definitely out-talent us like Carolina did last week but I like our chances. This Baylor team isn't as cohesive a unit as the ome we beat in 2010. Although neither are we.

Look, if we get to Kentucky, that's a bad matchup for us. But stranger things have happened, obviously.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:41 PM
He also left off St. Louis in the UNC pool which would be a rematch of Majerus who ousted UNC in 1998 F4. Committee missed a big subplot there.

College basketball just has so many coaches that have been around forever, former players sitting on benches, and the same programs consistently there that it is inevitable that some story exists.

Also another weak subplot. :)

Tell me what would get better ratings.... UNC/Creighton or UNC/St Louis?

You'll hear all about it when the announcers keep harping on McDermott vs Barnes, should Creighton and UNC advance.

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 11:46 PM
Also another weak subplot. :)

Tell me what would get better ratings.... UNC/Creighton or UNC/St Louis?

You'll hear all about it when the announcers keep harping on McDermott vs Barnes, should Creighton and UNC advance.

How is that a weak subplot? Majerus beat UNC in a F4 game? I guarantee you many UNC fans remember that. A much bigger subplot than Duke/Baylor or even MSU/Florida with Florida as a 7 seed. MSU could have subplots with Uconn who they beat in F4 2009, Duke who they've had battles with in the tournament, etc. I don't know anyone who is going to tune in to see Barnes play a HS teammate. Nobody cares that much. Yes, when it gets to the E8 and beyond, people want to see good matchups with the blue bloods but those will happen regardless. Whether its Duke/UK, Duke/MSU, Duke/KU, Duke/Cuse, UK/UNC, UNC/MSU.

Sgt. Dingleberry
03-11-2012, 11:46 PM
Unfortunately the dimwitted Scott Drew

What is his reputation like down there? I know we all had a ton of respect for him after playing him in the 2010 tourney. Then I started hearing some not-so-flattering things about him through the grapevine...I have also watched some Bears' games and he does not seem to command a lot of respect from some of his kids.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:51 PM
How is that a weak subplot? Majerus beat UNC in a F4 game? I guarantee you many UNC fans remember that. A much bigger subplot than Duke/Baylor or even MSU/Florida with Florida as a 7 seed. MSU could have subplots with Uconn who they beat in F4 2009, Duke who they've had battles with in the tournament, etc.

How many One Shining Moment clips have you seen from that game?

Now.... UNC/Georgetown....

I'm not saying that what I'm selling is based in fact. But doesn't it seem odd to you that the #1 overall seed gets the #2 overall #2 seed, while the #3 overall seed gets Kansas (not sure where they rank)....

If they were going by numbers, you'd see different brackets at 1/2.

ncexnyc
03-11-2012, 11:51 PM
How is that a weak subplot? Majerus beat UNC in a F4 game? I guarantee you many UNC fans remember that. A much bigger subplot than Duke/Baylor or even MSU/Florida with Florida as a 7 seed. MSU could have subplots with Uconn who they beat in F4 2009, Duke who they've had battles with in the tournament, etc. I don't know anyone who is going to tune in to see Barnes play a HS teammate. Nobody cares that much. Yes, when it gets to the E8 and beyond, people want to see good matchups with the blue bloods but those will happen regardless. Whether its Duke/UK, Duke/MSU, Duke/KU, Duke/Cuse, UK/UNC, UNC/MSU.
I can assure you that UNC fans have terrible memories. My co-workers can't seem to recall last year's drubbing in the ACC Tourney we gave them and that was only last year. When I mention Weber State they ask me why I'm talking about my grill.:D

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:52 PM
I can assure you that UNC fans have terrible memories. My co-workers can't seem to recall last year's drubbing in the ACC Tourney we gave them and that was only last year. When I mention Weber State they ask me why I'm talking about my grill.:D

Ha!

Harold "the show" Arceneaux!

sporthenry
03-11-2012, 11:55 PM
How many One Shining Moment clips have you seen from that game?

Now.... UNC/Georgetown....

I'm not saying that what I'm selling is based in fact. But doesn't it seem odd to you that the #1 overall seed gets the #2 overall #2 seed, while the #3 overall seed gets Kansas (not sure where they rank)....

If they were going by numbers, you'd see different brackets at 1/2.

After thinking about how they have done the brackets, no it doesn't seem that strange. Lets see, UK is the overall #1 seed and gets the South for regional preference. Syracuse is #2 so they get the East. UNC is #3 so they get the Mid-West and MSU goes out West. KU is the #1 2 seed so they get Mid-West, Duke is #2 2 seed so they get the South, OSU is #3 so they get the East, and Mizzou gets the West. Then follow general guidelines for seeding 1-4 and you get these brackets.

FerryFor50
03-11-2012, 11:57 PM
After thinking about how they have done the brackets, no it doesn't seem that strange. Lets see, UK is the overall #1 seed and gets the South for regional preference. Syracuse is #2 so they get the East. UNC is #3 so they get the Mid-West and MSU goes out West. KU is the #1 2 seed so they get Mid-West, Duke is #2 2 seed so they get the South, OSU is #3 so they get the East, and Mizzou gets the West. Then follow general guidelines for seeding 1-4 and you get these brackets.

Fair enough. But it seems to happen every year. :)

Not sure how Georgetown ends out in the MidWest, while FSU is in the East, Baylor is in the South and Marquette is in the West.

Wouldn't it make more sense to have FSU in the South, Georgetown in the East, Baylor in the Midwest and Marquette in the West?

A-Tex Devil
03-11-2012, 11:58 PM
What is his reputation like down there? I know we all had a ton of respect for him after playing him in the 2010 tourney. Then I started hearing some not-so-flattering things about him through the grapevine...I have also watched some Bears' games and he does not seem to command a lot of respect from some of his kids.

He took a job no one would touch and turned the program around with strong recruiting and really reaching out to the Baylor community, students and alumni, to increase support. He definitely has done a ton of good and soiled be commended for resurrecting a program and then taking it to unheard of levels.

That said, he has been Calipari-esquire in recruiting tactics and has burned bridges with other coaches in the Big XII. It is eyebrow raising, if not downright suspicious, how he has drawn so much 5 star talent to Baylor (with more coming) considering the location, Baylor's lack of tradition, and his system.

As for his system.... It's a combination of letting the guys out talent people on the offensive end and forcing them to play a zone they don't ever really seem to understand on the defensive end. This Baylor team (and last year's) would excel at man to man, weak side help defense with all the shot blockers they have had. Instead Drew has them playing a zone with because "that's what he does". If we run into them, we need to pray that the light that came on against KU doesn't against us.

uh_no
03-12-2012, 12:00 AM
Fair enough. But it seems to happen every year. :)

Mostly because all the good teams are in the east....so the worst 1 and 2 seeds end up out west, and the top 3 1 and 2 seeds get packed into the 3 more eastern brackets. Its more a consequence of the western half of the US being so down in basketball than anything.

Bluedog
03-12-2012, 12:01 AM
After thinking about how they have done the brackets, no it doesn't seem that strange. Lets see, UK is the overall #1 seed and gets the South for regional preference. Syracuse is #2 so they get the East. UNC is #3 so they get the Mid-West and MSU goes out West. KU is the #1 2 seed so they get Mid-West, Duke is #2 2 seed so they get the South, OSU is #3 so they get the East, and Mizzou gets the West. Then follow general guidelines for seeding 1-4 and you get these brackets.

Yep, seems like if the committee had had OSU as #6 overall and Duke as #7, we'd have gone to the East while OSU would go south since it's closer to them as well (unless they think Boston is a more "natural geographic fit" for OSU).

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 12:06 AM
Just look at Duke, they could have subplots with Michigan from last year or 1992. Uconn in 1999. MSU in 2005. KU in 2003. Florida in 2000. Indiana in 2002. VCU in 2007. Louisville in 1986. WVU, Baylor, Purdue, and Cal would all be rematches of 2010. And that doesn't even include other subplots like Brey being a disciple. Amaker with his Duke ties. Paulus on OSU's bench. And I'm sure you could do more of one degree of Mike Krzyzewski in the tournament especially if you consider things like Duke went after Greg Echenique back in the day.

FerryFor50
03-12-2012, 12:07 AM
Just look at Duke, they could have subplots with Michigan from last year or 1992. Uconn in 1999. MSU in 2005. KU in 2003. Florida in 2000. Indiana in 2002. VCU in 2007. Louisville in 1986. WVU, Baylor, Purdue, and Cal would all be rematches of 2010. And that doesn't even include other subplots like Brey being a disciple. Amaker with his Duke ties. Paulus on OSU's bench. And I'm sure you could do more of one degree of Mike Krzyzewski in the tournament especially if you consider things like Duke went after Greg Echenique back in the day.

Fair points....

I think I'm just still trying to wrap my head around how Duke and Kentucky got the hardest draw. :)

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 12:09 AM
Fair enough. But it seems to happen every year. :)

Not sure how Georgetown ends out in the MidWest, while FSU is in the East, Baylor is in the South and Marquette is in the West.

Wouldn't it make more sense to have FSU in the South, Georgetown in the East, Baylor in the Midwest and Marquette in the West?

Well FSU can't be in the South b/c not only would it violate the first 3 teams of a conference in the same bracket but nobody wants to see conference rematches until the regional finals so I agree with the NCAA in that rule. Similarly, Baylor can't be in KU or Mizzou's bracket. Georgetown can't be with Syracuse.

There are a ton of ways they could have placed the top 4, we drew the worst one as far as I'm concerned but I understand why it happened. Only the top 2 teams get regional preference and from a Duke fan (even though it is very improbably the 1-2 seeds all meet in the E8), I would much rather be out West with Marquette and MSU or in the Midwest vs. Georgetown.

FerryFor50
03-12-2012, 12:11 AM
Well FSU can't be in the South b/c not only would it violate the first 3 teams of a conference in the same bracket but nobody wants to see conference rematches until the regional finals so I agree with the NCAA in that rule. Similarly, Baylor can't be in KU or Mizzou's bracket. Georgetown can't be with Syracuse.

There are a ton of ways they could have placed the top 4, we drew the worst one as far as I'm concerned but I understand why it happened. Only the top 2 teams get regional preference and from a Duke fan (even though it is very improbably the 1-2 seeds all meet in the E8), I would much rather be out West with Marquette and MSU or in the Midwest vs. Georgetown.

So... how do we give pitchforks? Because I'd shoot one your way. You have way more knowledge about the seeding process than I do and deserve a pitchfork for your efforts! :)

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 12:32 AM
So... how do we give pitchforks? Because I'd shoot one your way. You have way more knowledge about the seeding process than I do and deserve a pitchfork for your efforts! :)

I enjoy the whole process so I kinda became a student of it all and its fun to put yourself in that room so figured I'd publish the only rationale that makes sense from the committee that got this bracket.

All that said, we had what 5 analysts say we'd be the first 1-2 seed to go down. No F4 predictions although as I projected FSU was a hot selection, which becomes a death certificate for a loss versus Cincy. We certainly have the bulletin board material and relatively easy schedule to get to the E8, see who is waiting for us and go from there. It is nice to know we can fly under the radar much like 2010.

TexHawk
03-12-2012, 12:54 AM
He took a job no one would touch and turned the program around with strong recruiting and really reaching out to the Baylor community, students and alumni, to increase support. He definitely has done a ton of good and soiled be commended for resurrecting a program and then taking it to unheard of levels.

That said, he has been Calipari-esquire in recruiting tactics and has burned bridges with other coaches in the Big XII. It is eyebrow raising, if not downright suspicious, how he has drawn so much 5 star talent to Baylor (with more coming) considering the location, Baylor's lack of tradition, and his system.

As for his system.... It's a combination of letting the guys out talent people on the offensive end and forcing them to play a zone they don't ever really seem to understand on the defensive end. This Baylor team (and last year's) would excel at man to man, weak side help defense with all the shot blockers they have had. Instead Drew has them playing a zone with because "that's what he does". If we run into them, we need to pray that the light that came on against KU doesn't against us.

Drew has basically fire-bombed those bridges in the Big 12. Bill Self and Rick Barnes, two of the nicest guys around off-the-court, refuse to speak to him. Not sure where Barnes's beef is, but with Self, Drew phoned KU-commit Dwight Lewis and lied to him about KU's graduation rate. Lewis de-committed from KU shortly after. (Turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as KU picked up Brandon Rush late.) He also pulls his team off the court and into the tunnel during pre-game introductions on the road. At best that's just weird, at worst it's disrespectful.

As far as coaching skills, the zone is hilarious, but that's not his only flaw. At times his team will just be happy chucking threes and he will do nothing to stop them. In the KU/Baylor game in Waco in February, Quincy Miller and Perry Jones started very well inside, and they went up by 8-9 points. They started drifting to the perimeter, and KU went on a ridiculous 34-4 run. They lead was 25+ before some garbage buckets made it more respectable.

Des Esseintes
03-12-2012, 01:30 AM
Drew has basically fire-bombed those bridges in the Big 12. Bill Self and Rick Barnes, two of the nicest guys around off-the-court, refuse to speak to him. Not sure where Barnes's beef is, but with Self, Drew phoned KU-commit Dwight Lewis and lied to him about KU's graduation rate. Lewis de-committed from KU shortly after. (Turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as KU picked up Brandon Rush late.) He also pulls his team off the court and into the tunnel during pre-game introductions on the road. At best that's just weird, at worst it's disrespectful.

As far as coaching skills, the zone is hilarious, but that's not his only flaw. At times his team will just be happy chucking threes and he will do nothing to stop them. In the KU/Baylor game in Waco in February, Quincy Miller and Perry Jones started very well inside, and they went up by 8-9 points. They started drifting to the perimeter, and KU went on a ridiculous 34-4 run. They lead was 25+ before some garbage buckets made it more respectable.

There was also this (http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/ncb/columns/story?columnist=caplan_jeff&id=4979714) pas de deux with Bobby Knight. The climax of which I think we are all a bit poorer for not having seen live.

CDu
03-12-2012, 07:45 AM
There was also this (http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/ncb/columns/story?columnist=caplan_jeff&id=4979714) pas de deux with Bobby Knight. The climax of which I think we are all a bit poorer for not having seen live.

Yup. He's at best as negative a recruiter as they come, at worst dirty (it IS suspicious that he's pulling all that top talent to Waco with a program that has absolutely no history). And as a coach, he appears to just roll the ball out there on offense and strictly play zone defense even when it doesn't suit his team's strengths.

kdavis
03-12-2012, 09:14 AM
We may have a game on our hands next Friday. Lehigh's is rated roughly equivalent to Clemson/VT, and lost away games to St. John's and MSU earlier this season by a combined 14 points. Obviously we should win, but it might not be a cakewalk.

I agree that Lehigh is actually a pretty decent 15 seed. I live in Bethlehem, PA so we hear a lot about how great Lehigh is (relatively speaking). One thing to keep in mind - I really think these kids are going to be overwhelmed by the tournament atmosphere. The campus is all abuzz with tourney talk right now. This is the biggest thing that has ever happened to these kids. My sense is, everything they will say to the contrary, they are just happy to be there and don't seriously envision winning this game. If you can't visualize it, you can't do it.

All of that said, I think this will help Duke as we get will face some decent guard play which will help us on the perimeter and give us an opportunity to work in the big man rotation with a potentially limited Kelly in the lineup.

Udaman
03-12-2012, 09:46 AM
This is mainly to JE.....but I think our bracket isn't as tough as it looks, nor is the West's as easy as it looks.

First with ours. Yes, we got Kentucky. They are great. Baylor is, in my opinion the most dangerous #3. But really, our team (yes Duke) is pretty overrated on the rankings right now. This is ESPECIALLY true if Kelly isn't 100%. We are one of the highest #2 seeds only because of our early season triumphs. The last 2 weeks we've struggled to win all of our games (and lost 2 of them), have shot incredibly poorly as a team, and seem to be having a hard time finding our identity. I think of all the #2 seeds out there, we would be the one most fortunate to make it to the regional finals. So, in my mind, Kentucky got the easiest #2 seed, and the hardest #3 seed, which they should have (this is not to say we have no chance....just that we would need a lot of things to go right, and one of those would be getting Kelly back, which is no sure thing).

As for the other seeds, Indiana is kind of like Duke - they just lost a key player, and have struggled big time. a #4 only in name...probably closer to a 6 or 7 in reality. Wichita State is good, but so is Vanderbilt and New Mexico (I would put Temple last). UNLV is only talked up because they beat UNC. After that this year, they've been average at best (went 5-5 down the stretch including losing to TCU, Colorado State and Wyoming). Yeah, Notre Dame if fine, but they are all over the place, and I would much rather have them than Florida or St. Mary's (St. Mary's would beat us right now, do doubt - senior leadership, patience, good defender of the 3 - they are a matchup nightmare). So, our region is tough...but not brutal, in my mind.

As for the West....you are right that on paper it looks the easiest. But....one measure I go by in looking at the brackets is to count the a) number of Top 5 conference regular season winners, and b) number of Top 5 conference tournament winners. Note, I'm excluding the Pac-10 because they were awful this year. So, that leaves ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big 12 and SEC. For those you had: ACC (UNC regular, Florida State tournament), Big East (Syracuse regular, Louisville tournament), Big 10 (Michigan State Regular, Michigan State tournament), Big 12 (Kansas regular, Missouri tournament). SEC (Kentucky regular, Vanderbilt tournament). The West has three of the tournament winners in their bracket. That's huge. These are teams coming in with real momentum, having just won a tournament filled with tough outs everywhere. And that matters. If you look at the last NCAA Champions you have

UConn - won Big East tournament
Duke - won ACC tournament
UNC - ACC regular season champion
Kansas - won Big 12 tournament
Florida - won SEC tournament
Florida - won SEC tournament
UNC - ACC regular season champion
UConn - won Big East tournament
Syracuse - Big East regular season champion
Maryland - ACC regular season champion

So, in the last 10 years the NCAA champion either won it's tournament (7 out of 10 times) or won its regular season (3 out of 10 times) - note, in the 5 years before that this held true as well.

This would seem to argue that one of this year's champions will either be UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Syracuse, Michigan State, Louisville, Missouri or Florida State. Two bracket are skewed with these teams, the East (with Syracuse, Florida State and Vanderbilt) and the West with Michigan State, Louisville and Missouri. By the way, only one bracket has just one of those teams. The South, with Kentucky.

The West also has New Mexico, who won arguably the 6th (or higher) best conference tournament this year, beating UNLV and San Diego State along the way, Murray State (who won its tournament) and Memphis (who won its tournament). So 5 of their top 6 seeds won their tournament. That's brutal. Those are teams coming in confident and with momentum.

If I had to rank the groups from hardest to easiest, I would say: 1) Midwest. Top heavy with UNC and Kansas, and a solid Michigan and Georgetown as well. 2) West. Due to all the tournament winners. 3) East. Ohio State is scary, Syracuse is probably overrated, but clearly good. Florida State is a huge sleeper and Wisconsin and Vanderbilt are all good. 4) South. Due to limping #2, #4 and #6 seeds.

A-Tex Devil
03-12-2012, 10:11 AM
This is mainly to JE.....but I think our bracket isn't as tough as it looks, nor is the West's as easy as it looks.



I agree with a lot of what Udaman said. When I first saw the seeds come out, I assumed we were the 8th overall seed and was fine with it. I was shocked that we were ranked higher than Mizzou. Mizzou is the real deal and can win this whole thing. They are weak inside and are thin, but they are senior laden, smart, well coached (yes, by Frank Haith) and deadly accurate from outside.

Our 7-10 potential matchup is pretty ideal I think. You could see that West Virginia loss coming from a mile away in 2008. I don't think Notre Dame or Xavier are that strong. So long as our interior guys don't turtle (and if Kelly plays, that especially means him) we should be able to beat both Notre Dame and Xavier when they are playing well if we are at, say 80%. Yes, we could play awful and lose, or one of those teams could go 'Zona on us and beat us. But taking out the extremes, these are good matchups for us.

Baylor can beat anyone, but of all the 3 seeds, other than maybe Marquette, I'd want them even with their big front line. I could see Baylor getting upset the first weekend, the only problem is -- Baylor got the easiest road to the sweet 16 of all of the 3 seeds, which is more evidence that the South isn't as strong at first glance.

The South is top heavy, but from 6-16, I think it's the weakest bracket. If you play to your seeding, you are going to have to play a tough team at some point. It's when those 6-16 seed teams are strong that the bracket becomes tricky.

CDu
03-12-2012, 10:12 AM
This is mainly to JE.....but I think our bracket isn't as tough as it looks, nor is the West's as easy as it looks.

First with ours. Yes, we got Kentucky. They are great. Baylor is, in my opinion the most dangerous #3. But really, our team (yes Duke) is pretty overrated on the rankings right now. This is ESPECIALLY true if Kelly isn't 100%. We are one of the highest #2 seeds only because of our early season triumphs. The last 2 weeks we've struggled to win all of our games (and lost 2 of them), have shot incredibly poorly as a team, and seem to be having a hard time finding our identity. I think of all the #2 seeds out there, we would be the one most fortunate to make it to the regional finals. So, in my mind, Kentucky got the easiest #2 seed, and the hardest #3 seed, which they should have (this is not to say we have no chance....just that we would need a lot of things to go right, and one of those would be getting Kelly back, which is no sure thing).

As for the other seeds, Indiana is kind of like Duke - they just lost a key player, and have struggled big time. a #4 only in name...probably closer to a 6 or 7 in reality. Wichita State is good, but so is Vanderbilt and New Mexico (I would put Temple last). UNLV is only talked up because they beat UNC. After that this year, they've been average at best (went 5-5 down the stretch including losing to TCU, Colorado State and Wyoming). Yeah, Notre Dame if fine, but they are all over the place, and I would much rather have them than Florida or St. Mary's (St. Mary's would beat us right now, do doubt - senior leadership, patience, good defender of the 3 - they are a matchup nightmare). So, our region is tough...but not brutal, in my mind.

Your analysis is basically from a UK perspective. From our perspective, all you've done is discounted the teams that we won't likely end up facing (Indiana, Wichita State, UNLV) while admitting that the teams we are likely to have to face in the second weekend (Baylor, UK) are very strong. So from Duke's perspective, we have a nice first weekend but then what is likely to be an absolutely brutal second weekend.

That's why Duke fans are saying we got a rough bracket. For the supposed second #2 seed (contrary to your analysis that we're limping in, the committee supposedly picked us as #6 overall), we got a very tough #3 seed who is likely to make it to the Sweet 16 based on a weakish first weekend bracket and the toughest #1 seed who should also advance to the second weekend and then face a lighter Sweet 16 game.

I agree that the bracket looks nice from UK's perspective with the exception of a possible 8/9 game against UConn. But it's most certainly not a nice bracket from Duke's perspective given where the tourney committee ranked us.

davekay1971
03-12-2012, 10:20 AM
So from Duke's perspective, we have a nice first weekend but then what is likely to be an absolutely brutal second weekend.
.

I wouldn't even call the first weekend nice. As a 2 seed, we should beat Lehigh no matter where we play, but count on the Tarheel faithful to stick around and make Greensboro feel like the Dean Dome (with the one exception that Roy can't have you thrown out if you shout obscenities like "Miss it!" at his guys). Our second round game, however, against either Xavier or Notre Dame, will be a challenging matchup, particularly playing in a hostile environment.

I absolutely agree that, if we get through to the Sweet 16 and have Baylor waiting for us, it's a brutal matchup. Frankly, KY should be very worried about the challenges posed by Baylor. That is a team very much capable of beating the Wildcats, even if KY plays well.

I have my usual faith that it will all come together for Duke, but, if we get out of this region, it will have been job well done to do it.

CDu
03-12-2012, 10:35 AM
I wouldn't even call the first weekend nice. As a 2 seed, we should beat Lehigh no matter where we play, but count on the Tarheel faithful to stick around and make Greensboro feel like the Dean Dome (with the one exception that Roy can't have you thrown out if you shout obscenities like "Miss it!" at his guys). Our second round game, however, against either Xavier or Notre Dame, will be a challenging matchup, particularly playing in a hostile environment.

I'm not terribly concerned about the environment being overly hostile. For one thing, we've actually been better away from home than at home this year. For another, I just don't see either Notre Dame or Xavier as really causing us enough trouble to beat us (especially Notre Dame, even though the Irish are the higher seed). In terms of potential 7/10 opponents, I'd much rather face Notre Dame or Xavier than St. Mary's, West Virginia, Purdue, Gonzaga or Florida. Only UVa would be a friendlier matchup than ND/Xavier, but that wasn't going to happen.

Udaman
03-12-2012, 10:59 AM
You are 100% correct - my looking at this bracket as an "easier" one is certainly in terms of Kentucky. They get a Duke team that might be missing it's #3 scorer, and and Indiana team that is not a legit #4 seed.

Yes, Baylor is a tough, tough #3 seed. But they just lost to Missouri, and they've been up and down all season.

And look at Duke's other possibilities.

MidWest - we couldn't be there because of UNC...but if we could, I wouldn't want to play them at all? They stomped us last time, and dominated us most of the first game. A terrible matchup for us. Georgetown is almost as dangerous as Baylor, and Michigan is much better than Indiana (right now). Throw in a Temple team (that beat us) and a scary St. Mary's team. That's a tough bracket.

West - Michigan State won their tournament and regular season. Louisville and New Mexico both won their tournaments and come in white hot. I think Marquette is overrated, so they would have been nice, but the other seeds more than make up for them. Florida is a better 7 seed than Notre Dame. Murray State got jobbed as a 6 seed. Not an easy bracket

East - yeah, I would have liked to play Syracuse. The 3 seed comes in on a roll. Both Wisconsin and Vanderbilt are dangerous outs and Gonzaga or West Virginia would be a tough matchup for us in the 2nd round.

I think the brackets are pretty even this year. My main beef was that the West actually looks pretty darn tough to me, and I think ours has Kentucky and a great #3 seed, but not much more (including, unfortunately, us).

Rich
03-12-2012, 11:02 AM
However, I'm not looking forward to the baby blue fans cheering against us in G'boro. I was hoping to be done with them for a while.

With the pod system the way it is, as long as both Duke and Carolina are 1-2 seeds, we are likely to share the arena for the first two rounds for years to come. Given the alternative of traveling for the first round, I suppose playing in front of Carolina fans is the lesser of two evils.

Rich
03-12-2012, 11:04 AM
"Hardcore Brackets" on TruTV right now, aka the revealing of what went down, featuring Charles Barkley being hilarious and knowing nothing about college basketball. I'll be interested to see how UK/Duke/Baylor happened.

Barkley always comes off as being somewhat of a jester, but he made some outstanding picks during last years tourney. Don't let his act fool you, he knows a good deal about college bball teams and players.

Billy Dat
03-12-2012, 01:07 PM
More evidence of ESPN using the Duke brand to sell stories. One of the current front page options is titled, "10 on Upset Alert" and introduced a blog covering favored teams that could lose/underdogs who could pull off upsets. The graphic is Austin Rivers, Seth Curry and Mason depicted as Giants and two players whose team I can't make out depicted as small next to a sling and stone with the words "Giant Killers". Why do I bring this up? Duke isn't even mentioned in the piece.

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 01:16 PM
I agree with a lot of what Udaman said. When I first saw the seeds come out, I assumed we were the 8th overall seed and was fine with it. I was shocked that we were ranked higher than Mizzou. Mizzou is the real deal and can win this whole thing. They are weak inside and are thin, but they are senior laden, smart, well coached (yes, by Frank Haith) and deadly accurate from outside.

Our 7-10 potential matchup is pretty ideal I think. You could see that West Virginia loss coming from a mile away in 2008. I don't think Notre Dame or Xavier are that strong. So long as our interior guys don't turtle (and if Kelly plays, that especially means him) we should be able to beat both Notre Dame and Xavier when they are playing well if we are at, say 80%. Yes, we could play awful and lose, or one of those teams could go 'Zona on us and beat us. But taking out the extremes, these are good matchups for us.

Baylor can beat anyone, but of all the 3 seeds, other than maybe Marquette, I'd want them even with their big front line. I could see Baylor getting upset the first weekend, the only problem is -- Baylor got the easiest road to the sweet 16 of all of the 3 seeds, which is more evidence that the South isn't as strong at first glance.

The South is top heavy, but from 6-16, I think it's the weakest bracket. If you play to your seeding, you are going to have to play a tough team at some point. It's when those 6-16 seed teams are strong that the bracket becomes tricky.

Like Jason Evans pointed out, the last few years, the "hardest" bracket has ended up ripe with upsets and who knows who Duke will play. Seth Davis said without hesitation that he had South Dakota State beating Baylor. But I agree they are the most dangerous and Duke is a terrible match-up. That said, we appear to have lucked out with our second round match-up and certainly won't be the first 1 or 2 seed out as one will undoubtedly fall out in the first weekend.

Mizzou is a very good team and continues to impress but when was the last time a team won a title without a certified big man. They play Moore a 6'9 guy 16 minutes a game with minimal impact and Ratliffe at 6'8 is a good player but can he cover the Sullinger's of the world. I know it wouldn't happen til the title game but I think UNC would slaughter Mizzou. The last team I can think of like that was Nova with Dante Cunningham who made a F4 but eventually dropped to UNC. I just don't see a team winning it all without some type of post game.

NashvilleDevil
03-12-2012, 01:20 PM
You could see that West Virginia loss coming from a mile away in 2008.

Until that kid hit the falling out of bounds 3 as the shot clock expired to tie the game in the 2nd half, I thought Duke was in control. After that shot fell it was a different game.

NashvilleDevil
03-12-2012, 01:21 PM
Like Jason Evans pointed out, the last few years, the "hardest" bracket has ended up ripe with upsets and who knows who Duke will play. Seth Davis said without hesitation that he had South Dakota State beating Baylor. But I agree they are the most dangerous and Duke is a terrible match-up. That said, we appear to have lucked out with our second round match-up and certainly won't be the first 1 or 2 seed out as one will undoubtedly fall out in the first weekend.

Seth also said that UNLV would beat Duke in the Sweet 16. Does UNLV still get that much love for beating UNC so early in the season?

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 01:25 PM
Seth also said that UNLV would beat Duke in the Sweet 16. Does UNLV still get that much love for beating UNC so early in the season?

I have no idea what the MWC brings this year. Last year they had some fun stories that were worth watching, this year they are a complete mystery to me so I have no clue what to expect out of UNLV. My main point was that I thought Baylor had a fairly easy draw (in fact thinking UNLV wasn't that good) and would easily make the S16 but perhaps not.

Duvall
03-12-2012, 01:41 PM
Seth also said that UNLV would beat Duke in the Sweet 16.

Is this good news for Duke, or for Baylor? Could be both.

NashvilleDevil
03-12-2012, 01:42 PM
Is this good news for Duke, or for Baylor? Could be both.

I know Seth's track record is pretty terrible so I do not know.

TexHawk
03-12-2012, 01:43 PM
Like Jason Evans pointed out, the last few years, the "hardest" bracket has ended up ripe with upsets and who knows who Duke will play. Seth Davis said without hesitation that he had South Dakota State beating Baylor. But I agree they are the most dangerous and Duke is a terrible match-up. That said, we appear to have lucked out with our second round match-up and certainly won't be the first 1 or 2 seed out as one will undoubtedly fall out in the first weekend.

Mizzou is a very good team and continues to impress but when was the last time a team won a title without a certified big man. They play Moore a 6'9 guy 16 minutes a game with minimal impact and Ratliffe at 6'8 is a good player but can he cover the Sullinger's of the world. I know it wouldn't happen til the title game but I think UNC would slaughter Mizzou. The last team I can think of like that was Nova with Dante Cunningham who made a F4 but eventually dropped to UNC. I just don't see a team winning it all without some type of post game.

Ratliffe has played 4 games against KU big men (Morris bros, Robinson, Withey) and either fouled out or was limited with 4 fouls in every game. TRob went for 25-13 and 28-12 this year. But defense isn't really their thing. (Kenpom has them at #80 in adjusted D.) They want to outscore you, and create mis-matches with their offense. Depends on the way you look at it. Kim English draws your power forward when he's on O, but then he has to guard you on the other end.

A team like MSU could give them problems, with Payne/Nix on Ratliffe and Green on English. Green is athletic enough to stick with English on the perimeter, and would just abuse him down low on the other end. But Mizzou may not really care about that. As long as Denmon, Dixon, and Pressey can get in the paint, they will score. They shoot free throws really well too. UNC would be a horrific matchup for them.

Wander
03-12-2012, 01:46 PM
Is this good news for Duke, or for Baylor? Could be both.

Probably Colorado :)

Bluedog
03-12-2012, 02:58 PM
More evidence of ESPN using the Duke brand to sell stories. One of the current front page options is titled, "10 on Upset Alert" and introduced a blog covering favored teams that could lose/underdogs who could pull off upsets. The graphic is Austin Rivers, Seth Curry and Mason depicted as Giants and two players whose team I can't make out depicted as small next to a sling and stone with the words "Giant Killers". Why do I bring this up? Duke isn't even mentioned in the piece.

ha, I noticed that too. Right now the FRONT PAGE of ESPN has this as the central image:

2459

The Harder They Fall: Which Goliaths need to look out below? According to our calculations, here are the 10 likeliest early upsets

I'm not an insider though, so I can't actually read the article..

Udaman
03-12-2012, 02:59 PM
UNLV has nothing. Nothing!

They absolutely lucked out to get Colorado (who is equally awful) and so they might win that game....but if they do Baylor is going to blow them out of the gym (so would S. Dakota State). I'll do numerous brackets and in none of them will I have UNLV in the Sweet 16. Teams that finish 5-5 down the stretch never do anything in the tournament. Ever. And the fact that people are talking them up makes it even worse. They'll buy into the hype, and for this team that will spell disaster.

NashvilleDevil
03-12-2012, 03:02 PM
UNLV has nothing. Nothing!

They absolutely lucked out to get Colorado (who is equally awful) and so they might win that game....but if they do Baylor is going to blow them out of the gym (so would S. Dakota State). I'll do numerous brackets and in none of them will I have UNLV in the Sweet 16. Teams that finish 5-5 down the stretch never do anything in the tournament. Ever. And the fact that people are talking them up makes it even worse. They'll buy into the hype, and for this team that will spell disaster.

Seth Davis was the only one I have heard hype them up and that was before they went to commercial. Of course I am not convinced that Seth has much basketball knowledge so I just shrugged and turned off the tv.

rasputin
03-12-2012, 04:44 PM
UNLV has nothing. Nothing!

They absolutely lucked out to get Colorado (who is equally awful) and so they might win that game....but if they do Baylor is going to blow them out of the gym (so would S. Dakota State). I'll do numerous brackets and in none of them will I have UNLV in the Sweet 16. Teams that finish 5-5 down the stretch never do anything in the tournament. Ever. And the fact that people are talking them up makes it even worse. They'll buy into the hype, and for this team that will spell disaster.

I saw UNLV's conference tourney loss to New Mexico, and frankly was impressed by the high level of play on both sides.

superdave
03-12-2012, 05:37 PM
ha, I noticed that too. Right now the FRONT PAGE of ESPN has this as the central image:

2459

The Harder They Fall: Which Goliaths need to look out below? According to our calculations, here are the 10 likeliest early upsets

I'm not an insider though, so I can't actually read the article..

It says not to pick Duke to get upset. The article also says Duke generates too much offense from the FT line. Uhm, that's a bad thing? Really?

loldevilz
03-12-2012, 09:21 PM
I just wanted to point out to all the people that were like "there is no way we will hit an elite athletic small forward there are only like 3 of them in college basketball" that in our likely sweet sixteen and elite eight matchups we will be going against small forwards that are lottery picks. We will have no answer for Quincy Miller and Michael Kid-Gilchrist and it will be our downfall. This is why many of us wanted Gbinije playing from day 1 so that we could use him in these situations.

uh_no
03-12-2012, 09:37 PM
I just wanted to point out to all the people that were like "there is no way we will hit an elite athletic small forward there are only like 3 of them in college basketball" that in our likely sweet sixteen and elite eight matchups we will be going against small forwards that are lottery picks. We will have no answer for Quincy Miller and Michael Kid-Gilchrist and it will be our downfall. This is why many of us wanted Gbinije playing from day 1 so that we could use him in these situations.

Do you really think Gbinije would be up to stopping either of those two guys? As you said, they are small forwards that are lottery picks. Gbinije is not. He's not experienced enough to have earned the playing time...what makes you think playing him more would have suddenly made him able to guard the best small forwards in the country?

ice-9
03-12-2012, 09:50 PM
I was randomly clicking around the cbssports.com website and saw the "experts'" brackets: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/ncaa-tournament/predictions

There are eight analysts and not a single one has us surviving the Sweet 16! We mostly lost to Baylor or got upset by Xavier. Not even one!

Somehow, strangely, this makes me feel better about our chances. ;)

loldevilz
03-12-2012, 09:52 PM
Do you really think Gbinije would be up to stopping either of those two guys? As you said, they are small forwards that are lottery picks. Gbinije is not. He's not experienced enough to have earned the playing time...what makes you think playing him more would have suddenly made him able to guard the best small forwards in the country?

Stopping? No. Making them actually work for their shots? Yes. You don't need to be Shane Battier to make a player work for their shots. You do however need to have a long athlete that you can put on them to make it difficult. You watch. Quincy Miller is going to score 25 points against Duke. Coach K will have no answer for him.

roywhite
03-12-2012, 10:00 PM
I was randomly clicking around the cbssports.com website and saw the "experts'" brackets: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/ncaa-tournament/predictions

There are eight analysts and not a single one has us surviving the Sweet 16! We mostly lost to Baylor or got upset by Xavier. Not even one!

Somehow, strangely, this makes me feel better about our chances. ;)

Well, that part is somewhat comforting.

Reminds me of 2010, where even as a #1 seed, almost none of the talking heads had Duke coming out of the Houston, TX bracket.
The popular choices were Villanova and Baylor.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/story/2012-03-12/ncaa-tournament-bracket-2012-smart-to-pick-duke-upset

Here's a link to the pick against Duke theme.

uh_no
03-12-2012, 10:01 PM
Stopping? No. Making them actually work for their shots? Yes. You don't need to be Shane Battier to make a player work for their shots. You do however need to have a long athlete that you can put on them to make it difficult. You watch. Quincy Miller is going to score 25 points against Duke. Coach K will have no answer for him.

Seeing as Quincy Miller is their 4, I don't think Ryan, Josh, or the Plumlees will have any trouble making him work for his shot.

OldPhiKap
03-12-2012, 10:02 PM
I was randomly clicking around the cbssports.com website and saw the "experts'" brackets: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/ncaa-tournament/predictions

There are eight analysts and not a single one has us surviving the Sweet 16! We mostly lost to Baylor or got upset by Xavier. Not even one!

Somehow, strangely, this makes me feel better about our chances. ;)

We've got them just where we want them!!!




(see that cat? see the cradle?)

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 10:05 PM
Do you really think Gbinije would be up to stopping either of those two guys? As you said, they are small forwards that are lottery picks. Gbinije is not. He's not experienced enough to have earned the playing time...what makes you think playing him more would have suddenly made him able to guard the best small forwards in the country?

I have faith in K and that he does what is right but I do think at some point G will be a stopper on the perimeter and we have been hurt in games like UNC versus Barnes not having someone who can at least look him in the eyes. It is just unfortunate that we have 2 true SF's on our bench and neither is ready to give us effective minutes in K's eyes off the bench.

davekay1971
03-12-2012, 10:07 PM
Stopping? No. Making them actually work for their shots? Yes. You don't need to be Shane Battier to make a player work for their shots. You do however need to have a long athlete that you can put on them to make it difficult. You watch. Quincy Miller is going to score 25 points against Duke. Coach K will have no answer for him.

Sadly, the reality is that when K gave G minutes in the season, he was lost on offense and not stellar on D. K made the decision, apparently, that on the whole there were more effective options for the wings than a guy who wasn't ready on either end of the court. Maybe if K had stubbornly kept throwing G out there, G would be ready to slow down those guys, if we meet them. Maybe we would also have lost 3 or 4 more games along the way and currently be a 3 or 4 seed with an even tougher path. Who knows? Kind of pointless second guessing at this point. Assuming we don't win the tournament, you can certainly find a way to explain how G would have made the difference, if only K had seen the wisdom to play him extensively through the season.

Des Esseintes
03-12-2012, 11:13 PM
I have faith in K and that he does what is right but I do think at some point G will be a stopper on the perimeter and we have been hurt in games like UNC versus Barnes not having someone who can at least look him in the eyes. It is just unfortunate that we have 2 true SF's on our bench and neither is ready to give us effective minutes in K's eyes off the bench.

Sure, but in the game we actually lost to Carolina this season, Barnes only scored 16 points. That means that if Barnes had been held scoreless, UNC would still have won the game. Which is to say that that game sucked for a complex of reasons. Our perimeter defense across the board and not only at the three has been a weakness all season. We lost an incredible two-way asset last year when Singler graduated, and we lost an incredible two-way asset last year when Smith graduated. Having a more prototypical three ready to contribute would obviously help, but I would suggest we were bound to take a step back regardless, considering what was lost.

tommy
03-12-2012, 11:48 PM
I just wanted to point out to all the people that were like "there is no way we will hit an elite athletic small forward there are only like 3 of them in college basketball" that in our likely sweet sixteen and elite eight matchups we will be going against small forwards that are lottery picks. We will have no answer for Quincy Miller and Michael Kid-Gilchrist and it will be our downfall. This is why many of us wanted Gbinije playing from day 1 so that we could use him in these situations.

Problem is, "many of us" don't have 900 wins and 4 national championships to our credit. So what do you think, maybe might be wise to defer to the judgment of one of the top 2 coaches in the history of the sport to have the best idea as to how to maximize the performance and results of the team? Or do "many of us" know more than he does?

Gbinije got a number of opportunities to play this year, and to play against opponents far inferior to guys like Kidd-Gilchrist and Miller. He couldn't handle them, and was obviously hurting the team. He wasn't ready to play this year, plain and simple. He didn't earn the time with his performance at practice or in the games. Folks just gotta let it go on Mike for this year. Just let it go.

sporthenry
03-12-2012, 11:53 PM
Sure, but in the game we actually lost to Carolina this season, Barnes only scored 16 points. That means that if Barnes had been held scoreless, UNC would still have won the game. Which is to say that that game sucked for a complex of reasons. Our perimeter defense across the board and not only at the three has been a weakness all season. We lost an incredible two-way asset last year when Singler graduated, and we lost an incredible two-way asset last year when Smith graduated. Having a more prototypical three ready to contribute would obviously help, but I would suggest we were bound to take a step back regardless, considering what was lost.

You just can't use the "he only scored 16 points" and somehow justify it. Who knows how much attention was paid to him? I wasn't specifically watching but perhaps Duke forced the ball out of his hand much like FSU with Dre? Justifying that the rest of our perimeter defense has been bad and that we lost Singler somehow justifies terrible defense of the 3. It might just be one of many problems on defense but it is still a problem.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2012, 12:28 AM
You just can't use the "he only scored 16 points" and somehow justify it. Who knows how much attention was paid to him? I wasn't specifically watching but perhaps Duke forced the ball out of his hand much like FSU with Dre? Justifying that the rest of our perimeter defense has been bad and that we lost Singler somehow justifies terrible defense of the 3. It might just be one of many problems on defense but it is still a problem.

Friend, you brought up Harrison Barnes, not me. He's your example, so I think it is worthwhile to mention that we lost that game without him murdering us. Moreover, I don't know what I'm "justifying." It would be great if we had a shutdown three. No argument from me there. It would be great if we had a lot of things defensively. A shutdown two and a shutdown point, just as a couple for examples.

gep
03-13-2012, 12:42 AM
Problem is, "many of us" don't have 900 wins and 4 national championships to our credit. So what do you think, maybe might be wise to defer to the judgment of one of the top 2 coaches in the history of the sport to have the best idea as to how to maximize the performance and results of the team? Or do "many of us" know more than he does?

Gbinije got a number of opportunities to play this year, and to play against opponents far inferior to guys like Kidd-Gilchrist and Miller. He couldn't handle them, and was obviously hurting the team. He wasn't ready to play this year, plain and simple. He didn't earn the time with his performance at practice or in the games. Folks just gotta let it go on Mike for this year. Just let it go.

And... I doubt any of us were there at practices, and know what was said, done, instructed, etc. So, yes, I think I defer to those that were at the practices, conducting practices, etc. I'd like to see silent-G get more game time, but he must know that he's having a hard time at practice, and hopefully, is working darn hard to overcome all of that.

TexHawk
03-13-2012, 12:45 AM
Stopping? No. Making them actually work for their shots? Yes. You don't need to be Shane Battier to make a player work for their shots. You do however need to have a long athlete that you can put on them to make it difficult. You watch. Quincy Miller is going to score 25 points against Duke. Coach K will have no answer for him.

Quincy Miller scored 25 points this year ONCE, in a loss to Missouri. He also was held scoreless once. He averages 11 points a game. Points in his last 7 games: 0-12-4-6-2-13-6. None of those teams had a lock-down "long athlete" to make his life difficult.

There are plenty of "athletes" to be scared of in the tournament. Not sure Miller is one of them.

gam7
03-13-2012, 01:40 AM
I've seen a lot of hand-wringing about the possibility of our playing Baylor. I'll admit that I have seen almost none of Baylor this year, but that small fact won't keep me from trying to change your opinion about them. I'm sure they are good (as they were two years ago), but they don't strike me as being as bad a matchup for us as many of you think.

First, their backcourt is not the type of backcourt with which we have struggled this year. Baylor's starting backcourt is short. Pierre Jackson is 5'10" and Heslip is 6'2" - both shorter than our usual backcourt counterparts. Heslip does not appear to be athletic, strong or quick. I'm sure he has other attributes, but bigger, stronger, quicker guards are the types that have given us fits. Heslip doesn't fit that mold. On the other hand, Jackson does seem very quick, which will help him get into the lane. Obviously, that's been a problem for this Duke team at times. But, again, the shorter guards have not given us the same trouble that bigger, quick guards have. Also, I compared Pierre's numbers to Tweety Carter's from two years ago. Not only do they look alike on the court, but they are pretty similar statistically (though Pierre is a bit more efficient - higher FG%, higher 3FG%, slightly higher FT%). But, on the down side, Jackson is averaging 3.6 TOs per game, a full TO per game more than Tweety did. Plus, his name is Pierre. We handled Tweety two years ago to the tune of 12 point on 12 shots, 4 assists, 4 TOs, and I would expect us to be pretty confident in a similar blueprint for Pierre (assuming - we have personnel who can do what we did to Tweety - which may be a big assumption).

As for the bigs, when a frontline is long, athletic and BIG - like Carolina and FSU, we struggle, but so does everyone else. But when I think back on the season, we seemed to have bigger problems with BIG (think Reggie Johnson) than athleticism. No question - Baylor has tons of athletic and long guys (PJIII, Acy, Miller, Jones), but I don't think hey don't fit the profile of the type of size that has caused all sorts of problems for us. Perry Jones obviously has the potential to cause problems down low with his size, but he seems to drift away from the basket a fair bit and disappears for long stretches (taking a page out of the Andre Dawkins Book of Disappearance). Acy likes to dunk and scowl, and Quincy Miller is a good player but again, not the types that I would consider bad match ups (assuming we have Ryan in there to counterbalance the height factor to some degree).

Anyway, I know Baylor is good, but I think we would have had a tougher time with Marquette (terrible backcourt match-up) and FSU (terrible match-up all-around even though we played well against them in all three games this year with the exception of the first half in the ACC tourney).

sporthenry
03-13-2012, 08:37 AM
Friend, you brought up Harrison Barnes, not me. He's your example, so I think it is worthwhile to mention that we lost that game without him murdering us. Moreover, I don't know what I'm "justifying." It would be great if we had a shutdown three. No argument from me there. It would be great if we had a lot of things defensively. A shutdown two and a shutdown point, just as a couple for examples.

Yes, I brought up Barnes as one example. Again, you can't use the transitive property that somehow him only scoring 16 and us losing by 18 makes it seem like we would have lost even if Barnes didn't score 16. But since you didn't want to just take the example at face value, I'll break it down a bit more. Versus OSU, Buford a 6'6 wing went for 20 points. Duke struggled mightily against UW where their 6'4 guard went for 22, 6'5 guard went for 23, and 6'6 guard went for 16. 6'4 Wyatt for Temple went off for 22. 6'6 Hardaway Jr. went for 19. 6'5 Lorenzo Brown went for 20. Now I know all of these guys might not have been covered by the 3 especially in the UW game and there were a few games where we played solid on the 3 most notably would be Tennessee where Tatum was 4-8 for 10 points and Releford for KU only got something like 6 points. But on the whole, I think many would argue we don't cover big guards very well.

Barnes was just an example (and in the first game he went 8-16 for 25 points) but I never said we needed a shutdown 3 but an actual 3. Barnes isn't even the greatest example because he doesn't use his size except to shoot over the defender on his jump shots. Yes, his size helps in that respect but imagine him attacking the rim or posting up any of our guards? I just fear for the day when Curry or Rivers is trying to cover Acy in the post. Sure we can double him in the post but that will create openings other places that wouldn't necessarily occur if we actually had a 6'6 wing to keep him honest.

CDu
03-13-2012, 08:53 AM
I've seen a lot of hand-wringing about the possibility of our playing Baylor. I'll admit that I have seen almost none of Baylor this year, but that small fact won't keep me from trying to change your opinion about them. I'm sure they are good (as they were two years ago), but they don't strike me as being as bad a matchup for us as many of you think.

First, their backcourt is not the type of backcourt with which we have struggled this year. Baylor's starting backcourt is short. Pierre Jackson is 5'10" and Heslip is 6'2" - both shorter than our usual backcourt counterparts. Heslip does not appear to be athletic, strong or quick. I'm sure he has other attributes, but bigger, stronger, quicker guards are the types that have given us fits. Heslip doesn't fit that mold. On the other hand, Jackson does seem very quick, which will help him get into the lane. Obviously, that's been a problem for this Duke team at times. But, again, the shorter guards have not given us the same trouble that bigger, quick guards have. Also, I compared Pierre's numbers to Tweety Carter's from two years ago. Not only do they look alike on the court, but they are pretty similar statistically (though Pierre is a bit more efficient - higher FG%, higher 3FG%, slightly higher FT%). But, on the down side, Jackson is averaging 3.6 TOs per game, a full TO per game more than Tweety did. Plus, his name is Pierre. We handled Tweety two years ago to the tune of 12 point on 12 shots, 4 assists, 4 TOs, and I would expect us to be pretty confident in a similar blueprint for Pierre (assuming - we have personnel who can do what we did to Tweety - which may be a big assumption).

As for the bigs, when a frontline is long, athletic and BIG - like Carolina and FSU, we struggle, but so does everyone else. But when I think back on the season, we seemed to have bigger problems with BIG (think Reggie Johnson) than athleticism. No question - Baylor has tons of athletic and long guys (PJIII, Acy, Miller, Jones), but I don't think hey don't fit the profile of the type of size that has caused all sorts of problems for us. Perry Jones obviously has the potential to cause problems down low with his size, but he seems to drift away from the basket a fair bit and disappears for long stretches (taking a page out of the Andre Dawkins Book of Disappearance). Acy likes to dunk and scowl, and Quincy Miller is a good player but again, not the types that I would consider bad match ups (assuming we have Ryan in there to counterbalance the height factor to some degree).

Anyway, I know Baylor is good, but I think we would have had a tougher time with Marquette (terrible backcourt match-up) and FSU (terrible match-up all-around even though we played well against them in all three games this year with the exception of the first half in the ACC tourney).

I think the biggest thing in our favor should we wind up facing Baylor is Drew's general insistence on playing zone. If we're shooting well, that is a huge advantage for us.

The biggest disadvantage will be that someone (likely Rivers) will have to guard a MUCH taller Miller. That, and Baylor has no shortage of big men to go to in the event of foul trouble. Additionally, we'll have to contain Jackson. If he can beat our guards on the perimeter, he'll have a field day throwing alleyoops to all of their athletes.

superdave
03-13-2012, 09:48 AM
Sadly, the reality is that when K gave G minutes in the season, he was lost on offense and not stellar on D. K made the decision, apparently, that on the whole there were more effective options for the wings than a guy who wasn't ready on either end of the court. Maybe if K had stubbornly kept throwing G out there, G would be ready to slow down those guys, if we meet them. Maybe we would also have lost 3 or 4 more games along the way and currently be a 3 or 4 seed with an even tougher path. Who knows? Kind of pointless second guessing at this point. Assuming we don't win the tournament, you can certainly find a way to explain how G would have made the difference, if only K had seen the wisdom to play him extensively through the season.

Agreed. I think Michael will be a rotation guy next year, but he did not show in his playing time that he was ready for rotation minutes this year. Quinn did and managed to carve out a role.

I'd like for people advocating Gbinije's role retrospectively to point out specific instances where he proved himself or showed that he could stop Barnes or was deserving of a much larger role. Specifics please.

A-Tex Devil
03-13-2012, 11:22 AM
I think the biggest thing in our favor should we wind up facing Baylor is Drew's general insistence on playing zone. If we're shooting well, that is a huge advantage for us.

The biggest disadvantage will be that someone (likely Rivers) will have to guard a MUCH taller Miller. That, and Baylor has no shortage of big men to go to in the event of foul trouble. Additionally, we'll have to contain Jackson. If he can beat our guards on the perimeter, he'll have a field day throwing alleyoops to all of their athletes.

I've watched Baylor about 5 or 6 times this year. Their beta is HUGE. They could lose to SDSU and they could beat Kentucky by 10.

Since this is a "regional" discussion, I don't think it's out of line to discuss Baylor's pros and cons vis a vis Duke, even though both teams have 2 games to play to get to the 2010 rematch. Purely hypothetical.

Here is where Baylor has the advantage:
1. Size: Their front line size is the only one in America that can rival North Carolina in terms of talent and size, and their forwards compliment each other well. Perry Jones is the offensive star in the Lamar Odom mold, Quincy Acy, if you remember, is an offensive rebounding force and can block shots. He is also not to be with as a low post player as he will score if you don't guard him well. Quincy Miller is a talent, but like John Michael McAdoo on the heels, he is young and has to wait his turn (if he doesn't come out anyway). He would be our starting 3 right now and would be the type of player that would make a huge difference at Duke. They've also got about 3 more guys that go 6'10" off the bench, so they can ring up fouls on our big men.

2. Skill up front: As mentioned, Perry Jones is skilled in the Lamar Odom mold. Quincy Miller will be a top 10 pick if he sticks around a year. This team is very talented and skilled.

3. Adequate complimentary guard play. Their guards are average, but Heslip can fill it up from 3 and often finds himself open when teams have to double Jones and Miller. Pierre Jackson is their second leading scorer, and will burn you if you ignore them. Ty Thornton will have to guard Quincy Miller like he did Barnes, and Miller is taller. Curry, Dawkins, Cook and Rivers need to be able to handle their business on these 2 average guards on the defensive end. As CDU mentioned, Jackson will have a field day throwing alley oops if our big men have to help on penetration. An absolute field day. Have to, have to, have to stay in front of him.

Here is where Duke has the advantate:
1. Coaching. Enough said. Drew is finally starting to see the light of the man-to-man, though, so if we start raining 3s, expect him to go to that. If we play Baylor, I expect K to have a wrinkle to throw at them with several days to prepare.

2. Guard play. While Baylor's guards are adequate, they aren't great defenders, and can be downright bad sometimes (see how Mizzou just torched them). We should have the advantage here, and we'll need to exploit it on the offensive end. We need to also make sure we hold are own on the defensive end.

3. Shooting. As mentioned, Baylor plays a ton of zone. This is one of K's best shooting teams ever. If we are shooting well from threes, that will be huge, and if we can continue to hit when Drew inevitably switches to man, we will be in really good shape.

Baylor is nothing to be sneezed at, but our advantages in coaching and guard play could overcome the huge size and talent advantage they have up front.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2012, 11:35 AM
Yes, I brought up Barnes as one example. Again, you can't use the transitive property that somehow him only scoring 16 and us losing by 18 makes it seem like we would have lost even if Barnes didn't score 16. But since you didn't want to just take the example at face value, I'll break it down a bit more. Versus OSU, Buford a 6'6 wing went for 20 points. Duke struggled mightily against UW where their 6'4 guard went for 22, 6'5 guard went for 23, and 6'6 guard went for 16. 6'4 Wyatt for Temple went off for 22. 6'6 Hardaway Jr. went for 19. 6'5 Lorenzo Brown went for 20. Now I know all of these guys might not have been covered by the 3 especially in the UW game and there were a few games where we played solid on the 3 most notably would be Tennessee where Tatum was 4-8 for 10 points and Releford for KU only got something like 6 points. But on the whole, I think many would argue we don't cover big guards very well.

Barnes was just an example (and in the first game he went 8-16 for 25 points) but I never said we needed a shutdown 3 but an actual 3. Barnes isn't even the greatest example because he doesn't use his size except to shoot over the defender on his jump shots. Yes, his size helps in that respect but imagine him attacking the rim or posting up any of our guards? I just fear for the day when Curry or Rivers is trying to cover Acy in the post. Sure we can double him in the post but that will create openings other places that wouldn't necessarily occur if we actually had a 6'6 wing to keep him honest.

I agree with most of what you're saying here. A couple of points.

1) We did not struggle "mightily" with Washington. We built a huge lead in that game and coasted to the finish line. They cut the lead considerably, but the game never felt in danger. That was a game in which we failed to maintain intensity. We were in the clearest possible way the superior squad on the court, however.

2) Many of the guys you mention are really good players. I mean Hardaway has lit us up before, when we actually had suffocating perimeter D. Every year there is a list of wings who have fantastic games against Duke; in and of itself, that fact does not mean we have a problem at the three. We do have a problem at the three this year, but some cherrypicked individual performances are not especially persuasive on that score.

3) We could do this exact same exercise with opposing point guards who get in the lane. We miss Nolan every bit as much (on defense) as we miss Kyle. I mean, it would be great if we had a guy to check Barnes better. But what would fan-effing-tastic would be someone who could turn Marshall's evening into a hall of mirrors like Nolan did last ACC tourney final. And I think you point to that yourself in mentioning the possibility of Curry getting posted up by Acy. Curry never plays the three. He's either getting posted up on a switch, which would indicate little about the effectiveness of our three, or he's getting posted up by an opposing two, which speaks to our general lack of size on the perimeter, not the three.

But I don't want to sound as though I'm dismissing your point. We have a legit size issue on the wing this season. To your list of issues it creates, I'd add that rebounding is more of a problem than it should be, considering how excellent we are in the post.

A-Tex Devil
03-13-2012, 09:17 PM
Just watched the end of the WKU/MVSU play in game. Amazing comeback by WKU. MVSU hit a meaning less bucket at end as time expired to make a 3 point game a 1 point game. They cut to Obama at end and he is intently looking at scoreboard.... to see if the last bucket counted? What I couldn't tell is whether he had WKU -2.5 or MVSU +2.5. Hopefully for the latter.

In all seriousness, UK v. WKU should be a fun crowd for a 1-16 game.

-jk
03-13-2012, 09:17 PM
The South's off to a rollicking start. Western Kentucky came back from 16 down and under five minutes to beat Mississippi Valley, 59-58. An astonishing box score: Combined 6 for 39 from 3. 45 turnovers. 42 fouls. 92 rebounds.

16 v 16. Parity?

-jk

Duvall
03-13-2012, 09:31 PM
The South's off to a rollicking start. Western Kentucky came back from 16 down and under five minutes to beat Mississippi Valley, 59-58.

Would be interesting to ask the Mississippi Valley coach if this was a worse way to lose than his last NCAA tournament experience.

ice-9
03-13-2012, 11:04 PM
I've watched Baylor about 5 or 6 times this year. Their beta is HUGE. They could lose to SDSU and they could beat Kentucky by 10.

Since this is a "regional" discussion, I don't think it's out of line to discuss Baylor's pros and cons vis a vis Duke, even though both teams have 2 games to play to get to the 2010 rematch. Purely hypothetical...

Pretty much everyone has Baylor circled in the Sweet 16 as our possible kryptonite...while I don't think they are our ideal match-up, Baylor isn't a team without flaws. They can be vulnerable. Baylor turns it over a lot (21% of possessions), they don't rebound well defensively despite all that size and athleticism (208th in the country), and they're bad at preventing the 3-point shot (120th among all teams).

These are weaknesses that Duke can exploit. While we don't force many turnovers, we have the depth to press. We're an above-average offensive rebounding team, and we are excellent 3-point shooters. If the shot is falling and if the Plumlees can get those offensive rebounds, we can be explosive against the Bears.

Baylor also likes to force turnovers, but we're good in taking care of the ball.

The area where we are most troubled in is defensive rebounding, because Baylor is a very good offensive rebounding team. We will have to make a conscious effort to block out.

If we can rebound and have a decent shooting night, we should be able to win this match-up.

jv001
03-14-2012, 11:50 AM
Just watched the end of the WKU/MVSU play in game. Amazing comeback by WKU. MVSU hit a meaning less bucket at end as time expired to make a 3 point game a 1 point game. They cut to Obama at end and he is intently looking at scoreboard.... to see if the last bucket counted? What I couldn't tell is whether he had WKU -2.5 or MVSU +2.5. Hopefully for the latter.

In all seriousness, UK v. WKU should be a fun crowd for a 1-16 game.

Just watched Obama make his bracket public and once again he picks the tarheels to win it all(over Kentucky). He picked them the last year they won it all. He picks Baylor to beat Duke. But for what it's worth he picked Kansas the last two years. Bilas picked Kentucky to beat unc in the final. I like Bilas much more than Obama. GoDuke!

superdave
03-14-2012, 01:23 PM
Just watched Obama make his bracket public and once again he picks the tarheels to win it all(over Kentucky). He picked them the last year they won it all. He picks Baylor to beat Duke. But for what it's worth he picked Kansas the last two years. Bilas picked Kentucky to beat unc in the final. I like Bilas much more than Obama. GoDuke!

Obama thinks North Carolina is a swing state this year.

Read nothing more into it!

A-Tex Devil
03-14-2012, 01:26 PM
Obama thinks North Carolina is a swing state this year.

Read nothing more into it!

Then he probably should have picked Ohio St. ;)

superdave
03-14-2012, 02:03 PM
I finally filled out my brackets. I have a terrible feeling that Kentucky is just too good this year with Davis in the middle. He reminds me of Marcus Camby. I think UK knocks off Duke in the Elite 8 and rolls to the title.

When I watched the UK-Unc game back in December I thought they were the two most talented teams this year. I dont think either has been that impressive all season. Unc has under-whelmed consistently by loafing and disappearing at times. You cannot lose at FSU by 33 and convince me you are a top 3-4 team. There's too much downside with the collective apathy on the roster and the inability to adjust in the coach. But I think UK only really has to overcome Teague's youth and mistakes and they can run through this field. You know what you are getting from Davis and MKG is an incredible glue guy who does everything. If they get average play out of Jones and Teague, they might not be contested.

My pick is for Calipari's talent to finally come through for him.

Super "Darn it all" Dave

Kedsy
03-14-2012, 02:32 PM
My pick is for Calipari's talent to finally come through for him.

They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.

DukieinSoCal
03-14-2012, 02:33 PM
I don't particularly like Calipari, either, but if we can't win it all, I just hope it's anyone but Carolina.

And Ky will probably have to vacate the wins eventually, anyways, if Calipari's track record holds. :)


I finally filled out my brackets. I have a terrible feeling that Kentucky is just too good this year with Davis in the middle. He reminds me of Marcus Camby. I think UK knocks off Duke in the Elite 8 and rolls to the title.

When I watched the UK-Unc game back in December I thought they were the two most talented teams this year. I dont think either has been that impressive all season. Unc has under-whelmed consistently by loafing and disappearing at times. You cannot lose at FSU by 33 and convince me you are a top 3-4 team. There's too much downside with the collective apathy on the roster and the inability to adjust in the coach. But I think UK only really has to overcome Teague's youth and mistakes and they can run through this field. You know what you are getting from Davis and MKG is an incredible glue guy who does everything. If they get average play out of Jones and Teague, they might not be contested.

My pick is for Calipari's talent to finally come through for him.

Super "Darn it all" Dave

timmy c
03-14-2012, 03:10 PM
Will Alex Murphy and MP3 get rings when Duke wins the 2012 title? Or will they have to wait until Duke's 2013 title? :D

Go Duke!

Jderf
03-14-2012, 03:18 PM
Will Alex Murphy and MP3 get rings when Duke wins the 2012 title? Or will they have to wait until Duke's 2013 title? :D

Go Duke!


We shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves, but I believe they would receive rings. Although they are redshirts, they are still alowed to get the jewelry because they are technically eligible to play (if the staff wanted them to). This is unlike the situation with Seth in 2010, when he was a transfer redshirt and was ineligible under any circumstances. More educated posters, please correct me if I'm wrong.

superdave
03-14-2012, 03:25 PM
They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.

Yes, I understand their limitations, namely youth. I think Teague is the key. If he goes out and plays even with his point guard opponent, I think the rest of the UK roster is that good. I am really high on Davis and Gilchrist. I think whatever they get out of Jones is gravy.

I think Ohio State is the one team that has a high probability of getting hot and winning 6 games. I'd compare OSU to 2010 Duke - mature, great defense, some real gamers. Unc should and could be in that conversation, but I've seen too much bad out of them this year. And with Henson not being full strength, it is easy to dismiss their chances of winning 6.

The rest of the contenders - Syracuse with Melo out; Duke, Kansas and Michigan State not quite being in the same class - would have to have help to win 6 games in a row. If the tournament goes into upset mode like last year, any of the 1 and 2 seeds could make a run without having to play their toughest potential opponent. But if the top seeds hang around, I like UK's chances of besting each one. Again, for me it comes back to MKG and Davis.

NSDukeFan
03-14-2012, 03:56 PM
They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.
I agree that it would be a first for a team that young to win a title, but I also wonder if it is also a first for a team that young to be that much more talented than the rest of the field. I don't think they will win, just because I would definitely pick the field vs. them, but do think they have as good a chance as anyone to win it. What a wishy-washy point, I know.

Will Alex Murphy and MP3 get rings when Duke wins the 2012 title? Or will they have to wait until Duke's 2013 title? :D

Go Duke!


We shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves, but I believe they would receive rings. Although they are redshirts, they are still alowed to get the jewelry because they are technically eligible to play (if the staff wanted them to). This is unlike the situation with Seth in 2010, when he was a transfer redshirt and was ineligible under any circumstances. More educated posters, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I agree we shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves. We don't know exactly what the team will look like in 2013. ;)

Yes, I understand their limitations, namely youth. I think Teague is the key. If he goes out and plays even with his point guard opponent, I think the rest of the UK roster is that good. I am really high on Davis and Gilchrist. I think whatever they get out of Jones is gravy.

I think Ohio State is the one team that has a high probability of getting hot and winning 6 games. I'd compare OSU to 2010 Duke - mature, great defense, some real gamers. Unc should and could be in that conversation, but I've seen too much bad out of them this year. And with Henson not being full strength, it is easy to dismiss their chances of winning 6.

The rest of the contenders - Syracuse with Melo out; Duke, Kansas and Michigan State not quite being in the same class - would have to have help to win 6 games in a row. If the tournament goes into upset mode like last year, any of the 1 and 2 seeds could make a run without having to play their toughest potential opponent. But if the top seeds hang around, I like UK's chances of besting each one. Again, for me it comes back to MKG and Davis.

I agree that Davis and Gilchrist are outstanding players, and Jones seems to be again playing like the lottery pick he will be. They are very tough defensively and I would pick them in a best of seven vs. anyone. One game situation, though, I think they will get beat by someone (hopefully, Duke.)

superdave
03-14-2012, 04:14 PM
The only really young team I could think of to compare UK to was the 2003 Syracuse title team. Here's their distribution of minutes:

Carmelo - Freshman - 1274
McNamara - Freshman - 1235
Warrick Sophomore - 1146
Duany - Senior - 944
McNeil - Junior - 657
Forth - Sophomore - 618
Edelin - Freshman - 533
Pace - Sophomore - 469

No one else had over 100 minutes on the year.

Minutes broken down by class.

Freshman - 3042 (44%)
Sophomore - 2233 (32%)
Senior - 944 (14%)
Junior - 657 (10%)
Total - 6876

Here's a similar comparison for UK this year:

Teague - Freshman - 1102
Davis - Freshman - 1073
Lamb - Sophomore - 1060
Gilchrist - Freshman - 1059
Jones - Sophomore - 922
Miller - Senior - 861
Wiltjer - Freshman - 427
Vargas - Senior - 191

Freshman - 3661 (55%)
Sophomore - 1982 (30%)
Senior - 1052 (15%)
Total - 6695

So UK gives 11% more minutes to freshmen, and about the same to everyone else. The difference comes from having no juniors on the roster. They all went pro after 2010 season.

That's younger than the 2003 Cuse roster, but not that much younger.

superdave
03-14-2012, 04:16 PM
2003 Syracuse
Freshman - 3042 (44%)
Sophomore - 2233 (32%)

2012 Kentucky
Freshman - 3661 (55%)
Sophomore - 1982 (30%)




Another way to think about this is 76% of Cuse's minutes went to underclassmen. 85% of UK's minutes are going to underclassmen.

Kedsy
03-14-2012, 04:22 PM
Another way to think about this is 76% of Cuse's minutes went to underclassmen. 85% of UK's minutes are going to underclassmen.

Yes, and that is a difference of 18 minutes a game, which to me seems fairly significant. That's the equivalent of one upperclassman, solid rotation player that Kentucky doesn't have, and that's comparing them to the youngest team you can think of.

superdave
03-14-2012, 04:38 PM
Yes, and that is a difference of 18 minutes a game, which to me seems fairly significant. That's the equivalent of one upperclassman, solid rotation player that Kentucky doesn't have, and that's comparing them to the youngest team you can think of.

That's a good way of thinking about it. The one guy from Cuse who fits that description is McNeil and he averaged 3 and 4 a game, which is hardly irreplaceable.

I'd also argue that UK's collection of talent is way better - Davis is pegged at #1 in the draft, Gilchrist #2, Jones #18, Teague #39, Lamb #51. Melo went #3 that year, Warrick went #19 in 2005 and McNamara went undrafted.

Also, Cuse went into the NCAAs with 5 losses on the year and UK only has 2.

If UK had a veteran leader like Josh Harrelson was last year, I'd feel better about it. Part of my thinking in picking UK is that all the other teams have flaws or have under-performed for stretches of this season.

Super "Maybe I'll go to the East Region discussion and start arguing for Ohio State now" Dave

NashvilleDevil
03-14-2012, 04:38 PM
The only really young team I could think of to compare UK to was the 2003 Syracuse title team. Here's their distribution of minutes:

Carmelo - Freshman - 1274
McNamara - Freshman - 1235
Warrick Sophomore - 1146
Duany - Senior - 944
McNeil - Junior - 657
Forth - Sophomore - 618
Edelin - Freshman - 533
Pace - Sophomore - 469

No one else had over 100 minutes on the year.

Minutes broken down by class.

Freshman - 3042 (44%)
Sophomore - 2233 (32%)
Senior - 944 (14%)
Junior - 657 (10%)
Total - 6876

Here's a similar comparison for UK this year:

Teague - Freshman - 1102
Davis - Freshman - 1073
Lamb - Sophomore - 1060
Gilchrist - Freshman - 1059
Jones - Sophomore - 922
Miller - Senior - 861
Wiltjer - Freshman - 427
Vargas - Senior - 191

Freshman - 3661 (55%)
Sophomore - 1982 (30%)
Senior - 1052 (15%)
Total - 6695

So UK gives 11% more minutes to freshmen, and about the same to everyone else. The difference comes from having no juniors on the roster. They all went pro after 2010 season.

That's younger than the 2003 Cuse roster, but not that much younger.

What was the minutes breakdown for the 05-06 Florida team? I think the core of that team was sophomores.

Kedsy
03-14-2012, 04:46 PM
That's a good way of thinking about it. The one guy from Cuse who fits that description is McNeil and he averaged 3 and 4 a game, which is hardly irreplaceable.

It's not the production that needs to be replaced, it's the veteran savvy. Kentucky has already started to show adverse reaction to pressure in the SEC tournament. Doesn't mean they won't win the championship, but as I said before it would be a historically young team to do so.

Kedsy
03-14-2012, 04:58 PM
What was the minutes breakdown for the 05-06 Florida team? I think the core of that team was sophomores.

FLORIDA, 2006
----------------
Freshmen: 1071 minutes (14%)
Sophomores: 4380 minutes (57%)
Juniors: 1819 minutes (23.5%)
Seniors: 437 minutes (5.5%)

Upperclassmen provided 29% of the minutes, a bit more than 2003 Syracuse's 24% and almost twice as much as 2012 Kentucky's 15%.

superdave
03-14-2012, 05:25 PM
FLORIDA, 2006
----------------
Freshmen: 1071 minutes (14%)
Sophomores: 4380 minutes (57%)
Juniors: 1819 minutes (23.5%)
Seniors: 437 minutes (5.5%)

Upperclassmen provided 29% of the minutes, a bit more than 2003 Syracuse's 24% and almost twice as much as 2012 Kentucky's 15%.

That team is probably more comparable to this year's UK team from a talent standpoint - in 2007 Horford went #3, Brewer went #7, Noah went #9, Green went #52. But they were sophomores, even though none had as big a freshman year as any of the top UK guys had as freshmen this year or last.

subzero02
03-14-2012, 05:41 PM
That team is probably more comparable to this year's UK team from a talent standpoint - in 2007 Horford went #3, Brewer went #7, Noah went #9, Green went #52. But they were sophomores, even though none had as big a freshman year as any of the top UK guys had as freshmen this year or last.

Horford, Brewer, Noah and Green were juniors in 2007... The year of their second national title

Greg_Newton
03-14-2012, 06:39 PM
They're good, of course, but if they win the championship it will be a historic first. No team with such a young roster has ever won it. Kentucky starts 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores, and the rest of the rotation consists of a freshman and a senior. One upperclassman of their players who get meaningful minutes.

Even the Fab Five Michigan team had three upperclassmen in its rotation. Plus, they didn't win, though obviously they came close.

Interesting. Their guys were so hyped even in high school that I forget just how inexperienced they are sometimes.

I think the one gamechanger that they have in that respect is Anthony Davis, though. He's kind of a safety net for anything; even if they start playing their age during a certain game, that guy can clean up mistakes like no other. What he does is so easy for him physically that it's almost hard for him to have an "off night," especially on the defensive end. Plus, Terrance Jones is an aggressive, physical beast with more big-time NCAA performances under his belt than 99% of players in the country as a sophomore.

I'll be most interested to see how Teague holds up. I've always thought he was an unreliable wild card, who was capable of some explosive players but very overrated as an overall PG. He seems to be growing up as of late, but I'm not sure how well I trust him to stay on an even keel for a 6-game NCAA run.

Kedsy
03-14-2012, 10:10 PM
Interesting. Their guys were so hyped even in high school that I forget just how inexperienced they are sometimes.

I think the one gamechanger that they have in that respect is Anthony Davis, though. He's kind of a safety net for anything; even if they start playing their age during a certain game, that guy can clean up mistakes like no other. What he does is so easy for him physically that it's almost hard for him to have an "off night," especially on the defensive end. Plus, Terrance Jones is an aggressive, physical beast with more big-time NCAA performances under his belt than 99% of players in the country as a sophomore.

I'll be most interested to see how Teague holds up. I've always thought he was an unreliable wild card, who was capable of some explosive players but very overrated as an overall PG. He seems to be growing up as of late, but I'm not sure how well I trust him to stay on an even keel for a 6-game NCAA run.

I think UK's inexperience showed in the SEC tournament. They beat a mediocre LSU team by only 9 points (60-51), beat Florida (a #7 seed in the NCAAT) by only 3 (74-71), and then lost to Vanderbilt (a #5 seed in the NCAAT) by 7 (64-71). Teague shot 0 for 5 against LSU, for 2 points, and 0 for 7 against Vanderbilt, for zero points. Will Kentucky bounce back now? Probably, they're very talented. But it's a lot of pressure for such a young team.

uh_no
03-14-2012, 10:47 PM
I think UK's inexperience showed in the SEC tournament. They beat a mediocre LSU team by only 9 points (60-51), beat Florida (a #7 seed in the NCAAT) by only 3 (74-71), and then lost to Vanderbilt (a #5 seed in the NCAAT) by 7 (64-71). Teague shot 0 for 5 against LSU, for 2 points, and 0 for 7 against Vanderbilt, for zero points. Will Kentucky bounce back now? Probably, they're very talented. But it's a lot of pressure for such a young team.

Not to mention they were down in each of those games....I argue their gaudy record is very much the product of a terrible SEC slate...

UNC played them to within 1, louisville to within 7....if they had to play those caliber of teams all the time...in the Big 10/12/east....or even have to play a few times against UNC/Duke and FSU....they would have at least 3-4 losses.

stixof96
03-14-2012, 10:56 PM
I think UK's inexperience showed in the SEC tournament. They beat a mediocre LSU team by only 9 points (60-51), beat Florida (a #7 seed in the NCAAT) by only 3 (74-71), and then lost to Vanderbilt (a #5 seed in the NCAAT) by 7 (64-71). Teague shot 0 for 5 against LSU, for 2 points, and 0 for 7 against Vanderbilt, for zero points. Will Kentucky bounce back now? Probably, they're very talented. But it's a lot of pressure for such a young team.

Kentucky won't win it. They will definately have a meltdown again before these 6 pressure games are done.

House G
03-14-2012, 11:32 PM
Some of their fans are already melting down lol:
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20120314/NEWS01/303140078/1029/sports/Some-UK-fans-think-UPS-delivers-pain-ad?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CSports%7Cs

UrinalCake
03-15-2012, 12:15 AM
I don't think the lack of experience is what will do Kentucky in. I think it's the fact that every one of their players expects to be in the NBA next year, and the tournament is their place to prove it. I'm sure Calipari tries to sell them all on the fact that winning is the most important thing, that it will help their draft status if they win as a team, but seriously, what are the chances they'll believe that?

Chris Randolph
03-15-2012, 12:29 AM
Kentucky is the one team that I would not be surprised either way, meaning I could see them win it all or I could see them get beat this weekend. The team dynamics give you an argument either way. I do think too much youth can be a bit of a downfall in the tourney but sometimes the talent is so great it can cover the inexperience up.

In the end it is hard for me to fill out my bracket and not put them in the Final 4. But deep down I feel their lack of consistent perimeter shooting and turnover prone/overrated point guard will do them in before New Orleans

DukieTiger
03-15-2012, 12:49 AM
Pomeroy's giving Kentucky a 19% chance at winning the title. That's better than any other team, but it also means that in the thousands and thousands of simulations that were run, someone else won the title more than 80% of the time. But their odds are quite good to win it- they have roughly the same chance of going to the NC game as Duke does of making the Elite 8.

While Kentucky is a very good team and has been dominant this year (I find it funny when we talk about a team with 2 total losses as having meltdowns) I don't think there is anything regarding their youth or their makeup (re: pro auditions, etc.) that will cause them to "choke." If Kentucky loses, I could see it being for one of two reasons:

1) They have a bad night and/or they run into a team having an awesome night. People make a lot of noise about teams (including Duke) choking, but what makes March Madness so great is that legitimately anyone can win on any night. Sometimes the "best" teams don't win it all. Sometimes they do.

2) Lack of depth. What happens if Davis gets into foul trouble? Or Teague? For all the talent they have, they need their key players to stay out of foul trouble in order for them to truly click on all cylinders. Duh. Doesn't everyone. But who knows if that will happen 6 times in a row over the next 3 weeks?

uh_no
03-15-2012, 12:57 AM
I don't think the lack of experience is what will do Kentucky in. I think it's the fact that every one of their players expects to be in the NBA next year, and the tournament is their place to prove it. I'm sure Calipari tries to sell them all on the fact that winning is the most important thing, that it will help their draft status if they win as a team, but seriously, what are the chances they'll believe that?


The problem, in my opinion, is that calipari just isn't a great xs and os or in game coach....his offense is pretty much dribble it and drive....if you get stuck pass it...his defense is basic man to man....credit him for getting them to play ANY defense....so in that sense I guess he has some motivational skills....but you just look at the way his teams lose....the game against west virginia rings huge....they were something like 0-24 from 3pt in the first half? what kind of half decent coach doesn't make the necessary adjustments, or is UNABLE to make said adjustments when their team is so frequently doing something they are so horrendously bad at (and make no mistake, that UK team was not a great 3pt shooting team all season)...he had no idea what to do...duke takes a lot of threes, but 24 in a half is crazy....and when you're making 0 of them, you know that not all of them could have been good shots....(and we won't even get to the fact that he and his team were looking forward to duke in the final 4...)


furthermore...freethrows....cost him the (what would have been vacated) national title against kansas, cost him the game against uconn last year (4-12)...not to mention they shot 55% (16-29) in the second half....


part of it is that he has inexperienced guys every year who are going to be less coachable and who are going to make stupid mistakes.....part of it is that he gets top recruits and plays in a weak conference, gets a high seed, and then some good team comes along and puts him in his place (that was his mojo at memphis....and the SEC hasn't been much better since he's been there...)

Wander
03-15-2012, 01:50 AM
I think UK's inexperience showed in the SEC tournament. They beat a mediocre LSU team by only 9 points (60-51), beat Florida (a #7 seed in the NCAAT) by only 3 (74-71), and then lost to Vanderbilt (a #5 seed in the NCAAT) by 7 (64-71). Teague shot 0 for 5 against LSU, for 2 points, and 0 for 7 against Vanderbilt, for zero points. Will Kentucky bounce back now? Probably, they're very talented. But it's a lot of pressure for such a young team.



I don't think the lack of experience is what will do Kentucky in. I think it's the fact that every one of their players expects to be in the NBA next year, and the tournament is their place to prove it. I'm sure Calipari tries to sell them all on the fact that winning is the most important thing, that it will help their draft status if they win as a team, but seriously, what are the chances they'll believe that?


I think you both are missing the most direct point. Kentucky is not a great three point shooting team, and that's what showed in the SEC tournament.

When they lose to Wichita State, it'll be because they get baited into taking more threes than they should, while their opponent makes a great percentage of them.

stixof96
03-15-2012, 10:30 AM
The NCAAT creates the perfect mine field for Kty. All of their skel;etons in the closet come pouring out as soon as a team steps up and hits them in the mouth early and keeps the pressure on them after that. Kty is like a big ole balloon, all you have to do is put a little hole in it at will blow itself up after that.

COYS
03-15-2012, 10:43 AM
The problem, in my opinion, is that calipari just isn't a great xs and os or in game coach....his offense is pretty much dribble it and drive....if you get stuck pass it...his defense is basic man to man....credit him for getting them to play ANY defense....so in that sense I guess he has some motivational skills....but you just look at the way his teams lose....the game against west virginia rings huge....they were something like 0-24 from 3pt in the first half? what kind of half decent coach doesn't make the necessary adjustments, or is UNABLE to make said adjustments when their team is so frequently doing something they are so horrendously bad at (and make no mistake, that UK team was not a great 3pt shooting team all season)...he had no idea what to do...duke takes a lot of threes, but 24 in a half is crazy....and when you're making 0 of them, you know that not all of them could have been good shots....(and we won't even get to the fact that he and his team were looking forward to duke in the final 4...)


furthermore...freethrows....cost him the (what would have been vacated) national title against kansas, cost him the game against uconn last year (4-12)...not to mention they shot 55% (16-29) in the second half....


part of it is that he has inexperienced guys every year who are going to be less coachable and who are going to make stupid mistakes.....part of it is that he gets top recruits and plays in a weak conference, gets a high seed, and then some good team comes along and puts him in his place (that was his mojo at memphis....and the SEC hasn't been much better since he's been there...)

My personal opinion is that Calipari is a very good defensive coach even though his "dribble drive" offense gets a lot of attention. (On a related note, Coach K, for all the attention he gets for his defensive-oriented approach, is an incredible offensive coach who consistently gets his players into their most comfortable positions on the floor from which to score.) While his team last year fell out of the top 10 in KenPom's defensive rankings, all of his other teams in the past 6 years or so have had top 10 defenses, even when the offenses have faltered a bit. Offensively, I don't think he runs enough sets for the few three point shooters he has to get catch and shoot opportunities. They usually have to create their own shot or get a kick out as a last, reluctant resort (for example, I think it would open up the floor a lot of, when Witjer is in the game for Cal to run him baseline to baseline, taking the opposing team's 4 or 5 out of the paint to leave space for Teague, MKG, Lamb, and Jones to slash to the hoop). On the other hand, his teams always play tough defense, and only the inconsistent effort of Jones kept them from being a top defensive team last year.

Completely agree with you about free throws, though. It's almost comical how many times Cal's teams have been foiled by poor free throw shooting.

Jderf
03-15-2012, 10:49 AM
My personal opinion is that Calipari is a very good defensive coach even though his "dribble drive" offense gets a lot of attention.

Great post, COYS. One minor correction: You've placed the quotation marks over the wrong part of the bolded phrase above. I fixed it below,


My personal opinion is that Calipari is a very good defensive coach even though his dribble drive "offense" gets a lot of attention.

COYS
03-15-2012, 10:58 AM
Great post, COYS. One minor correction: You've placed the quotation marks over the wrong part of the bolded phrase above. I fixed it below,

Haha, I can agree with that. There are some similarities between Coach K's and Cal's offensive styles, though, in that they both allow a lot of freedom for their players to create based on what the defense gives them. The difference, in my opinion, is that every Duke player is put in a position that best suits them and is given the opportunity to read the defense. The motion offense constantly forces defenders to either switch or fight through screens, decide to go under or over screens, keep track of shooters, etc. Calipari offers a lot of freedom, too, but that freedom usually only involves one guy taking his man off the dribble and then seeing what happens. If they are unable to overpower the perimeter defense or their three's aren't falling while the opposing team packs it in, their offense looks completely stagnant and helpless.

donutclub
03-15-2012, 11:12 AM
It looks like it was prophesied by Jim Morrison...check it out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uWkqttd04&feature=related

This one must've been shot before Selection Sunday...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTBh_I4Dwgk&feature=related

Jderf
03-15-2012, 11:21 AM
Haha, I can agree with that. There are some similarities between Coach K's and Cal's offensive styles, though, in that they both allow a lot of freedom for their players to create based on what the defense gives them. The difference, in my opinion, is that every Duke player is put in a position that best suits them and is given the opportunity to read the defense. The motion offense constantly forces defenders to either switch or fight through screens, decide to go under or over screens, keep track of shooters, etc. Calipari offers a lot of freedom, too, but that freedom usually only involves one guy taking his man off the dribble and then seeing what happens. If they are unable to overpower the perimeter defense or their three's aren't falling while the opposing team packs it in, their offense looks completely stagnant and helpless.

Right, like in their Final Four collapse against WVU's zone defense in 2010.

True that both coaches allow tons of freedom for their stars to create their own offense, but there are some some critical differences, as you hint at. First is spacing, spacing, spacing. We stretch opposing defenses from stripe to stripe, and Duke is consistently one of the top NCAA teams in this regard, thanks in large part to some Polish guy that always seems to be on or near the bench. Combine the excellent spacing with the constant motion that you pointed out (which both are also related to the fact that Duke actually runs sets from time to time -- imagine that!) and, when executed right, you get an offense that works like a well-oiled machine.

Criticisms aside, I do feel like Calipari takes a lot more flak than he deserves, coaching-wise. He is a serviceable practice and in-game coach, and obviously one of the best recruiters in the game. Regarding potential violations, some (most) people attack him with the "Where there's smoke there's fire" argument, but I like to reserve judgment until someone hands me definitive evidence. "Where there's fire there's fire," I guess, or something along those lines. Either way, I'm happy we have K and they have Cal and I would never even dream of trading.

jipops
03-15-2012, 11:47 AM
Is it possible to re-vote in these polls? I'm thinking Wichita St now.

superdave
03-15-2012, 01:39 PM
Is it possible to re-vote in these polls? I'm thinking Wichita St now.

To the Final Four? For serious?

Jderf
03-15-2012, 02:46 PM
Right, like in their Final Four collapse against WVU's zone defense in 2010.

Kind of surprised that the accuracy police didn't jump all over me for this one yet. It was, of course, a collapse in the Elite Eight, not the Final Four.

superdave
03-15-2012, 03:34 PM
Kind of surprised that the accuracy police didn't jump all over me for this one yet. It was, of course, a collapse in the Elite Eight, not the Final Four.

Self-governance is next to cleanliness.

jipops
03-15-2012, 06:58 PM
To the Final Four? For serious?

Vcu did it, why not?

Greg_Newton
03-15-2012, 07:13 PM
Interesting, if daunting, take by KenPom: http://kenpom.com/blog/

Gives each team's chances of advancing to a given round, going by his formula.

Duke? 77% chance of beating Lehigh, 53% chance of sweet 16, 30% chance of Elite 8, and under a 1-in-10 shot at the final four. And that's with Kelly.

Yikes.

superdave
03-15-2012, 07:35 PM
Interesting, if daunting, take by KenPom: http://kenpom.com/blog/

Gives each team's chances of advancing to a given round, going by his formula.

Duke? 77% chance of beating Lehigh, 53% chance of sweet 16, 30% chance of Elite 8, and under a 1-in-10 shot at the final four. And that's with Kelly.

Yikes.

We've got em right where we want em!

Greg_Newton
03-15-2012, 08:11 PM
SDSU up 19-7 on Baylor 7 minutes in. :eek:

superdave
03-15-2012, 09:35 PM
If Quincy Miller had come to Duke, he would be wearing less ugly unis.

superdave
03-15-2012, 09:37 PM
SDSU up 19-7 on Baylor 7 minutes in. :eek:

Too bad we never saw San Diego State vs. South Dakota State. Would have been epic.

Go Jackrabbits. My grandfather used to eat them during the Depression.

Dukehky
03-15-2012, 09:52 PM
Baylor is kind of an anomaly as are many teams with suspect coaching and a lot of talent. The way that they are playing right now is not necessarily indicative of how they would play against a big named team like Kansas or Duke. Their talent level is through the roof and when they come to play together (and in a man to man defense, please don't read this Scott Drew), they are really good. Kenny Smith said it really well, "When I watch Baylor I say to myself that he's really good, he's really good, he's really good, but I rarely say that they're very good." With all that being said, I'm desperately hoping that S. Dakota State pulls this game out, but I'm not particularly hopeful. If Baylor plays the way they're playing tonight against a potential UNLV, they're gonna get beat.

Despite how talented they are and how well they are capable of playing, on the perimeter, they are just bad defensively, and guess where Duke is really good!!!!!!???? Yeah, at the guard spot, not to mention that the Plumlees are stronger than Jones and Miller (Acy is tough but he's only 6'7), so with 1 on 1 defense. they can push them out. Zeller and Henson are granite compared to Baylor's front line and they can definitely be exposed. I don't think they're as serious of a threat as a lot of people seem to think, but they are good, and they can beat us, and badly if things don't go right.

Gotta get to the Sweet 16 first though and Lehigh has a good player and can't be overlooked, and Xavier and ND, although I think are good match-ups for Duke are certainly not going to be pushovers.

Kentucky though, gonna need a really special game IMO to knock them off. What makes them different and especially special this year IMO again, is Gilchrest. He is a Duke player with the unfortunate word Kentucky written across the front of his jersey. He's a leader with enormous physical gifts. That Davis character is okay too I guess.

FerryFor50
03-16-2012, 12:09 AM
Down double digits... plenty of time left. They can't hit anything deep, but yet keep jacking up contested 3s when they could easily be driving for baskets and trips to the foul line. Dumb, dumb, dumb... they should take a page out of the Wichita St comeback book and start pressuring on D and running on offense. The shots will eventually fall if they're in the flow of the offense. I think what disappoints me more is that UNLV would be a better test for Baylor than Colorado... .Baylor lucks out if UNLV loses.

FerryFor50
03-16-2012, 12:25 AM
Down double digits... plenty of time left. They can't hit anything deep, but yet keep jacking up contested 3s when they could easily be driving for baskets and trips to the foul line. Dumb, dumb, dumb... they should take a page out of the Wichita St comeback book and start pressuring on D and running on offense. The shots will eventually fall if they're in the flow of the offense. I think what disappoints me more is that UNLV would be a better test for Baylor than Colorado... .Baylor lucks out if UNLV loses.

They must read my posts, because that's exactly what they started doing. :D

Greg_Newton
03-16-2012, 12:59 AM
That was an incredible comeback by UNLV, and an impressive response by Colorado. When UNLV cut the second-half lead from 20 to 2 with 4:30 left, I thought it was over. But credit to the Buffaloes for not panicking and living to play Saturday.

Man, what a day of basketball. This day is always my favorite - no Duke anxiety, but 4 meaningful games at a time for 12 straight hours. Better than Christmas morning... :D

ice-9
03-16-2012, 01:12 AM
Today was pretty much the worst case scenario in terms of Duke's path to the Final Four.

Iowa State beat U-Conn, a dysfunctional team yes but one with comparable talent to Kentucky. U-Conn could possibly upset Kentucky, Iowa State unlikely.

Wichita State has the track record to beat Kentucky, but they were upset by a plucky VCU team who I just can't see putting together another run in the NCAA tournament. Indiana, despite faltering towards the end of the season with injuries, is just good enough to beat VCU but will get overwhelmed by Kentucky. Yes, I know they defeated Kentucky this season, but that was at Indiana and at full strength and by one point on a buzzer beater! Kentucky will be extremely motivated to avenge that loss.

Bottom line, you can just pencil Kentucky into the Elite Eight.

Then on our side of the bracket, an erratic but potentially dangerous UNLV team gets upset by Colorado. I don't see Colorado, who needed to win the Pac-12 to get into the NCAA tournament, getting by Baylor, who was lucky to survive the S Dakota St. That close game was probably enough to get the Baylor Bears dialed into the Colorado.

So, you can also pencil Baylor into the Sweet Sixteen.

Next weekend is likely going to be a killer one should we survive and advance past this weekend. Which we should....................hopefully. :)

Greg_Newton
03-16-2012, 01:19 AM
I don't know, I'd almost rather face Baylor than UNLV; they're SO explosive, and so quick.

I also think VCU is a team UK wouldn't want to face. You want Teague handling the ball against that madness? VCU is flat-out a better team than Wichita State; they take you out of your game and make your work, work, work for 40 minutes. I think it could get interesting, especially considering UK's depth issues and lack of ballhandlers.

tommy
03-16-2012, 01:29 AM
UNLV has nothing. Nothing!

They absolutely lucked out to get Colorado (who is equally awful) and so they might win that game....but if they do Baylor is going to blow them out of the gym (so would S. Dakota State). I'll do numerous brackets and in none of them will I have UNLV in the Sweet 16. Teams that finish 5-5 down the stretch never do anything in the tournament. Ever. And the fact that people are talking them up makes it even worse. They'll buy into the hype, and for this team that will spell disaster.

On target. Good call.

tommy
03-16-2012, 01:33 AM
Stopping? No. Making them actually work for their shots? Yes. You don't need to be Shane Battier to make a player work for their shots. You do however need to have a long athlete that you can put on them to make it difficult. You watch. Quincy Miller is going to score 25 points against Duke. Coach K will have no answer for him.

Hmm. Miller scored 10 points against South Dakota State tonight. I'd say the likelihood that Duke's defense is stronger than South Dakota State's is . . . high. The announcers were saying that he was having trouble staying on the floor because he couldn't guard anybody. On South Dakota State.

tommy
03-16-2012, 01:45 AM
Today was pretty much the worst case scenario in terms of Duke's path to the Final Four.

Iowa State beat U-Conn, a dysfunctional team yes but one with comparable talent to Kentucky. U-Conn could possibly upset Kentucky, Iowa State unlikely.

Wichita State has the track record to beat Kentucky, but they were upset by a plucky VCU team who I just can't see putting together another run in the NCAA tournament. Indiana, despite faltering towards the end of the season with injuries, is just good enough to beat VCU but will get overwhelmed by Kentucky. Yes, I know they defeated Kentucky this season, but that was at Indiana and at full strength and by one point on a buzzer beater! Kentucky will be extremely motivated to avenge that loss.

Bottom line, you can just pencil Kentucky into the Elite Eight.

Then on our side of the bracket, an erratic but potentially dangerous UNLV team gets upset by Colorado. I don't see Colorado, who needed to win the Pac-12 to get into the NCAA tournament, getting by Baylor, who was lucky to survive the S Dakota St. That close game was probably enough to get the Baylor Bears dialed into the Colorado.

So, you can also pencil Baylor into the Sweet Sixteen.

Next weekend is likely going to be a killer one should we survive and advance past this weekend. Which we should....................hopefully. :)

Or you could look at it this way:

Iowa State was flat-out better than U-Con. ISU was athletic, aggressive, and played well together. They absolutely pounded the Huskies on the boards and now have proven to themselves that they belong in this tournament and can take down talented teams. And they have da Mayor.

Based on last year's run, VCU is also a team that is confident going up against bigger name, talented opponents. They have more tournament experience than UK, and more close game experience as well. If anyone's going to get tight down the stretch, it's going to be Kentucky.

Indiana is one of only two teams in the field that KNOWS it can beat Kentucky. They will not be in fear.

Baylor struggled mightily with the Jackrabbits of South Dakota State, in particular at the defensive end. They were unfocused and lacked intensity. Perry Jones III was a non-factor, despite SDSU having nobody close to him in size and athletic ability. Baylor demonstrated nothing if not vulnerability.

So I'd say let's just worry about ourselves. Let's not look past Lehigh. They're good. Our next game is going to be against a pretty good team, and we are almost assuredly going to be down one very important piece in Ryan Kelly. Let's get ourselves to the regionals first, and if we do, whoever survives in our region to join us will have plenty to worry about in facing Duke as well.

DukieTiger
03-16-2012, 03:08 AM
^Yeah, I'm much more concerned with Duke playing up to potential and with Kelly's health than with any potential opponents that might be lying in wait. So much uncertainty in the tournament anyways, really the only opponent that scares me right now is Lehigh- because that's the only opponent that we KNOW is in Duke's way of a Final Four.

ice-9
03-16-2012, 04:01 AM
Or you could look at it this way:

Iowa State was flat-out better than U-Con. ISU was athletic, aggressive, and played well together. They absolutely pounded the Huskies on the boards and now have proven to themselves that they belong in this tournament and can take down talented teams. And they have da Mayor.

Based on last year's run, VCU is also a team that is confident going up against bigger name, talented opponents. They have more tournament experience than UK, and more close game experience as well. If anyone's going to get tight down the stretch, it's going to be Kentucky.

Indiana is one of only two teams in the field that KNOWS it can beat Kentucky. They will not be in fear.

Baylor struggled mightily with the Jackrabbits of South Dakota State, in particular at the defensive end. They were unfocused and lacked intensity. Perry Jones III was a non-factor, despite SDSU having nobody close to him in size and athletic ability. Baylor demonstrated nothing if not vulnerability.

So I'd say let's just worry about ourselves. Let's not look past Lehigh. They're good. Our next game is going to be against a pretty good team, and we are almost assuredly going to be down one very important piece in Ryan Kelly. Let's get ourselves to the regionals first, and if we do, whoever survives in our region to join us will have plenty to worry about in facing Duke as well.


I hope you're right! It'd be great to see Kentucky and Baylor get upset this Saturday.

P.S. I'm not looking past Lehigh! More that as a fan there's not much for me to prognosticate about with Lehigh.

NSDukeFan
03-16-2012, 08:24 AM
I hope you're right! It'd be great to see Kentucky and Baylor get upset this Saturday.

P.S. I'm not looking past Lehigh! More that as a fan there's not much for me to prognosticate about with Lehigh.

I really don't care what else is going in the tournament. I just hope Duke plays well tonight and beats Lehigh and then wins this mini-tournament on Sunday. If that happens, and Baylor and UK both advance, that is perfectly fine with me. If Duke takes care of business, they will have a chance to play some other very good teams. They have already beaten a bunch of very good teams this year and I would enjoy watching them do it again.

moonpie23
03-16-2012, 01:40 PM
I'm not hoping uk gets upset. they might be the only team able to handle the tarholes.

Jderf
03-16-2012, 01:56 PM
I'm not hoping uk gets upset. they might be the only team able to handle the tarholes.

Meh. I don't know if they're that daunting. Us, FSU, and UNLV were able to "handle them." NC State, UVA, and Wiscy also took them down to the wire in single-possession games, among others. UNC is not unstoppable this year, and they're just as susceptible as any of the other top teams if they come up against a decent team that catches fire.

Kedsy
03-16-2012, 02:00 PM
...a plucky VCU team who I just can't see putting together another run in the NCAA tournament.

Here's the thing about VCU -- in the past six years they've made the NCAAT four times. In all four they were seeded 11th or worse. Their record in those four years is 7-3, with their three losses being a 1 point loss to UCLA, an overtime loss to #3 seed Pitt, and a Final Four loss. All that from an 11th or 12th seed!

They are as good a team in the tournament as any.