ACC tournament seeding

[MarkD83]

Well with UVA beating Louisville it looks like UVA has the inside track for the #1 seed in the ACC tournament. It would be hard to imagine them losing two of their remaining games to get back to the 3 loss teams.

As I understand it the 1,2,3 and 4 seeded teams are automatically slotted into the quarterfinals on Friday. That means that one of Duke, ND, Louisville or UNC would NOT be seeded into the quarters. So a top 12 team nationally would have to win 4 games to win the ACC tournament....Wow!

[hurleyfor3]

To answer your question, yes.

But that win over Virginia is going to be mighty nice to have for tiebreaking purposes.

We've actually beaten Virginia twice, but the first time they were called Wisconsin.

[Green Wave Dukie]

Well with UVA beating Louisville it looks like UVA has the inside track for the #1 seed in the ACC tournament. It would be hard to imagine them losing two of their remaining games to get back to the 3 loss teams.

As I understand it the 1,2,3 and 4 seeded teams are automatically slotted into the quarterfinals on Friday. That means that one of Duke, ND, Louisville or UNC would NOT be seeded into the quarters. So a top 12 team nationally would have to win 4 games to win the ACC tournament....Wow!


Agree, except I think ACC tourney Scedule is pushed up a day and quarters are actually Thursday.

[arnie]

Well with UVA beating Louisville it looks like UVA has the inside track for the #1 seed in the ACC tournament. It would be hard to imagine them losing two of their remaining games to get back to the 3 loss teams.

As I understand it the 1,2,3 and 4 seeded teams are automatically slotted into the quarterfinals on Friday. That means that one of Duke, ND, Louisville or UNC would NOT be seeded into the quarters. So a top 12 team nationally would have to win 4 games to win the ACC tournament....Wow!

ND and UNC will be fighting over the 4th spot.

[Troublemaker]

Current KenPom Projections (today's results included)

UVA 16-2
Duke 14-4
Lville 13-5
ND 13-5
UNC 13-5

So, we own tiebreakers galore and the best projection besides UVA at this point. Duke as the #2 seed is looking good.

[CDu]

I think that, unless we beat ourselves, the #2 seed is ours for the taking. We are now in a 4-way tie in the loss column with the tiebreaker over two of the other three.

[jmck214]

Yes tiebreakers are all in our favor so even 13-5 will pretty much guarantee a bye into the quarterfinals

[BigWayne]

Well with UVA beating Louisville it looks like UVA has the inside track for the #1 seed in the ACC tournament. It would be hard to imagine them losing two of their remaining games to get back to the 3 loss teams.



UVA lost their leading scorer (Justin Anderson) to a broken finger for 4-6 weeks. He's having surgery Sunday.
Sad to hear this and hope he is back for the post season, but UVA could be affected the next few weeks.

[Bob Green]

Agree, except I think ACC tourney Scedule is pushed up a day and quarters are actually Thursday.

Here is the bracket:

http://raycomsports.com/sports_labs_docs/m-baskbl/2015_mbb_bracket.pdf

The tournament runs five days starting Tuesday March 10 with the championship game on Saturday March 14.

[bob blue devil]

So a top 12 team nationally would have to win 4 games to win the ACC tournament....Wow!

ACC tourney will be great this year. One note, however, is that the team garnering the 5 seed is very likely to be ranked worse than 12 nationally, as it will probably have struggled a bit down the stretch.

[cptnflash]

UVA lost their leading scorer (Justin Anderson) to a broken finger for 4-6 weeks. He's having surgery Sunday.
Sad to hear this and hope he is back for the post season, but UVA could be affected the next few weeks.

Losing Anderson definitely hurts, but UVa has a very easy ACC schedule from here on out. The only difficult game they have left is the season-ender at Louisville. None of their other games are against likely NCAAT teams.

I think the key for us (and everyone else) is avoiding the 4/5 seed lines, and thus avoiding Virginia until the finals. Barring injury, I think that's very achievable based on our remaining schedule and the way we're playing now. But getting the #1 seed is still a long shot.

[uh_no]

jeez...looking down uva's schedule:

85%
98%
97%
98%
92%
99%
88%
61%

we'll be lucky if they lose 1 more game....People will complain about schedules....but all you can do is beat the teams you have in front of you...and there's no doubt uva thus far has done that far better than duke or anyone else in the league.

Best we can do is pull for the packies on wednesday!

[freshmanjs]

jeez...looking down uva's schedule:

85%
98%
97%
98%
92%
99%
88%
61%

we'll be lucky if they lose 1 more game....People will complain about schedules....but all you can do is beat the teams you have in front of you...and there's no doubt uva thus far has done that far better than duke or anyone else in the league.

Best we can do is pull for the packies on wednesday!

based on those #s, there is a >60% chance they lose a game and a >35% chance they lose before the louisville game.

[sagegrouse]

jeez...looking down uva's schedule:

85%
98%
97%
98%
92%
99%
88%
61%

we'll be lucky if they lose 1 more game....People will complain about schedules....but all you can do is beat the teams you have in front of you...and there's no doubt uva thus far has done that far better than duke or anyone else in the league.

Best we can do is pull for the packies on wednesday!

UVa has a 39 percent chance of at least one loss.

[freshmanjs]

UVa has a 39 percent chance of at least one loss.

that's backwards. 39% is the chance of winning all of them.

[sagegrouse]

that's backwards. 39% is the chance of winning all of them.

Sorry. Yep, I thought it correctly and posted it backwards. The probability of UVa going undefeated is 0.39. Therefore, the probability of at least one loss is 0.61. This calculation only requires seven operations. Figuring out the probability of two or more losses requires forty-something.

[Troublemaker]

If UVA is going to go 16-2 (or 17-1) again, I'll just have to take my hat off to them. There's no way I will ever expect my team to go 16-2 to win or share in a regular season title. That's just ridiculous consistency.

For Duke, that is especially true since we're generally going to have one of the tougher schedules of the contenders. And we're generally going to be a younger team and more likely to encounter a rough patch here or there that has to be sorted through. If 16-2 becomes the standard for first place in this expanded conference, Duke's not going to finish in first place much.

[uh_no]

Sorry. Yep, I thought it correctly and posted it backwards. The probability of UVa going undefeated is 0.39. Therefore, the probability of at least one loss is 0.61. This calculation only requires seven operations. Figuring out the probability of two or more losses requires forty-something.

we can approximate quite well by averaging their win probabilities:

they have .39 chance of going undefeated...making their average win probability .39^(8^-1) or 89%.

We can then use the binomial distribution to come up with approximate probabilities of losing a certain number of games:

losses probabilty
0 .39
1 .39
2 .17
3 .04
4+ <.01

Realistically, since the UL game is such an outlier, the probability of losing 1 or 2 games is probably far higher. Here is the split up distribution without the UL game

Probability of beating everyone but UL: .64
Average win probability of the other 7 teams: .94

Probability of # of losses not including UL:
0 .64
1 .29
2 .02
3+ <.01

So then a really good approximation of uva getting 2 or more losses is
(loss to UL * more than 1 loss to everyone else) + (win over UL * more than 2 losses to everyone else)
.39*.36 + .61*.05 = .17 (turns out our first approximation was pretty good anyway)

So there you have it. about 1/5 times duke controls their own destiny. But we still gotta win.

[gurufrisbee]

Obviously there is a gap between the 4 and 5 seed in terms of difficulty, but I think there is another one between 4 and 3. The 4 seed will likely have to start off against that 5 seed and then play Virginia (whose easy schedule and lead all but locks up the 1 seed already). If I'm any of Duke, LVille, NC, or NDame I think your only real good chance to get the 2 or 3 seed.

[MarkD83]

I saw the probability discussion and strength of schedule and added some reality to it.

First if we just stick to the 5 ranked ACC teams at the top of the standings here is what we have:

UVA 1 loss; 3-1 against other top 5; One remaing game against top 5 - Louisville; 5 total games against top 5
ND 3; 2-2; Louisville; 5
Louis 3; 1-3; ND and UVA; 6
Duke 3; 3-1; UNC twice; 6 (no reason I put them down here just easier for next scenarios)
UNC 3; 1-3; Duke twice; 6

Let's assume these 5 teams beat eveyone left on their schedule that is not on this list.

Then if ND beats Louisville and Louisville beats UVA we have:

UVA 2 losses; 3-2 against top 5
ND 3; 3-2;
Louis 4; 2-4;

Duke 3; 5-1 when Duke beats UNC twice
UNC 5; 1-5 when they lose to Duke twice

So Duke needs UVA to lose to someone in the rest of the league and UVA still plays Syracuse and Pitt (the next highest schools in the standings still on their schedule)
If Louisville does not beat UVA then UVA needs to lose to Syr and Pitt
The ND/Louisville game could flip to a Louisville win but would not matter since Duke has tie-breaker.

In terms of hardest schedule if we add Syracuse to the mix and make it the top 6 then Duke will have played 8 games against the top 6 and everyone else less than that.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I saw the probability discussion and strength of schedule and added some reality to it.

First if we just stick to the 5 ranked ACC teams at the top of the standings here is what we have:

UVA 1 loss; 3-1 against other top 5; One remaing game against top 5 - Louisville; 5 total games against top 5
ND 3; 2-2; Louisville; 5
Louis 3; 1-3; ND and UVA; 6
Duke 3; 3-1; UNC twice; 6 (no reason I put them down here just easier for next scenarios)
UNC 3; 1-3; Duke twice; 6

Let's assume these 5 teams beat eveyone left on their schedule that is not on this list.

Then if ND beats Louisville and Louisville beats UVA we have:

UVA 2 losses; 3-2 against top 5
ND 3; 3-2;
Louis 4; 2-4;

Duke 3; 5-1 when Duke beats UNC twice
UNC 5; 1-5 when they lose to Duke twice

So Duke needs UVA to lose to someone in the rest of the league and UVA still plays Syracuse and Pitt (the next highest schools in the standings still on their schedule)
If Louisville does not beat UVA then UVA needs to lose to Syr and Pitt
The ND/Louisville game could flip to a Louisville win but would not matter since Duke has tie-breaker.

In terms of hardest schedule if we add Syracuse to the mix and make it the top 6 then Duke will have played 8 games against the top 6 and everyone else less than that.

I started the optimist thread, and this is a bit much to assume even for me...

Let's play the games one at a time and not assume multiple positive outcomes against teams that we are generally happy to defeat on any given day.

[MarkD83]

I started the optimist thread, and this is a bit much to assume even for me...

Let's play the games one at a time and not assume multiple positive outcomes against teams that we are generally happy to defeat on any given day.

Just trying to see a realistic path for Duke to get #1 seed and ACC Regular Season Championship. I can't see UVA losing 3 more, so 4 losses by Duke won't get it done.

[Jarhead]

I saw the probability discussion and strength of schedule and added some reality to it.

First if we just stick to the 5 ranked ACC teams at the top of the standings here is what we have:

UVA 1 loss; 3-1 against other top 5; One remaing game against top 5 - Louisville; 5 total games against top 5
ND 3; 2-2; Louisville; 5
Louis 3; 1-3; ND and UVA; 6
Duke 3; 3-1; UNC twice; 6 (no reason I put them down here just easier for next scenarios)
UNC 3; 1-3; Duke twice; 6

Let's assume these 5 teams beat eveyone left on their schedule that is not on this list.

Then if ND beats Louisville and Louisville beats UVA we have:

UVA 2 losses; 3-2 against top 5
ND 3; 3-2;
Louis 4; 2-4;

Duke 3; 5-1 when Duke beats UNC twice
UNC 5; 1-5 when they lose to Duke twice

So Duke needs UVA to lose to someone in the rest of the league and UVA still plays Syracuse and Pitt (the next highest schools in the standings still on their schedule)
If Louisville does not beat UVA then UVA needs to lose to Syr and Pitt
The ND/Louisville game could flip to a Louisville win but would not matter since Duke has tie-breaker.

In terms of hardest schedule if we add Syracuse to the mix and make it the top 6 then Duke will have played 8 games against the top 6 and everyone else less than that.

Speaking of Syracuse, what are the consequences of them voluntarily dropping out of the ACC tourney? Will games with Syracuse be used in determining seedings, and what are the consequences of that? Conversely, what are the consequences of not using them?

[BobBender]

If UVA is going to go 16-2 (or 17-1) again, I'll just have to take my hat off to them. There's no way I will ever expect my team to go 16-2 to win or share in a regular season title. That's just ridiculous consistency.

For Duke, that is especially true since we're generally going to have one of the tougher schedules of the contenders. And we're generally going to be a younger team and more likely to encounter a rough patch here or there that has to be sorted through. If 16-2 becomes the standard for first place in this expanded conference, Duke's not going to finish in first place much.

The unspoken truth behind this statement is : if we are going to have Freshman and sophomores starting every year at 2 or 3 spots, it's is going to be highly unlikely to "run the table ", as it were. It is the difference between the old Duke model, and the new. Underclassman, no matter how naturally gifted, are going to have nights where they look like, well, underclassman.

[Edouble]

Speaking of Syracuse, what are the consequences of them voluntarily dropping out of the ACC tourney? Will games with Syracuse be used in determining seedings, and what are the consequences of that? Conversely, what are the consequences of not using them?

I assume that one of the Tuesday games will not occur.

How strange would it be if there was just a random bye on one of the other days? Like, what if Syracuse finished in fourth place on the ACC... so on Quarter Final Thursday there would be a noon game, then no 2:00 game? You'd just be waiting for the night session to start at 7:00?

[uh_no]

I assume that one of the Tuesday games will not occur.

How strange would it be if there was just a random bye on one of the other days? Like, what if Syracuse finished in fourth place on the ACC... so on Quarter Final Thursday there would be a noon game, then no 2:00 game? You'd just be waiting for the night session to start at 7:00?

i don't thing the timeslots for each particular game are set in stone...so even if this is a crazy hypothetical, they wouldn't schedule the games with a gap in the middle.

[bob blue devil]

It is the difference between the old Duke model, and the new. Underclassman, no matter how naturally gifted, are going to have nights where they look like, well, underclassman.

Agree with this - it's hard to assume consistency from a group of underclassmen. One quibble with the characterization, however. The "old Duke model" is dead because the old college basketball is dead. Grant Hill, Christian Laettner and Bobby Hurley probably aren't sticking around for four years. So what you're really referring to is the difference in the old college basketball and the new.

[Troublemaker]

The unspoken truth behind this statement is : if we are going to have Freshman and sophomores starting every year at 2 or 3 spots, it's is going to be highly unlikely to "run the table ", as it were. It is the difference between the old Duke model, and the new. Underclassman, no matter how naturally gifted, are going to have nights where they look like, well, underclassman.

Well, I think 16-2 would be difficult for any team, young or old, to match. Luckily, I don't think that'll become the norm for first place. I figure over the next fifty years of the 18-game schedule (making a huge assumption that conferences stay put and don't continue super-sizing), the average number of wins for first place in the ACC will be like 14.5 wins.

Again, this is a "hats off" to UVA if they can pull off 16-2 (or better) two seasons in a row. I figure that's going to be looked back upon as being very rare accomplishment.

[rasputin]

Speaking of Syracuse, what are the consequences of them voluntarily dropping out of the ACC tourney? Will games with Syracuse be used in determining seedings, and what are the consequences of that? Conversely, what are the consequences of not using them?

They said on one of the broadcasts over the weekend that Syracuse would be included in all seeding tiebreakers.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Well, I think 16-2 would be difficult for any team, young or old, to match. Luckily, I don't think that'll become the norm for first place. I figure over the next fifty years of the 18-game schedule (making a huge assumption that conferences stay put and don't continue super-sizing), the average number of wins for first place in the ACC will be like 14.5 wins.

Again, this is a "hats off" to UVA if they can pull off 16-2 (or better) two seasons in a row. I figure that's going to be looked back upon as being very rare accomplishment.

I have to agree with this. UVA is the most consistent team in the ACC, and it ain't close. Duke may be the most talented (we clearly have the most talented players), but it's not a consistent team just yet. Post-Sulaimon may have changed that, but there are just too few data points to prove this.

This is UVA's ACC reg season title to lose, not for anyone else to win. If UVA stumbles - which I don't think they will - then I think Duke is in a good position via the driver's seat.

The good news is that we are clearly getting better while UVA's ceiling has nearly been reached. Come ACC Tourney, things could get really exciting!

[wk2109]

I have to agree with this. UVA is the most consistent team in the ACC, and it ain't close. Duke may be the most talented (we clearly have the most talented players), but it's not a consistent team just yet. Post-Sulaimon may have changed that, but there are just too few data points to prove this.

This is UVA's ACC reg season title to lose, not for anyone else to win. If UVA stumbles - which I don't think they will - then I think Duke is in a good position via the driver's seat.

The good news is that we are clearly getting better while UVA's ceiling has nearly been reached. Come ACC Tourney, things could get really exciting!

There's still a LOT of basketball to be played. Last year, Syracuse was 25-0 (12-0) as of 2/15/14 before the wheels fell off and they ended up with an ACC #2 seed and an NCAA #3 seed. Maybe they didn't look as good or consistent as Virginia has this year, but when they were 25-0 and #1 in the country, I don't think anyone expected their season to take the turn that it did.

None of the percentages discussed upthread take into account that Justin Anderson will be out for at least a month. Duke looked really good in 2011 and 2013 before losing key guys -- in spite of all of the healthy talent that remained, Duke absolutely took a few steps back and lost to teams it probably shouldn't have. As good as Virginia has been, there's no reason to think the same can't happen there.

Virginia is likely on a downward trajectory after the Anderson injury and it looks like Duke is ascending. I think there's a fair probability (maybe even 50% or greater) that Duke can close a 2-game gap with 8 games left to play. Virginia does face a relatively easy schedule, but there is an injury to consider and the fact that Duke has a decent chance to make it through February without a loss.

No one would claim an NFL team clinched home-field advantage if it had a 2 game lead with 8 games left to play. I see no reason to do so with Virginia. I don't even think Virginia is a lock for a top-2 NCAA seed at this point.

[CDu]

There's still a LOT of basketball to be played. Last year, Syracuse was 25-0 (12-0) as of 2/15/14 before the wheels fell off and they ended up with an ACC #2 seed and an NCAA #3 seed. Maybe they didn't look as good or consistent as Virginia has this year, but when they were 25-0 and #1 in the country, I don't think anyone expected their season to take the turn that it did.

None of the percentages discussed upthread take into account that Justin Anderson will be out for at least a month. Duke looked really good in 2011 and 2013 before losing key guys -- in spite of all of the healthy talent that remained, Duke absolutely took a few steps back and lost to teams it probably shouldn't have. As good as Virginia has been, there's no reason to think the same can't happen there.

Virginia is likely on a downward trajectory after the Anderson injury and it looks like Duke is ascending. I think there's a fair probability (maybe even 50% or greater) that Duke can close a 2-game gap with 8 games left to play. Virginia does face a relatively easy schedule, but there is an injury to consider and the fact that Duke has a decent chance to make it through February without a loss.

No one would claim an NFL team clinched home-field advantage if it had a 2 game lead with 8 games left to play. I see no reason to do so with Virginia. I don't even think Virginia is a lock for a top-2 NCAA seed at this point.

I agree with your overall argument, but I think you may be underselling the ease of UVa's remaining schedule and the challenge of ours. We have a substantially more difficult schedule left than UVa, and while we are more talented than UVa (especially without Anderson) we are also young. I would say that another loss is a reasonable expectation for us. And expecting 3 losses from UVa (even without Anderson) is really optimistic.

It is certainly possible that we end up catching UVa, and I would not say it is definitely Uva as the #1 seed. But I certainly would not put our chances of catching UVa at 50%. I might not even put our chances of catching UVa at 50% even if we win out.

[flyingdutchdevil]

There's still a LOT of basketball to be played. Last year, Syracuse was 25-0 (12-0) as of 2/15/14 before the wheels fell off and they ended up with an ACC #2 seed and an NCAA #3 seed. Maybe they didn't look as good or consistent as Virginia has this year, but when they were 25-0 and #1 in the country, I don't think anyone expected their season to take the turn that it did.

None of the percentages discussed upthread take into account that Justin Anderson will be out for at least a month. Duke looked really good in 2011 and 2013 before losing key guys -- in spite of all of the healthy talent that remained, Duke absolutely took a few steps back and lost to teams it probably shouldn't have. As good as Virginia has been, there's no reason to think the same can't happen there.

Virginia is likely on a downward trajectory after the Anderson injury and it looks like Duke is ascending. I think there's a fair probability (maybe even 50% or greater) that Duke can close a 2-game gap with 8 games left to play. Virginia does face a relatively easy schedule, but there is an injury to consider and the fact that Duke has a decent chance to make it through February without a loss.

No one would claim an NFL team clinched home-field advantage if it had a 2 game lead with 8 games left to play. I see no reason to do so with Virginia. I don't even think Virginia is a lock for a top-2 NCAA seed at this point.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. Because I'm convinced that UVA isn't dropping more than one game.

And while Anderson is their "best" player, UVA's difference between their #1 and #2 player and #3 players is arguably the smallest drop-off. For instance, Duke would suffer much more if Okafor we're out for 4-6 weeks than UVA would be without Anderson.

Also, UVA's schedule is incredibly favorable for the last 8 games. They don't face a ranked team until Louisville, the last game of the reg season (and I suspect Anderson will be back by then). Their away games are NCSU (challenging), Wake (a joke), Syracuse (will they fight? it is their last game of the season), and Louisville (tough).

Duke has a fairly challenging remaining schedule, with playing two teams twice (UNC and Syracuse) who are going to fight Duke harder than then they play any other team just for the sake of us being their main ACC rival.

I am conceding the ACC reg title to UVA because I think that they are in the best position to win it all, even without Anderson for the majority of the reg games remaining. However, going into the ACC tournament, if we continue to improve, I am also convinced that we will win it.

[CDu]

We'll have to agree to disagree then. Because I'm convinced that UVA isn't dropping more than one game.

And while Anderson is their "best" player, UVA's difference between their #1 and #2 player and #3 players is arguably the smallest drop-off. For instance, Duke would suffer much more if Okafor we're out for 4-6 weeks than UVA would be without Anderson.

Also, UVA's schedule is incredibly favorable for the last 8 games. They don't face a ranked team until Louisville, the last game of the reg season (and I suspect Anderson will be back by then). Their away games are NCSU (challenging), Wake (a joke), Syracuse (will they fight? it is their last game of the season), and Louisville (tough).

Duke has a fairly challenging remaining schedule, with playing two teams twice (UNC and Syracuse) who are going to fight Duke harder than then they play any other team just for the sake of us being their main ACC rival.

I am conceding the ACC reg title to UVA because I think that they are in the best position to win it all, even without Anderson for the majority of the reg games remaining. However, going into the ACC tournament, if we continue to improve, I am also convinced that we will win it.

I would even argue that Anderson isn't UVa's best player. I'd say that Brogdon is their best player. And I'd say that Brogdon and Perrantes are more important to UVa's success than Anderson. Anderson is certainly very good, but he is much less critical to their success against lesser teams than the guys who run the offense and the guys who defend the paint. Where I think UVa would most miss Anderson would be against the really good teams. But it is quite possible that he'll be back in time for the Louisville game, and everyone else in between is far enough down in talent and/or experience that UVa should be fine.

They are certainly more likely to lose without Anderson than with him, but I still don't think they are likely to lose any of their games between now and Louisville.

[Kedsy]

The unspoken truth behind this statement is : if we are going to have Freshman and sophomores starting every year at 2 or 3 spots, it's is going to be highly unlikely to "run the table ", as it were. It is the difference between the old Duke model, and the new. Underclassman, no matter how naturally gifted, are going to have nights where they look like, well, underclassman.

It may be worth noting that in both 1991 and 2001, we had freshmen/sophomores starting at 3 or even 4 spots. So maybe the "old model" wasn't as different as we remember.

[wk2109]

I agree with your overall argument, but I think you may be underselling the ease of UVa's remaining schedule and the challenge of ours. We have a substantially more difficult schedule left than UVa, and while we are more talented than UVa (especially without Anderson) we are also young. I would say that another loss is a reasonable expectation for us. And expecting 3 losses from UVa (even without Anderson) is really optimistic.

It is certainly possible that we end up catching UVa, and I would not say it is definitely Uva as the #1 seed. But I certainly would not put our chances of catching UVa at 50%. I might not even put our chances of catching UVa at 50% even if we win out.


We'll have to agree to disagree then. Because I'm convinced that UVA isn't dropping more than one game.

And while Anderson is their "best" player, UVA's difference between their #1 and #2 player and #3 players is arguably the smallest drop-off. For instance, Duke would suffer much more if Okafor we're out for 4-6 weeks than UVA would be without Anderson.

Also, UVA's schedule is incredibly favorable for the last 8 games. They don't face a ranked team until Louisville, the last game of the reg season (and I suspect Anderson will be back by then). Their away games are NCSU (challenging), Wake (a joke), Syracuse (will they fight? it is their last game of the season), and Louisville (tough).

Duke has a fairly challenging remaining schedule, with playing two teams twice (UNC and Syracuse) who are going to fight Duke harder than then they play any other team just for the sake of us being their main ACC rival.

I am conceding the ACC reg title to UVA because I think that they are in the best position to win it all, even without Anderson for the majority of the reg games remaining. However, going into the ACC tournament, if we continue to improve, I am also convinced that we will win it.


They are certainly more likely to lose without Anderson than with him, but I still don't think they are likely to lose any of their games between now and Louisville.

Perhaps I'm just underestimating how good Virginia was with Anderson and/or overestimating the effect of his injury, but I don't think Virginia is so good that it's a given that they'll get to Louisville unblemished. There's always an adjustment period when a key player gets injured, so I can see them losing a game or two before their back-to-back road games at Syracuse and Louisville (and I can see them losing one or both on that back-to-back). I'm not basing this on the schedule, because I know it's a very favorable schedule, but more on the principle that in the ACC, you can never be completely shocked when an upset occurs.

And maybe I'm overestimating Duke's chances of running the table in February.

[CDu]

It may be worth noting that in both 1991 and 2001, we had freshmen/sophomores starting at 3 or even 4 spots. So maybe the "old model" wasn't as different as we remember.

I think you are being too literal and skirting the point here. In 1991, we had one freshman starter and two sophomore starters (but those two sophs were starters as freshmen). In 2001, we had one freshman on the team and those 3 sophomores were all starters as freshmen.

This year's team has 5 of the 8 regulars with a combined 235 minutes of play coming into this year, and a 6th with under 500 minutes coming into this year. That's quite a bit different than either of the 1991 and 2001 teams:

1991 (experience coming in):
Laettner (starter): 1742
Hurley (starter): 1268
Koubek (key reserve): 890
Davis (key reserve): 776
T. Hill (starter): 430
McCaffrey (starter): 530
Palmer: 262
G. Hill (starter): 0
Lang: 0

2001:
Battier (starter): 2971
James (starter/key reserve): 1823
Williams (starter): 1157
Boozer (starter): 807
Dunleavy (starter): 724
Sanders: 144
Duhon (key reserve/starter): 0

2015:
Cook (starter): 2637
Sulaimon (key reserve until dismissed): 1921
Jefferson (starter): 1201
Plumlee: 458
M. Jones (key reserve): 235
Allen: 0
T. Jones (starter): 0
Okafor (starter): 0
Winslow (starter): 0

Those teams weren't old, but they certainly didn't have multiple starters having played 0 minutes at Duke previously, nor did they have more than half of the rotation having played less than 250 minutes combined previously.

I think the poster's point is valid. It is much harder to go through an 18 game ACC schedule fairly unscathed in this era of one-and-dones where the best and often most important players on your team are freshmen.

[UrinalCake]

The 3 seed is really tough, as you have to play in the very last game of the day and then come back the following afternoon. For that reason I'm really hoping we can secure the 2. I'm more concerned about depth than I am about playing freshmen. Three games in three days when you run a 8-man rotation where the #7 and #8 players are usually in single-digit minutes is a pretty tall order.

[Kedsy]

I think the poster's point is valid. It is much harder to go through an 18 game ACC schedule fairly unscathed in this era of one-and-dones where the best and often most important players on your team are freshmen.

Maybe, but I'll continue to be literal and mention that the 1999-2000 team went 15-1 in the ACC with 3 of its top 6 minute-getters having never played a minute at Duke before that season, and the 1997-98 team went 15-1 in the ACC with 3 of its top 7 minute-getters (4 of top 9) having never played a minute at Duke before that season.

Let's face it, it's hard to go through an ACC season "fairly unscathed" no matter what the makeup of your team, experience-wise. Having really good players helps.

[CDu]

Maybe, but I'll continue to be literal and mention that the 1999-2000 team went 15-1 in the ACC with 3 of its top 6 minute-getters having never played a minute at Duke before that season, and the 1997-98 team went 15-1 in the ACC with 3 of its top 7 minute-getters (4 of top 9) having never played a minute at Duke before that season.

Let's face it, it's tough to go through an ACC season "fairly unscathed" no matter what the makeup of your team, experience-wise. Having really good players helps.

I didn't say impossible, just more difficult. Those two teams you mentioned were pretty exceptional cases. The 1998 team had much more depth of talent, and (with a fifth-year senior McLeod, a true senior Wojo, and a fourth-year junior Langdon) was still much more experienced. And the 2000 team happened to play in one of the worst years for the ACC, with just 3 teams making the tournament (and one of those was an 8th seed).

[jhmoss1812]

The 3 seed is really tough, as you have to play in the very last game of the day and then come back the following afternoon. For that reason I'm really hoping we can secure the 2. I'm more concerned about depth than I am about playing freshmen. Three games in three days when you run a 8-man rotation where the #7 and #8 players are usually in single-digit minutes is a pretty tall order.

I don't think the 3 seed is as tough this year as in past years. You play Thursday at 9 and then Friday at 9. And then the championship is 8:30 on Saturday. It's different this year with having a Saturday final instead of a Sunday one. Of course, it's still the least favorable in terms of schedule but it's not quite as bad as it used to be.

As for UVA, I think we lose to NCSU this Wednesday. Too quick of a turnaround to figure out how to play without Anderson. He's so important on both sides of the ball and we'll be relying mostly on freshman (Shayok, Hall and Stith) to replace him. Nolte will get extended minutes too but he's been in a huge funk. Plus, NCSU is a tough team to play at home and needs a big win badly.

[devildeac]

I don't think the 3 seed is as tough this year as in past years. You play Thursday at 9 and then Friday at 9. And then the championship is 8:30 on Saturday. It's different this year with having a Saturday final instead of a Sunday one. Of course, it's still the least favorable in terms of schedule but it's not quite as bad as it used to be.

As for UVA, I think we lose to NCSU this Wednesday. Too quick of a turnaround to figure out how to play without Anderson. He's so important on both sides of the ball and we'll be relying mostly on freshman (Shayok, Hall and Stith) to replace him. Nolte will get extended minutes too but he's been in a huge funk. Plus, NCSU is a tough team to play at home and needs a big win badly.

I will root (root, root) for the home team here to bring UVa one loss closer to Duke, but I'm not putting much faith in a team who has lost at home to Wofford and Clemson this year:p.

[Kedsy]

I'm not putting much faith in a team who has lost at home to Wofford and Clemson this year:p.

And beaten Duke. State is a decent team who can get up for a big game. Not saying they'll beat Virginia, but they certainly have a shot.

[devildeac]

And beaten Duke. State is a decent team who can get up for a big game. Not saying they'll beat Virginia, but they certainly have a shot.

Of course they have a shot, that's why I made the statement "...not putting much faith..." and not making the statement "...putting no faith." They'll practice hard, show up ready to play, hopefully have a good game, knowing they've got a better chance of winning with Anderson out of the line-up, and, if they win, storm the court as they celebrate their first home win over a Top 25 foe not named Duke in the last ~4.5 seasons (if my recent perusal of their 2010/11 to 2014/15 season results is correct). Heck, I might even risk life and limb and make the 10 mile drive from my house to participate in the festivities if that happens:rolleyes:.

[-bdbd]

We'll have to agree to disagree then. Because I'm convinced that UVA isn't dropping more than one game.

And while Anderson is their "best" player, UVA's difference between their #1 and #2 player and #3 players is arguably the smallest drop-off. For instance, Duke would suffer much more if Okafor we're out for 4-6 weeks than UVA would be without Anderson.

Also, UVA's schedule is incredibly favorable for the last 8 games. They don't face a ranked team until Louisville, the last game of the reg season (and I suspect Anderson will be back by then). Their away games are NCSU (challenging), Wake (a joke), Syracuse (will they fight? it is their last game of the season), and Louisville (tough).

Duke has a fairly challenging remaining schedule, with playing two teams twice (UNC and Syracuse) who are going to fight Duke harder than then they play any other team just for the sake of us being their main ACC rival.

I am conceding the ACC reg title to UVA because I think that they are in the best position to win it all, even without Anderson for the majority of the reg games remaining. However, going into the ACC tournament, if we continue to improve, I am also convinced that we will win it.

I have to agree that UVA is fairly close to locking in on the #1 seed. The NFL analogy fails b/c in the NFL, teams don't generally enter almost all of their "remaining 8-9 games" with 90+% chance of winning in each of them. UVA shouldn't lose more than one more game - which is certainly different from "can't.")

I think the odds should dictate that we root for UVA to WIN all of its remaining games against the other "top-5" schools. (Feel free to root against them versus State and Wake, but it may be fairly futile...) At this juncture, I would be satisfied/pleased if we were able to still grab the #2 seed. I think #2 or #3 serves us well, but would really look hard at avoiding #4 or #5, as those would likely get a semi-final date with UVA. Obviously be sure to root against the other top-5 teams versus non-top-5 ACC schools.

I hadn't heard any official announcement, but had assumed the Syracuse's withdrawl from the ACCT meant that there was one less first-round game - in effect the #11 seed now gets a free pass to the next round. Should be a really competitive tournament for once. There's obviously a few ways the conference could go to accommodate the Orange's no-show. I was assuming they'd, effectively, become the #16 seed. But there's other ways to go as well...

Here is what the brackets looked like before Syracuse's withdrawl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_ACC_Men's_Basketball_Tournament

[wk2109]

I have to agree that UVA is fairly close to locking in on the #1 seed. The NFL analogy fails b/c in the NFL, teams don't generally enter almost all of their "remaining 8-9 games" with 90+% chance of winning in each of them. UVA shouldn't lose more than one more game - which is certainly different from "can't.")

I just don't buy the premise that Virginia has a "90+% chance" of winning those games, because those percentages are based on results WITH Anderson. Without him, Virginia's offensive and defensive efficiency will suffer, thus decreasing the team's chances of winning. By how much obviously no one knows, but given Anderson's incredible offensive rating and .484 3-pt shooting, I'm guessing a good amount.

Going back to 2014: after starting 25-0, Syracuse lost at home to BC (#138 on kenpom at the time) and at home to Georgia Tech (#109). I don't know what % chance kenpom gave Syracuse to win prior to each game, but given Syracuse's home court advantage and considerably higher ranking, I'm guessing the kenpom %'s were similar to Virginia's %'s for the next few games.

Maybe the NFL analogy isn't perfect, but what I'm saying is that a two-game lead with eight games remaining by no means locks Virginia in as the #1 seed in the ACC tournament, especially given the injury to their most efficient offensive player.

[Wahoo2000]

I just don't buy the premise that Virginia has a "90+% chance" of winning those games, because those percentages are based on results WITH Anderson. Without him, Virginia's offensive and defensive efficiency will suffer, thus decreasing the team's chances of winning. By how much obviously no one knows, but given Anderson's incredible offensive rating and .484 3-pt shooting, I'm guessing a good amount.

Going back to 2014: after starting 25-0, Syracuse lost at home to BC (#138 on kenpom at the time) and at home to Georgia Tech (#109). I don't know what % chance kenpom gave Syracuse to win prior to each game, but given Syracuse's home court advantage and considerably higher ranking, I'm guessing the kenpom %'s were similar to Virginia's %'s for the next few games.

Maybe the NFL analogy isn't perfect, but what I'm saying is that a two-game lead with eight games remaining by no means locks Virginia in as the #1 seed in the ACC tournament, especially given the injury to their most efficient offensive player.

Anderson is a key member of our team, but he was absolutely OUT OF THIS WORLD in the nonconference season. He's been solid, but not GREAT since conference play began, and offensively has really been struggling in his last 6 games - 17-52 from the field (32.7%) & 7-25 from 3 (28%). The key will be more about replacing what he brings from a defensive standpoint, not as much the offense.

I'm almost positive we'll drop either the game at NCSU Wednesday OR the finale at Louisville. Maybe even both. I don't think we'll lose outside of those though. If there's one thing Bennett's teams have been since the middle of last year, it's consistent. We don't have those "WTF" games where you drop one to poor competition. (42-4 in that stretch. 2 losses to Duke, 1 vs MSU in the tourney, and one in OT @MD when we already had the ACC tourney 1 seed locked last year)

Even without Anderson, I really don't see us losing more than 2 games the rest of the way. Can Duke win out? Certainly, but I don't think it's likely that Duke will win out AND we'll drop 2 more. It doesn't really matter either way though. Since December, I've felt like Duke and UVA were a solid notch above Louisville, Notre Dame, and UNC. Pretty sure those two will be 1/2 seeds in the conference tourney.

[CDu]

I just don't buy the premise that Virginia has a "90+% chance" of winning those games, because those percentages are based on results WITH Anderson. Without him, Virginia's offensive and defensive efficiency will suffer, thus decreasing the team's chances of winning. By how much obviously no one knows, but given Anderson's incredible offensive rating and .484 3-pt shooting, I'm guessing a good amount.

Going back to 2014: after starting 25-0, Syracuse lost at home to BC (#138 on kenpom at the time) and at home to Georgia Tech (#109). I don't know what % chance kenpom gave Syracuse to win prior to each game, but given Syracuse's home court advantage and considerably higher ranking, I'm guessing the kenpom %'s were similar to Virginia's %'s for the next few games.

Maybe the NFL analogy isn't perfect, but what I'm saying is that a two-game lead with eight games remaining by no means locks Virginia in as the #1 seed in the ACC tournament, especially given the injury to their most efficient offensive player.

I just don't think you are assessing the probabilities well. For us to get the 1 seed, we have to win out AND UVa must lose twice. Considering that we have three tougher games than UVa's second-toughest, I think us winning out is far from 100% (it is probably not all that close to 50%). And I would say that UVa losing 2 is at best 50/50. So we are talking a less than 25% chance (probably substantially less).

Is it possible? Sure. But I would call it highly unlikely.

[wk2109]

Anderson is a key member of our team, but he was absolutely OUT OF THIS WORLD in the nonconference season. He's been solid, but not GREAT since conference play began, and offensively has really been struggling in his last 6 games - 17-52 from the field (32.7%) & 7-25 from 3 (28%). The key will be more about replacing what he brings from a defensive standpoint, not as much the offense.

I'm almost positive we'll drop either the game at NCSU Wednesday OR the finale at Louisville. Maybe even both. I don't think we'll lose outside of those though. If there's one thing Bennett's teams have been since the middle of last year, it's consistent. We don't have those "WTF" games where you drop one to poor competition. (42-4 in that stretch. 2 losses to Duke, 1 vs MSU in the tourney, and one in OT @MD when we already had the ACC tourney 1 seed locked last year)

Even without Anderson, I really don't see us losing more than 2 games the rest of the way. Can Duke win out? Certainly, but I don't think it's likely that Duke will win out AND we'll drop 2 more. It doesn't really matter either way though. Since December, I've felt like Duke and UVA were a solid notch above Louisville, Notre Dame, and UNC. Pretty sure those two will be 1/2 seeds in the conference tourney.


I just don't think you are assessing the probabilities well. For us to get the 1 seed, we have to win out AND UVa must lose twice. Considering that we have three tougher games than UVa's second-toughest, I think us winning out is far from 100% (it is probably not all that close to 50%). And I would say that UVa losing 2 is at best 50/50. So we are talking a less than 25% chance (probably substantially less).

Is it possible? Sure. But I would call it highly unlikely.

I hear what you're both saying -- perhaps I just need to take the easy way out and respond with a "well that's just how I feel." I just think UVA was getting too much credit for its 19-0 start, which is why I keep bringing up Syracuse and its 25-0 start. A perfect record in February (or on January 31 before the Duke game, in UVA's case) does not a great team make.

Losing a key player, especially in the middle of the season, is a big deal. Duke fans should understand that better than anyone. Maybe UVA will just keep trucking on without Anderson, but more likely than not there will be a period of adjustment, at least that's what I'm expecting. That's why I think there will be an unexpected slip-up or two, even though I do acknowledge the point about UVA not having "WTF" games.

As far as Duke's schedule goes, I really think there's a good chance that Duke can run the table in February (can't put a number on it but better than 50%). The game @UNC is really the only remaining game that gives me some concern, but if Duke can beat UW, UVA and UL on the road, why not UNC too?

[Olympic Fan]

With tonight's win in Tallahassee, Duke ties UNC for third place in the standings (both 8-3) .. one-half game behind Notre Dame (9-3) in second.

With seven ACC games remaining -- four vs. UNC and Syracuse -- much too early to be making plans for Greensboro, but a top four seed definitely looks a lot better than it did a couple of weeks ago.

[jv001]

Last night, our own Jay Williams predicted Virginia will not win the regular season. He didn't comment on how that takes place. He did comment earlier, Virginia will miss Anderson more than people think. But what does Jay, know, he took Virginia over Duke and was wrong on that occasion as well. GoDuke!

[SCMatt33]

With tonight's win in Tallahassee, Duke ties UNC for third place in the standings (both 8-3) .. one-half game behind Notre Dame (9-3) in second.

With seven ACC games remaining -- four vs. UNC and Syracuse -- much too early to be making plans for Greensboro, but a top four seed definitely looks a lot better than it did a couple of weeks ago.

Certainly better, but not out of the woods at all. Everyone in the top 5 had a front loaded schedule. There are only 4 games left that pit two top 5 teams against each other (two Duke-UNC, ND@Louisville, and UVA@Louiville). If you look at the bottom 5, everyone in the top 5 has at least two games against them left, including UVA with 4. I see no schedule advantage for Duke in there at all. All the work Duke has done to pull back even with everyone is certainly a big part of making our outlook better, but still lots of work to do.

[Olympic Fan]

Wednesday night's games virtually guarantees that Duke will end up with a top four seed (and a bye into Thursday's quarterfinal round).

With Duke beating UNC and Syracuse beating Louisville, Duke now has a two-game cushion over the two teams tied for fourth (actually it's three teams, but Syracuse is out of the tourney so they don't matter). Not only does Duke have a two game edge, but the Devils have the tiebreaker over UNC and Louisville, so it would take three Duke losses in the final five games to give either team a chance.

The top of the standings:

Virginia 12-1
Notre Dame 11-3
Duke 10-3
Louisville 8-5
UNC 8-5
Syracuse 8-5

Duke wins almost every conceivable tiebreaker with every team on that list (even if UNC gets a split by winning in Chapel Hill).

I'm still not giving up the regular season title ... Virginia has three loseable games left -- at Wake (which they just beat by on in C'ville), at Syracuse and at Louisville. They won't lose all three, but until Duke loses again, there is still hope.

But the second seed is a really good shot -- since we have the tiebreaker over Notre Dame and at least the third seed is a virtual lock.

Big advantage to get the third seed -- the quarterfinal game is likely to be somebody like NC State or Miami (and I'd like to play an inferior team that beat us earlier)... the fourth seed -- either UNC or Louisville -- is likely to play the other one in the quarters.

[uh_no]

Wednesday night's games virtually guarantees that Duke will end up with a top four seed (and a bye into Thursday's quarterfinal round).

With Duke beating UNC and Syracuse beating Louisville, Duke now has a two-game cushion over the two teams tied for fourth (actually it's three teams, but Syracuse is out of the tourney so they don't matter). Not only does Duke have a two game edge, but the Devils have the tiebreaker over UNC and Louisville, so it would take three Duke losses in the final five games to give either team a chance.

The top of the standings:

Virginia 12-1
Notre Dame 11-3
Duke 10-3
Louisville 8-5
UNC 8-5
Syracuse 8-5

Duke wins almost every conceivable tiebreaker with every team on that list (even if UNC gets a split by winning in Chapel Hill).

I'm still not giving up the regular season title ... Virginia has three loseable games left -- at Wake (which they just beat by on in C'ville), at Syracuse and at Louisville. They won't lose all three, but until Duke loses again, there is still hope.

But the second seed is a really good shot -- since we have the tiebreaker over Notre Dame and at least the third seed is a virtual lock.

Big advantage to get the third seed -- the quarterfinal game is likely to be somebody like NC State or Miami (and I'd like to play an inferior team that beat us earlier)... the fourth seed -- either UNC or Louisville -- is likely to play the other one in the quarters.

FWIW duke also has the tiebreaker over ND.

[budwom]

Channeling my inner oldfartness here, the dilution factor of the ACC has me incredibly unexcited about the ACC Tournament. In short, I kind of wish we weren't
playing in it. With a roster of eight healthy souls, we don't need another injury, and no matter how much zone we play, three games in three days really isn't
what we need. Yeah, I hope we win, but would rather have the guys just play a game, or perhaps two, and then rest up for the tournament that really matters.
Now get off my lawn!

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

Channeling my inner oldfartness here, the dilution factor of the ACC has me incredibly unexcited about the ACC Tournament. In short, I kind of wish we weren't
playing in it. With a roster of eight healthy souls, we don't need another injury, and no matter how much zone we play, three games in three days really isn't
what we need. Yeah, I hope we win, but would rather have the guys just play a game, or perhaps two, and then rest up for the tournament that really matters.
Now get off my lawn!


Why not try to win both, you can learn just as much by winning than by losing and resting. With the championship game on Saturday now, we will have at least 5 days of rest before our first round match up against hopefully a 16 seed. I think winning the ACC Tournament and getting a 1 seed is more important to this team than rest, barring an injury of course. With three freshman playing key roles they are used to playing 3 games in 3 days, if not 3 games in 1 day like in AAU ball. After all, these guys are young studs who we only get for a season so lets use up all the gas in that tank before they leave us for the NBA.

[Reilly]

Channeling my inner oldfartness here, the dilution factor of the ACC has me incredibly unexcited about the ACC Tournament. In short, I kind of wish we weren't
playing in it. With a roster of eight healthy souls, we don't need another injury, and no matter how much zone we play, three games in three days really isn't
what we need. Yeah, I hope we win, but would rather have the guys just play a game, or perhaps two, and then rest up for the tournament that really matters.
Now get off my lawn!

If you're saying the ACC Tourney is not as compelling or exciting with all the expansion, I agree with you 100%. Think how cool it would've been for Duke and UVa to be meeting for the third time potentially this year.

If you're saying we need, say, six days of rest (Friday-Wed) before our first NCAA game the following Thurs against a team we will be double digit favorites against, as opposed to four days rest (Sun-Wed) against the same weaker opponent, I don't buy it. And I don't think playing Friday and Saturday in the ACCs is going to have some huge hangover effect the next weekend in the NCAAs.

[SCMatt33]

I think more importantly, Duke would likely have to lose three more games to even drop out of the top three (I haven't gone through every three and four team tie-breaking scenario, but it looks good for Duke). That keeps Duke out of that 4-5 quarterfinal game. Even the 4 seed will likely have to go through 3 of the other four tourney locks to win the thing, and that is daunting. The top three will likely each get a bubble team in the quartefinal, then two of the top five to finish it. Of coarse, those bubble teams will be laying it all out there, but I'd still rather have one of them over UNC or Louisville

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'm still not giving up the regular season title ... Virginia has three loseable games left -- at Wake (which they just beat by on in C'ville), at Syracuse and at Louisville. They won't lose all three, but until Duke loses again, there is still hope.

Thanks Olympic Fan for the analysis. Good stuff.

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

UVa has the best body of work of any ACC team thus far. They are the most consistent ACC team. But I think Duke is much more talented with so many other weapons. Right now, I'd take Duke in any one-on-one. But Duke has come a long way since the Miami games. UVa has been steady since.

So, in conclusion, UVa has been awesome during the whole ACC and absolutely deserves the ACC Reg title when they get it. But my money is on Duke to win the ACC Tourney. They are just the better team right now.

[CDu]

I think more importantly, Duke would likely have to lose three more games to even drop out of the top three (I haven't gone through every three and four team tie-breaking scenario, but it looks good for Duke). That keeps Duke out of that 4-5 quarterfinal game. Even the 4 seed will likely have to go through 3 of the other four tourney locks to win the thing, and that is daunting. The top three will likely each get a bubble team in the quartefinal, then two of the top five to finish it. Of coarse, those bubble teams will be laying it all out there, but I'd still rather have one of them over UNC or Louisville

Not "likely". Duke would definitely have to lose 3 more games, as we currently hold the tiebreakers over all of Syracuse, UNC, and Louisville. Each of the m has two losses to the others (the most we could get), and our record against UVa is best.

[Troublemaker]

Thanks Olympic Fan for the analysis. Good stuff.

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


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

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

[Olympic Fan]

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

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

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

[BlueDevilBrowns]

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

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

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

[flyingdutchdevil]

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

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

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

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

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

[Duvall]

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

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

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

[Olympic Fan]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Troublemaker]

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

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



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

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

[flyingdutchdevil]

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

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

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

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

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

[CDu]

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


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

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

[azzefkram]

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

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

[Newton_14]

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

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

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

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

[Wander]

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


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

[Troublemaker]

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

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

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

[bluedev_92]

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

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

[flyingdutchdevil]

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

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

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

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

[Troublemaker]

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

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

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

[azzefkram]

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

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



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

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

[Troublemaker]

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

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

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

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

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

[rasputin]

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

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

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

[azzefkram]

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

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

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

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

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

[Seattle Hoo]

Reading this thread and reading the threads on the UVA board relative to the same issue is very interesting to me. Over there, the discussion is all about hoping everybody else loses so UVA has a cushion, and over here it is all about whether UVA will lose a couple games. To me, what is fascinating is that both discussions center around the Hoos losing. I guess that's natural. My position on it is this: I am very confident that Virginia will not lose more than one game the rest of the regular season. The Pitt game gives me more reason to believe that, because what made the Wake game as close as it was was bad decisions by Virginia down the stretch, and a disturbing trend of losing intensity after getting a big lead early in the second half. The decision-making was much better against Pitt, and if Virginia plays with good mental focus, only Louisville has a chance to beat the Hoos, and even that is dubious. Louisville is a deeply flawed team. I've watched Virginia enough to know that they are unlikely to lose to any of the teams remaining.

That said, I want Duke, Louisville, Notre Dame and Carolina to win as many games as they can. I want all five of the top teams to go into the tournaments as strong as possible. That sets up a great ACC Tournament. It sets up the ACC to get a lot of high seeds in the NCAA Tournament. We're having one of the great seasons of the last twenty years. With average scoring margin one of the lowest in history (a stat I got off of this board), and with TWO top 5 teams, another Top 10 team, and two more in the top 15, and with it not just being Duke and UNC dominating everybody else, it's been a tense and interesting season. We can make it a great tournament and a real season to remember if these teams all stride into the tournament season like titans. That's what I hope. I don't want UVA to lose a couple games and limp into the tournament as the 1 seed only because everybody else fell down too.

Last night was a great game. Duke-UVA was a great game. I want to see some more great games. I want to see a great Tournament.

And I want to see a really boring regular season stretch run because UVA keeps winning. :cool:

[jhmoss1812]

Can UVA lose at least two more games? Of course. Can Duke win out? Of course. The likelihood of both of those things happening together are much lower though. UVA and Duke are basically guaranteed a double bye and are most likely going to be on opposite sides of the bracket (UVA 1, Duke 2 or Duke 1, UVA 2). It's a lot less likely that UVA and Duke are on the same side of the bracket, which is fine by me.

[-bdbd]

I think things look just fine for now for Duke. I am expecting a 2 or 3 seed, and ACCT matchups with (or teams similar to, if seedings hold up) Miami/Clemson/FSU (Thursday), ND (Fri.) and UVA (Sat.).

The standings now have UVA at the top, with ND and Duke essentially 2 games back, followed by L'ville & NC two games further back. Looking at the remaining skeds, you'd have to give a high probability to UVA losing no more than one more game (though they DO have 3 away games, but one of those is @ Wake). Similarly, Duke and ND have managable slates left as well - both play ony one more ranked opponent (ND at L'ville and Duke at NC). Both Duke and ND have only 2 away games left as well. NC has three 'losable" games left - hosting State & Duke, and @ MIA - so expecting 1-2 losses there. L'ville's remaining slate holds 2 ranked opponents, and then vs MIA and @ FSU, plus factoring in their current losing skid, you would expect to see L'ville finish 5th, with maybe 2 or more losses left.

Current ACC standings:
TEAM CONF GB OVR
#2 Virginia 12-1 -- 24-1
#10 Notre Dame 11-3 1.5 23-4
#4 Duke 10-3 2 23-3
#12 Louisville 8-5 4 20-6
#15 North Carolina 8-5 4 18-8
Syracuse 8-5 4 17-9
Miami (FL) 7-6 5 17-9
Clemson 7-7 5.5 15-11
Florida St 7-7 5.5 15-12
......


So, you'd reasonably expect ACCT seedings at the top to look something like this:

1. Waho-U
2. Duke/ND
3. ND/Duke
4. NC
5. 'ville

UVA's remaining slate:
Feb 22 vsFSU 6:30 PM ET
Feb 25 @WAKE 7:00 PM ET
Feb 28 vsVT 4:00 PM ET
Mar 2 @SYR 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 @#12 LOU TBD

Here's Duke's remaining slate:
Feb 21 vsCLEM 4:00 PM ET
Feb 25 @VT 9:00 PM ET
Feb 28 vsSYR 7:00 PM ET
Mar 4 vsWAKE 8:00 PM ET
Mar 7 @#15 UNC TBD

And ND's:
Feb 21 @BC 4:00 PM ET
Feb 24 vsSYR 8:00 PM ET
Mar 4 @#12 LOU 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 vsCLEM 4:00 PM ET

And NC's:
Feb 21 vsGT 12:00 PM ET
Feb 24 vsNCST 8:00 PM ET
Feb 28 @MIA 2:00 PM ET
Mar 3 @GT 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 vs#4 DUKE TBD

And L'ville's:
Feb 21 vsMIA 2:00 PM ET
Feb 23 @GT 7:00 PM ET
Feb 28 @FSU 12:00 PM ET
Mar 4 vs#10 ND 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 vs#2 UVA TBD

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Not really. It's more injuries than anything else

I agree that injuries have definitely played a role in our reg season conference record(see Ryan Kelly and Kyrie Irving).

But as Olympic pointed out, since Kyrie in 2011, the One And Dones have indeed played a role in fielding some younger than usual Duke teams. If KI, Austin, Jabari, and Hood had stayed more than one year, our odds of finishing first would have been much more likely in either '12, '13, '14, or this year.

And the unbalanced schedule the last 3 years has hurt us as well. Hopefully soon the schedule will tip back in our favor.


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

In 2010, if you want to be technical, we lost the tiebreaker to MD, as we were the #2 seed in the ACCT.

It isn't "outright " when another team can also lay claim to the same title in the same year. That's called a tie.

[hurleyfor3]

In 2010, if you want to be technical, we lost the tiebreaker to MD, as we were the #2 seed in the ACCT.

Incorrect, we were the 1 seed. Source: Was there, but also Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_ACC_Men%27s_Basketball_Tournament).

[gofurman]

I think things look just fine for now for Duke. I am expecting a 2 or 3 seed, and ACCT matchups with (or teams similar to, if seedings hold up) Miami/Clemson/FSU (Thursday), ND (Fri.) and UVA (Sat.).

The standings now have UVA at the top, with ND and Duke essentially 2 games back, followed by L'ville & NC two games further back. Looking at the remaining skeds, you'd have to give a high probability to UVA losing no more than one more game (though they DO have 3 away games, but one of those is @ Wake). Similarly, Duke and ND have managable slates left as well - both play ony one more ranked opponent (ND at L'ville and Duke at NC). Both Duke and ND have only 2 away games left as well. NC has three 'losable" games left - hosting State & Duke, and @ MIA - so expecting 1-2 losses there. L'ville's remaining slate holds 2 ranked opponents, and then vs MIA and @ FSU, plus factoring in their current losing skid, you would expect to see L'ville finish 5th, with maybe 2 or more losses left.

Current ACC standings:
TEAM CONF GB OVR
#2 Virginia 12-1 -- 24-1
#10 Notre Dame 11-3 1.5 23-4
#4 Duke 10-3 2 23-3
#12 Louisville 8-5 4 20-6
#15 North Carolina 8-5 4 18-8
Syracuse 8-5 4 17-9
Miami (FL) 7-6 5 17-9
Clemson 7-7 5.5 15-11
Florida St 7-7 5.5 15-12
......


So, you'd reasonably expect ACCT seedings at the top to look something like this:

1. Waho-U
2. Duke/ND
3. ND/Duke
4. NC
5. 'ville

UVA's remaining slate:
Feb 22 vsFSU 6:30 PM ET
Feb 25 @WAKE 7:00 PM ET
Feb 28 vsVT 4:00 PM ET
Mar 2 @SYR 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 @#12 LOU TBD

Here's Duke's remaining slate:
Feb 21 vsCLEM 4:00 PM ET
Feb 25 @VT 9:00 PM ET
Feb 28 vsSYR 7:00 PM ET
Mar 4 vsWAKE 8:00 PM ET
Mar 7 @#15 UNC TBD

And ND's:
Feb 21 @BC 4:00 PM ET
Feb 24 vsSYR 8:00 PM ET
Mar 4 @#12 LOU 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 vsCLEM 4:00 PM ET

And NC's:
Feb 21 vsGT 12:00 PM ET
Feb 24 vsNCST 8:00 PM ET
Feb 28 @MIA 2:00 PM ET
Mar 3 @GT 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 vs#4 DUKE TBD

And L'ville's:
Feb 21 vsMIA 2:00 PM ET
Feb 23 @GT 7:00 PM ET
Feb 28 @FSU 12:00 PM ET
Mar 4 vs#10 ND 7:00 PM ET
Mar 7 vs#2 UVA TBD

I don't want to face Miami in a Thurs game - that's the only Thursday game I see us losing. The upside to playing Miami in ACC is potential practice vs a super quick guard team even if it means early exit from ACC - maybe we would zone now'

[Newton_14]

Incorrect, we were the 1 seed. Source: Was there, but also Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_ACC_Men%27s_Basketball_Tournament).

Correct and also the tiebreaker is only about seed and has nothing to do with the regular season title. Both teams are co-champs and the tiebreaker is simply about seeding in the tournament. Nothing else.

[CDu]

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

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

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

You know what else can't tell us who the best team was? A single elimination tournament with way fewer games and an even more unbalanced schedule. I love the tourney, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking it is in any way better at determining the best team.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Incorrect, we were the 1 seed. Source: Was there, but also Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_ACC_Men%27s_Basketball_Tournament).

I stand corrected. I should have remembered that.

Dang my old age!(I turn 36 on Sunday)

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

So who is going? Also who has spare tickets for face value. I think I will fly up on Tuesday and mull around Greensboro until I find someone selling a book. The ticket prices online are outrageous, such as 5 grand for a book of lower level seats. I imagine by Wed/Thurs there will be losers giving away tickets. By losers I mean fans of teams that lost games, (Looking at you Wake and NC State fans) I see them as the most appealing teams to lose to get cheap tickets. Obviously Carolina would be the most ideal but if I am going I want a Duke VS Carolina championship game if at all possible.

I haven't been since the DC tourney, which was a fun time. It also introduced me to five guys burgers and fries, which was a wonderful experience.

See you all there.

[jv001]

So who is going? Also who has spare tickets for face value. I think I will fly up on Tuesday and mull around Greensboro until I find someone selling a book. The ticket prices online are outrageous, such as 5 grand for a book of lower level seats. I imagine by Wed/Thurs there will be losers giving away tickets. By losers I mean fans of teams that lost games, (Looking at you Wake and NC State fans) I see them as the most appealing teams to lose to get cheap tickets. Obviously Carolina would be the most ideal but if I am going I want a Duke VS Carolina championship game if at all possible.

I haven't been since the DC tourney, which was a fun time. It also introduced me to five guys burgers and fries, which was a wonderful experience.

See you all there.

I hope we don't end up playing NC State or Wake, but especially State. They play over their heads against Duke. I wish they did that against uncheat. I remember when they did. Have a great time at the Tourney. By the way, I appreciate your service. GoArmy and GoDuke!

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

I hope we don't end up playing NC State or Wake, but especially State. They play over their heads against Duke. I wish they did that against uncheat. I remember when they did. Have a great time at the Tourney. By the way, I appreciate your service. GoArmy and GoDuke!

I just meant that when Wake, NC State or UNC, or even Duke for that matter lose there tends to be a ton of tickets available for really cheap in lower levels. Also, I actually hope we get to play State in the tourney as it would give us a chance to avenge a loss, same goes for Miami. The mental revenge factor is very real in the tourney I think. By that measure, I want no part of UVA and since I will be there I want a Duke UNC final.

[jv001]

I just meant that when Wake, NC State or UNC, or even Duke for that matter lose there tends to be a ton of tickets available for really cheap in lower levels. Also, I actually hope we get to play State in the tourney as it would give us a chance to avenge a loss, same goes for Miami. The mental revenge factor is very real in the tourney I think. By that measure, I want no part of UVA and since I will be there I want a Duke UNC final.

Good points. I just want Duke to play up to their potential, no injuries and of course win the Tournament. If we play our best, I don't think even the Cavaliers will beat us. A win over the Cheaters would be nice. :cool: GoDuke!

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

Good points. I just want Duke to play up to their potential, no injuries and of course win the Tournament. If we play our best, I don't think even the Cavaliers will beat us. A win over the Cheaters would be nice. :cool: GoDuke!

Winslow on Lebron

Jones on Kyrie

Oak on Love

were golden, bring on the CAVS baby, lets just play 3 on 3 though our freshman vs their big 3!!

[Olympic Fan]

You know what else can't tell us who the best team was? A single elimination tournament with way fewer games and an even more unbalanced schedule. I love the tourney, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking it is in any way better at determining the best team.

It's not about which one is best for determining the best team.

It's about determining the ACC champion.

The ACC Tournament determines the ACC champion. Period.

Like it or not. Prefer the "Regular season championship" of not, the ACC Tournament Champion is the one and only, OFFICIAL, ACC champion.

It's been that way since 1954 ... the conference only began to officially recognize the regular season champion (as the "Regular season champion") in 1990.

Naturally, I'd prefer to win both. But if I had to choose one or the other, I'd prefer to be the league's official champion -- and that means winning the tournament.

[uh_no]

Like it or not. Prefer the "Regular season championship" of not, the ACC Tournament Champion is the one and only, OFFICIAL, ACC champion.


why are you so militant about what amounts to semantics? We hang banners for it, it's recognized by the ACC, it's given credit by fans and the media....that's good enough for me.

[Bob Green]

why are you so militant about what amounts to semantics?

It is not semantics. The winner of the ACCT is the official conference champion. This fact is very important to us older fans.

[bob blue devil]

It is not semantics. The winner of the ACCT is the official conference champion. This fact is very important to us older fans.

hesitant to wade in here, but as far as i can read it, the conversation went something like:
- acct determines the champion, i'd rather have that
- yes, and unbalanced regular season makes it impossible to determine a fair winner; it can't determine who the best team is; acct is better
- on the contrary, the acct is even more ineffective in determining the best team given the luck of the draw, and the single elimination nature

so... i'm with cdu in that the acc regular season does a better job determining the best team. of course at the end of the day i'd rather have an acc championship than a regular season championship, but i haven't read anyone arguing the contrary. if they awarded the acc championship to the regular season champion it would be more likely to go to the best team (not that i'd want that - it would take a lot of the fun out).

[uh_no]

It is not semantics. The winner of the ACCT is the official conference champion. This fact is very important to us older fans.

The text on the banner says "atlantic coast conference champions" followed by tournament or regular season. Are you advocating an asterisk on the regular season ones that says "unofficial?"

[CDu]

hesitant to wade in here, but as far as i can read it, the conversation went something like:
- acct determines the champion, i'd rather have that
- yes, and unbalanced regular season makes it impossible to determine a fair winner; it can't determine who the best team is; acct is better
- on the contrary, the acct is even more ineffective in determining the best team given the luck of the draw, and the single elimination nature

so... i'm with cdu in that the acc regular season does a better job determining the best team. of course at the end of the day i'd rather have an acc championship than a regular season championship, but i haven't read anyone arguing the contrary. if they awarded the acc championship to the regular season champion it would be more likely to go to the best team (not that i'd want that - it would take a lot of the fun out).

Thank you for understanding the point. I wasn't discussing "champion" at all. I was pointing out that many revere the Tourney for its alleged ability to determine the conference's best, and bemoan the meaninglessness of the unbalanced regular season. Well, that is silly: the tourney is way more unbalanced, over way shorter a period of time. It is a far inferior measure of the best team. The regular season, even though it is unbalanced, is the better representation of best team. Both are impressive; the regular season is more impressive.

As to the other issue (which had nothing to do with my prior post, but since it has been brought up), I will say this: I realize and respect that the older folks celebrate the tourney over all else ACC. But I do believe that it is an outdated viewpoint. We hang banners for both. Coach K has stated both as goals each season. And with tourney expansion we don't need the tourney title to make the NCAA tourney (nor do we usually need it to get a 1 seed in the NCAA).

I still want to win both. But the regular season title is, in my opinion, more impressive.

[NancyCarol]

so after carefully reading all these very well written posts I must conclude it is NOT too early to talk about ACC seeding.

[Bob Green]

The text on the banner says "atlantic coast conference champions" followed by tournament or regular season. Are you advocating an asterisk on the regular season ones that says "unofficial?"

I'm suggesting we have a generation gap here. You're young, it's not your fault, I'm old, it beats the heck out of the alternative. Let's just agree to disagree. It's not important to me to convince you that you are wrong. But you are.

[CDu]

And with the win, we are currently the 2 seed.

[CDu]

And with the win, we are currently the 2 seed.

And I am a dum-dum. NEXT weekend is Notre Dame's bye. So we are of course still a half-game back (but of course still tied in the loss column). Two more wins this week and we will be in second though.

[Newton_14]

It is not semantics. The winner of the ACCT is the official conference champion. This fact is very important to us older fans.
Yep. That will always be my stance.
I far value the tourney over the regular season, always have, always will. I get we hang banners for finishing first in the very unbalanced Reg Season but the tourney means far more to me.

[hurleyfor3]

And I am a dum-dum. NEXT weekend is Notre Dame's bye. So we are of course still a half-game back (but of course still tied in the loss column). Two more wins this week and we will be in second though.

We win all tiebreakers against them, tho.

UVa first, Duke/ND tied for second --> Duke 1-0 vs. UVa, ND 0-1
UVa/Duke/ND three-way tie --> Duke is 2-1 vs. other two, UVa 1-1, ND is 1-2

For Looville to be involved they'd have to beat both ND and UVa and hope ND loses one other game and we lose twice. Even then we have the upper hand because we're 2-1 vs. ND+Loo, beat UVa outright and beat Loo outright and 3-1 vs. UVa+ND+Loo.

Unc is screwed, the proof of which is left as an exercise to the reader.

[-bdbd]

We win all tiebreakers against them, tho.

UVa first, Duke/ND tied for second --> Duke 1-0 vs. UVa, ND 0-1
UVa/Duke/ND three-way tie --> Duke is 2-1 vs. other two, UVa 1-1, ND is 1-2

For Looville to be involved they'd have to beat both ND and UVa and hope ND loses one other game and we lose twice. Even then we have the upper hand because we're 2-1 vs. ND+Loo, beat UVa outright and beat Loo outright and 3-1 vs. UVa+ND+Loo.

Unc is screwed, the proof of which is left as an exercise to the reader.

All of this is good news to me, as we likely won't play our first ACCT game until Thursday NIGHT (when the 2 and 3-seed games are held). For those of us who must work that Thursday, we can still (potentially) attend. :D

[hurleyfor3]

200-level topic: Root for Looville to beat UVa. This will cause unc to lose a potential tiebreaker with Loo (Loo 1-1 vs. UVa; unc 0-1), and push them down to a 5 seed, meaning they have to play an extra game.


All of this is good news to me, as we likely won't play our first ACCT game until Thursday NIGHT (when the 2 and 3-seed games are held). For those of us who must work that Thursday, we can still (potentially) attend. :D

As noted, a 1-seed for Duke is still possible if we tie with either or both of UVa and/or ND for the lead.

[OldPhiKap]

so after carefully reading all these very well written posts I must conclude it is NOT too early to talk about ACC seeding.

And we wlll NOT be playing Stonehenge tonight.

[hurleyfor3]

I split the discussion of regular-season vs. tournament into a separate thread. Seeding for the 2015 ACC Tournament should still be discussed here.

[jv001]

With Chris Jones being kicked off Louisville, the odds of them beating Virginia are pretty slim. It looks like everything is falling into place for the Cavaliers to finish first in the regular season. But we'll take 'em in the tournament. GoDuke!

[Wahoo2000]

With Chris Jones being kicked off Louisville, the odds of them beating Virginia are pretty slim. It looks like everything is falling into place for the Cavaliers to finish first in the regular season. But we'll take 'em in the tournament. GoDuke!

Except that Perrantes broke his nose tonight, and may miss some time as well. With Anderson likely out until AT LEAST the ACC tourney, I think it's going to be REALLY tough to avoid dropping one or two between now and the conference tourney.

[jv001]

Except that Perrantes broke his nose tonight, and may miss some time as well. With Anderson likely out until AT LEAST the ACC tourney, I think it's going to be REALLY tough to avoid dropping one or two between now and the conference tourney.

I hate to see any players get injured and miss time. I hope Perrantes and Anderson get back soon. I even hate to see the uncheat players injured, :cool: GoDuke!

[CDu]

We win all tiebreakers against them, tho.

UVa first, Duke/ND tied for second --> Duke 1-0 vs. UVa, ND 0-1
UVa/Duke/ND three-way tie --> Duke is 2-1 vs. other two, UVa 1-1, ND is 1-2

For Looville to be involved they'd have to beat both ND and UVa and hope ND loses one other game and we lose twice. Even then we have the upper hand because we're 2-1 vs. ND+Loo, beat UVa outright and beat Loo outright and 3-1 vs. UVa+ND+Loo.

Unc is screwed, the proof of which is left as an exercise to the reader.

Right, which is why I said with two wins this week we will move into 2nd.

[Dukehky]

I hate to see any players get injured and miss time. I hope Perrantes and Anderson get back soon. I even hate to see the uncheat players injured, :cool: GoDuke!

Broken Nose = mask and probably back before the next game.

He will probably not be the same guy.

Wake, Tech, Syracuse, and an extremely overrated UL team without their 3rd best player. I think UVA runs that without any issue even without Anderson. If London can't go at all, maybe they lose a game.

I'm sorry though, a team that scores 20 first half points against FSU, not a final four team. I don't care that they were missing their best player. Duke was missing its best player this weekend too...

So congrats on your regular season best record, UVA. The schedulers gave you an easy schedule and you took advantage. They will not get out of the Sweet 16 though.

[jhmoss1812]

Broken Nose = mask and probably back before the next game.

He will probably not be the same guy.

Wake, Tech, Syracuse, and an extremely overrated UL team without their 3rd best player. I think UVA runs that without any issue even without Anderson. If London can't go at all, maybe they lose a game.

I'm sorry though, a team that scores 20 first half points against FSU, not a final four team. I don't care that they were missing their best player. Duke was missing its best player this weekend too...

So congrats on your regular season best record, UVA. The schedulers gave you an easy schedule and you took advantage. They will not get out of the Sweet 16 though.

First of all, we scored 22 points in the first half tonight. Second, you may be right about everything else you say in this post but man you are salty. Some people might say that a team that gives up 90 points to Miami at home or loses by double digits to NCSU isn't a final four team either. We beat NCSU without our best player. You guys lost to them at full strength. The point is that we keep winning games. We are 46-4 in our last 50 games overall and 32-3 in our last 35 ACC games, including an ACC tournament championship. Keep chalking that up to an easy schedule if that makes you feel better. I'm reasonable so I know that we have plenty of flaws that might get exposed. But you play to win the games and that's what we've done at a pretty remarkable clip this year.

[Kedsy]

First of all, we scored 22 points in the first half tonight. Second, you may be right about everything else you say in this post but man you are salty. Some people might say that a team that gives up 90 points to Miami at home or loses by double digits to NCSU isn't a final four team either. We beat NCSU without our best player. You guys lost to them at full strength. The point is that we keep winning games. We are 46-4 in our last 50 games overall and 32-3 in our last 35 ACC games, including an ACC tournament championship. Keep chalking that up to an easy schedule if that makes you feel better. I'm reasonable so I know that we have plenty of flaws that might get exposed. But you play to win the games and that's what we've done at a pretty remarkable clip this year.

Relax. I think most of us here have a healthy respect for UVa.

[jhmoss1812]

Relax. I think most of us here have a healthy respect for UVa.

I'm relaxed. I'm just trying to show that one poster that anyone can use one game to support why a team won't make the final four. It doesn't make much sense.

[gofurman]

I'm relaxed. I'm just trying to show that one poster that anyone can use one game to support why a team won't make the final four. It doesn't make much sense.

Anyone who doesn't respect UVA is crazy. A few late injuries may hamper an otherwise stellar season. I think that post above was way too harsh. You beat everyone but Duke and that was v close. No one else has been close to the level of UVA on D for the whole season. No one in ACC. As you said.. For every 22 pt half you have, Duke gives up 42 to UNC in a half. Duke scores more on o. UVA does better on D. Just hope you get everyone back for NCAA. No Duke fan should tease a team with great D. We can only wish we had that great a D as we lose to Lehigh and mercer. This yrs UVA team would not have lost to mercer

[Dukehky]

Edit, nevermind.


UVA is incredible, their defense is impenetrable, and they only win games by scoring 50 points against bad teams just to show they can do it. Best record in the conference = best team in the conference.

[gumbomoop]

There's no accounting for taste, and as regards UVa's team this year, mine differs altogether from Dukehky's [original offering] above ^. I like 'em a lot, especially Brogdon and Gill, Perrantes, too. Tobey should play better, and Shayok looks to be a real find. Bennett is superb.

I'd really like to see UVa play UK in NCAAT; alas, I fear that is most likely to happen only if Duke is eliminated before the FF, as I assume Duke and UVa may wind up on the same side of the FF bracket, and opposite UK's side of the FF bracket. If it doesn't work out that way, I sure hope UVa is in the region paired with UK's region. A UVa-UK semifinal and a Duke-Stanford [ok, Gonzaga, Arizona] would be lovely.

Don't know whether UVa has better chance than anyone else to beat UK, but I'd like to see UK face the pack-line, and UVa's patient offense deal with UK's excellent D.

[I suppose these last 2 paragraphs belong in NCAAT bracketology thread, so maybe I'll ask about such possibilities over there one of these days.]

[NSDukeFan]

Edit, nevermind.


UVA is incredible, their defense is impenetrable, and they only win games by scoring 50 points against bad teams just to show they can do it. Best record in the conference = best team in the conference.

Glad to see you're coming around. UVa has had a pretty incredible year. Their defense is ranked as superior to the impenetrable UK defense by KenPom. It is nice to have a defense where if the team has a poor shooting night, you still have a very real chance to win. With a two game lead in the conference and a 25-1 record overall, I don't think there shook be any doubt about who the best team in the ACC has been so far. Do I think Duke has a good chance of beating UVA in a one game neutral court game? Was Duke's most recent win more impressive? Sure, but Virginia has been the best team in the conference so far.

[CDu]

Glad to see you're coming around. UVa has had a pretty incredible year. Their defense is ranked as superior to the impenetrable UK defense by KenPom. It is nice to have a defense where if the team has a poor shooting night, you still have a very real chance to win. With a two game lead in the conference and a 25-1 record overall, I don't think there shook be any doubt about who the best team in the ACC has been so far. Do I think Duke has a good chance of beating UVA in a one game neutral court game? Was Duke's most recent win more impressive? Sure, but Virginia has been the best team in the conference so far.

Agreed. Duke is, when playing at their best, the best team in the conference. But Duke has not always (or even regularly for that matter) played at their best. And as such we've lost two games that we shouldn't have lost. If we win the games we're supposed to win, the schedule is irrelevant.

UVa is not as talented as Duke. But they have played more consistently than Duke. They didn't lose to NC State and they didn't lose to Miami and they didn't lose to Notre Dame. And that is why they are in first, not because their schedule is easier (even though it IS easier). Over the course of the season, UVa has played closer to its best than Duke, and that's why they have been the best team in the conference this season.

[jv001]

Agreed. Duke is, when playing at their best, the best team in the conference. But Duke has not always (or even regularly for that matter) played at their best. And as such we've lost two games that we shouldn't have lost. If we win the games we're supposed to win, the schedule is irrelevant.

UVa is not as talented as Duke. But they have played more consistently than Duke. They didn't lose to NC State and they didn't lose to Miami and they didn't lose to Notre Dame. And that is why they are in first, not because their schedule is easier (even though it IS easier). Over the course of the season, UVa has played closer to its best than Duke, and that's why they have been the best team in the conference this season.

I agree that Virginia has been the best team in the ACC. The reason they have been the best is because of their great defense. They keep the score low and don't have to depend on their offense to carry them. Bennett has figured it out and has installed a great defensive scheme up in Charlottesville. I also agree that Duke is more talented than Virginia and I think we can beat them in the ACC tournament if we continue to play as we are now. Our Freshman are playing really well and have gotten better. As long as we get the senior leadership from Quinn and he keeps hitting the 3s we'll be fine. GoDuke!

[flyingdutchdevil]

Glad to see you're coming around. UVa has had a pretty incredible year. Their defense is ranked as superior to the impenetrable UK defense by KenPom. It is nice to have a defense where if the team has a poor shooting night, you still have a very real chance to win. With a two game lead in the conference and a 25-1 record overall, I don't think there shook be any doubt about who the best team in the ACC has been so far. Do I think Duke has a good chance of beating UVA in a one game neutral court game? Was Duke's most recent win more impressive? Sure, but Virginia has been the best team in the conference so far.

Thank you! The ACC isn't about who is best in February, or about who is best in early March. It's about who is best from late Dec / early Jan UNTIL early March. And, without question, UVa has been top dog.

Like CDu, I believe that Duke is the better team right now. I would take Duke 10/10 times on a neutral court. But UVa has the better body of work in the ACC. This is their regular season. They deserved it. They beat nearly everyone they were supposed to beat (yay Duke!) while Duke looked awful during a two game stretch. UVa capitalized, Duke didn't.

Congrats, UVa, congrats.

[uh_no]

Thank you! The ACC isn't about who is best in February, or about who is best in early March. It's about who is best from late Dec / early Jan UNTIL early March. And, without question, UVa has been top dog.

Like CDu, I believe that Duke is the better team right now. I would take Duke 10/10 times on a neutral court. But UVa has the better body of work in the ACC. This is their regular season. They deserved it. They beat nearly everyone they were supposed to beat (yay Duke!) while Duke looked awful during a two game stretch. UVa capitalized, Duke didn't.

Congrats, UVa, congrats.

the team has lost one game all year, but you don't think they would win a single one of 10 on a neutral court? to a team that has already lost several and had some scares against far inferior teams?

I'd give them at least 3.

[Dukehky]

Last thing I'll say on UVA. I think that their players are incredible. Brogdon is incredible, there is no other word for it. Anderson is so, so, so, good and Perrantes is awesome. He hits huge shots, and doesn't turn the ball over. Tobey is a big with some semblance of an offensive post game and he overcomes his doofiness on defense to be a very solid defender. Gill is a better version of Jefferson, IMO.

This team would be more dangerous, IMO if Bennett unleashed them a little bit. They remind me of Wisconsin every once and a while. The system is set up for the schools to compete with the great athletes and great recruits, but when you have the best players like UVA does this year, I think it is more dangerous to themselves to slow the game down as much as they do. Brogdon, Anderson, Perrantes and the gang could put up bigger numbers, and I think that they're being over coached (albeit they are extremely well coached).
Jhmoss, do you not think the same? I mean it seems like Brogdon never misses a shot, play a little faster, get some bigger leads!

Lastly, the pack-line defense is a product of the product that college basketball teams have been putting on the floor. Over the past 30 years you have never seen a national champion ship team play a pack line defense. That system preys on the fact that college teams 3 point shooting and passing is atrocious right now. If you can pass the ball, push the ball, and shoot the 3 at a decent clip, the pack line is no longer the force of nature that UVA makes it look like against Georgia Tech. UVA's defense is great, they would be great if they played zone, so that criticism of the pack line isn't really on them, I just think it comforts people too much when they see how well it works against teams without any real offensive talent. The win over ND shuts me up a little bit though, they are a dribble drive and bomb away team that UVA beat pretty well.

UVA is a great defensive team, and I think they could be a better offensive team than they are. Here is my thing on UVA, I think that there are teams that UVA just won't lose to, but I also think there are teams that UVA can't beat. Like if Cal played Ulis and Booker for most of the game, I don't think they could beat Kentucky. I don't think UVA could beat Wisconsin, the offensive variability would have them playing on skates. I'll save my thoughts on Duke for after the ACCT.

UVA is going to have earned the 1 seed by virtue of beating everyone in front of them, we lost 3 games we shouldn't have.

[Troublemaker]

the team has lost one game all year, but you don't think they would win a single one of 10 on a neutral court? to a team that has already lost several and had some scares against far inferior teams?

I'd give them at least 3.

I'd give them 5-6 wins out of 10. Not sure I'm on the "Duke > UVA now" train, unless we're talking about literally right now when they're playing without Anderson. But once Anderson is back, I'm just hoping we are as good a team as them, in that tier just below Kentucky consisting of UVA, Arizona and (hopefully) Duke, and just ahead of the next tier of Wisconsin, Villanova, Gonzaga, Utah, etc.

[Atldukie79]

I believe the following:

UVA has the better overall performance in the ACC.
UVA has been more consistent.

Duke has the higher ceiling and at its best plays better than UVA.
Duke has more impressive wins and 2 unimpressive losses.

I believe UVA's relative consistency in the ACC is a function of:
Defensive strength (consistently)
Older players
Weaker schedule

I believe Duke's relative inconsistency is a function of:
Offensive strength (can be inconsistent)
Younger players
Tougher schedule


The record does not lie. UVA is where they are.
I would take Duke 7 out of ten on a neutral floor.

The uneven schedule is a factor.
Of the other top 5 ACC teams, UVA has only played ND and UNC on the road. (won both)
Duke has played ND, UVA, Louisville, and Syracuse on the road and won all 4.

Add in the Wisconsin road win and I think Duke has had more opportunities at difficult road wins. UVA has not had the opportunity.

[Kedsy]

I believe Duke's relative inconsistency is a function of:
Offensive strength (can be inconsistent)
Younger players
Tougher schedule

Considering two of Duke's losses came to middling ACC teams, how can the tougher schedule explain our inconsistency? That would only be true if our losses came to top teams that UVa didn't have to play, right?

[gumbomoop]

The dismissal of Chris Jones hurts UL badly, which in turn might hurt Duke marginally. It's a margin I'd much prefer to win, not lose.

Fighting the Irish for #2 ACCT seed, Duke could use some help from UL when they host ND. That's ND's only away game, and a possible loss. True enough that Duke will secure 2-seed [at least, see below] if we win out, but the combo of Jahlil uncertainty and DeanDome once-per-season madness might produce another loss or 2. Say only one, but that still means Duke would need UL @ home or 'Cuse on road to beat ND. I realize there's not a big difference between ACCT 2-3 seeds, but just in case finishing second helps Duke's case for NCAAT 1-seed, I'd like us to nip in ahead of ND.

UL desperately needs Blackshear to wake up here at the end of his senior season. They have to have a 3d scorer to help Rozier and Harrell, and Blackshear is only candidate.

Can Duke still tie UVa at 15-3? Yes, but Jones's dismissal hurts doubly, as UVa's final game is @ UL. Should Hoos lose either @ Wake or @ 'Cuse prior to visiting UL, and should Duke overcome Jahlil injury and win out, then we'd need UL to beat UVa to tie Hoos at 15-3. And thus, I assume, absolutely secure NCAAT 1-seed.

Go Cards. C'mon Blackshear, wake up.

[BobBender]

Agreed. Duke is, when playing at their best, the best team in the conference. But Duke has not always (or even regularly for that matter) played at their best. And as such we've lost two games that we shouldn't have lost. If we win the games we're supposed to win, the schedule is irrelevant.

UVa is not as talented as Duke. But they have played more consistently than Duke. They didn't lose to NC State and they didn't lose to Miami and they didn't lose to Notre Dame. And that is why they are in first, not because their schedule is easier (even though it IS easier). Over the course of the season, UVa has played closer to its best than Duke, and that's why they have been the best team in the conference this season.

Can we stop the narrative about the "easy schedule", and the "unbalanced schedule" that UVa has enjoyed? For God's sake, they are 32-3 in ACC play over the last 2 seasons! It is really stale to constantly moan about "unbalanced". We can't have it both ways. We want these epic showdowns with UNC twice a year, which gives Duke so much good pub. Yet I have read complaints that "we have to play UNC twice a year and UVa plays them once". It's just gotten really old, and is not the reason they are winning so much. They just know how to win. ( This isn't aimed at CDu's post, just the generally incessant whining about this issue)

[flyingdutchdevil]

Can we stop the narrative about the "easy schedule", and the "unbalanced schedule" that UVa has enjoyed? For God's sake, they are 32-3 in ACC play over the last 2 seasons! It is really stale to constantly moan about "unbalanced". We can't have it both ways. We want these epic showdowns with UNC twice a year, which gives Duke so much good pub. Yet I have read complaints that "we have to play UNC twice a year and UVa plays them once". It's just gotten really old, and is not the reason they are winning so much. They just know how to win. ( This isn't aimed at CDu's post, just the generally incessant whining about this issue)

I do agree that the "unbalanced" schedule argument is belittling of UVa, even if it is true. UVa may not be the best team, but they, without question, the most consistent team in the ACC over the last two years, easier schedule or not. I tip my hat to them for doing what no other team in the ACC can do: always beat the lower- and middle-tier teams. UNC can't, Syracuse can't, and Duke can't.

[DarkstarWahoo]

Why is the cutoff at Syracuse, a team with a ridiculously back-loaded conference schedule and nothing to play for? They've got one victory over the top 2/3 of the ACC. Any kind of legitimate tier delineation in the ACC has to stop at UNC. But if we're including bubble (or would-be bubble) mediocrities in this equation, UVA also won at Miami and NC State (who are only one game back of Cuse).

Also, while neither is in Wisconsin's class, Maryland and VCU (at full strength) certainly qualify as "difficult road wins." And UVA gets a shot at Louisville at the end of the year (just as Duke gets a shot at Chapel Hill, also on the road).

Finally, when did Duke win at ND? I must have missed that.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'd give them 5-6 wins out of 10. Not sure I'm on the "Duke > UVA now" train, unless we're talking about literally right now when they're playing without Anderson. But once Anderson is back, I'm just hoping we are as good a team as them, in that tier just below Kentucky consisting of UVA, Arizona and (hopefully) Duke, and just ahead of the next tier of Wisconsin, Villanova, Gonzaga, Utah, etc.

I am on the Duke > UVa bandwagon, because I think our offense is nearly unstoppable and we're slowly getting better at D. UVa's D has gotten better, but their O has certainly digressed somewhat. A product of that is Anderson, but I also think that UVa just isn't creative enough and doesn't have enough offensive weapons.

Also, I like your tiering system, but I disagree with Arizona:

Tier 1: Kentucky
Tier 2a: Duke, UVa, Wisconsin
Tier 2b: Nova, Zona, Zaga

[Seattle Hoo]

I believe the following:

The uneven schedule is a factor.
Of the other top 5 ACC teams, UVA has only played ND and UNC on the road. (won both)
Duke has played ND, UVA, Louisville, and Syracuse on the road and won all 4.

Add in the Wisconsin road win and I think Duke has had more opportunities at difficult road wins. UVA has not had the opportunity.

UVA has @Syracuse and @Louisville to end the season. I am one fan who believes it is unfortunate that we no longer get to play @Duke and @UNC every year, only partly because every year, it leaves Virginia at the mercy of this argument. At least we were able to get Louisville to replace Maryland and make up somewhat for being saddled with Virginia Tech as our "rival." Virginia Tech is our "rival" the way your little brother who is too young to play ball with you and your friends, but whom you have to let play with you because Mommy said so is your "rival." Of course, Louisville is not a rival either, but at least they're a prestige program so beating them means something.

My take on Duke v UVA is that Duke has far and away the more talented players. I was watching the Duke-UNC game and just kept thinking, "Both these teams are a lot more talented than we are." Virginia has very good players, but they are not as talented as their Duke/UNC rivals. Your players are faster and quicker, pretty much across the board. If Bennett "unleashed" the players (they're not really leashed except by disciplined adherence to the principles of the system), we would lose to Carolina and Duke every single time. Yeah, our players can run, but they cannot compete in an up-and-down game with those teams. But that's ok, because when it gets down to winning time, nobody plays up-and-down. I think we all noticed how the scoring slowed down in that game in the second half. Tournament ball is halfcourt ball, and teams that cannot play halfcourt effectively but who are great in a fullcourt game are the ones who are in trouble in the tournament. Virginia just plays tournament ball all season long.

Please note that this post is not just a response to the quoted post, but also to a couple things I saw in other posts. Bennett is perfect for Virginia because his system is designed for less talented teams to compete with more talented. Face it, we'll probably always have a talent deficit with Carolina and Duke. The difference is that Bennett's recruiting has closed the gap to where it always could be: 3-4* against 5* instead of 2-3* like it used to be. So with the packline (and I disagree with what the other poster said about why the packline is successful) and the patient halfcourt offense being played by older players, Virginia is able to stay on an equal footing with Duke and Carolina in the standings and on the court, where it matters. The system enables Bennett to turn the advantage of his recruits over yours (that more of them are going to be here longer) into a competitive advantage. Your players are going to be better, but ours are going to be older and more mature. Against everyone else in the conference, our players are better and at least as mature. I also think people underestimate the importance of the high basketball IQ Bennett recruits. In that sense, he is recruiting the same guys as Duke is. Both are getting high IQ guys, but Duke's players have those big brains housed in shiny bodies.

The way it plays out is that we all know that in any one game, your players can play better than ours and all other things being equal should win every time, but then we're anticipating next year and having everybody except Darion Atkins back, joined by a Bennett big man redshirt freshman, a Bennett big man true freshman, and a transfer point guard who is somewhat of a cross between Brogdon and Perrantes, while you guys are wondering how K is going to add to or win with his 7 scholarship players when all three of your 5* frosh go pro.

[Wahoo2000]

Hardly earth-shattering, but I agree with a lot of stuff in this thread.

I think it's become clear that Duke/UVA are in their own tier at the top of the conference (regardless of standings) as legitimate top 5 teams, and final 4 contenders. As numerous others have pointed out, Duke's strength is offense - which tends to be a little more variable game-to-game. UVA's calling card is defense, which usually offers a little more consistency.

What I'd really like to see is an ACC title game between the 2 where UVA is shooting the ball well from the outside, and Duke is really giving max effort on D. That would be an incredibly high level of basketball and just really, REALLY enjoyable to watch.

Slightly OT (mods - feel free to move) Really hoping we can both secure #1 seeds for the tourney, but with the likelihood that KY and Zags win out, combined with Wisconsin either winning out or dropping 1 but winning the B1G tourney.... it seems unlikely. What would really be interesting is a hypothetical scenario where KY, Zags, WIS, & Duke all win out, and UVA drops only 1 - to Duke in ACC champ game. I wonder which of those 5 would be relegated to a 2 seed? My guess is that it'd come down to UVA or Zags. Jeesh, I can't believe UVA could potentially go 31-2, with 2 losses to (at that point) the #2 team in the nation and get a 2 seed..... I hate the WCC.

[Kedsy]

What would really be interesting is a hypothetical scenario where KY, Zags, WIS, & Duke all win out, and UVA drops only 1 - to Duke in ACC champ game. I wonder which of those 5 would be relegated to a 2 seed? My guess is that it'd come down to UVA or Zags. Jeesh, I can't believe UVA could potentially go 31-2, with 2 losses to (at that point) the #2 team in the nation and get a 2 seed..... I hate the WCC.

In the scenario you name, I have to think Virginia would have the edge over Gonzaga. Frankly, I don't think it would be close.

[gumbomoop]

Hardly earth-shattering, but I agree with a lot of stuff in this thread.

I think it's become clear that Duke/UVA are in their own tier at the top of the conference (regardless of standings) as legitimate top 5 teams, and final 4 contenders. As numerous others have pointed out, Duke's strength is offense - which tends to be a little more variable game-to-game. UVA's calling card is defense, which usually offers a little more consistency.

What I'd really like to see is an ACC title game between the 2 where UVA is shooting the ball well from the outside, and Duke is really giving max effort on D. That would be an incredibly high level of basketball and just really, REALLY enjoyable to watch.

Slightly OT (mods - feel free to move) Really hoping we can both secure #1 seeds for the tourney, but with the likelihood that KY and Zags win out, combined with Wisconsin either winning out or dropping 1 but winning the B1G tourney.... it seems unlikely. What would really be interesting is a hypothetical scenario where KY, Zags, WIS, & Duke all win out, and UVA drops only 1 - to Duke in ACC champ game. I wonder which of those 5 would be relegated to a 2 seed? My guess is that it'd come down to UVA or Zags. Jeesh, I can't believe UVA could potentially go 31-2, with 2 losses to (at that point) the #2 team in the nation and get a 2 seed..... I hate the WCC.

You and the other Hoo posters -- excellent and welcomed all -- will forgive me for hoping against hope that UVa is on same side of FF bracket as UK. I'd really, no joke, absolutely serious, like to see a UVa-UK matchup, but can't hope for that if UVa and Duke, whether or not both are 1-seeds, are potential FF semi foes. I prefer that your guys get the first crack at those Cats.

But maybe I should be thrilled to play UVa two more times this season, as that would mean ........

[duketaylor]

I watched the 2nd half of Gonzaga at St. Mary's-not very impressed with the Zags. They trailed by 17 in the 1st half, closed to less than 10 for a good while, then again trailed by double-digits before St. Mary's couldn't score and Gonzaga (Wiltjer, in particular) finally took over. Their last 5 minutes were impressive, but so was St. Mary's disintegration.

UVA would have to lose two games, IMO, to even be close to losing a #1 seed. Doubt that will happen. With the dismissal of Chris Jones at UL it makes a W for the Hoos there a bit easier.

I know Lunardi has Gonzaga as a 1. As I look at resumes I guess they should be. I'd consider them the "4th" #1 seed. All the current 2-seeds could easily nab a 1.

I think if Duke played UVA 10 times on a neutral court it'd be 5/5 or Duke 6/UVA 4. With Anderson, that is, and with Okafor.

[Dukehky]

I watched the 2nd half of Gonzaga at St. Mary's-not very impressed with the Zags. They trailed by 17 in the 1st half, closed to less than 10 for a good while, then again trailed by double-digits before St. Mary's couldn't score and Gonzaga (Wiltjer, in particular) finally took over. Their last 5 minutes were impressive, but so was St. Mary's disintegration.

UVA would have to lose two games, IMO, to even be close to losing a #1 seed. Doubt that will happen. With the dismissal of Chris Jones at UL it makes a W for the Hoos there a bit easier.

I know Lunardi has Gonzaga as a 1. As I look at resumes I guess they should be. I'd consider them the "4th" #1 seed. All the current 2-seeds could easily nab a 1.

I think if Duke played UVA 10 times on a neutral court it'd be 5/5 or Duke 6/UVA 4. With Anderson, that is, and with Okafor.

Committee worships geography. Gonzaga, barring a loss is going to get a 1. Somehow Wisconsin is on the 2 line. If UVA loses a game in the regular season and loses to Duke in the ACC tournament with Wiscy winning out, they're dropping, even if Duke loses at UNC,

Gonzaga should get the 2 out west no matter what happens. I think UK, Wiscy, UVA, and Duke have earned their 1 seed more than Gonzaga has. Gonzaga tried to play a harder schedule, but some of the teams they scheduled didn't pan out to be as good as they were supposed to be when they were scheduled a few years ago like UCLA and St Johns. Too bad. They have lost their only game against a top 10 team. I think Gonzaga is solid, but they are not one of the four best teams in the country.

[Wahoo2000]

You and the other Hoo posters -- excellent and welcomed all -- will forgive me for hoping against hope that UVa is on same side of FF bracket as UK. I'd really, no joke, absolutely serious, like to see a UVa-UK matchup, but can't hope for that if UVa and Duke, whether or not both are 1-seeds, are potential FF semi foes. I prefer that your guys get the first crack at those Cats.

But maybe I should be thrilled to play UVa two more times this season, as that would mean ........

I not only forgive you, I'm hoping for the EXACT same scenario with Duke playing UK before we could potentially. It's not THAT big a deal though, as it seems rare that the top teams actually survive through to the final four though. This year might be an exception to the recent trend though, as it seems there is some significant separation after the top 6-7 teams. I'd love to see a final four with 3 1s and a 2. Maybe UVA-Wisconsin on one side and Duke-KY on the other? Setting up a championship game of "talent vs experience/scheme"? (an oversimplification, but that's obviously how it'd be marketed)

[Kedsy]

Committee worships geography.

#1 seed in West Region, past 10 years:

2014: Arizona
2013: Gonzaga
2012: Michigan State
2011: Duke
2010: Syracuse
2009: Connecticut
2008: UCLA
2007: Kansas
2006: Memphis
2005: Washington

Four western teams in ten years. Not particularly faithful worshipers, that committee.

[Wahoo2000]

#1 seed in West Region, past 10 years:

2014: Arizona
2013: Gonzaga
2012: Michigan State
2011: Duke
2010: Syracuse
2009: Connecticut
2008: UCLA
2007: Kansas
2006: Memphis
2005: Washington

Four western teams in ten years. Not particularly faithful worshipers, that committee.

I think he meant if it's a remotely close call, they'll favor the west coast based team. I didn't do the research, so could be wrong. However, 05 in particular stands out as I believe there were other better qualified teams that Washington beat out for the #1 out west. And while I didn't do the research, I'd wager a guess that if somebody investigates the 06, 07, & 10-12 seasons they'll find that in a chunk of those seasons, nobody from the west was really "in the hunt" for a 1 seed.

[Kedsy]

I'd wager a guess that if somebody investigates the 06, 07, & 10-12 seasons they'll find that in a chunk of those seasons, nobody from the west was really "in the hunt" for a 1 seed.

Of the five seasons you mention, a western team got a #2 seed in 2006, 2007, and 2011.

[jhmoss1812]

Last thing I'll say on UVA. I think that their players are incredible. Brogdon is incredible, there is no other word for it. Anderson is so, so, so, good and Perrantes is awesome. He hits huge shots, and doesn't turn the ball over. Tobey is a big with some semblance of an offensive post game and he overcomes his doofiness on defense to be a very solid defender. Gill is a better version of Jefferson, IMO.

This team would be more dangerous, IMO if Bennett unleashed them a little bit. They remind me of Wisconsin every once and a while. The system is set up for the schools to compete with the great athletes and great recruits, but when you have the best players like UVA does this year, I think it is more dangerous to themselves to slow the game down as much as they do. Brogdon, Anderson, Perrantes and the gang could put up bigger numbers, and I think that they're being over coached (albeit they are extremely well coached).
Jhmoss, do you not think the same? I mean it seems like Brogdon never misses a shot, play a little faster, get some bigger leads!

Lastly, the pack-line defense is a product of the product that college basketball teams have been putting on the floor. Over the past 30 years you have never seen a national champion ship team play a pack line defense. That system preys on the fact that college teams 3 point shooting and passing is atrocious right now. If you can pass the ball, push the ball, and shoot the 3 at a decent clip, the pack line is no longer the force of nature that UVA makes it look like against Georgia Tech. UVA's defense is great, they would be great if they played zone, so that criticism of the pack line isn't really on them, I just think it comforts people too much when they see how well it works against teams without any real offensive talent. The win over ND shuts me up a little bit though, they are a dribble drive and bomb away team that UVA beat pretty well.

UVA is a great defensive team, and I think they could be a better offensive team than they are. Here is my thing on UVA, I think that there are teams that UVA just won't lose to, but I also think there are teams that UVA can't beat. Like if Cal played Ulis and Booker for most of the game, I don't think they could beat Kentucky. I don't think UVA could beat Wisconsin, the offensive variability would have them playing on skates. I'll save my thoughts on Duke for after the ACCT.

UVA is going to have earned the 1 seed by virtue of beating everyone in front of them, we lost 3 games we shouldn't have.

I definitely think the same as you do. I think your post is spot on. As much as I love Bennett and admire what he's done for our program, I wish he would unleash the guys more against inferior talent. I do feel that they're being overcoached at some points. I don't know if I agree that this team and style is incapable of beating teams like Kentucky or Duke or Wisconsin. In fact, we've beaten two of those three teams in the last few years with the packline defense and our offensive system. We have also lost to two of those three teams so it's not foolproof. We've beaten UNC, NCSU, ND, Miami, VCU, MD, Davidson and most of those teams by double digits. Some of those teams are very good offensive teams. Our offense has looked much worse without Anderson and I agree that we can't beat upper echelon teams without him at this point. But fully healthy, we are fully capable of beating all those teams you mentioned. The flip side of the argument is, can we beat those teams with another system? I highly doubt it. So it gives us the best chance to win and so I have no problem with it.

[nmduke2001]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/why-the-top-no--2-seed-could-be-selection-sunday-s-biggest-loser-194001171.html

[Kedsy]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/why-the-top-no--2-seed-could-be-selection-sunday-s-biggest-loser-194001171.html

Yeah, it's hard for me to believe the committee is so foolish that they'd send Duke or Virginia to Cleveland rather than Syracuse just because it's a little closer by miles. The guidelines can't possibly be that strict.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Yeah, it's hard for me to believe the committee is so foolish that they'd send Duke or Virginia to Cleveland rather than Syracuse just because it's a little closer by miles. The guidelines can't possibly be that strict.

Ugh. If Duke doesn't win out and get a 1-seed, I can see the committee doing something stupid like setting up a Duke-UK Elite Eight match-up. Would be absolutely cruel, but it would destroy the EE TV ratings.

[Bob Green]

Except that Perrantes broke his nose tonight, and may miss some time as well. With Anderson likely out until AT LEAST the ACC tourney, I think it's going to be REALLY tough to avoid dropping one or two between now and the conference tourney.

You guys have been surviving without Anderson and I'm confident you can survive without Perrantes as Brogdon can handle the ball plus Shayok and Hall played decent last night. The player who has to step up his game is Evan Nolte as the Cavaliers need consistent outside shooting. I've really enjoyed watching Virginia the last few years so I am pulling for you guys to get healthy and make a run to the Final Four where Duke will be waiting for you. :)

[Seattle Hoo]

I've really enjoyed watching Virginia the last few years so I am pulling for you guys to get healthy and make a run to the Final Four where Duke will be waiting for you. :)

That will make a great rubber match! :cool:

[tbyers11]

Yeah, it's hard for me to believe the committee is so foolish that they'd send Duke or Virginia to Cleveland rather than Syracuse just because it's a little closer by miles. The guidelines can't possibly be that strict.

Mark Titus' report on the mock selection committee (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/ncaa-basketball-power-rankings-march-madness-tournament-selection-sunday-kentucky-wildcats-wisconsin-badgers-duke-blue-devils-villanova-wildcats-virginia-cavaliers-gonzaga-bulldogs-dick-vitale-arizona/) conducted for journalists suggest that the committee does frequently place geography above all. He covered the same "top 2 seed getting placed with UK" argument in both the Virginia and Wisconsin section of his rankings last week based on his experiences on the mock committee.

[Olympic Fan]

Obviously, two good battles going on for top seeds -- Duke and Notre Dame both have three loses. The Irish have one more win at the moment, but Duke wins any conceivable tiebeaker, so a pretty even race. That said, it's not a huge difference between the No. 2 and No. 3 seeds. That changes if Virginia loses two more and suddenly we're in the mix for No. 1.

On the other hand, the battle between Louisville and UNC for the No. 4 seed is pretty interesting and important. Big difference between the No. 4 seed (and a bye on Wednesday) and the No 5 seed.

Right now, both teams are dead even at 9-4. I was looking at tiebreakers and that's really up for grabs. They split against each other, so nothing there. And it's too early to figure the next tiebreaker down:

-- both teams are 0-1 against Virginia But Louisville gets the Cavs in the Yum Center for the regular season finale. A win in that game, would give them a tiebreaker win. A loss doesn't hurt, since for tiebreaker purposes 0-1 is the same as 0-2

-- UNC is 0-1 vs. Notre Dame. Louisville plays them for the first time on Mar. 4... a win gives them the tiebreaker (provided Notre Dame stays No. 2) ... a loss leaves them tied

-- UNC is 0-1 against Duke ... Louisville is 0-1. But UNC gets Duke at home in the regular season finale. Obviously, they have to win to stay tied (again, 0-2 is the same as 0-1). If UNC wins, they win the tiebreaker -- unless Louisville has already won it vs. Virginia or Notre Dame.

-- Beyond that, I won't go -- I have no confidence that Syracuse holds off Pitt -- Syracuse helps UNC (1-0 vs.0-1); Pitt helps Louisville (2-0 vs. 0-1)

Looking at the options, I think the schedule favors Louisville ... but they may be on the verge of collapse after losing Chris Jones, so I don't know.

[Dukehky]

Obviously, two good battles going on for top seeds -- Duke and Notre Dame both have three loses. The Irish have one more win at the moment, but Duke wins any conceivable tiebeaker, so a pretty even race. That said, it's not a huge difference between the No. 2 and No. 3 seeds. That changes if Virginia loses two more and suddenly we're in the mix for No. 1.

On the other hand, the battle between Louisville and UNC for the No. 4 seed is pretty interesting and important. Big difference between the No. 4 seed (and a bye on Wednesday) and the No 5 seed.

Right now, both teams are dead even at 9-4. I was looking at tiebreakers and that's really up for grabs. They split against each other, so nothing there. And it's too early to figure the next tiebreaker down:

-- both teams are 0-1 against Virginia But Louisville gets the Cavs in the Yum Center for the regular season finale. A win in that game, would give them a tiebreaker win. A loss doesn't hurt, since for tiebreaker purposes 0-1 is the same as 0-2

-- UNC is 0-1 vs. Notre Dame. Louisville plays them for the first time on Mar. 4... a win gives them the tiebreaker (provided Notre Dame stays No. 2) ... a loss leaves them tied

-- UNC is 0-1 against Duke ... Louisville is 0-1. But UNC gets Duke at home in the regular season finale. Obviously, they have to win to stay tied (again, 0-2 is the same as 0-1). If UNC wins, they win the tiebreaker -- unless Louisville has already won it vs. Virginia or Notre Dame.

-- Beyond that, I won't go -- I have no confidence that Syracuse holds off Pitt -- Syracuse helps UNC (1-0 vs.0-1); Pitt helps Louisville (2-0 vs. 0-1)

Looking at the options, I think the schedule favors Louisville ... but they may be on the verge of collapse after losing Chris Jones, so I don't know.


There is no way in hell Louisville can beat UVA (they can't shoot, meet pack line expectations). I would bet all my star wars figurines on UVA for that game. Except Boba Fet, no matter how sure I am, I never risk the Fet man.

I however hope that UL gets the 4th seed, and pray that UNC loses on Wednesday Night so that the second market ticket prices for the ACC tournament plummet.

[Olympic Fan]

There is no way in hell Louisville can beat UVA (they can't shoot, meet pack line expectations). I would bet all my star wars figurines on UVA for that game. Except Boba Fet, no matter how sure I am, I never risk the Fet man.

I however hope that UL gets the 4th seed, and pray that UNC loses on Wednesday Night so that the second market ticket prices for the ACC tournament plummet.

I'm amazed when fans are this positive about an outcome.Yes, I think that Virginia should win at Louisville, but to suggest "there's no way in hell" ... how much chance would you have given Virginia Tech in Blacksburg against Virginia or Wake in Charlottesville -- both lost, but both in a one-possession game.

Glad to see Louisville get past Georgia Tech tonight to go to 10-5. Tough finish -- at FSU, Notre Dame in the Yum, the Virginia in the Yum.

UNC should even up the race tonight against NC State (the Pack rarely competes in Chapel Hill). They've got dangerous games at Miami and at Georgia Tech (although Tech will find a way t lose) ... then Duke at home

The race for fourth is pretty interesting. The best thing for us would be for Louisville to win out (it would help us with Notre Dame and Virginia) plus they would almost certainly win the tiebreaker with UNC ... I don't think they do it -- they'll be lucky to finish 12-6. But I think we knock off UNC in Chapel Hill, so 12-6 should be enough ... and 11-5 might be I have no hope for NC State or Georgia Tech, but Miami is a wild card).

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

... Except Boba Fet, no matter how sure I am, I never risk the Fet man.

Er.... that's "Boba FETT."

Sorry, pet peev.

[Dev11]

At least we were able to get Louisville to replace Maryland and make up somewhat for being saddled with Virginia Tech as our "rival." Virginia Tech is our "rival" the way your little brother who is too young to play ball with you and your friends, but whom you have to let play with you because Mommy said so is your "rival." Of course, Louisville is not a rival either, but at least they're a prestige program so beating them means something.

How many Virginia Tech fans are worried about their basketball inferiority when all the high school football talent in the state can't remember the last time UVA beat VT on the gridiron? VT's fans have a slightly different focus than the core of the ACC, I would imagine.

[DarkstarWahoo]

How many Virginia Tech fans are worried about their basketball inferiority when all the high school football talent in the state can't remember the last time UVA beat VT on the gridiron? VT's fans have a slightly different focus than the core of the ACC, I would imagine.

The average VT football fan is still in mourning over UNC's loss at Cameron last week.

[Seattle Hoo]

How many Virginia Tech fans are worried about their basketball inferiority when all the high school football talent in the state can't remember the last time UVA beat VT on the gridiron? VT's fans have a slightly different focus than the core of the ACC, I would imagine.

Their focus seemed to come a little more in line with the rest of the ACC when they were on a par with UVA and beating us on a fairly regular basis.

If Hokie football drops in level and they start losing to UVA all the time, all the Hokies will be above sports.

[Duvall]

Their focus seemed to come a little more in line with the rest of the ACC when they were on a par with UVA and beating us on a fairly regular basis.

If Hokie football drops in level and they start losing to UVA all the time, all the Hokies will be above sports.

Well, they'd have have to drop a couple of levels for that. Maybe more.

[Seattle Hoo]

Well, they'd have have to drop a couple of levels for that. Maybe more.

Oh, I meant in the conjunctive, that both things would have to happen. If they were going to bowls and competing for the ACC every year, but losing to UVA, they would still care about football. If they sucked at football but beat UVA every year, they would still care about football. But if they sucked AND lost to UVA every year? Emotional self-preservation would require them to renounce caring about all sports (because football is pretty much the only sport they can compete with UVA).

My personal choice would be for them to be great at football but lose to UVA every year. That would drive them absolutely insane.

[Dev11]

Their focus seemed to come a little more in line with the rest of the ACC when they were on a par with UVA and beating us on a fairly regular basis.

If Hokie football drops in level and they start losing to UVA all the time, all the Hokies will be above sports.

Everybody is guilty of frontrunning their teams that currently win. I'd love to know the number of new football threads per month on DBR in 2007 through the present.

[CDu]

And now, thanks to the Cuse, we are in 2nd. Lots of cushion to stay top 3, too, thanks to State. Feeling good about staying #2 though. Just hope we don't catch State as a 7 seed on their good night.

[SCMatt33]

And now, thanks to the Cuse, we are in 2nd. Lots of cushion to stay top 3, too, thanks to State. Feeling good about staying #2 though. Just hope we don't catch State as a 7 seed on their good night.

With the way State is playing, they could get a double bye...seriously. They're 8-7 with three winnable games left, @BC, @Clemson, vs. Cuse. None are guaranteed, but they're playing well on the road and Cuse may well run they're tank empty before getting to Raleigh. UNC still has @Miami and vs. Duke sandwiched around a trip to Atlanta. Certainly a chance for 7 or 8 losses for them. Louisville is 10-5, but still has trips to South Bend and Charlottesville and is clearly struggling without Chris Jones. A three way tie at 11-7 goes to State by virtue of going 2-1 vs that group. A two way tie with Louisville goes to State by virtue of head to head. A two way tie with UNC goes to state by virtue of going undefeated against Duke (they split their own meetings and both lost to UVA). ND's loss could prove big as the 3 seed might now end up seeing UNC or Louisville in the quarters if State continues to win and steals the 4 or 5 seed. Duke just has to win 3 of 4 to ensure the two seed now.

[gumbomoop]

I'll guess Pack gets to 6th, possibly 5th [........]. Maybe winner of Miami @ Pitt next week takes 7th. Still just possible Duke won't play either 6 or 7 on ACCT Thurs. Lots of excitement left.

[gumbomoop]

UVa's final reg season record will be known by the time the Duke-UNC game begins.

[jhmoss1812]

UVa's final reg season record will be known by the time the Duke-UNC game begins.

I'm hoping the UVA-Louisville game is meaningless for ACC regular season seeding. Win the next 3 games and it is.

[Seattle Hoo]

Louisville is 10-5, but still has trips to South Bend and Charlottesville .

The UVA game is at Louisville.

[jhmoss1812]

The UVA game is at Louisville.

So is the Louisville-ND game. They play @FSU on Saturday though.

[SCMatt33]

The UVA game is at Louisville.


So is the Louisville-ND game. They play @FSU on Saturday though.

Oops. Got ahead of myself there. Still no sure things for them given their present state.

[gumbomoop]

I'm hoping the UVA-Louisville game is meaningless for ACC regular season seeding. Win the next 3 games and it is.

I hope my hope cancels out your hope. At least I hope so.

[flyingdutchdevil]

And now, thanks to the Cuse, we are in 2nd. Lots of cushion to stay top 3, too, thanks to State. Feeling good about staying #2 though. Just hope we don't catch State as a 7 seed on their good night.

If Syracuse had been compliant with NCAA rules and regulations, the ACC would easily get 7 teams into the tourney (I'm putting State as a lock even though their record is mediocre. Wins over Kerlina, Duke, and Louisville is a great resume). Now, it's looking like 6. 6 is good, but no cigar.

[DarkstarWahoo]

I hope my hope cancels out your hope. At least I hope so.

Always good to have hope.

To CDu's point, what do Miami and Pitt have to do to get in? Lunardi has them both in his "next four out," which was updated 2/23, so it factors in all of Miami's games and every Pitt game but the win over BC last night, which wouldn't move the needle anyway.

They play each other on March 4 in Pittsburgh, which is looking like an elimination game unless one of them goes on a run. Miami has by far the best win between the two of them (you guys know which one), but that RPI is pretty weak and they have some godawful losses. Meanwhile, Pitt has a solid RPI but only one real good win, which is looking weaker and weaker.

Miami (17-10, 7-7)
RPI: 67
Good-to-decent wins: Duke, NC State, @Cuse
Big games left: vs. Chapel Hill, @Pitt, ACC tournament

Pitt (19-10, 8-7)
RPI: 36
Good-to-decent wins: vs. Cuse, @Cuse, vs. Chapel Hill
Big games left: vs. Miami, ACC tournament

[W&LHoo]

Always good to have hope.

To CDu's point, what do Miami and Pitt have to do to get in? Lunardi has them both in his "next four out," which was updated 2/23, so it factors in all of Miami's games and every Pitt game but the win over BC last night, which wouldn't move the needle anyway.

They play each other on March 4 in Pittsburgh, which is looking like an elimination game unless one of them goes on a run. Miami has by far the best win between the two of them (you guys know which one), but that RPI is pretty weak and they have some godawful losses. Meanwhile, Pitt has a solid RPI but only one real good win, which is looking weaker and weaker.

Miami (17-10, 7-7)
RPI: 67
Good-to-decent wins: Duke, NC State, @Cuse
Big games left: vs. Chapel Hill, @Pitt, ACC tournament

Pitt (19-10, 8-7)
RPI: 36
Good-to-decent wins: vs. Cuse, @Cuse, vs. Chapel Hill
Big games left: vs. Miami, ACC tournament

I think Pitt winds up dancing and Miami doesn't provided Pitt can sneak one win in the ACCT. If they make the tourney and NCState does as well, that's a very solid performance for the league.

[SCMatt33]

Always good to have hope.

To CDu's point, what do Miami and Pitt have to do to get in? Lunardi has them both in his "next four out," which was updated 2/23, so it factors in all of Miami's games and every Pitt game but the win over BC last night, which wouldn't move the needle anyway.

They play each other on March 4 in Pittsburgh, which is looking like an elimination game unless one of them goes on a run. Miami has by far the best win between the two of them (you guys know which one), but that RPI is pretty weak and they have some godawful losses. Meanwhile, Pitt has a solid RPI but only one real good win, which is looking weaker and weaker.

Miami (17-10, 7-7)
RPI: 67
Good-to-decent wins: Duke, NC State, @Cuse
Big games left: vs. Chapel Hill, @Pitt, ACC tournament

Pitt (19-10, 8-7)
RPI: 36
Good-to-decent wins: vs. Cuse, @Cuse, vs. Chapel Hill
Big games left: vs. Miami, ACC tournament

Of coarse, the big part missing from these profiles is bad losses. Pitt lost to Hawaii early in the year and Miami lost at home to both Green Bay and Eastern Kentucky. Also, neither have any notable non-conference wins. Florida's collapse this year has taken any potential shine off of that win for Miami and Kansas State is Pitt's best win. Miami's only great win is @Duke and probably needs to pick off UNC or another top ACC team in Greensboro. Pitt doesn't need the big win as much, but can't afford the bad losses. If one of them wins out, I think that they'll merely need to avoid a bad loss on the first day in Greensboro. Losses for either probably means needing to pick off a good win to feel comfortable, especially knowing the the bubble will shrink from where it is today with the inevitable bid stealing that will occur.

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

I think they both make it, the field just isn't very good this year and they might just fall into a spot. Of course they will have to win 2-3 games and not lose in the first round of the ACC tournament.

[Henderson]

I think they both make it, the field just isn't very good this year and they might just fall into a spot. Of course they will have to win 2-3 games and not lose in the first round of the ACC tournament.

I'm not going to make any predictions about either Pitt or Miami, but your comment about the quality of the field this year seems right to me. I look at the teams in the 15-35 range of the rankings, and I think, "meh". Just eyeballing it, of course. :o

Now watch Valparaiso run the table and cut down the nets....

[jv001]

I'm not going to make any predictions about either Pitt or Miami, but your comment about the quality of the field this year seems right to me. I look at the teams in the 15-35 range of the rankings, and I think, "meh". Just eyeballing it, of course. :o

Now watch Valparaiso run the table and cut down the nets....

I agree with you both. With Pomeroy rating the SEC teams so highly, that tells me the field is weak this season. Or he just likes the SEC. Outside of Kentucky and Arkansas, I don't see a good team in the conference. GoDuke!

[wilson]

...hope we don't catch State as a 7 seed on their good night.I for one would like another crack at State, even if it is on their good night. If we're having a good night, it doesn't matter what kind of night State is having; we're the better team. And if we're not having good nights as late in the season as the ACC tournament, we're in trouble anyway.

[Bluedog]

Yeah, it's hard for me to believe the committee is so foolish that they'd send Duke or Virginia to Cleveland rather than Syracuse just because it's a little closer by miles. The guidelines can't possibly be that strict.


Mark Titus' report on the mock selection committee (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/ncaa-basketball-power-rankings-march-madness-tournament-selection-sunday-kentucky-wildcats-wisconsin-badgers-duke-blue-devils-villanova-wildcats-virginia-cavaliers-gonzaga-bulldogs-dick-vitale-arizona/) conducted for journalists suggest that the committee does frequently place geography above all. He covered the same "top 2 seed getting placed with UK" argument in both the Virginia and Wisconsin section of his rankings last week based on his experiences on the mock committee.

While "geography" certainly plays a large part, it's not necessarily "how many miles from campus," but can be "geographic fit." (Although that's contrary to the linked article, I realize.) They put UK as a #1 seed in Atlanta over St. Louis for this reason even though St. Louis is closer to Lexington. It is conceivable (but not necessarily as obvious) that a better geographic fit for Duke is Syracuse, being closer to thousands of alumni in the NY area rather than Cleveland (not many Dukies there....). When you combine that with the fact that the distance difference is really negligible, that might push Duke to Syracuse as a #2 (BUT if UVa is the #1 there, as seems likely, then obviously that's not an option). I wonder if they ever ask a team their preference -- I would imagine that would be viewed upon unfavorably by outsiders. But, for a school like Duke, their geographic preferences are probably quite a bit different than a school like Wisconsin with its alumni base being scattered. For example, I'd think Duke would prefer to play in Boston over Louisville in a Regional Championship if it came to something like that.

[duketaylor]

I have never seen/heard of the committee asking a team regarding preference of sites. Can't even imagine that. That would show favoritism.

[Bluedog]

I have never seen/heard of the committee asking a team regarding preference of sites. Can't even imagine that. That would show favoritism.

I agree, but guessing what they would prefer is considered okay? There's an important distinction, I suppose, but the end goal is the same -- giving #1/2 seeds their "preferred" location.

[Olympic Fan]

With the way State is playing, they could get a double bye...seriously.

Interesting observation ... but I think it's an extreme longshot.

The best State can finish is 11-7 -- and that requires them to win out. As good as they looked at Carolina last night and against us early in the season, there's a reason they've been on the bubble -- they have not been very consistent. They finish up at BC, which they should win (although BC gave Pitt fits last night), at Clemson, which is tough, and Syracuse at home (and as good as State looked last night, the 'Cuse was every bit as good at Notre Dame).

It's possible, but not likely.

Still, let's say they do it. What does 11-7 get them?

Well, both Virginia and Notre Dame already have more than 11 ACC wins, so they are in the clear. Duke is 11-3 and needs one more win (or one more State loss) to clinch a higher finish. It's mathematically possible that State could catch Duke at 11-7 (and they would win the tiebreaker), but it not's not a realistic chance.

That leaves Louisville 10-5, UNC 9-6 ahead of them. And don't forget Pitt 8-7 and Miami 7-7 as other potential 11-7 teams.

Personally, I think Pitt has an easier path to 11-7 than NC State (at Wake, Miami at home, at FSU). Not easy, but easier. Miami has home games with FSU and UNC, road games at Pitt and Va Tech.

Still, Louisville is in the driver's seat for the fourth spot. They eliminate State with two wins (or one win and a State loss ... or two State losses). But they have a tough finish -- at FSU, Notre Dame at home and Virginia at home. I could easily see them losing two of those -- or even all three.

UNC needs three more wins (since they lose the tiebreaker with State). They also have a tough finish -- at Miami, at Georgia Tech and Duke at home. I think a three-game sweep is unlikely.

The point is, when you match State's chances with any other team in the race -- Louisville, UNC, Pitt or Miami -- it looks reasonable. But for them to get the fourth seed, not only do they have to be perfect the rest of the way, four other teams must stumble -- although to be fair, if they tie Pitt at 11-7, they win the tiebreaker. If they tie Miami, they lose the tiebreaker.

So good suggestion ... State has a chance to get the fourth seed IF THEY WIN OUT.

But it's going to be tough.

PS I've hijacked a thread or two in my time, but we have another threat (Other People's Brackets) to talk about NCAA seedings. Can't we keep this one to ACC Tournament speculation?

[Olympic Fan]

I think I'm right about this -- somebody correct me if I'm wrong ...

But I'm pretty sure Duke clinched a double bye in the ACC Tournament with the win at Virginia Tech. Duke is now 12-3 in the ACC and can finish no worse than 12-6. That eliminates all the seven-win teams (NC State, Miami and Pitt).

Virginia and Notre Dame could still finish ahead of us. Virginia got ACC win No. 14 at Wake and Notre Dame is 12-4 and could finish as good as 14-4.

Louisville is 10-5 and could finish at 13-5, so they could finish ahead of us (but won't).

That leaves North Carolina at 9-6 -- they could tie Duke at 12-6, but if that happened, they would lose the tiebreaker (1-1 head-to-head; Duke 1-0 vs. Va ... UNC 0-1 vs. UVa)

I also checked potential three-way and even four-way ties with Notre Dame, Louisville and UNC. In any tiebreaking scenario, we come out on top ...

So no worse than fourth place is a certainty. Of course, Duke is in second now and in good shape to finish there ... and still alive for the top seed, even if we need some help there.

[-bdbd]

I'm sold. And, frankly, I'm perfectly fine if we finish 2nd or third - and I suspect there's something like 80% probability that we land on one of those two spots - as I have to work Thursday, at least most of the day, but can get away for evening games, which is probably true for many of us. The 2 and 3 seeds play their first games Thursday NIGHT. A 2-3 seed is also good b/c I'd prefer a semi-final matchup vs ND than UNC or L'ville. I think we've mostly solved that (Irish) puzzle by now.

[Duvall]

I think I'm right about this -- somebody correct me if I'm wrong ...

But I'm pretty sure Duke clinched a double bye in the ACC Tournament with the win at Virginia Tech. Duke is now 12-3 in the ACC and can finish no worse than 12-6. That eliminates all the seven-win teams (NC State, Miami and Pitt).

Virginia and Notre Dame could still finish ahead of us. Virginia got ACC win No. 14 at Wake and Notre Dame is 12-4 and could finish as good as 14-4.

Louisville is 10-5 and could finish at 13-5, so they could finish ahead of us (but won't).

That leaves North Carolina at 9-6 -- they could tie Duke at 12-6, but if that happened, they would lose the tiebreaker (1-1 head-to-head; Duke 1-0 vs. Va ... UNC 0-1 vs. UVa)

I also checked potential three-way and even four-way ties with Notre Dame, Louisville and UNC. In any tiebreaking scenario, we come out on top ...

So no worse than fourth place is a certainty. Of course, Duke is in second now and in good shape to finish there ... and still alive for the top seed, even if we need some help there.

I think that's right. The only tournament-eligible teams that can be seeded ahead of Duke at this point are Virginia, Notre Dame and Louisville. UNC can tie Duke, but there's no way for UNC to win a tiebreaker with Duke because there's no way Virginia can fall behind a team that UNC has a better record against than Duke does.

[Seattle Hoo]

I think that's right. The only tournament-eligible teams that can be seeded ahead of Duke at this point are Virginia, Notre Dame and Louisville. UNC can tie Duke, but there's no way for UNC to win a tiebreaker with Duke because there's no way Virginia can fall behind a team that UNC has a better record against than Duke does.

I believe Virginia has clinched no lower than second seed. Worst we can do is 14-4. Only Duke can do better, and only Notre Dame can match it. We have the tiebreakers on ND in a 2-way or three-way tie.

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

I believe Virginia has clinched no lower than second seed. Worst we can do is 14-4. Only Duke can do better, and only Notre Dame can match it. We have the tiebreakers on ND in a 2-way or three-way tie.

Sounds legit to me, congrats on a great season so far. I think its pretty clear that they locked up the regular season championship as well. I don't see them losing two more games no matter who isn't playing. That team I saw destroy Wake last night was just too tough to drop 2 more games during the regular season. It will be very interesting to see how they preform with the return of Anderson.

I think the top 3 seeds stay the same and the shake ups will all come from below in the next week and a half. It'll be a fun ride.

[gofurman]

Edit, nevermind.


UVA is incredible, their defense is impenetrable, and they only win games by scoring 50 points against bad teams just to show they can do it. Best record in the conference = best team in the conference.

Example. Virginia tech.
UVA won at VT 50-47. Duke win at VT 91-86. UVA has an awesome D! Duke has awesome O! K and Bennett need to have a mind meld and create the greatest team ever. If Duke loses early in NCAA it's because of inability to get stops. If UVA losses early in NCAA it's bc of inability to score. Both teams are worthy of top 5 rankings so far

[Tripping William]

In what scenario can the Canes get the double-bye? Inquiring potential Tourney attendees want to know.

[uh_no]

Example. Virginia tech.
UVA won at VT 50-47. Duke win at VT 91-86. UVA has an awesome D! Duke has awesome O! K and Bennett need to have a mind meld and create the greatest team ever. If Duke loses early in NCAA it's because of inability to get stops. If UVA losses early in NCAA it's bc of inability to score. Both teams are worthy of top 5 rankings so far

UVA's O is actually not horrible. they just play suuuper slowly.

[Bob Green]

In what scenario can the Canes get the double-bye? Inquiring potential Tourney attendees want to know.

I believe the following would work:

1. Win out to finish at 11-7, which would include a win today over North Carolina giving Miami the tiebreaker against UNC with a 1-0 head-to-head record.
2. Louisville loses their last three to finish 10-8.

I didn't try to look at scenarios resulting in a 3-way or 4-way tie for 4th place. Too hard, makes my head hurt...

[Bob Green]

UVA's O is actually not horrible. they just play suuuper slowly.

I agree with this. Folks who say Virginia has a horrible offense are not really watching. They have multiple players with strong handles who can drive. They can shoot. They can pass. They can rebound.

[uh_no]

I agree with this. Folks who say Virginia has a horrible offense are not really watching. They have multiple players with strong handles who can drive. They can shoot. They can pass. They can rebound.

to put some context: yes, they're "only" 31 in the country, but once you get past the top 10, team offense is insanely clustered together (enough as to make the ranking silly....as a tiny change in rating makes a huge change in ranking) they play a 112 o, and UNC plays a 114...that amounts to about 1 point in a typical game, which might amount to 1 more win over the course of a season....but not enough to say that UNC's offense is "good" but UVA's is "bad"

the problem with slow teams, though, is that you have fewer possessions over which to exercise your advantage. If I give you a die, and tell you can flip it N times (you determine N before the first flip), but I want to see heads MORE than 1/3 of the time, are you going to flip it 1 time, or 1000 times? Obviously you'll flip it more times! (in fact it's probabalistic law....the law of large numbers).

The same is true with UVA. They undoubtedly have an advantage over any team they play, but if you take fewer posessions, a single missed three could spell doom! 4 games decided by 5 points or fewer....a shot here and the game goes a different way!

That doesn't mean that fast teams won't have close games, but that fast teams are less susceptible to getting beaten by teams they ought not.

Now of course, that's not the ONLY thing to it, as pace of play will certainly affect a team's efficiency (it's unlikely UVA would be as effective playing faster), just that I would be less confident in a slow top team than a fast one when push comes to shove.

[SCMatt33]

UVA's offense is definitely not horrible, unless you try to extrapolate data from their VT game. It was their second worst offensive performance of the year. By th same token, the VT game was easily Duke worst defensive performance of the year (both according to KenPom). It's pretty silly on either end for people (not so much here, but in other threads) to make declarative statements based on the worst game of the year.

Now, since I just looked at the top of the page and realized that this is the ACC seeding thread, a Louisville loss would (nearly) clinch at least the three seed for Duke in Greensboro. Technically if they lost today, a two way tie would be in Lousivilles favor as they'd have to beat ND and UVA to get there, matching us with 1-0 against UVA and going 1-0 against ND to top our 1-1. Still rooting for (EDIT: Lousiville) though, as it hurts Carolina's hunt for a double bye.

[Olympic Fan]

So with the win today, Virginia clinched a share of the ACC regular season title. They can clinch the top seed in the tournament -- and the outright regular season title -- with a win at Syracuse Monday night (or a win at Louisville next Saturday or a Duke loss next week).

Duke can now finish no lower than the No. 3 seed.

They can clinch the No. 2 seed with a win Wednesday night (or a win at UNC Saturday or a Louisville loss).

The No. 2 seed seems likely -- that means Duke plays Thursday night in Greensboro at 7 p.m.

[jhmoss1812]

to put some context: yes, they're "only" 31 in the country, but once you get past the top 10, team offense is insanely clustered together (enough as to make the ranking silly....as a tiny change in rating makes a huge change in ranking) they play a 112 o, and UNC plays a 114...that amounts to about 1 point in a typical game, which might amount to 1 more win over the course of a season....but not enough to say that UNC's offense is "good" but UVA's is "bad"

the problem with slow teams, though, is that you have fewer possessions over which to exercise your advantage. If I give you a die, and tell you can flip it N times (you determine N before the first flip), but I want to see heads MORE than 1/3 of the time, are you going to flip it 1 time, or 1000 times? Obviously you'll flip it more times! (in fact it's probabalistic law....the law of large numbers).

The same is true with UVA. They undoubtedly have an advantage over any team they play, but if you take fewer posessions, a single missed three could spell doom! 4 games decided by 5 points or fewer....a shot here and the game goes a different way!

That doesn't mean that fast teams won't have close games, but that fast teams are less susceptible to getting beaten by teams they ought not.

Now of course, that's not the ONLY thing to it, as pace of play will certainly affect a team's efficiency (it's unlikely UVA would be as effective playing faster), just that I would be less confident in a slow top team than a fast one when push comes to shove.

UVA doesn’t play closer games because of its tempo. In fact, when you factor in tempo, you have to shake your head when you realize that Virginia is sixth in the nation in scoring margin, at +16.2 points per game.

Looking at just ACC games, Virginia’s margin drops to +12.8 points per game. That’s still good for first by a mile in the ACC. Duke is second with a +7.1 points per game scoring margin. Breaking that down, UVA has eight double-digit ACC wins; Duke has five. Looking at 20-plus-point wins in ACC play: UVA has three, Duke has three.

[Seattle Hoo]

to put some context: yes, they're "only" 31 in the country,

UVA's offensive efficiency was top 5 much of the year, and was still top 10 when Anderson went down. It's been so inefficient since then that it dropped all the way to 31.

[uh_no]

UVA's offensive efficiency was top 5 much of the year, and was still top 10 when Anderson went down. It's been so inefficient since then that it dropped all the way to 31.

I think my overall point was a trivial change in rating can result in a huge change in ranking....hence the pointing out that they're a point per game off of UNC.

Further, kenpom is biased towards recent games, so they don't have to be much worse than 31 to drop to 31.

[Seattle Hoo]

I think my overall point was a trivial change in rating can result in a huge change in ranking....hence the pointing out that they're a point per game off of UNC.

Further, kenpom is biased towards recent games, so they don't have to be much worse than 31 to drop to 31.

Was not contradicting you, just adding a piece of information that others might not know.

I think one of the UVA stat wonks said that since Anderson's injury (before the Wake game), UVA's rating would put them in the 200 range. The shooting was brutal and we had a couple games with uncharacteristic turnover numbers, plus offensive rebounds went down. It's been getting better again, though. Anderson will be back soon (maybe Monday night, but probably next Saturday).

[akg4y]

UVA's offensive efficiency was top 5 much of the year, and was still top 10 when Anderson went down. It's been so inefficient since then that it dropped all the way to 31.


It has improved the last 2 games as we have learned to play without Anderson. We had 2 of our worst shooting games in the past 3 years in the 2 games following Anderson's injury. Shots have started to fall again, and our OE is improving. In the end, it will hopefully help us in the ACC T and NCAA T with some depth and confidence for the freshman. Wilkins looks like an everygame starter almost at this point. He cant replace Anderson but man can that boy defend and rebound.

[akg4y]

#1-2
#1 UVA (15-1) - @Cuse, @ Lou W,W (17-1)
#2 Duke (13-3) - WF, @UNC W,W (15-3)

#3
#3 ND (12-4) - @Lou, Clem W,W (14-4)
#5 Lou (11-5) - ND, UVA L,L (11-7)
#4 UNC (10-6) - @GT, Duke W,L (11-7) - UNC most likely will have tiebreaker over Lou b/c of win over Cuse (unless Cuse doesn't count, then Lou has tiebreaker over Pitt... does anyone know?)
Cuse (9-7) - UVA, @NCST L,L (9-9) - OUT

#6-10
#7 Pitt (8-7) - @Wake, Mia, @FSU W,L,W (10-8)
#8Mia (8-8) - @Pitt, @VT W,L (9-9)
#6 NC St (8-8) - @Clem, Cuse W,W (10-8)
#9 Clem (8-8) - NCST, @ND L,L (8-10) - I think Clemson has the tiebreaker over FSU with wins over Cuse & Pitt
#10 FSU (7-10) - Pitt L (7-11)

#11
Wake (4-11) - Pitt, @Duke, @BC L,L,W (5-11)

#12
GT (3-14) - UNC L (3-15)

#13-14
#14 BC (2-14) - @VT, Wake L,L (2-15)
#13 VT (1-14) - BC, Mia W,W (3-14) - Winner of BC/VT game has tiebreaker.

1-3:
UVA might lose 1 but 2 is unlikely.
Duke likely wins both, if they lose to UNC it doesn't matter for seeding as they have the tiebreaker over ND.
ND may lose 1 but I doubt they lose 2, and I doubt Lou wins both.

4-5 is just a matter of if Lou or UNC can pull an upset, Im betting no, so UNC gets the #4.

#12 is basically set with GT
#13-14 I think VT beats BC given how they have been playing, and I doubt BC upsets Wake, but possible.


Matchups:
2 seed bracket:
BC-Wake winner plays NCST. Winner plays ND
Pitt-FSU winner plays Duke

1 seed bracket:
GT-VT winner plays Lou, winner plays UNC
Mia-Clemson winner plays UVA

[CDu]

UVA's offense is definitely not horrible, unless you try to extrapolate data from their VT game. It was their second worst offensive performance of the year. By th same token, the VT game was easily Duke worst defensive performance of the year (both according to KenPom). It's pretty silly on either end for people (not so much here, but in other threads) to make declarative statements based on the worst game of the year.

Now, since I just looked at the top of the page and realized that this is the ACC seeding thread, a Louisville loss would (nearly) clinch at least the three seed for Duke in Greensboro. Technically if they lost today, a two way tie would be in Lousivilles favor as they'd have to beat ND and UVA to get there, matching us with 1-0 against UVA and going 1-0 against ND to top our 1-1. Still rooting for (EDIT: Lousiville) though, as it hurts Carolina's hunt for a double bye.

Louisville has already lost a game to UVa. More importantly, they lost head-to-head against us. They can't win a tiebreaker with us.

[SCMatt33]

Louisville has already lost a game to UVa. More importantly, they lost head-to-head against us. They can't win a tiebreaker with us.

Forgot about that first game with UVA. On the other point, I have simply chosen to ignore that silly first tiebreaker. Head to head, who need that? :p

[bob blue devil]

kenpom has all of the acc's top 10 team's finishing the season 1-1...

[akg4y]

UPDATED 3/1/15

#1-2
#1 UVA (15-1) - @Cuse, @ Lou W,W (17-1)
#2 Duke (13-3) - WF, @UNC W,W (15-3)

#3
#3 ND (12-4) - @Lou, Clem W,W (14-4)
#5 Lou (11-5) - ND, UVA L,L (11-7)
#4 UNC (10-6) - @GT, Duke W,L (11-7) - UNC most likely will have tiebreaker over Lou b/c of win over Cuse (unless Cuse doesn't count, then Lou has tiebreaker over Pitt... does anyone know?)
Cuse (9-7) - UVA, @NCST L,L (9-9) - OUT

#6-10
#8 Pitt (8-8) - Mia, @FSU L,W (9-9)
#7Mia (8-8) - @Pitt, @VT W,L (9-9)
#6 NC St (8-8) - @Clem, Cuse W,W (10-8)
#9 Clem (8-8) - NCST, @ND L,L (8-10) - I think Clemson has the tiebreaker over FSU with wins over Cuse & Pitt
#10 FSU (7-10) - Pitt L (7-11)

#11
Wake (5-11) - @Duke, @BC L,W (6-12)

#12
GT (3-14) - UNC L (3-15)

#13-14
#14 BC (2-14) - @VT, Wake L,L (2-15)
#13 VT (1-14) - BC, Mia W,W (3-14) - Winner of BC/VT game has tiebreaker.

1-3:
UVA might lose 1 but 2 is unlikely.
Duke likely wins both, if they lose to UNC it doesn't matter for seeding as they have the tiebreaker over ND.
ND may lose 1 but I doubt they lose 2, and I doubt Lou wins both.

4-5 is just a matter of if Lou or UNC can pull an upset, Im betting no, so UNC gets the #4.

#12 is basically set with GT
#13-14 I think VT beats BC given how they have been playing, and I doubt BC upsets Wake, but possible.


Matchups:
2 seed bracket:
BC-Wake winner plays NCST. Winner plays ND
Mia-FSU winner plays Duke

1 seed bracket:
GT-VT winner plays Lou, winner plays UNC
Pitt-Clemson winner plays UVA

[Olympic Fan]

UPDATED 3/1/15

#1-2
#1 UVA (15-1) - @Cuse, @ Lou W,W (17-1)
#2 Duke (13-3) - WF, @UNC W,W (15-3)

#3
#3 ND (12-4) - @Lou, Clem W,W (14-4)
#5 Lou (11-5) - ND, UVA L,L (11-7)
#4 UNC (10-6) - @GT, Duke W,L (11-7) - UNC most likely will have tiebreaker over Lou b/c of win over Cuse (unless Cuse doesn't count, then Lou has tiebreaker over Pitt... does anyone know?)
Cuse (9-7) - UVA, @NCST L,L (9-9) - OUT


Syracuse definitely does count for tiebreaking purposes ...

[akg4y]

UPDATED 3/1/15

#1-2
#1 UVA (16-1) - @Lou W (17-1)
#2 Duke (13-3) - WF, @UNC W,W (15-3)

#3
#3 ND (12-4) - @Lou, Clem W,W (14-4)
#5 Lou (11-5) - ND, UVA L,L (11-7)
#4 UNC (10-6) - @GT, Duke W,L (11-7)

Cuse (9-8) - @NCST L (9-9) - OUT

#6-10
#8 Pitt (8-8) - Mia, @FSU L,W (9-9)
#7 Mia (8-8) - @Pitt, @VT W,W (10-8)
#6 NC St (8-8) - @Clem, Cuse W,W (10-8)
#9 Clem (8-8) - NCST, @ND L,L (8-10) - I think Clemson has the tiebreaker over FSU with wins over Cuse & Pitt
#10 FSU (7-10) - Pitt L (7-11)

#11
Wake (5-11) - @Duke, @BC L,W (6-12)

#12
GT (3-14) - UNC L (3-15)

#13-14
#13 BC (3-14) - Wake L (3-14)
#14 VT (1-15) - Mia L (1-16)

1-2: Set
3: Almost set as ND
4-5 is just a matter of if Lou or UNC can pull an upset, Im betting no, so UNC gets the #4.
6-10 Still up in the air.
11-14: Set unless BC beats Wake.


Matchups:
2 seed bracket:
VT-Wake winner plays NCST. Winner plays ND
Mia-FSU winner plays Duke

1 seed bracket:
GT-BC winner plays Lou, winner plays UNC
Pitt-Clemson winner plays UVA

[OldPhiKap]

UPDATED 3/1/15

#1-2
#1 UVA (16-1) - @Lou W (17-1)
#2 Duke (13-3) - WF, @UNC W,W (15-3)

#3
#3 ND (12-4) - @Lou, Clem W,W (14-4)
#5 Lou (11-5) - ND, UVA L,L (11-7)
#4 UNC (10-6) - @GT, Duke W,L (11-7)

Cuse (9-8) - @NCST L (9-9) - OUT

#6-10
#8 Pitt (8-8) - Mia, @FSU L,W (9-9)
#7 Mia (8-8) - @Pitt, @VT W,W (10-8)
#6 NC St (8-8) - @Clem, Cuse W,W (10-8)
#9 Clem (8-8) - NCST, @ND L,L (8-10) - I think Clemson has the tiebreaker over FSU with wins over Cuse & Pitt
#10 FSU (7-10) - Pitt L (7-11)

#11
Wake (5-11) - @Duke, @BC L,W (6-12)

#12
GT (3-14) - UNC L (3-15)

#13-14
#13 BC (3-14) - Wake L (3-14)
#14 VT (1-15) - Mia L (1-16)

1-2: Set
3: Almost set as ND
4-5 is just a matter of if Lou or UNC can pull an upset, Im betting no, so UNC gets the #4.
6-10 Still up in the air.
11-14: Set unless BC beats Wake.


Matchups:
2 seed bracket:
VT-Wake winner plays NCST. Winner plays ND
Mia-FSU winner plays Duke

1 seed bracket:
GT-BC winner plays Lou, winner plays UNC
Pitt-Clemson winner plays UVA

We are only set with a win tomorrow, correct?

[Olympic Fan]

We are only set with a win tomorrow, correct?

No. 1 seed is now set -- Virginia locked it up Monday night

Duke and Notre Dame are still vying for 2-3. Duke gets it with one more win (Wednesday night vs. Wake?) or one more Notre Dame loss.

Louisville and UNC are vying for the No. 4-5 spot. Louisville has a one game lead, but the tiebreakers are muddled. They are 1-1 head-to-head, but with Louisville meeting Virginia Saturday and UNC facing Duke (both at home), they tiebreaker could change a lot. If both lose Sunday and they tie (which would mean a UNC win at Georgia Tech and a Louisville loss at home to Notre Dame), then it's a real mess. Both would be winless against Virginia, Duke and Notre Dame; 1-1 against each other. UNC has a better record against Syracuse (which DOES count for tiebreaker purposes), BUT it's not clear 'Cuse finishes sixth ... they are 9-8 at the moment and could end up tied or even behind any of the four teams at 8-8.

We've just got to wait on that one.

And we have to wait on the teams vying for spots 6-9. It' going to be Pitt, NC State, Miami and Clemson in some order, although FSU (at 7-10) could sneak in at the bottom of that list.

Again, too many possibilities for me to figure out.

Absolutely certain of the bottom four -- the teams that play Tuesday -- although the order could change. Right now, it looks like No. 11 Wake Forest, No. 12-13 BC or Georgia Tech and No. 14 Virginia Tech.

[Seattle Hoo]

I'm sorry this is not going to really add anything, but man am I excited for this ACC Tournament. Not just because of the obvious reason, but I felt it when you were talking about the Tuesday games. Even the Tuesday games are going to be worth watching! Buzz Williams has Virginia Tech playing with so much confidence for a last place team, and they can be fun to watch. I loved Devin Wilson's game last year, and the freshmen are talented players. Olivier Hanlan is a marvelous player who is worth watching all by himself. Wake Forest is going to be good, you can see it, and they have some good talent. Fun to watch. Then Georgia Tech keeps me riveted to the edge of my seat wondering, "When and in what crazily inspired way are they going to screw this game up?!"

The winners of Tuesday's games will have a real, honest chance to win on Wednesday. We go from two games to four, and it's going to be a bloodbath between 8 teams that are pretty much evenly matched, with at least half of those teams having a legitimate shot at a Bubble Berth if they can make it to Thursday and pull off an upset then. Then on Thursday, the real tournament starts when the big boys and Notre Dame and #4 jump into the action, everybody with something to play for. Two games Friday followed by PRIME TIME Saturday Night Fight! Sorry baby, no Date Night this weekend! Don't care if that means no nookie for me for a couple days, how often do my Hoos have a chance to win back-to-back ACC Tournament Championships over the Ookies? (Please note, there is no "O" in Virginia Cavaliers... No "D" either, oddly enough).

Thanks to WatchESPN, my firm's wifi, and no monitoring of wifi traffic, I won't have to miss a minute of it!

[SCMatt33]

With Louisville's loss tonight, the 4-5 situation is a lot clearer. ND with their 13th win is now locked into the top 3, so they're no longer a factor. Louisville and UNC are both 11-6, but the tiebreaker depends entirely on Louisville's result with UVA. If Louisville wins, they get the tiebreaker, if not, UNC gets it by beating Syracuse, so UNC actually has no control of it's seed anymore. Barring literally the biggest collapse in NCAA history, Duke will lock in the two seed tonight, rendering Saturday's game meaningless in terms of ACCT seeding.

[CDu]

With Louisville's loss tonight, the 4-5 situation is a lot clearer. ND with their 13th win is now locked into the top 3, so they're no longer a factor. Louisville and UNC are both 11-6, but the tiebreaker depends entirely on Louisville's result with UVA. If Louisville wins, they get the tiebreaker, if not, UNC gets it by beating Syracuse, so UNC actually has no control of it's seed anymore. Barring literally the biggest collapse in NCAA history, Duke will lock in the two seed tonight, rendering Saturday's game meaningless in terms of ACCT seeding.

Have to assume that we win tonight. So the top 3 will be set. As you said, 4 and 5 come down to the UVa/Louisville game (the Duke/UNC game makes no difference).

[Wahoo2000]

Something else of semi-note: Miami beating Pitt tonight has virtually assured NC State and Miami will both be on the bottom half of the bracket (as likely Duke & ND quarterfinal opponents). As a UVA fan, I'm actually pretty relieved - I think those two are SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous than any of Clemson, Pitt, or FSU. Hoping they can give the 2 and 3 seeds VERY tough quarters - should we (UVA) get to the final, I'd love to see an opponent coming off of 2 grueling games hopefully with legs a little heavy for a 3pt barrage (probably our biggest weakness defensively).

[SCMatt33]

Miami's win over Pitt has also given a bit of clarity to the race for 6-10. Barring a loss at VT combined with and NC State win vs. Syracuse, Miami will have the 6 seed. They swept State, Pitt, and Clemson, and therefore win all tiebreakers at 9-9 or at 10-8 with State. State, unless they get the 6 seed via the previously described scenario, will be the 7 seed as they beat Pitt, and hold the tiebreaker with Clemson via their Duke win. That same Duke win gives them the win in a 3 way tiebreaker as Pitt gets dropped for having been swept with the others at 2-1. These scenarios are a bit unlikely as Clemson would have to win in South Bend to make them possible.

For 8-10, much is riding on the Pitt-FSU game in Tallahassee. Should Pitt win, they will be in the 8-9 game with the exact seed determined by Clemson's result Saturday. Should FSU win, Pitt will drop all the way to the 10 seed and have to play a Tuesday game (assuming a Clemson loss), by losing the three way tiebreaker (Pitt 1-2, FSU 2-2, CLEM 2-1 vs. each other). If Clemson wins, Pitt will win the head to head with FSU via their ND win.

For Duke, that all means that NC State is most likely the 7 seed with a small chance of Miami. Should the 7 seed not make it to the quarters, it will most likely be at the hands of Pitt or FSU depending on who loses their match-up Saturday.

[gofurman]

Miami's win over Pitt has also given a bit of clarity to the race for 6-10. Barring a loss at VT combined with and NC State win vs. Syracuse, Miami will have the 6 seed. They swept State, Pitt, and Clemson, and therefore win all tiebreakers at 9-9 or at 10-8 with State. State, unless they get the 6 seed via the previously described scenario, will be the 7 seed as they beat Pitt, and hold the tiebreaker with Clemson via their Duke win. That same Duke win gives them the win in a 3 way tiebreaker as Pitt gets dropped for having been swept with the others at 2-1. These scenarios are a bit unlikely as Clemson would have to win in South Bend to make them possible.

For 8-10, much is riding on the Pitt-FSU game in Tallahassee. Should Pitt win, they will be in the 8-9 game with the exact seed determined by Clemson's result Saturday. Should FSU win, Pitt will drop all the way to the 10 seed and have to play a Tuesday game (assuming a Clemson loss), by losing the three way tiebreaker (Pitt 1-2, FSU 2-2, CLEM 2-1 vs. each other). If Clemson wins, Pitt will win the head to head with FSU via their ND win.

For Duke, that all means that NC State is most likely the 7 seed with a small chance of Miami. Should the 7 seed not make it to the quarters, it will most likely be at the hands of Pitt or FSU depending on who loses their match-up Saturday.
Looks like we play who I didn't want to. Miami or state? Is this right? The 7.10 matchup is between the two teams from mid-tier who beat us? On other hand, it's good practice for NCAA - quick guards of Miami. We neeeeed to know how to defend that

[Wahoo2000]

Miami's win over Pitt has also given a bit of clarity to the race for 6-10. Barring a loss at VT combined with and NC State win vs. Syracuse, Miami will have the 6 seed. They swept State, Pitt, and Clemson, and therefore win all tiebreakers at 9-9 or at 10-8 with State. State, unless they get the 6 seed via the previously described scenario, will be the 7 seed as they beat Pitt, and hold the tiebreaker with Clemson via their Duke win. That same Duke win gives them the win in a 3 way tiebreaker as Pitt gets dropped for having been swept with the others at 2-1. These scenarios are a bit unlikely as Clemson would have to win in South Bend to make them possible.

For 8-10, much is riding on the Pitt-FSU game in Tallahassee. Should Pitt win, they will be in the 8-9 game with the exact seed determined by Clemson's result Saturday. Should FSU win, Pitt will drop all the way to the 10 seed and have to play a Tuesday game (assuming a Clemson loss), by losing the three way tiebreaker (Pitt 1-2, FSU 2-2, CLEM 2-1 vs. each other). If Clemson wins, Pitt will win the head to head with FSU via their ND win.

For Duke, that all means that NC State is most likely the 7 seed with a small chance of Miami. Should the 7 seed not make it to the quarters, it will most likely be at the hands of Pitt or FSU depending on who loses their match-up Saturday.

Could be wrong on this, but I think FSU is locked at 10. If memory serves, procedure for the 3-way tiebreak is only followed to get a "winner" (Clemson in this case), and the "leftover" 2 teams are then evaluated head-to-head (putting Pitt over the top by virtue of their split head to head and tiebreaking win over ND). Man, that is weird, but that's how I remember it. Maybe the rule has changed?

[Wahoo2000]

Looks like we play who I didn't want to. Miami or state? Is this right? The 7.10 matchup is between the two teams from mid-tier who beat us? On other hand, it's good practice for NCAA - quick guards of Miami. We neeeeed to know how to defend that

I think you guys are waaaaaaay more likely to get State than Miami in the quarters. You could face Miami in the semis if they can beat ND though.

[SCMatt33]

Could be wrong on this, but I think FSU is locked at 10. If memory serves, procedure for the 3-way tiebreak is only followed to get a "winner" (Clemson in this case), and the "leftover" 2 teams are then evaluated head-to-head (putting Pitt over the top by virtue of their split head to head and tiebreaking win over ND). Man, that is weird, but that's how I remember it. Maybe the rule has changed?

I think that only happens if the three team tiebreaker produces a winner with the others still tied at the point which the "winner" was created. For example, If teams a, b, and c are tied, and all went 1-1 within the group, but team a beat the league champion and teams b and c both lost, it would then revert to the head to head for those two instead of continuing on with the three way tie breaker. In this case, because the first 3 way step produces a clear 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, those will be used.

Here's the complete three way rule from the this year's press release


a. The combined record of conference games between the tied teams involved will be compiled. Ties will be broken, and seedings assigned, based on the winning percentage of the combined conference records. The higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group is unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1; 1-0 is the same as 2-0; 2-0 is the same as 4-0; 2-1 is the same as 4-2; 1-0 is better than 1-1; 0-1 is the same as 0-2; 0-2 is the same as 0-4).

b. If procedure (a) fails to break the tie, then each tied team’s record shall be compared to the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings, continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage by a higher winning percentage.

c. If the tie is broken by (a) or (b) regarding one or more teams, but three or more teams remain tied, then procedures (a) and (b) will be reapplied among those tied teams only.

d. If two teams remain tied, procedures (1) and (2) will be followed.

Note that procedures (1) and (2) refer to the two way tie-breaking rules. Based on step "a" Pitt, Clemson, and FSU would be seeded via the three way tiebreaker and it wouldn't revert back to the two way procedure.

[SCMatt33]

I have a slight correction to make on the 4-5 scenarios. I said earlier that it only depends on Louisville's result and that's not quite right. If both finish tied at 11-7 (both lose Saturday), it is possible for Louisville to get the tiebreaker, but only if State, Miami, and Pitt all win. That would create a scenario with State and Miami tied for 6th. Since both teams went 2-1 against that group, you move on to the group tied for 8th. That group would be Syracuse, Pitt, and possibly Clemson, but both are 1-0 vs Clemson rendering Clemson's involvement meaningless either way. Lousiville is 2-1 vs. Pitt and Syracuse, while UNC is only 1-1, giving Louisville the tiebreak.

[OldPhiKap]

I have a slight correction to make on the 4-5 scenarios. I said earlier that it only depends on Louisville's result and that's not quite right. If both finish tied at 11-7 (both lose Saturday), it is possible for Louisville to get the tiebreaker, but only if State, Miami, and Pitt all win. That would create a scenario with State and Miami tied for 6th. Since both teams went 2-1 against that group, you move on to the group tied for 8th. That group would be Syracuse, Pitt, and possibly Clemson, but both are 1-0 vs Clemson rendering Clemson's involvement meaningless either way. Lousiville is 2-1 vs. Pitt and Syracuse, while UNC is only 1-1, giving Louisville the tiebreak.

So is this right:

UNC is 4 if

*it beats Duke and Louisville loses
*It beats Duke, Louisville also wins, but (State, Miami and Pitt) do not all win
*It loses to Duke, Louisville also loses, but (State, Miami and Pitt) do not all win

All other scenarios, Louisville is 4 and UNC is 5 (or worse?)

[SCMatt33]

So is this right:

UNC is 4 if

*it beats Duke and Louisville loses
*It beats Duke, Louisville also wins, but (State, Miami and Pitt) do not all win
*It loses to Duke, Louisville also loses, but (State, Miami and Pitt) do not all win

All other scenarios, Louisville is 4 and UNC is 5 (or worse?)

Not quite, strike the middle scenario. If Louisville wins, they have a win over UVA which renders the middle of the pack tiebreakers moot.

[OldPhiKap]

So is this right:

UNC is 4 if

*it beats Duke and Louisville loses
*It beats Duke, Louisville also wins, but (State, Miami and Pitt) do not all win
*It loses to Duke, Louisville also loses, but (State, Miami and Pitt) do not all win

All other scenarios, Louisville is 4 and UNC is 5 (or worse?)


Not quite, strike the middle scenario. If Louisville wins, they have a win over UVA which renders the middle of the pack tiebreakers moot.

OK. So UNC only gets the fourth bye if it beats Duke (in which case no other game matters), or if it loses to Duke but four other games fall a specific way. Otherwise, they play on Wednesday. (I think I've distilled that from your response correctly).

So, I guess I'm rooting for Duke and one out of four other teams at minimum. So, go State! (I guess I'm rooting for all three bubble teams to win, but State gets the first nod in that group. Can't say that I am rooting for Louisville unless that's the only one of the four that keeps Carolina off the bye line).

[Ian]

Actually UNC has no control over their seeding.

It's all on the UVA/Louisville game. If Louisville wins they are the 4th seed regardless of what happens in UNC/Duke. And if Louisville loses they are the 5th seed regardless of what happens in the UNC/Duke game.

[OldPhiKap]

Actually UNC has no control over their seeding.

It's all on the UVA/Louisville game. If Louisville wins they are the 4th seed regardless of what happens in UNC/Duke. And if Louisville loses they are the 5th seed regardless of what happens in the UNC/Duke game.

Damn. I guess I have to root for Louisville then. Sorry, Wahoo friends. As I'm sure you understand -- it's not personal.

(I am rooting for Anderson to come back ASAP though if that helps).

[devildeac]

OK. So UNC only gets the fourth bye if it beats Duke (in which case no other game matters), or if it loses to Duke but four other games fall a specific way. Otherwise, they play on Wednesday. (I think I've distilled that from your response correctly).

So, I guess I'm rooting for Duke and one out of four other teams at minimum. So, go State! (I guess I'm rooting for all three bubble teams to win, but State gets the first nod in that group. Can't say that I am rooting for Louisville unless that's the only one of the four that keeps Carolina off the bye line).


Actually UNC has no control over their seeding.

It's all on the UVA/Louisville game. If Louisville wins they are the 4th seed regardless of what happens in UNC/Duke. And if Louisville loses they are the 5th seed regardless of what happens in the UNC/Duke game.

Go Cards!!!

And, GTHc, GTH!

And, speaking of 9F, where's Ozzie?

[OldPhiKap]

Go Cards!!!

And, GTHc, GTH!

And, speaking of 9F, where's Ozzie?

I don't know about you, but my status feels oddly unchecked.

[SCMatt33]

Actually UNC has no control over their seeding.

It's all on the UVA/Louisville game. If Louisville wins they are the 4th seed regardless of what happens in UNC/Duke. And if Louisville loses they are the 5th seed regardless of what happens in the UNC/Duke game.

Likely no control. If Louisville loses, and Pitt, State, and Miami all win earlier in the day, UNC will have to win to get the 4 seed, so there is a scenario where Louisville can lose and get the double bye, but it will take a lot of help.

[DU82]

With wins, Miami and NC State are locked into 6th and 7th. Miami, with the head-to-head victory, is 6th. So, assuming the Wolfies get past the 10th seed, we'll see if we can get revenge Thursday evening at 7PM.

[uh_no]

With wins, Miami and NC State are locked into 6th and 7th. Miami, with the head-to-head victory, is 6th. So, assuming the Wolfies get past the 10th seed, we'll see if we can get revenge Thursday evening at 7PM.

this means that should UL and UNC both lose, UNC would have the tiebreak, as they are 2-1 against miami and state, vs 1-1 for UL.

So ultimately, the only game that matters for that is UL. Win and they're in, lose and they're out.

[davekay1971]

With wins, Miami and NC State are locked into 6th and 7th. Miami, with the head-to-head victory, is 6th. So, assuming the Wolfies get past the 10th seed, we'll see if we can get revenge Thursday evening at 7PM.

I'm honestly not sure if I want a rematch with State. Duke is a better team and should not be afraid of anyone. But this is an NCSU team that has balanced out truly awful performances against bad teams (the ugly losses at BC and Wake and the close home win against GT, all in the last 6 weeks), with really stellar performances against their best opponents (their dismantling of Duke, UNC, and Louisville, and their very close losses to ND and UVa). It's usually an exaggeration to say, of a team, that they could lose to anybody and they could beat anybody, but it's absolutely true of this NCSU team.

I would actually love to see NCSU as the 9 seed in the KY bracket. You can rely on the KY boys to look at NCSU's win-loss record and not take them seriously; but if State were to follow their pattern, they would bring their absolute best against KY.

[SCMatt33]

this means that should UL and UNC both lose, UNC would have the tiebreak, as they are 2-1 against miami and state, vs 1-1 for UL.

So ultimately, the only game that matters for that is UL. Win and they're in, lose and they're out.

Actually UL swept two games against Miami, so they move down from there. Pitts loss, however, does give UNC the potential tiebreaker if they both lose, as the next one will be either Syracuse alone or Syracuse and Clemson if they pull an upset in ND. Either way, UNC wins that. Tonight's game is now officially meaningless for seeds in the ACCT

[uh_no]

If it hasn't been covered, the seeds are effectively done

1 UVA
2 Duke
3 ND
4 UL with win or UNC with UL loss
5 UL with loss, or UNC with UL win
6 miami
7 NCSU
8 clemson (tie breaker over pitt and FSU even if they should lose)
9 pitt (by win over ND)
10 FSU
11 wake
12 BC
13 GT
14 VT

Making the bracket:
UVA vs (clemson vs pitt)
Duke vs (NCSU vs FSU)
ND vs (miami vs (wake vs vt))
UNC vs UL vs (BC vs GT)

[uh_no]

Actually UL swept two games against Miami, so they move down from there. Pitts loss, however, does give UNC the potential tiebreaker if they both lose, as the next one will be either Syracuse alone or Syracuse and Clemson if they pull an upset in ND. Either way, UNC wins that. Tonight's game is now officially meaningless for seeds in the ACCT

Nope (or at least as far as my understanding...uless the procedures have changed). Ties are broken from first to last in the conference, therefore for the purposes of breaking the tie between UNC and UL, teams with equal records BELOW them are considered equivalent. Miami and state are both 10-8, and therefore the tiebreaker is the better record against BOTH teams. the verbiage is "Multiple ties will be broken from first to last"

I was incorrect, however, since both are 2-1 against those two teams, it gets even more complicated, as it depends whether they consider syracuse for tiebreaking reasons, or whether clemson finishes at 8-10 (for the same reason as they'd have the same record as the other teams).

[Olympic Fan]

If it hasn't been covered, the seeds are effectively done

1 UVA
2 Duke
3 ND
4 UL with win or UNC with UL loss
5 UL with loss, or UNC with UL win
6 miami
7 NCSU
8 clemson (tie breaker over pitt and FSU even if they should lose)
9 pitt (by win over ND)
10 FSU
11 wake
12 BC
13 GT
14 VT

Making the bracket:
UVA vs (clemson vs pitt)
Duke vs (NCSU vs FSU)
ND vs (miami vs (wake vs vt))
UNC vs UL vs (BC vs GT)


This is almost -- but not quite right.

I believe that if Clemson loses to FSU (which is likely) then FSU gets the No. 9 seed over Pitt. Head-to-head comes first -- and in a 3-way tie at 8-10, Clemson is 2-1, FSU is 2-2 and Pitt is 1-2. Therefore, Clemson-8; FSU-9; Pitt-10.

The UNC-Louisville situation is very, very simple -- if Louisville beats Virginia, they are No. 4 and UNC No. 5. If Virginia beats Louisville, UNC is No. 4 and Louisville No. 5 -- no matter what else happens.

[gumbomoop]

If it hasn't been covered, the seeds are effectively done

1 UVA
2 Duke
3 ND
4 UL with win or UNC with UL loss
5 UL with loss, or UNC with UL win
6 miami
7 NCSU
8 clemson (tie breaker over pitt and FSU even if they should lose)
9 pitt (by win over ND)
10 FSU
11 wake
12 BC
13 GT
14 VT



Making the bracket:
UVA vs (clemson vs pitt)
Duke vs (NCSU vs FSU)
ND vs (miami vs (wake vs vt))
UNC vs UL vs (BC vs GT)

If Clemson loses @ ND, that leaves a 3-way tie for 8-9-10. In that group Celmson is 2-1, FSU 2-2, Pitt 1-2. So wouldn't that mean Clemson 8, FSU 9, Pitt 10? If I'm right, Clemson has secured 8, but their result v. ND will determine 9-10.

[gumbomoop]

This is almost -- but not quite right.

I believe that if Clemson loses to FSU (which is likely) then FSU gets the No. 9 seed over Pitt. Head-to-head comes first -- and in a 3-way tie at 8-10, Clemson is 2-1, FSU is 2-2 and Pitt is 1-2. Therefore, Clemson-8; FSU-9; Pitt-10.

The UNC-Louisville situation is very, very simple -- if Louisville beats Virginia, they are No. 4 and UNC No. 5. If Virginia beats Louisville, UNC is No. 4 and Louisville No. 5 -- no matter what else happens.

-- to ND.

Otherwise, agree.

[uh_no]

This is almost -- but not quite right.

I believe that if Clemson loses to FSU (which is likely) then FSU gets the No. 9 seed over Pitt. Head-to-head comes first -- and in a 3-way tie at 8-10, Clemson is 2-1, FSU is 2-2 and Pitt is 1-2. Therefore, Clemson-8; FSU-9; Pitt-10.

The UNC-Louisville situation is very, very simple -- if Louisville beats Virginia, they are No. 4 and UNC No. 5. If Virginia beats Louisville, UNC is No. 4 and Louisville No. 5 -- no matter what else happens.

I can't find the exact page right now, but i believe once clemson has won, it reverts to a 2-way tie breaker for the remaining teams.

[gumbomoop]

I can't find the exact page right now, but i believe once clemson has won, it reverts to a 2-way tie breaker for the remaining teams.

Both OF and I were only partly disagreeing with your post #235. Your 8-10 list is correct if Clemson wins @ND, but incorrect if Clemson loses @ND. Clemson is 8, win or lose. But a Clemson loss leaves a 3-way tie for 8-10, which is determined by records against each other within the 3.

So, here in this post you refer only to a Clemson win. Also have to consider a (more likely) Clemson loss, which will change order of 9 and 10 seeds.

[Troublemaker]

I can't find the exact page right now, but i believe once clemson has won, it reverts to a 2-way tie breaker for the remaining teams.

I think that may be a mis-read. I think it only reverts if two of the three teams remain tied when applying the three-way tiebreaker. So, for example, if A went 4-0 vs the other two teams, B went 1-3, and C went 1-3, then the tiebreaker reverts to determine B and C's order since 1-3 = 1-3 and they still remain tied.

But, in this case, 2-1 > 2-2 > 1-2, so no reverting.

[uh_no]

I think that may be a mis-read. I think it only reverts if two of the three teams remain tied when applying the three-way tiebreaker. So, for example, if A went 4-0 vs the other two teams, B went 1-3, and C went 1-3, then the tiebreaker reverts to determine B and C's order since 1-3 = 1-3.

But, in this case, 2-1 > 2-2 > 1-2, so no reverting.

does anybody have the link to the actual rules? i did a cursory search but couldn't find it.

[Olympic Fan]

I can't find the exact page right now, but i believe once clemson has won, it reverts to a 2-way tie breaker for the remaining teams.

I confirmed this with the ACC -- if the three-way head-to-head can decide the seeding, it does -- and in this case, it does -- No. 8 Clemson, No. 9. FSU and No. 10 Pitt

The method you employ only works if the three split does not separate all three teams. For instance, if it was Clemson 2-0, FSU 1-2, Pitt 1-2, THEN it would work the way you siggest -- Clemson would get 8 and then Pitt and FSU would be treated as a 2-way tie.

But this one works out -- Clemson 2-1; FSU 2-2; Pitt 1-2

So if Clemson wins at Notre Dame, it's 8. Clemson, 9. Pitt and 10. FSU

If Clemson loses at Notre Dame, it's 8. Clemson, 9. FSU and 10. Pitt

Interesting for Clemson (which plays the No. 9 seed on Wednesday) and also for NC State, the No. 7 seed, which gets the No. 10 seed Wednesday. BTW, State and the No. 10 seed (either Pitt or FSU) will be in Duke's bracket.

[uh_no]

I confirmed this with the ACC -- if the three-way head-to-head can decide the seeding, it does -- and in this case, it does -- No. 8 Clemson, No. 9. FSU and No. 10 Pitt

Thanks!

I personally think that's silly (as the order between pitt and fsu shouldn't need to be affected by clemson tying, but it is), but rules are the rules, and learned something new!

[OldPhiKap]

'Ville gets the bye. Carolina gets to play a day early.

Heh.

[dukelifer]

'Ville gets the bye. Carolina gets to play a day early.

Heh.

UVA tries a Hill to Laettner against Rick's team with 2.7 sec and throw it out of bounds- like Hill did when Duke played Wake in the regular season. This time Pitino put a man on the man out of bounds.

[OldPhiKap]

UVA tries a Hill to Laettner against Rick's team with 2.7 sec and throw it out of bounds- like Hill did when Duke played Wake in the regular season. This time Pitino put a man on the man out of bounds.

exact same thing I thought.