AP poll 3/9: #2

[53n206]

After the weekend we are now in the number two position. Virginia dropped only one spot. I believe that the significance here is that if we lose in the ACC tournament we will still be ranked in the top 4 and will likely get a number one seed.

[FerryFor50]

This guy ranked Duke 4th.

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/09/college-basketball-talks-latest-top-25-kentucky-goes-31-0/

The excerpt:


1. Kentucky (31-0, LW: No. 1): The Wildcats did it. They finished the regular season a perfect 31-0. I’m not sure anyone is disagreeing with this ranking.

2. Virginia (28-2, LW: No. 2): Virginia lost at Louisville on Saturday. On a last-second jumper. From Mangok Mathiang. Not exactly a sign that this team is crumbling. The bigger concern? They’re still waiting for Justin Anderson to return to health. After nearly completing his recovery from a fractured finger, Anderson underwent an appendectomy last week. Will he be healthy for the NCAA tournament?

3. Wisconsin (28-3, LW: No. 3): The Badgers finished their regular season without a hiccup, pounding No. 23 Ohio State in Columbus on Sunday. Like Virginia, the Badgers are still waiting on a starter — Trae Jackson — to get healthy. Unlike Virginia, his replacement — Bronson Koenig — has been terrific in a starting role.

4. Duke (28-3, LW: No. 4): The Blue Devils are tough to peg for me. They’ve got such glaring problems that they are impossible to ignore. But … they’ve won at Virginia, at Wisconsin, at Louisville, at North Carolina and at St. John’s. They have the nation’s most dominant low-post scorer in Jahlil Okafor. They have a point guard (Tyus Jones) that is channelling his inner-Bobby Hurley. And they have a pair of wings (Quinn Cook and Justise Winslow) that can take over a game in the drop of a hat.

Glaring problems? I assume he means the defense. Maybe the depth. But what other "glaring problems" does Duke have? And how does UVA not drop? Yes, it was an improbable jumper by Mathiang, but a loss is a loss. And honestly, L'ville had that game in control until a Brogden 3.

They're missing Anderson - is that not a "glaring weakness"? They aren't very efficient on offense. Glaring weakness?

Duke beat Wisconsin at Wisconsin. Does that not count for anything?

Also, he has UNC at 16. The only 10 loss team in the top 20.

[flyingdutchdevil]

This guy ranked Duke 4th.

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/09/college-basketball-talks-latest-top-25-kentucky-goes-31-0/

The excerpt:



Glaring problems? I assume he means the defense. Maybe the depth. But what other "glaring problems" does Duke have? And how does UVA not drop? Yes, it was an improbable jumper by Mathiang, but a loss is a loss. And honestly, L'ville had that game in control until a Brogden 3.

They're missing Anderson - is that not a "glaring weakness"? They aren't very efficient on offense. Glaring weakness?

Duke beat Wisconsin at Wisconsin. Does that not count for anything?

Also, he has UNC at 16. The only 10 loss team in the top 20.

I would absolutely argue that Duke has a glaring problem and you pointed it out: defense. No one is scared of the Duke defense, as they would be with Kentucky or UVa. We are ranked 65 in defensive efficiency by KenPom. Luke Winn ranked our defense a "C" (of the top 8 teams, the next worse defensive ranking was a "B-/C+" - Wisconsin): http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/26/power-rankings-best-defenses-kentucky-virginia-duke

But this team's offense is so potent and diversified that it makes our defense look somewhat irrelevant. Our defense is better than last year, but it's not elite or great by any means. Right now, I'd argue we're somewhere between "mediocre" and "okay". I hope come second weekend of the NCAA tournament, we can be "good".

[FerryFor50]

I would absolutely argue that Duke has a glaring problem and you pointed it out: defense. No one is scared of the Duke defense, as they would be with Kentucky or UVa. We are ranked 65 in defensive efficiency by KenPom. Luke Winn ranked our defense a "C" (of the top 8 teams, the next worse defensive ranking was a "B-/C+" - Wisconsin): http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/26/power-rankings-best-defenses-kentucky-virginia-duke

But this team's offense is so potent and diversified that it makes our defense look somewhat irrelevant. Our defense is better than last year, but it's not elite or great by any means. Right now, I'd argue we're somewhere between "mediocre" and "okay". I hope come second weekend of the NCAA tournament, we can be "good".

Oh I agree it's a weakness. But as the past 11 games have shown, Duke has the ability to defend well if they put in the work. K has thrown a number of wrinkles in and the defense has looked much better overall... I'd say closer to "okay." C+ for Wisconsin isn't much better and Duke showed that in Madison. Why is that not a "glaring weakness" for Wisconsin?

[roywhite]

I would absolutely argue that Duke has a glaring problem and you pointed it out: defense. No one is scared of the Duke defense, as they would be with Kentucky or UVa. We are ranked 65 in defensive efficiency by KenPom. Luke Winn ranked our defense a "C" (of the top 8 teams, the next worse defensive ranking was a "B-/C+" - Wisconsin): http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/26/power-rankings-best-defenses-kentucky-virginia-duke

But this team's offense is so potent and diversified that it makes our defense look somewhat irrelevant. Our defense is better than last year, but it's not elite or great by any means. Right now, I'd argue we're somewhere between "mediocre" and "okay". I hope come second weekend of the NCAA tournament, we can be "good".

Defense seems significantly improved lately. Quinn Cook has shown he can be a stopper when he dogs an opposing guard, the full-court and 3/4 trapping defense has definitely been effective, we can change defensive schemes within a game pretty well, and even the rotation on man-to-man coverage seems greatly improved. An example of improved defense is the 2nd half vs UNC, where we forced turnovers and difficult shots.

The established narrative of our defensive weaknesses and a rating based on a season-long metric does not adequately describe our current defense IMO.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Oh I agree it's a weakness. But as the past 11 games have shown, Duke has the ability to defend well if they put in the work. K has thrown a number of wrinkles in and the defense has looked much better overall... I'd say closer to "okay." C+ for Wisconsin isn't much better and Duke showed that in Madison. Why is that not a "glaring weakness" for Wisconsin?

I agree we've shown the ability to play solid D in spurts, but we haven't put a solid defense game together. I'm sure most of us would argue that the Wake Forest 1st half at Cameron was our best defensive performance. But we were awful defensively in the second half (not that it mattered). You'd be hard-pressed to find a Duke team with a top 15 defense who took halves off defense. I also don't think Coach K would tell the players to take their foot off the gas defensively.

With regards to Wisconsin, their defense was bad in the first half of the season, but they have improved greatly. Their Kenpom ranking is 25 (I think it was in the 40s a few months back), much better than the 65 of Duke. They have really shown improvement on that side of the ball, and the numbers back it up. Duke may show good defensive stops here and there, but the numbers aren't as telling.

[Chicken Little]

I'm almost certain the the writer is leaning more on the glaring problems of defense and depth. Perhaps not a glaring problem, but definitely my main concern with this team is that in the month of March, they're capable of going 7 (or was it 8?) minutes without scoring a point. Yes, it was a rivalry game. Yes, the officiating was questionable. Yes, yes, yes to any justification. It is a legit problem in my mind.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Defense seems significantly improved lately. Quinn Cook has shown he can be a stopper when he dogs an opposing guard, the full-court and 3/4 trapping defense has definitely been effective, we can change defensive schemes within a game pretty well, and even the rotation on man-to-man coverage seems greatly improved. An example of improved defense is the 2nd half vs UNC, where we forced turnovers and difficult shots.

The established narrative of our defensive weaknesses and a rating based on a season-long metric does not adequately describe our current defense IMO.

I agree it has improved, but it's still a major weakness, IMO. A bad game defensively is harsher on your kenpom efficiency than a good game improves the metric, but I think it's telling that we are, according to the #1 college basketball analytical system, the #65 best team in the country defensively.

Our offense is just so good that it masks our defensive weaknesses. Had we lost a game or two, I think more people would be talking about our defense. But we have been insanely good on offense, and that's not proving an accurate insight into our defense.

The question , however, is whether this is a problem or not. If our scoring stays the same for every game (a possibility given the fact that we haven't scored less than 72 points in our 11-game win streak), we may be able to get by. But in the rare but possible circumstance of Okafor being off and poor 3pt shooting, it could be. Let's hope I'm wrong.

[bbosbbos]

When we play 3 or 4 freshmen, inconsistency in O & D is a problem. But remember one thing, they are getting more and more comfortable playing with each other.

We are playing very well recently. Very good sign to the postseason performance.

[Duvall]

I'm almost certain the the writer is leaning more on the glaring problems of defense and depth. Perhaps not a glaring problem, but definitely my main concern with this team is that in the month of March, they're capable of going 7 (or was it 8?) minutes without scoring a point. Yes, it was a rivalry game. Yes, the officiating was questionable. Yes, yes, yes to any justification. It is a legit problem in my mind.

Duke scored 84 points in 68 possessions. The fact that those points were not evenly distributed through every part of the case doesn't seem like something worth worrying about.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Count me as one of the many who do not believe that depth is a problem at all. We "only" play 8 guys max, but these 8 guys really round out the team. Here is our depth chart:

1: Tyus, Cook
2: Cook, Allen, M Jones
3: M Jones, Winslow
4: Winslow, Jefferson
5: Okafor, MP3

Sure - Jefferson can also play some 5, MP3 some 3, and Allen some 3, but that helps out our depth.

I really like this team, with 4 players with actual positions (Tyus, Okafor, MP3, Jefferson) and 4 players who are versatile enough to play 2 positions. Great "problem" to have, if you can call it a problem

[FerryFor50]

Count me as one of the many who do not believe that depth is a problem at all. We "only" play 8 guys max, but these 8 guys really round out the team. Here is our depth chart:

1: Tyus, Cook
2: Cook, Allen, M Jones
3: M Jones, Winslow
4: Winslow, Jefferson
5: Okafor, MP3

Sure - Jefferson can also play some 5, MP3 some 3, and Allen some 3, but that helps out our depth.

I really like this team, with 4 players with actual positions (Tyus, Okafor, MP3, Jefferson) and 4 players who are versatile enough to play 2 positions. Great "problem" to have, if you can call it a problem

I also agree depth isn't an issue - I just was trying to figure out what the plural weaknesses that the author referred to were. Defense and....?

Also, the other point I made - UNC is the only 10 loss team in the top 25. Did not drop a spot in the rankings after losing to Duke. Pays to be a journalism school...

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings/_/year/2015/poll/1

[freshmanjs]

Also, the other point I made - UNC is the only 10 loss team in the top 25. Did not drop a spot in the rankings after losing to Duke. Pays to be a journalism school...

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings/_/year/2015/poll/1

they also have the #2 most difficult schedule in the country according to kenpom

[bbosbbos]

Highly ranked UNC helps us. Do not forget this.

[weezie]

It's just that time of year when all the "experts" weigh in. Listen to sports radio for fifteen minutes and your head will blow off your shoulders.
On sec idiot fan was whining to Brando that Jay Williams is unqualified to comment on sec ball because he's a Duke man. Brando pawned it off, saying Jay has markedly improved his delivery but still left the impression that the sec is slighted because they don't have an sec color guy calling games.
Everybody has a beef. Why even measured strength of schedule (being facetious here)? What's the point? The only reason we aren't #1 SOS is because we can't play ourselves.

[sagegrouse]

Duke does have problems. Any "glaring problems" would involve defense, FT shooting, and depth.

I believe the defense in the March 7 UNC game was visibly better than in the Feb 18 UNC game, even though the "defensive efficiency" stats for the two games are approximately the same -- 77 pts. in 69 possessions (my est.) vs. 90 pts. in 84 possessions in the earlier game. UNC was hot, hot, hot last Saturday, making all 13 FTs and shooting 50 percent from three. But Duke shut down the easy inside baskets that UNC made in the earlier game: Meeks, for example, was 1-7 versus 8-10.

I believe the defense is coming around nicely; after all, we are starting three freshmen, none of whom probably played an advanced defensive scheme in HS.

Grayson is an asset, and therefore, our depth has improved significantly -- three subs now vs. two subs a month ago.

FT shooting is a problem with Jah, Amile and Justise. Offsetting that is the excellent pressure FT shooting of Quinn, Tyus and Grayson. Jah has a chance to improve his FT shooting -- he has looked good at times.

I think the "glare" has been reduced.

[AIRFORCEDUKIE]

Man we sure love our dork stats and polls on this board :cool: Its like a disease that 70% of the board has caught and the only cure is....Duke winning the championship so we can say see defensive kenpom ratings don't matter that much.
(you thought I was going to say cowbell didnt you?)

[FerryFor50]

they also have the #2 most difficult schedule in the country according to kenpom

And they're 2-8 vs the top 25. 6-9 vs the top 50.

It's not a huge deal - just amusing to me.

[blazindw]

It's just that time of year when all the "experts" weigh in. Listen to sports radio for fifteen minutes and your head will blow off your shoulders.
On sec idiot fan was whining to Brando that Jay Williams is unqualified to comment on sec ball because he's a Duke man. Brando pawned it off, saying Jay has markedly improved his delivery but still left the impression that the sec is slighted because they don't have an sec color guy calling games.
Everybody has a beef. Why even measured strength of schedule (being facetious here)? What's the point? The only reason we aren't #1 SOS is because we can't play ourselves.

The SEC fan rant is so ironic given what the rest of America has to suffer through during football season.

[FerryFor50]

The SEC fan rant is so ironic given what the rest of America has to suffer through during football season.

Nothing beats this SEC fan rant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n6jxMKUluE

[Lar77]

Duke does have problems. Any "glaring problems" would involve defense, FT shooting, and depth.

I believe the defense in the March 7 UNC game was visibly better than in the Feb 18 UNC game, even though the "defensive efficiency" stats for the two games are approximately the same -- 77 pts. in 69 possessions (my est.) vs. 90 pts. in 84 possessions in the earlier game. UNC was hot, hot, hot last Saturday, making all 13 FTs and shooting 50 percent from three. But Duke shut down the easy inside baskets that UNC made in the earlier game: Meeks, for example, was 1-7 versus 8-10.

I believe the defense is coming around nicely; after all, we are starting three freshmen, none of whom probably played an advanced defensive scheme in HS.

Grayson is an asset, and therefore, our depth has improved significantly -- three subs now vs. two subs a month ago.

FT shooting is a problem with Jah, Amile and Justise. Offsetting that is the excellent pressure FT shooting of Quinn, Tyus and Grayson. Jah has a chance to improve his FT shooting -- he has looked good at times.

I think the "glare" has been reduced.

I know everyone looks at KenPom and says our defense is mediocre. It is inconsistent and at times sloppy and maddening, but our defense was strong at UNC and Wake is still wondering what happened. Do we slack off? Of course, especially with a comfortable lead. In our 3 losses and GT, FSU and VT, we were not top 25 in defense by any stretch, but how many times have we come from behind with a combination of offense and defense? I'll take a KenPom of 65, because looking at many of the teams ahead of us in this category, I believe (an opinion) that we have a better defense than them.

Our depth is fine as long as we don't get a key person injured. And if that occurred, having a solid 9th or 10th man is not going to help much.

Free throws continue to be an issue for Jah and Amile, but Justise has gotten a little better. Fortunately, we have some players who have ice in their veins.

Keep the glare up; blind our opponents.

[MChambers]

I also agree depth isn't an issue - I just was trying to figure out what the plural weaknesses that the author referred to were. Defense and....? http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings/_/year/2015/poll/1

I'd guess free throw shooting, at least in the front court.

[MCFinARL]

Nothing beats this SEC fan rant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n6jxMKUluE

Bama.

That is all.

[Chicken Little]

Duke scored 84 points in 68 possessions. The fact that those points were not evenly distributed through every part of the case doesn't seem like something worth worrying about.

So the sky isn't falling?

[gumbomoop]

I'd guess free throw shooting, at least in the front court.

And it is a weakness, in 2 ways. (1) As the game progresses, missed FTs mean, well, fewer points, so it means a closer game than would otherwise obtain. In tight game, means either Duke is behind by a couple, or maybe leads by 2 rather than 5-6 going into final 1:30.

(2) If Duke is protecting a 5-6 point lead with 1-1:30 left, K can use his preferred Total Small Ball guys: Winslow and 4 guards. But if the score is tied, or Duke is down, or Duke leads by only 1-2, Jahlil must be in, and opponent has option of fouling him in any tactically advantageous situation. K has to play O/D sub, limits his end-game TO options.

[blazindw]

Nothing beats this SEC fan rant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n6jxMKUluE

That whole entire show--let me rephrase...that whole entire channel is a walking contradiction. But the rants after the national semifinal when Bama lost were the most epic of epicness. Also, the entire SEC Network was on air like the conference had died.

[OldPhiKap]

I must admit -- I never expected to click on a thread about how we moved up to #2 in the country, to be met by a discussion of how bad we are.

As for the guy or gal who put us #4, so be it. It's subjective. I find glaring errors in his/her conclusion. We probably care equally about each other's opinion.

As for seeding, we are not assured anything at this point. A win Thursday would go a long way though. Still, I am sure there will be some pressure to avoid two teams from the same conference getting top lines, and three of the four from the same region. Keep on winning until you can't.

[hurleyfor3]

I must admit -- I never expected to click on a thread about how we moved up to #2 in the country, to be met by a discussion of how bad we are.

As for the guy or gal who put us #4, so be it. It's subjective. I find glaring errors in his/her conclusion. We probably care equally about each other's opinion.

Second is too high. Fourth is too low. Sixth (Pomeroy) is just right.

[Henderson]

Nothing beats this SEC fan rant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n6jxMKUluE

What does "Row Todd" mean?

[tbyers11]

With regards to Wisconsin, their defense was bad in the first half of the season, but they have improved greatly. Their Kenpom ranking is 25 (I think it was in the 40s a few months back), much better than the 65 of Duke. They have really shown improvement on that side of the ball, and the numbers back it up. Duke may show good defensive stops here and there, but the numbers aren't as telling.

Wisconsin's KenPom D rating was in the mid-40s Sunday morning. Their very strong D performance against Ohio St (80.6 PPP) moved them all the way to 25. I've watched a lot of Wisconsin and I don't think they have really improved their D much outside of the Ohio St game (which I did not see). Their previous three games (Mich st, Minn and maryland) were all 103 or higher.

I'd agree with Ferry for 50 that anyone says that Duke's D is a glaring liability should feel the same way about Wisconsin. They are pretty comparable. Neither is truly awful nor truly good.

[toooskies]

The important thing to keep in mind is that this Duke team's offense can't be stopped by most defenses. We haven't played a single game where our offense has played worse than our average defense. The only other teams that can say that are Kentucky and Arizona, who both accomplish that feat with spectacular defense (and certainly good, but not spectacular, offense).

[FerryFor50]

Wisconsin's KenPom D rating was in the mid-40s Sunday morning. Their very strong D performance against Ohio St (80.6 PPP) moved them all the way to 25. I've watched a lot of Wisconsin and I don't think they have really improved their D much outside of the Ohio St game (which I did not see). Their previous three games (Mich st, Minn and maryland) were all 103 or higher.

I'd agree with Ferry for 50 that anyone says that Duke's D is a glaring liability should feel the same way about Wisconsin. They are pretty comparable. Neither is truly awful nor truly good.

Another thing about Wisconsin... Sam Dekker wasn't healthy when we played them. But they also had Traveon Jackson.

I wonder what Traveon Jackson's return does to Wisconsin's team chemistry. He had a pretty high USG% (21.5%) for someone not named Sam Dekker (23.5%) or Frank Kaminsky (28.6%). His replacement, Bronson Koenig has a pretty low USG% (16.5%). Just based on what I saw, Jackson had a tendency to shoot when he shouldn't and did not pass enough. What happens when he returns?

Remember when Ryan Kelly returned to Duke after his foot injury? Will be interesting to see how Wisconsin responds.

[mr. synellinden]

Second is too high. Fourth is too low. Sixth (Pomeroy) is just right.

Sixty percent of the time KenPom is right every time.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I must admit -- I never expected to click on a thread about how we moved up to #2 in the country, to be met by a discussion of how bad we are.

As for the guy or gal who put us #4, so be it. It's subjective. I find glaring errors in his/her conclusion. We probably care equally about each other's opinion.

As for seeding, we are not assured anything at this point. A win Thursday would go a long way though. Still, I am sure there will be some pressure to avoid two teams from the same conference getting top lines, and three of the four from the same region. Keep on winning until you can't.

I'm probably one of the guys talking about our glaring weaknesses (okay, I am definitely one of those guys). Despite this glaring weakness, I think we are the number 2/3 team in the country. UK is obviously #1 (and rightly so) and I'd put a healthy UVa up there with us.

Our offense is so crazy good. IMO, our O is to the rest of the country what UK's D is to the rest of the country. I think our O alone can get us in the FF. But having a better D mitigates risk, and it'd be nicer to have better odds of getting to the FF (or winning the whole thing!).

Lastly, I think, at minimum, we are a 2 seed. If we win against NC State, I'd be shocked if we weren't a 1 seed. The only guarantee is that UK is a 1 seed. That leaves three 1 seeds for Duke, UVa, Nova, Zona, and Wisconsin. I just don't see the committee putting Gonzaga or Utah as a 1 seed, even if they win out. A loss anywhere puts Winny as a 2 seed. Same goes for Nova and Zona. UVa is an interesting animal. The loss @ Louisville really opens up the opportunity for UVa to be a 2 seed. I think if UVa wins one game, they are a 1 seed. However, if both UVa and Duke lose in the ACC tourney, one will be a one seed and the other a two seed. I can't see the committee giving two 1 seeds to a conference where those teams didn't win the conference tourney. Let's pray for a Duke/UVa ACC final, because that way both teams get 1 seeds.

[FerryFor50]

I'm probably one of the guys talking about our glaring weaknesses (okay, I am definitely one of those guys). Despite this glaring weakness, I think we are the number 2/3 team in the country. UK is obviously #1 (and rightly so) and I'd put a healthy UVa up there with us.

Our offense is so crazy good. IMO, our O is to the rest of the country what UK's D is to the rest of the country. I think our O alone can get us in the FF. But having a better D mitigates risk, and it'd be nicer to have better odds of getting to the FF (or winning the whole thing!).

Lastly, I think, at minimum, we are a 2 seed. If we win against NC State, I'd be shocked if we weren't a 1 seed. The only guarantee is that UK is a 1 seed. That leaves three 1 seeds for Duke, UVa, Nova, Zona, and Wisconsin. I just don't see the committee putting Gonzaga or Utah as a 1 seed, even if they win out. A loss anywhere puts Winny as a 2 seed. Same goes for Nova and Zona. UVa is an interesting animal. The loss @ Louisville really opens up the opportunity for UVa to be a 2 seed. I think if UVa wins one game, they are a 1 seed. However, if both UVa and Duke lose in the ACC tourney, one will be a one seed and the other a two seed. I can't see the committee giving two 1 seeds to a conference where those teams didn't win the conference tourney. Let's pray for a Duke/UVa ACC final, because that way both teams get 1 seeds.

Well, if Utah wins out, that takes care of Arizona, right? Will be interesting to see what happens to Wisconsin in the Big 10 tourny, but that conference seems way down this season.

I don't see Utah getting higher than 2/3 seed, regardless of what happens.

[BigWayne]

As for seeding, we are not assured anything at this point. A win Thursday would go a long way though. Still, I am sure there will be some pressure to avoid two teams from the same conference getting top lines, and three of the four from the same region. Keep on winning until you can't.

A Duke/UVA ACCT final translates to a very good chance of both getting a #1 seed, especially if the game is a close one. A loss for either team on Thursday makes a #1 seed improbable. A loss for either team on Friday makes their chances for a #1 seed 50/50 and subject to outside developments.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Well, if Utah wins out, that takes care of Arizona, right? Will be interesting to see what happens to Wisconsin in the Big 10 tourny, but that conference seems way down this season.

I don't see Utah getting higher than 2/3 seed, regardless of what happens.

I agree with you regarding Zona/Utah. Utah is a 2 seed if they win out. Nova is a 1 seed guaranteed if they win out. Likewise with UVa or Duke. And I couldn't agree more with Wisconsin. I have no idea what to do with them if they win out. I guess it will depend on what the field does, but Winny winning the conference tourney gives them a really strong profile. I suspect that the loser of the Duke/UVa final may have to be a 2-seed if Winny and Nova win out. Sad.

[weezie]

What does "Row Todd" mean?

Phyllis sounds like a fun gal! Was she the Homecoming Queen at Mulga High, AL?

[budwom]

What does "Row Todd" mean?

I'm not sure, but I think Row Todd is the arch enemy of Waw Egoo; some kind of kids' comic characters I think.

[NYBri]

Best way to shut everyone up is to win 9 more games.

[TruBlu]

Highly ranked UNC helps us. Do not forget this.

But, highly ranked UNC sickens me. Do not forget this, either.

On second thought, UNC sickens me whether highly ranked or not.

[OldPhiKap]

But, highly ranked UNC sickens me. Do not forget this, either.

On second thought, UNC sickens me whether highly ranked or not.

Fair to say, UNC is rank.

[NYBri]

9 More Games.

Win those, we grab the ring.

[-jk]

9 More Games.

Win those, we grab the ring.

Well, yea. And 67 other teams, too. (Or thereabouts, or so.)

-jk

[hurleyfor3]

Best way to shut everyone up is to win 9 more games.

Last time we tried that, everyone whined about how easy our draw was.

[NYBri]

Last time we tried that, everyone whined about how easy our draw was.

Just win 9.

[WakeDevil]

After the weekend we are now in the number two position. Virginia dropped only one spot. I believe that the significance here is that if we lose in the ACC tournament we will still be ranked in the top 4 and will likely get a number one seed.

What does the poll have to do with seeding?

[sagegrouse]

9 More Games.

Win those, we grab the ring.

Yeah, as the pro golfers say -- nyuk, nyuk -- it ain't "how" -- it's "how many."

[-jk]

What does the poll have to do with seeding?

I seem to recall the top seeds tend to track the human polls more closely than any other measure.

-jk

[jv001]

Yeah, as the pro golfers say -- nyuk, nyuk -- it ain't "how" -- it's "how many."

And Sage you can add: "you don't have to draw a picture, just put down the score on the card". GoDuke!

[Bomar]

Last time we tried that, everyone whined about how easy our draw was.

I remember hearing that "whine" and rolling my eyes when thinking about the practically-a-home-game-for-Baylor in the Elite 8 that year. That was not an easy draw. What a game it was, though!

[Atldukie79]

Man we sure love our dork stats and polls on this board :cool: Its like a disease that 70% of the board has caught and the only cure is....Duke winning the championship so we can say see defensive kenpom ratings don't matter that much.
(you thought I was going to say cowbell didnt you?)

Love your comment.

I love stats and analytics too, but methinks we get carried away.

On the one hand you had "seat of the pants" coaches like Al McGuire, who's 1977 team won the title. He did not pay attention to stats at all. He looked for heart. Worked for him.

Now we have so many metrics to consider. I guess the other extreme sports example might be the NBA's 76's who continue to make deals that are odd at best and downright crazy at worst...all in the name of metrics.

The NCAA tourney is not a computer game and it is not (necessarily) a function of your placement in the bracket.
It is fun to analyze and discuss, but we sometimes slice and dice to the Nth degree.

It is just plain fun!

[budwom]

Love your comment.

I love stats and analytics too, but methinks we get carried away.

On the one hand you had "seat of the pants" coaches like Al McGuire, who's 1977 team won the title. He did not pay attention to stats at all. He looked for heart. Worked for him.

Now we have so many metrics to consider. I guess the other extreme sports example might be the NBA's 76's who continue to make deals that are odd at best and downright crazy at worst...all in the name of metrics.

The NCAA tourney is not a computer game and it is not (necessarily) a function of your placement in the bracket.
It is fun to analyze and discuss, but we sometimes slice and dice to the Nth degree.

It is just plain fun!

I tend to agree. I'm keeping some rudimentary track this year of the ACC and NCAA tournaments to see how various entities predict winners. Not ultra scientific, but
I'm going to compare Vegas opening lines (yes, I know, they want to balance the bets, but the opening lines should be a decent indicator), Sagarin, KenPom, and Charlotte the Black Lab.

After all, after we get done discussing and arguing about various efficiencies, don't we want to know if someone is actually good or bad at predicting winners?
If Vegas, Sagarin and KenPom, for example, almost always predict the same winners, it won't be clear what the benefit of advanced analytics really is.
So the focus will be on games in which these prognosticators/rankers differ in their assessments.

[Skitzle]

I remember hearing that "whine" and rolling my eyes when thinking about the practically-a-home-game-for-Baylor in the Elite 8 that year. That was not an easy draw. What a game it was, though!

How about facing Butler in Indianapolis?

[alteran]

Last time we tried that, everyone whined about how easy our draw was.

And it was the most beautiful whining I ever heard.