PDA

View Full Version : Pick Duke's Seed



pfrduke
03-14-2015, 02:00 AM
Since we have no basketball to watch tomorrow, let's play the prognostication game. Where do you think Duke will end up seeded when the brackets come out in ~40 hours?

Note that I assume Kentucky is locked into #1 in the Midwest and that we won't be the #8 team, which is the only possible way I could see ending up as #2 in the West.

FireOgilvie
03-14-2015, 02:07 AM
No idea which region, but I'm thinking we're a 2 seed; our BPI is surprisingly low (#7 before the loss).

stals
03-14-2015, 02:14 AM
And Duke has a better "body of work" than UVa. Including:

1. A win at UVa
2. Better SOS
3. UVa has lost 2 of last three
4. Justin Anderson was a non factor in G'boro and may not be a factor the big dance
5. UVa is a boring, boring team that has trouble scoring more than 55 points

I'm sure there are more, but I think Duke will be that ACC #1 seed referenced in the title.

subzero02
03-14-2015, 02:41 AM
If we're not a 1 seed, I will be sorely disappointed

Duvall
03-14-2015, 02:44 AM
If we're not a 1 seed, I will be sorely disappointed

In whom?

CharlestonDave
03-14-2015, 06:20 AM
If Wisconsin, Arizona and Villanova all win their tournaments, both UVA and Duke could drop to a #2 seed, although UVA winning the regular season might stay at a number 1.

Duke3517
03-14-2015, 06:41 AM
Wins at Virginia, Wisconsin, and North Carolina.

Should warrant a 1 seed. For both teams to see a one seed they have to hope Villanova, Arizona, and Wisconsin lose

RCDevil
03-14-2015, 07:06 AM
The correct answer is #1 South.

Duke should be the 3rd overall one seed regardless of what happens in the conference tournaments.

Right now there are five teams fighting for three open 1 seeds: Villanova, Duke, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Arizona.

Villanova has 2 losses. Wisconsin, Arizona and Virginia have 3 apiece. Duke has 4.

Villanova has 11 wins over top 50 RPI teams and their losses aren't bad. @Georgetown and @Seton Hall, the latter of whom is at least RPI top 100. Give them the 2nd 1 seed.

Duke has 10 top 50 RPI wins and it's not really debatable that we have the most impressive slate of wins of anyone in the country, including UK. Of our 4 losses, 2 were to a Notre Dame team that spent all year as being one of the best teams in the country, and 1 was @ State who's a solid tourney team (probably a 9 seed). Even our "bad" loss was to Miami, a solid top-70 team who's currently on the bubble. Give Duke the 3rd overall seed.

Virginia has done better than everyone except Kentucky at limiting bad losses. Their three losses were all against RPI top 20 teams. I'd say they have a case for the 3rd overall seed, but since we beat them at their place and Duke has a more impressive slate of wins, give UVA the fourth and final 1 seed.

Now we look at Wisconsin. What separates them from the three teams I just discussed is the fact that they have a TERRIBLE loss against Rutgers, who is ranked sub 150 in the RPI. I don't care that they didn't have Kaminsky for that game - in no universe should a top-5 team be losing to a squad ranked THAT low. Their slate of wins also isn't nearly as impressive as my top three - their best wins were Georgetown and Oklahoma and their strength of victory drops dramatically after that. Throw in the fact we beat them in Madison and it seems very unlikely they jump us on the S-curve. Give Wisconsin the top overall 2 seed.

Finally, Arizona. These guys are so overrated with respect to how they'll be seeded it's not even funny. They beat Gonzaga (whoop-dee-doo) and swept Utah, but their next best accomplishment is sweeping Oregon. The real scarlet letter for Arizona is the fact that they have THREE HORRIBLE LOSSES TO SUB-100 RPI TEAMS. None of the other top 8 teams have that kind of black mark on their resume, not even "our conference is terrible" Gonzaga and "we lost 7 games" Kansas. Give Arizona the second overall 2 seed, since a 3-loss power conference team will still place higher than 2-loss Gonzaga, as well as Kansas who has simply lost too many games overall.

Also keep in mind that Arizona will play Oregon in the Pac-12 final, while Wisconsin will play Purdue and then one of Michigan State or Maryland if they beat the Boilermakers. These potential wins are simply not good enough to overcome the glaring weaknesses in their resumes when you compare them to Duke and UVA. I can't even see either one of them overtaking Villanova if they lose to Xavier in the Big East final - they can't match Villanova's wins and Xavier is top 40 RPI.

So, here's how I see the S-curve shaking out:

1. Kentucky - Midwest
2. Villanova - East
3. Duke - South
4. Virginia - West

Duke and UVa would both prefer the East/South regional, but I firmly believe Duke will rank ahead of them on the S-curve so Duke stays in the South. Villanova should be 2nd overall so they'd get the East over everyone else.

The 2 seeds:

5. Wisconsin
6. Arizona - West
7. Gonzaga
8. Kansas

Arizona will be kept out west because it makes sense geographically. The others could be shipped anywhere, though I have a feeling KU will end up paired with UK, also due to geography and competitive balance in each region (best 1 vs worst 2). So I feel like the most likely scenario is Duke ends up the 1 seed in the South with either Wisconsin or Gonzaga as our 2 seed, with our first/second round games in Charlotte.

Everyone who is talking up Wisconsin and Arizona right now is doing so because "OMG BUT THEY'LL PROBABLY WIN THEIR CONFERENCE TOURNAMENTS AND THEY WON THE REGULAR SEASON TITLES!" They're also probably pointing out Duke's defensive concerns. My response: Who cares? Things like conference titles and offensive/defensive metrics mean MUCH LESS to the NCAAT committee than things like RPI, SOS, and good wins/bad losses. These are the things that matter, and when you base seedings on those, Duke will not only remain a 1 seed but should also get a favorable draw as far as which region they'll be sent to.

People, including allegedly professional "bracketologists," are overreacting way too much to this loss and ignoring simple facts about how the NCAAT committee actually conducts the seeding process.

Owen Meany
03-14-2015, 08:04 AM
I believe Duke's entire body of work warrants a 1 seed. I was heartened by Joe Lunardi saying Duke would remain a 1 seed, because I have previously thought he seemed ready to drop Duke to a 2 even when it was unwarranted. I do worry that the selection committee will look for a reason to drop Duke down to a 2, perhaps out of concern of public criticism from a large anti-Duke crowd. In the past, I can remember it being said that someone (Duke perhaps?) wasn't given a 1 seed because the team didn't win either their conference tournament or regular season. I am concerned that this, and the fact the ACC would have 2 #1 seeds may give the committee an excuse to drop Duke down. I hope this isn't like 2013 where a lackluster game (or half in this case) in the ACC Tournament costs Duke a #1 seed and sends them to a region with the strongest #1. Hopefully Duke's very strong resume and big wins (on the road in particular) will keep them safe.

I will be pulling against Arizona, Wisonsin and Villanova heartily this weekend.

Saratoga2
03-14-2015, 08:26 AM
Frankly, I think both Duke and Virginia will fall two 2 seeds, assuming both Wisconsin and Arizona win their tournaments. Virginia without Anderson is not the threat that they were as a whole team. Duke has shown it has weaknesses. Had we got to the finals of the ACC tourney, I feel we would have deserved the #1 seed.

MarkD83
03-14-2015, 08:48 AM
I said #2 midwest because at this point being a 1 or a 2 does not matter. What matters is who brings their A game to the tournament. If you are a 1 and bring your B game, you could lose to a 16.

So Duke bring your A game, play Ky in the elite eight, win and move on to the Final Four.

WakeDevil
03-14-2015, 09:06 AM
A comparison of the contenders, similar to a previous post. He thinks Duke is safe.

http://thebiglead.com/2015/03/14/duke-virginia-wisconsin-villanova-and-arizona-the-battle-for-the-1-seeds-tightened-up-on-friday-night/

What do you notice? Duke should be safe. They have the two best wins of the group, at Virginia and at Wisconsin, and those could come into play if there is a debate with Duke and either of those teams.

Virginia has the second best profile. They’ve got three losses to teams that are also likely to be among the top 4 seeds in the tournament. They have three great road wins, better than the best road wins of Arizona, Villanova, and Wisconsin combined.

Among the other three, I would go narrowly with Villanova (with no more losses), Wisconsin (with a Big Ten title), then Arizona (with a Pac-12 tourney title). Wisconsin and Villanova are very debatable, though.

And then the question becomes whether Virginia can withstand the Committee rewarding a team that wins both the conference regular season and tourney titles, instead of them. Last year, that bolted Virginia to the #1 seed line (in fact, when I was at the Mock Selection exercise, they said that Virginia winning both was a factor in moving them ahead of Villanova a year ago). This year, it could be Villanova and Wisconsin that benefits. I don’t know that Arizona (with three losses all worse than Virginia’s) can overcome even with that bonus.

But unless you have a pipeline or bug in the Committee room, you just don’t know for sure. This is going to be quite the decision.

cptnflash
03-14-2015, 09:10 AM
Totally depends on the outcome of the Big 10, Big East, and Pac 12 tournaments. I think any/all of Wisconsin, Villanova, and Arizona will deservedly be seeded ahead of us if they complete the regular season / conference tournament sweep. If they all win out, I think we're looking at a #2 for sure. The committee specifically pointed to our conference tournament win when justifying our somewhat controversial (in some camps) #1 seed in 2010. They care about accomplishment, which this year will work against us despite all of our gaudy road wins (which we know they overvalue).

The more interesting question is, what does the committee do with Virginia at this point? They are clearly not the same team they were in early February before Anderson got hurt, and he's clearly nowhere near full strength right now. Given the historical precedents regarding injuries to key players, I think they're in danger of being seeded below us despite winning the regular season title. So if only two (or fewer) of Wisconsin/Villanova/Arizona win their conference tournaments, we might sneak in as the last #1 seed.

And based on geography, which in my understanding trumps the s-curve in terms of #2 seed placement, I think there's a non-trivial risk that we wind up in Cleveland.

Does Laettner have any eligibility left?

devildeac
03-14-2015, 09:15 AM
#2 Midwest. If Villanova, Wisconsin and Arizona win their tournaments, that drops UVa and us to #2s, and where else would they place us but in the UK regional, hoping for that Duke-UK match-up in the regional final, assuming of course we can get out of the opening week/weekend/night(s) against a #15:rolleyes:. I'm a pessimist now but really thought if we had made it to the ACCT finals, we'd be a #1, regardless of the outcome of the championship game, especially with UVa losing to the cheaters. :(

YmoBeThere
03-14-2015, 09:16 AM
at this point being a 1 or a 2 does not matter. What matters is who brings their A game to the tournament.

Agreed, we've learned this lesson a couple times over the last few years. Unfortunately, the core of the team is different every time.

YmoBeThere
03-14-2015, 09:17 AM
hoping for that Duke-UK match-up in the regional final

I would think that they would rather have a UK-Duke matchup occur on a bigger stage than a regional final. That would be the most compelling matchup ratings wise. Nothing else would come close.

devildeac
03-14-2015, 09:23 AM
I would think that they would rather have a UK-Duke matchup occur on a bigger stage than a regional final. That would be the most compelling matchup ratings wise. Nothing else would come close.

I dunno about that. This "ancient" regional final still garners a lot of attention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3_IT622Sbc

;)

cptnflash
03-14-2015, 09:32 AM
Agreed, we've learned this lesson a couple times over the last few years. Unfortunately, the core of the team is different every time.


Actually, I feel like we've learned over the past few years that there's a significant difference between being a #1 and #2 (or #3) seed. For starters, the caliber of team you play in the first round is dramatically different:

#1 seed years
2010: Arkansas Pine Bluff = KP 220 (29 point win)
2011: Hampton = KP 199 (38 point win)

#2 seed years
2012: Lehigh = KP 74 (loss)
2013: Albany = KP 142 (12 point win)

#3 seed year
2014: Mercer = 86 (loss)

Second, and perhaps more importantly for teams with national title aspirations, being a #1 seed obviously allows us to avoid playing the very best teams in the country until the final four, making it more likely that they'll be upset before they get to us. 2010 is a great example - besides us, the best two teams in the country were Kentucky and Kansas. They both lost in the regionals, giving us an easier path to the title (our draw was harder than people think that year, but the final four was easier than it could have been because of upsets in other regions).

Contrast that with 2013, when we were on track for a #1 seed before we lost to Maryland in the ACC tournament quarterfinals. Suddenly we became the #2 seed in Louisville's region, which was a bad outcome.

That's not to say we can't still do well in the tournament as a #2 seed, if it comes to that. But I don't think we've "learned" that it doesn't matter, because it clearly does.

weezie
03-14-2015, 09:42 AM
I'm trying to stay positive here but maybe I've been kidding myself about ESPN salivating over a Duke-ky matchup. Now maybe it's only for the drive by factor.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 10:19 AM
As of the time of this post, 18 brackets are in for Bracket Matrix (http://bracketmatrix.com/)'s morning update.

The early returns indicate:

Villanova has sailed past the two ACC teams. If they beat Xavier today, Nova will be the overall #2 seed.
Wisconsin has made major inroads on Duke and UVA. I suspect if they win the Big 10 tournament, they will leapfrog one or both of the ACC teams.
Arizona has a low probability of a #1 seed even if they win the Pac-12 tournament
Whether Duke is ahead of UVA or vice versa is up in the air.

dukelifer
03-14-2015, 10:29 AM
As of the time of this post, 18 brackets are in for Bracket Matrix (http://bracketmatrix.com/)'s morning update.

The early returns indicate:

Villanova has sailed past the two ACC teams. If they beat Xavier today, Nova will be the overall #2 seed.
Wisconsin has made major inroads on Duke and UVA. I suspect if they win the Big 10 tournament, they will leapfrog one or both of the ACC teams.
Arizona has a low probability of a #1 seed even if they win the Pac-12 tournament
Whether Duke is ahead of UVA or vice versa is up in the air.


Hard not to put Duke ahead of UVa since we beat them at UVa. Also UVa has stumbled more down the stretch and Anderson does not look to be ready. Either both are 2 seeds or Duke is a 1.

gurufrisbee
03-14-2015, 11:12 AM
I want to believe Duke (and Virginia) are both still in line for #1 seeds. They had dominant seasons in the toughest conference in America. Villanova played in a conference with ZERO other actually good teams. The Big lEast might get several bids, but all the rest are not good teams. Wisconsin and Arizona both played in conferences with only one other actually good team. And Duke did win AT Wisconsin. As much as there seems to be a large gap between the top 8 and whoever is the 9th best team and first #3 seed, to me there still feels like a decent gap between the top 3 and whoever is #4.

It's going to be a tough argument for the committee to make bumping Duke to a #2 seed when they won @ Wisconsin (a 1 or 2 seed), @ Virginia (probably a 1 seed), @ NC (maybe a 3 seed if they win today), vs NC, vs Notre Dame (probably a 3 seed), @ Louisville (4 seed-ish) and didn't lose to anyone who wasn't at least in the thick of bubble conversation or in. There is no one with as many impressive wins and no truly bad losses out there.

jhmoss1812
03-14-2015, 11:24 AM
I don't see too much separating UVA and Duke so it may come down to the H2H which Duke won. UVA has 3 losses, all to ranked teams, by a total of 12 points. Duke has 4 losses, 3 of which are double digits losses, and 2 of which are to unranked teams. Duke has better wins overall and a H2H win. UVA has better losses. I really don't know who deserves it more. In the end, if UVA is a 2 seed (which I think we will be), then that's what we are and we'll play the teams in front of us.

If you asked me before the season if I'd be happy with UVA finishing 29-3 with losses to Duke, UNC and Louisville and a 2-seed in the NCAA tournament, you're damn right I would be. Sometimes it's about stepping back and having some perspective. But I fully expect UVA to be a 2-seed now. I just hope it's a a 2-seed in the East.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 11:26 AM
Hard not to put Duke ahead of UVa since we beat them at UVa. Also UVa has stumbled more down the stretch and Anderson does not look to be ready. Either both are 2 seeds or Duke is a 1.

Yeah, hopefully our head-to-head wins over UVA and Wiscy save our butts.

If it turns out to be three teams (Duke, UVA, Wiscy) for two remaining 1-seed slots, I want to be ranked first out of those three teams.

The #1 seed out West is almost as onerous to me as being UK's two seed.

devildeac
03-14-2015, 11:48 AM
Yeah, hopefully our head-to-head wins over UVA and Wiscy save our butts.

If it turns out to be three teams (Duke, UVA, Wiscy) for two remaining 1-seed slots, I want to be ranked first out of those three teams.

The #1 seed out West is almost as onerous to me as being UK's two seed.

Why? I think I might understand/know some of your possible reasons but would like to read your thoughts/opinions. Travel? Recent experience (2011)? Arizona as our possible 2 seed? All of the above?

dukelifer
03-14-2015, 12:05 PM
I don't see too much separating UVA and Duke so it may come down to the H2H which Duke won. UVA has 3 losses, all to ranked teams, by a total of 12 points. Duke has 4 losses, 3 of which are double digits losses, and 2 of which are to unranked teams. Duke has better wins overall and a H2H win. UVA has better losses. I really don't know who deserves it more. In the end, if UVA is a 2 seed (which I think we will be), then that's what we are and we'll play the teams in front of us.

If you asked me before the season if I'd be happy with UVA finishing 29-3 with losses to Duke, UNC and Louisville and a 2-seed in the NCAA tournament, you're damn right I would be. Sometimes it's about stepping back and having some perspective. But I fully expect UVA to be a 2-seed now. I just hope it's a a 2-seed in the East.
All true but UVa is not the same team without Anderson and struggled at times down the stretch with 2 losses in the last 2 weeks. If Anderson is healthy- I have no issues with a 1 seeding and they likely have only one loss - but they have not been the same team. He is a big weapon and his performance this week did not allay concerns that UVa is whole and ready to rumble

jhmoss1812
03-14-2015, 12:11 PM
All true but UVa is not the same team without Anderson and struggled at times down the stretch with 2 losses in the last 2 weeks. If Anderson is healthy- I have no issues with a 1 seeding and they likely have only one loss - but they have not been the same team. He is a big weapon and his performance this week did not allay concerns that UVa is whole and ready to rumble

I agree. I know in my heart of hearts that UVA has a 1-seed resume but we will be a 2-seed because of our quality of play recently and the uncertainty with Justin Anderson. It's understandable and I accept it. This is how I see things playing out. Let's just assume that Wisky, Zona and Nova all win their conference tourneys.

East: Nova/UVA
South: Duke/Kansas
West: Wisky/Zona
Midwest: Kentucky/Gonzaga

dukebluesincebirth
03-14-2015, 12:14 PM
East: Villanova
South: Duke
West: Wisconsin
Midwest: Kentucky

If UVA hadn't laid an egg against tarholes, they'd be 1 in the south or east, but these are now the 1 seeds IMO.

fuse
03-14-2015, 12:39 PM
I didn't vote but still optimistic we are a one seed.

Wahoo2000
03-14-2015, 01:12 PM
I don't think AZ will claw its way into the 1 seed mix even if they win the PAC12 tourney. Especially now that they won't even have to play Utah in the tourney. Pac-12 was just awful, awful, awful overall this year. That combined with their (really) bad losses probably lock them as a 2.

If 'Nova wins out, I think they'll end up as the #2 OVERALL seed and get the east. Despite lack of elite wins, only 2 losses, reg season and tourney titles in a solid conference RPI-wise makes them the second best resume after Kentucky.

Is Wisc wins their conf tourney, I really just don't see much at ALL separating them from Duke and UVA. Those 3 squads are all in a toss-up for the final 2 1 seeds.

When resumes are so close like this, here's what history tends to favor:
1)conf titles/recent play, followed by:
2)signature wins, followed by:
3)quality of losses

If I had to guess, I think Wisc ends up at #3 overall in this scenario - not sure if the committee would feel they're better suited to the south or west. Duke comes next (despite the head to head win over Wisc, I think a B10 double-title keeps the Badgers above the Devils) getting the last #1 in whichever region is left (south/west). UVa, despite having a resume that would assure a #1 in pretty much any of the past 10 years, falls to a #2 and goes to Syracuse (after 1st weekend in Raleigh) with 'Nova.

Entirely possibly that those 3 could end up in ANY order though. It's that close. Of course Wisc still has games to win......

OldPhiKap
03-14-2015, 01:16 PM
I don't think AZ will claw its way into the 1 seed mix even if they win the PAC12 tourney. Especially now that they won't even have to play Utah in the tourney. Pac-12 was just awful, awful, awful overall this year. That combined with their (really) bad losses probably lock them as a 2.

If 'Nova wins out, I think they'll end up as the #2 OVERALL seed and get the east. Despite lack of elite wins, only 2 losses, reg season and tourney titles in a solid conference RPI-wise makes them the second best resume after Kentucky.

Is Wisc wins their conf tourney, I really just don't see much at ALL separating them from Duke and UVA. Those 3 squads are all in a toss-up for the final 2 1 seeds.

When resumes are so close like this, here's what history tends to favor:
1)conf titles/recent play, followed by:
2)signature wins, followed by:
3)quality of losses

If I had to guess, I think Wisc ends up at #3 overall in this scenario - not sure if the committee would feel they're better suited to the south or west. Duke comes next (despite the head to head win over Wisc, I think a B10 double-title keeps the Badgers above the Devils) getting the last #1 in whichever region is left (south/west). UVa, despite having a resume that would assure a #1 in pretty much any of the past 10 years, falls to a #2 and goes to Syracuse (after 1st weekend in Raleigh) with 'Nova.

Entirely possibly that those 3 could end up in ANY order though. It's that close. Of course Wisc still has games to win......

UVa's biggest issue -- despite an incredible season -- is how Andrerson recovers and the team works him back in. I am afraid that may knock them down to the two-line

jv001
03-14-2015, 01:17 PM
I don't think AZ will claw its way into the 1 seed mix even if they win the PAC12 tourney. Especially now that they won't even have to play Utah in the tourney. Pac-12 was just awful, awful, awful overall this year. That combined with their (really) bad losses probably lock them as a 2.

If 'Nova wins out, I think they'll end up as the #2 OVERALL seed and get the east. Despite lack of elite wins, only 2 losses, reg season and tourney titles in a solid conference RPI-wise makes them the second best resume after Kentucky.

Is Wisc wins their conf tourney, I really just don't see much at ALL separating them from Duke and UVA. Those 3 squads are all in a toss-up for the final 2 1 seeds.

When resumes are so close like this, here's what history tends to favor:
1)conf titles/recent play, followed by:
2)signature wins, followed by:
3)quality of losses

If I had to guess, I think Wisc ends up at #3 overall in this scenario - not sure if the committee would feel they're better suited to the south or west. Duke comes next (despite the head to head win over Wisc, I think a B10 double-title keeps the Badgers above the Devils) getting the last #1 in whichever region is left (south/west). UVa, despite having a resume that would assure a #1 in pretty much any of the past 10 years, falls to a #2 and goes to Syracuse (after 1st weekend in Raleigh) with 'Nova.

Entirely possibly that those 3 could end up in ANY order though. It's that close. Of course Wisc still has games to win......

I agree with your entire post. I think Duke and Virginia shot themselves in the foot on Friday the 13th, :cool: GoDuke!

subzero02
03-14-2015, 01:40 PM
In whom?

The committee for undervaluing our road wins versus top notch competition... And Winslow for a shameful first half vs. Notre Dame when compared to some of the jaw-dropping plays he made in the 2nd half.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 01:44 PM
Why? I think I might understand/know some of your possible reasons but would like to read your thoughts/opinions. Travel? Recent experience (2011)? Arizona as our possible 2 seed? All of the above?

You're exactly right. It's all of the above. Duke is 0-3 under Coach K in NCAAT games played on the West Coast, including the recent 2011 loss to Arizona that you mentioned. That's not a large sample, but I'm a superstitious person so it gives me the heebie jeebies.

But mostly, it's about this year's Arizona team. They were the preseason #2 team and current Kenpom #2 team and loaded with talent. It is not a prize to earn a 1-seed in their backyard with them as the 2-seed.

I would rather be the 2-seed in the East.

gofurman
03-14-2015, 01:53 PM
Actually, I feel like we've learned over the past few years that there's a significant difference between being a #1 and #2 (or #3) seed. For starters, the caliber of team you play in the first round is dramatically different:

#1 seed years
2010: Arkansas Pine Bluff = KP 220 (29 point win)
2011: Hampton = KP 199 (38 point win)

#2 seed years
2012: Lehigh = KP 74 (loss)
2013: Albany = KP 142 (12 point win)

#3 seed year
2014: Mercer = 86 (loss)

Second, and perhaps more importantly for teams with national title aspirations, being a #1 seed obviously allows us to avoid playing the very best teams in the country until the final four, making it more likely that they'll be upset before they get to us. 2010 is a great example - besides us, the best two teams in the country were Kentucky and Kansas. They both lost in the regionals, giving us an easier path to the title (our draw was harder than people think that year, but the final four was easier than it could have been because of upsets in other regions).

Contrast that with 2013, when we were on track for a #1 seed before we lost to Maryland in the ACC tournament quarterfinals. Suddenly we became the #2 seed in Louisville's region, which was a bad outcome.

That's not to say we can't still do well in the tournament as a #2 seed, if it comes to that. But I don't think we've "learned" that it doesn't matter, because it clearly does.

2 sides to a coin. If you bring your a game ( us v nc state a few days ago) then the early opponent...15 or 16 doesn't matter

BUT seeding does matter some as noted above plus look at it this way. Seeding reflects how good WE are, not just do we play a 15 or 16. Is the best 16 really difft from the worst 15? No. Then why do 15s win on occasion and 16s never do (yet)?? Because 1 seeds don't have the flaws that 2 seeds do. UK isn't susceptible to a low seed. Duke w Hood and Parker ? Defensive flaws that had us beat teams like Vermont by 2. Not sure if I articulated that well but the 1 v 2 debate reflects our team as much as the concern over what a 16 seed brings vs a 15. Jay will, boozer, dunleavy? One seed. No concerns regardless of who the first opponent is

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 01:57 PM
Bracket Project @bracketproject (https://twitter.com/bracketproject) · 32m32 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/bracketproject/status/576795180935729152)

#1 seed breakdown based on today's brackets: Kentucky-54 brackets, Villanova-53, Duke-40, Virginia-35, Wisconsin-29, Arizona-4, Gonzaga-1

Atldukie79
03-14-2015, 02:26 PM
So... some of you who feel Wisconsin will be ranked ahead of us if they win the BIG whatever tourney...does that mean I need to pull for the Twerps if they face Wisconsin for the title?

Yucky thought...talk about cognitive dissonance!

Wahoo2000
03-14-2015, 03:14 PM
So... some of you who feel Wisconsin will be ranked ahead of us if they win the BIG whatever tourney...does that mean I need to pull for the Twerps if they face Wisconsin for the title?

Yucky thought...talk about cognitive dissonance!

You could also root for Xavier to beat 'Nova tonight. That'd certainly drop Nova off the one line, given they have 0 wins over consensus top 20 teams. Of course, then you run the risk of ending up out west if Wisconsin wins AND committee rewards UVa for winning ACC regular season and better quality losses.

I think the best scenario for ANY Duke/UVa fan is for both Nova and Wisc to go down. Then it's back to being either in the East/South as a #1 for sure.

freshmanjs
03-14-2015, 03:25 PM
seems like there are 6 possible slots for Duke. i would rank them as follows in order of preference

1. East #1
2. South #1
3. East #2
4. South #2
5. West #1
6. Midwest #2

being 4th overall is actually not good for us. 5th is better as long as the committee doesn't go strictly by distance when determining regional preference.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-14-2015, 03:30 PM
The committee for undervaluing our road wins versus top notch competition... And Winslow for a shameful first half vs. Notre Dame when compared to some of the jaw-dropping plays he made in the 2nd half.

The real problem is whatever "logic" the committee uses changes from year-to-year.

One of the committee reps just appeared on CBS and he said basically that the top 8 teams are set with UK as the overall #1 regardless of tomorrow's result(shocker!).

But he gave no clue as to what order the other 7 are in.

My assumption is that the other 7 teams are:

Villanova
Duke
Virginia
Wisconsin
Arizona
Kansas
Gonzaga

Predict away, but trying to understand the committee's logic is a lost cause.

stals
03-14-2015, 03:54 PM
The real problem is whatever "logic" the committee uses changes from year-to-year.

One of the committee reps just appeared on CBS and he said basically that the top 8 teams are set with UK as the overall #1 regardless of tomorrow's result(shocker!).

But he gave no clue as to what order the other 7 are in.

My assumption is that the other 7 teams are:

Villanova
Duke
Virginia
Wisconsin
Arizona
Kansas
Gonzaga

Predict away, but trying to understand the committee's logic is a lost cause.
_________

I didn't hear the quote, but the top eight might be "set" and the order in which those top eight are seeded not set. Otherwise, why play the rest of the games today and tomorrow?

cptnflash
03-14-2015, 04:16 PM
2 sides to a coin. If you bring your a game ( us v nc state a few days ago) then the early opponent...15 or 16 doesn't matter

BUT seeding does matter some as noted above plus look at it this way. Seeding reflects how good WE are, not just do we play a 15 or 16. Is the best 16 really difft from the worst 15? No. Then why do 15s win on occasion and 16s never do (yet)?? Because 1 seeds don't have the flaws that 2 seeds do. UK isn't susceptible to a low seed. Duke w Hood and Parker ? Defensive flaws that had us beat teams like Vermont by 2. Not sure if I articulated that well but the 1 v 2 debate reflects our team as much as the concern over what a 16 seed brings vs a 15. Jay will, boozer, dunleavy? One seed. No concerns regardless of who the first opponent is

Actually, there is usually a much bigger difference in quality between 15 and 16 seeds than there is between 1 and 2 seeds. It's because the 15/16 seeds are all automatic qualifiers from the weakest conferences in D1, so the difference between them becomes a function of league strength (which can vary a lot at that level) and conference tournament upsets (which is where the really bad 16 seeds usually come from). Meanwhile, 1 and 2 seeds are a combination of automatic qualifiers and at large teams, so no matter what happens in conference tournaments (and even allowing for mistakes by the committee), you're generally looking at top 10 teams with a fairly tight quality distribution.

Uniquely among all tournament participants, 16 seeds are typically below average D1 teams - their average KenPom rank over the past six years is 188 out of roughly 350 total teams. The average 15 seed rank is 55 spots higher at 133, and 3 of them have been in the top 100 (including the one we were unfortunate enough to play in 2012, when Lehigh was #74).

I agree that if a 1 or 2 seed plays close to their best (which I assume is what you mean by "A" game), no 15 or 16 seed will beat them. But what about when you don't play your best, like our game against Lehigh a few years ago? If we were a 1 seed that year, and playing a 16 seed from the bottom half of D1 with no future pros on it, I think we would have won anyway, instead of losing by 5. But as a 2 seed, we were playing a top-75 team that was just barely good enough to beat us on an off day.

I think in the end we're going to have to agree to disagree about why there have been 15/2 upsets, but no 16/1 upsets. The data suggest that it has more to do with how bad 16 seeds are than any issues a 2 seed might have. Personally, I think this year's team is better than our 2012 team, so even if we wind up as a #2 seed I don't think we're at meaningful risk of losing in the first round. But I'd still rather have easier opponents all the way through the regional, including in our first game, and the single biggest difference in expected quality of opponent in the entire bracket is between 15 and 16 seeds in the first round.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-14-2015, 04:25 PM
_________

I didn't hear the quote, but the top eight might be "set" and the order in which those top eight are seeded not set. Otherwise, why play the rest of the games today and tomorrow?

That is correct.

According to him, the top 8 are set as to "who" they will be. In what order apparently hasn't been determined yet, with the exception of UK.

DBFAN
03-14-2015, 04:31 PM
I think that with unbalanced schedules that there had to be less weight on Conference play than we have seen in the past. Nobody would think that Duke couldn't have beaten UVA at home either. I don't see how the number 6 team even if they win their tourney could jump up and take the number 2 team 1 seed away. Especially if Duke beat them at their place. It is also important to remember that is only the first loss for Duke since Jan. their body of work speaks volumes. UVA seems to be the only one in real trouble here, even if they won reg season. Because there is a glaring stat, and that is they have lost 2 of their last 3 games. I think the Anderson surgery is starting to take its toll. Not to say he won't get healthy, but right now he isn't

jv001
03-14-2015, 04:48 PM
I think that with unbalanced schedules that there had to be less weight on Conference play than we have seen in the past. Nobody would think that Duke couldn't have beaten UVA at home either. I don't see how the number 6 team even if they win their tourney could jump up and take the number 2 team 1 seed away. Especially if Duke beat them at their place. It is also important to remember that is only the first loss for Duke since Jan. their body of work speaks volumes. UVA seems to be the only one in real trouble here, even if they won reg season. Because there is a glaring stat, and that is they have lost 2 of their last 3 games. I think the Anderson surgery is starting to take its toll. Not to say he won't get healthy, but right now he isn't

Your post along with Mr. Sumner's vote for Duke being a #1 seed has me feeling better. I can just see the committee plotting on how they can put Duke in Kentucky's region. We need that #1 seed. GoDuke!

TexHawk
03-14-2015, 05:00 PM
I think that with unbalanced schedules that there had to be less weight on Conference play than we have seen in the past. Nobody would think that Duke couldn't have beaten UVA at home either. I don't see how the number 6 team even if they win their tourney could jump up and take the number 2 team 1 seed away. Especially if Duke beat them at their place. It is also important to remember that is only the first loss for Duke since Jan. their body of work speaks volumes. UVA seems to be the only one in real trouble here, even if they won reg season. Because there is a glaring stat, and that is they have lost 2 of their last 3 games. I think the Anderson surgery is starting to take its toll. Not to say he won't get healthy, but right now he isn't

Couple things:
1-- The committee *supposedly* dropped the "record in the last 10" component from their process. (Which I hope is true, since until yesterday, KU was only 6-4 in their last 10.) So, if true, losing 2 out of 3 will not affect UVA. I'm a bit skeptical, but they keep saying it.

2-- Doesn't the Big10 Tournament title game throw a wrench in a lot of this? Looks like they tip at 3:30 est, and the Selection Show starts at 6. And it can't be as easy to say "If Wisconsin wins they are a #1 here, if they lose, they're a #2 here", with all of the other chaos that could cause.

-jk
03-14-2015, 05:11 PM
This is the NCAA's own bracket criteria (http://www.ncaa.com/content/di-principles-and-procedures-selection)

-jk

Bluedog
03-14-2015, 05:44 PM
So, if Wisconsin wins the Big Ten tournament but doesn't have to even beat a top 25 team in doing so, is that still equally impressive in the eyes of the committee? I'd think not. The toughest game is against MSU next who is projected as like an 8 seed. I think MSU beating Maryland helps Duke since it prevents Wisconsin from getting another very high quality win. (Of course, would rather they lose the final, which they certainly still could).

DBFAN
03-14-2015, 05:51 PM
Well if the NCAA would just read my petition to get rid of those mega conferences then the whole thing would run a lot smoother

NancyCarol
03-14-2015, 06:00 PM
I think Virginia loses its #1 to wisconsin and we get in by the skin of our teeth as a 1

BlueDevilBrowns
03-14-2015, 06:11 PM
Seth Davis on CBS predicted the committee would choose the last two #1's from either Duke, VA, or Wisconsin.

Hard to put both UVA and Wisc on the top line without Duke when we beat both of them head to head at their buildings nonetheless.

arnie
03-14-2015, 06:28 PM
Seth Davis on CBS predicted the committee would choose the last two #1's from either Duke, VA, or Wisconsin.

Hard to put both UVA and Wisc on the top line without Duke when we beat both of them head to head at their buildings nonetheless.

Now lunardi has UVA as a 2 and Wisconsin as the last 1. If you believe him, I guess we have it wrapped up.

pfrduke
03-14-2015, 06:30 PM
Now lunardi has UVA as a 2 and Wisconsin as the last 1. If you believe him, I guess we have it wrapped up.

Thanks, I needed a good chuckle after last night.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 08:18 PM
Bleacher Report "behind the scenes" article on the Selection / Seeding Process: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2387936-behind-the-scenes-how-the-ncaa-tournament-selection-committee-really-works

Various excerpts from the article that are raising my confidence that Duke will be announced as the South Region's #1 seed tomorrow:

------------
To start, according to one NCAA executive, past seasons have zero impact. You might be hesitant to pick Gonzaga or Wichita State because of how they fared as No. 1 seeds in recent tournaments, but all the committee cares about is evaluating teams on games played this season.
-------------
According to Oklahoma AD Joe Castiglione, in the eyes of most committee members, who you beat is more important than who beat you. There's no cut-and-dried formula for how many bad losses can be canceled out by a great win, but it certainly sounds like a resume with two great wins and four bad losses is better than one with no great wins and no bad losses.
-------------
While some computer numbers take scoring margin into account, it's apparently otherwise not overtly discussed by the selection committee. In the argument over BYU as a bubble team, I noted that the Cougars had not been beaten by more than seven points in the entire season and that several of their losses were decided in overtime. One of the NCAA folks immediately interjected, "What you just said would never actually be discussed."
--------------
Likewise, they said, a conference's overall RPI would never be brought up, nor would where teams finished in their conference standings. Conference record doesn't even appear on the "nitty-gritty sheets" that committee members use for overviews of teams.
---------------
The results of major conference tournaments—particularly the championship games played on Selection Sunday—also aren't nearly as drastic as many want to believe. Worlock said that even if Kentucky had beaten Florida (the No. 1 overall seed) in last year's SEC Championship Game, the Wildcats were still going to be the No. 8 seed in the Midwest Region.
---------------
Worlock mentioned that he monitors the Bracket Matrix (http://bracketmatrix.com/) throughout the week, but no need to fear that any Joe Schmo with a WordPress account might be impacting what the committee does. "It serves as a checks and balances," Worlock said via email. "I don't spend time looking at the individual brackets, but if a team is projecting as a 2 seed on the matrix and the committee has them as a 4, I'd talk about it with Dan Gavitt [VP of men's basketball championships]. The discussion might end there, but it could be something that Dan brings to the chair.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 08:23 PM
I believe this has been posted before, but here is a PDF containing examples of the Team Sheets that the Selection Committee are looking at when they're selecting and seeding:

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/MBB_RPI/MBBTeam.pdf

Again, the format of these sheets boosts my confidence in Duke becoming the South #1 seed.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 08:27 PM
With all that said, for my own mental health, I'm just going to assume Duke will be the #1 seed in the West and be pleasantly surprised if that doesn't turn out to be the case.

jhmoss1812
03-14-2015, 08:38 PM
Now lunardi has UVA as a 2 and Wisconsin as the last 1. If you believe him, I guess we have it wrapped up.

No surprise. Gotta love it when you when you go 29-3 in the ACC with losses to Duke, @Louisville and UNC by a combined 12 points and that doesn't get you a 1-seed. We'll be fine as a 2-seed.

Troublemaker
03-14-2015, 08:43 PM
No surprise. Gotta love it when you when you go 29-3 in the ACC with losses to Duke, @Louisville and UNC by a combined 12 points and that doesn't get you a 1-seed. We'll be fine as a 2-seed.

Yeah, 2-seed in the East is a perfectly fine outcome for either UVA or Duke. If it were offered right now, I'd accept to remove the uncertainty of worse outcomes -- #2 Midwest, #1 West

CatDevil
03-14-2015, 08:57 PM
So... some of you who feel Wisconsin will be ranked ahead of us if they win the BIG whatever tourney...does that mean I need to pull for the Twerps if they face Wisconsin for the title?

Yucky thought...talk about cognitive dissonance!

At least we don't have to worry about that! Maryland Blew it big time, so at least Michigan State will get a shot at Wisconsin. Really glad MD doesn't land a title their first year in the Big 10. Hope Duke lands in the south. Friday will be a good day to play hooky from school/work and hit the games.

GO Duke!!!

OldPhiKap
03-14-2015, 09:47 PM
I'm hearing that the Chic-fil-A Bowl is planning to jump over Duke and take Miami instead.

Wait, wrong paranoid train of thought. Sorry.

We should be a #1 over Wisconsin (we beat them there) and UVa (same, plus we we're ranked higher at the time of our dual losses, plus there is a big question make about Anderson).

I am in the school of thought that there is little practical difference between 1 and 2 anyway, but I think we are one of the four top draws.

jv001
03-14-2015, 09:58 PM
I'm hearing that the Chic-fil-A Bowl is planning to jump over Duke and take Miami instead.

Wait, wrong paranoid train of thought. Sorry.

We should be a #1 over Wisconsin (we beat them there) and UVa (same, plus we we're ranked higher at the time of our dual losses, plus there is a big question make about Anderson).

I am in the school of thought that there is little practical difference between 1 and 2 anyway, but I think we are one of the four top draws.

I agree about being a 1 seed over both Wisconsin and Virginia. The main reason for being a 1 seed is not having a chance for the committee to put us in Kentucky's region. Other wise, 2nd seed not much different than a 1 seed. We have to win 6 games to win the Championship. GoDuke!

CameronBornAndBred
03-14-2015, 10:07 PM
I agree about being a 1 seed over both Wisconsin and Virginia. The main reason for being a 1 seed is not having a chance for the committee to put us in Kentucky's region. Other wise, 2nd seed not much different than a 1 seed. We have to win 6 games to win the Championship. GoDuke!
I've seen a couple posts in here about not being in Kentucky's region, and I don't get it. If you are DWB, you do NOT want to be anywhere near UCONN if you want to go to the Final Four, but that is because unless Geno's crew all gets the flu, there is a 99.9% chance that will be our last game of the season. The men are a different story all together.
I WANT to play Kentucky, and I don't care if it's in the Final Four or if it's in a regional. I have confidence that our team can win. That doesn't mean that we will win, but I know we can, and I want the chance to prove it. For us to be champions, we'll likely either have to beat UK or the team that beat UK. It doesn't matter to me if we do it sooner than later.
Anyways, if we are a 2 seed, I find it very unlikely we'll be put in the same region.

subzero02
03-14-2015, 10:28 PM
If Arizona wins tonight and Wisconsin loses tomorrow, there could be a plethora of wildcats amongst the 1 seeds... 3 wildcats and the Blue Devils... That works.

InSpades
03-14-2015, 10:52 PM
I think the #1 seeds should be... UK, 'Nova, Duke and UVA.

I think the #1 seeds will be UK, 'Nova, Duke and Wisconsin.

If Wisconsin loses to MSU tomorrow then I think UVA might be back in for the 4th #1.

dukelifer
03-14-2015, 10:58 PM
I think the #1 seeds should be... UK, 'Nova, Duke and UVA.

I think the #1 seeds will be UK, 'Nova, Duke and Wisconsin.

If Wisconsin loses to MSU tomorrow then I think UVA might be back in for the 4th #1.

I think tomorrow's game will not matter for them. They made the finals - UVa did not.

OldPhiKap
03-14-2015, 11:00 PM
I think tomorrow's game will not matter for them. They made the finals - UVa did not.

Yup. Even though it is apples and oranges, UVa fell short and there are real question marks as Anderson works his way back. Plus, politics of spreading the conference and regional love, as opposed to two ACC teams and three southeastern top seeds.

Not saying it's right, but it's a factor.

jhmoss1812
03-14-2015, 11:03 PM
I think tomorrow's game will not matter for them. They made the finals - UVa did not.

Wisconsin played Purdue in the semis. UVA played UNC. A lot easier for Wisconsin to make the finals than it was for UVA. Wisconsin should drop if they don't win the B1G. If they win the B1G, they deserve the 1 seed. But I think tomorrow's game should matter. Just my opinion though. It may not matter at all. I think UVA is a 2 seed because of the Anderson injury.

dukelifer
03-14-2015, 11:20 PM
Wisconsin played Purdue in the semis. UVA played UNC. A lot easier for Wisconsin to make the finals than it was for UVA. Wisconsin should drop if they don't win the B1G. If they win the B1G, they deserve the 1 seed. But I think tomorrow's game should matter. Just my opinion though. It may not matter at all. I think UVA is a 2 seed because of the Anderson injury.

They won the big 10 regular season and are on a 5 game winning streak. . UVa stumbled down the stretch. Wisconsin is on the top line.

Bluedog
03-15-2015, 12:04 AM
They won the big 10 regular season and are on a 5 game winning streak. . UVa stumbled down the stretch. Wisconsin is on the top line.

I think that's preferable to UVa anyways. They'd rather be the two opposite Nova in the East than the 1 with Zona as their two out West. Unless the committee sends them to Cleveland (with UK) as I think it's technically a bit closer than Syracuse...

jhmoss1812
03-15-2015, 12:31 AM
They won the big 10 regular season and are on a 5 game winning streak. . UVa stumbled down the stretch. Wisconsin is on the top line.

That's fine. They won their league and will probably win their conference tournament. And that's why they'll get a 1-seed and deservedly so. But you can't convince me that Wisconsin has a better resume than UVA when you look at quality wins vs. quality losses.

Wisconsin is 3-2 vs. the RPI Top 25 and has only one win against the RPI top 20 (Oklahoma). Wisconsin didn't beat a single top 25 team on the road.

UVA is 5-3 vs. the RPI top 25 with all 5 wins vs. the RPI top 20 (with 4 of them on the road - ND, UNC, VCU, MD).

Both UVA and Wisconsin have 3 losses. UVA lost to RPI 4 (Duke), 11 (UNC) and 20 (Louisville). Wisconsin lost to RPI 4 (Duke), 9 (Maryland), and 175 (Rutgers). Even without Kaminsky and Jackson, that's a horrible loss.

If you want to extrapolate it out even further, UVA was 8-3 vs. top 50 (Wisconsin was 8-2). UVA was 14-3 vs. top 100 (Wisky was 17-2).

The only thing I see going for Wisconsin is more top 100 wins and winners of their conference. The B1G is much softer than the ACC this year. I mean Wisconsin played Purdue in the semis and Michigan State in the finals. Neither of those teams are ranked. I have a lot more confidence that UVA would win the B1G than I do Wisconsin winning the ACC tournament.

In the end, Wisconsin will be a 1-seed but show me where Wisconsin has better wins or better losses than UVA does.

jhmoss1812
03-15-2015, 12:35 AM
I think that's preferable to UVa anyways. They'd rather be the two opposite Nova in the East than the 1 with Zona as their two out West. Unless the committee sends them to Cleveland (with UK) as I think it's technically a bit closer than Syracuse...

You're right. I would rather be a 2 in the East than a 1 in the West. But it's possible that we get a 2 in the Midwest and that would be pretty unfortunate.

JasonEvans
03-15-2015, 09:09 AM
You're right. I would rather be a 2 in the East than a 1 in the West. But it's possible that we get a 2 in the Midwest and that would be pretty unfortunate.

Sigh... as I have said numerous times, the only way Duke is #2 in the Midwest is if you think we are the #7 overall seed... and the #5 and #6 seeds are both South/East teams. If we are the #5 or #6, our geographic preference would put us in the South or East first. So give me a scenario that puts Duke in the Midwest. I've looked and there is no scenario that follows NCAA seeding criteria to put us in the MW. I'm not saying it is unlikely, I'm saying THERE IS NO SCENARIO THAT PUTS US IN THE MIDWEST.

-Jason "I'm telling you, zero percent chance we are Kentucky's #2 seed in the Midwest... but if they put Kentucky in the South, all bets are off" Evans

CDu
03-15-2015, 09:16 AM
Sigh... as I have said numerous times, the only way Duke is #2 in the Midwest is if you think we are the #7 overall seed... and the #5 and #6 seeds are both South/East teams. If we are the #5 or #6, our geographic preference would put us in the South or East first. So give me a scenario that puts Duke in the Midwest. I've looked and there is no scenario that follows NCAA seeding criteria to put us in the MW. I'm not saying it is unlikely, I'm saying THERE IS NO SCENARIO THAT PUTS US IN THE MIDWEST.

-Jason "I'm telling you, zero percent chance we are Kentucky's #2 seed in the Midwest... but if they put Kentucky in the South, all bets are off" Evans

The post you are replying to is from a UVa fan, not a Duke fan. The "we" referenced UVa not Duke. Now, that same logic in your post might apply to UVa as it does Duke, but the post was probably not worthy of a sigh.

freshmanjs
03-15-2015, 09:44 AM
Sigh... as I have said numerous times, the only way Duke is #2 in the Midwest is if you think we are the #7 overall seed... and the #5 and #6 seeds are both South/East teams. If we are the #5 or #6, our geographic preference would put us in the South or East first. So give me a scenario that puts Duke in the Midwest. I've looked and there is no scenario that follows NCAA seeding criteria to put us in the MW. I'm not saying it is unlikely, I'm saying THERE IS NO SCENARIO THAT PUTS US IN THE MIDWEST.

-Jason "I'm telling you, zero percent chance we are Kentucky's #2 seed in the Midwest... but if they put Kentucky in the South, all bets are off" Evans

if they use distance to determine geo preference, then we would be #2 in the midwest as #5 overall.

budwom
03-15-2015, 10:22 AM
Yeah, I would not be surprised to see Wisconsin get a 1 seed if they win today, but clearly Anderson is damaged goods, and UVA should drop from
the one line before Duke.

Duvall
03-15-2015, 10:58 AM
Sigh... as I have said numerous times, the only way Duke is #2 in the Midwest is if you think we are the #7 overall seed... and the #5 and #6 seeds are both South/East teams. If we are the #5 or #6, our geographic preference would put us in the South or East first. So give me a scenario that puts Duke in the Midwest. I've looked and there is no scenario that follows NCAA seeding criteria to put us in the MW. I'm not saying it is unlikely, I'm saying THERE IS NO SCENARIO THAT PUTS US IN THE MIDWEST.

-Jason "I'm telling you, zero percent chance we are Kentucky's #2 seed in the Midwest... but if they put Kentucky in the South, all bets are off" Evans

1) Saying it numerous times won't make Cleveland farther than Syracuse or Houston; and
2) No scenario, no matter how inept or insane, is impossible when Joe Alleva is part of the decisionmaking.

Udaman
03-15-2015, 11:23 AM
All of you saying there's no real difference between a 1 and 2 are nuts. It's a huge difference. Especially this year. We all know no 16 has won and several 15s have. So the 1 gives you a bye basically. Then the 7s are much better than the 8/9s and then you likely have to play a 3 and the 3's this year are really good (as they are most years). Throw in that as a 2 if there are upsets they are also seeded higher and any way you slice it the 2 is a tougher road to the final four than a 1.

I think Duke gets the last 1 seed but I'm certainly nervous about it. They could definitely move Duke and UVA to the 3 seeds behind Wisconsin and Arizona. Don't think it will happen because of our wins over Wisconsin and Virginia. But nervous.

rsvman
03-15-2015, 11:24 AM
The speculation is kinda fun and I get why we do it, but three thoughts:

1) Seeding and placement is completely out of our hands, and the guys who do it often do surprising things.
2) If we play like we played against NC State in the ACCT, it won't matter where we get placed, we can beat anybody.
3) If we play like we played in the first 24 minutes against Notre Dame, it won't matter where we get placed, we can lose to anybody.


Having said all that, I'll join in the speculation. I think we'll end up as a 1 seed in the South.

freshmanjs
03-15-2015, 11:44 AM
I think Duke gets the last 1 seed but I'm certainly nervous about it.

really hope not. that would put us in the west -- not a good outcome. we would be better off as #5 overall than #4.

i epxect that we will actually be #3 overall and placed as #1 in the South

NYBri
03-15-2015, 12:07 PM
Number 1, in the South with the candlestick and Colonel Mustard.

Newton_14
03-15-2015, 12:35 PM
Number 1, in the South with the candlestick and Colonel Mustard.
Based on the NCAA's selection criteria, we should be the 1 seed in the South. I personally feel we earned a 1 seed with body of work, and quality wins.

It will be interesting to see where they put us, but I admit I will be wringing my hands for the next 5 and a half hours.

subzero02
03-15-2015, 12:54 PM
Based on the NCAA's selection criteria, we should be the 1 seed in the South. I personally feel we earned a 1 seed with body of work, and quality wins.

It will be interesting to see where they put us, but I admit I will be wringing my hands for the next 5 and a half hours.

Yeah... At least they cut to the chase at the beginning of the show and reveal the 1 seeds first. Until then... Go VCU...and CBS... Please don't show any more video of Frank Kaminsky "dancing".

jhmoss1812
03-15-2015, 01:53 PM
I am fully convinced that Duke will be a 1-seed in the South. You guys have earned it. I could make a case for UVA being a 1-seed but it won't matter. It's not happening and we're not playing like a 1-seed right now anyway. This is how the seedings should be in my estimation.

East: Nova/UVA
South: Duke/Kansas
Midwest: Kentucky/Gonzaga
West: Wisconsin/Arizona

The interesting question is what happens if Wisconsin loses today? I think they lose the 1-seed but do they just switch Wisconsin and Arizona? Or does UVA move up?

mr. synellinden
03-15-2015, 02:07 PM
I am fully convinced that Duke will be a 1-seed in the South. You guys have earned it. I could make a case for UVA being a 1-seed but it won't matter. It's not happening and we're not playing like a 1-seed right now anyway. This is how the seedings should be in my estimation.

East: Nova/UVA
South: Duke/Kansas
Midwest: Kentucky/Gonzaga
West: Wisconsin/Arizona

The interesting question is what happens if Wisconsin loses today? I think they lose the 1-seed but do they just switch Wisconsin and Arizona? Or does UVA move up?

I think this is spot on. But if Wisconsin loses today, I think it's possible Arizona goes to 1 in the west. Wisconsin goes to 2 in the Midwest and Gonzaga goes to 2 in the west.

I also think UVA could be a 1 in the west with Arizona as the 2. Then move Wisconsin to 2 in the east and Gonzaga to the 2 in the Midwest. I wouldn't mind having Gonzaga in Kentucky's region because I think they match up as well as anyone with Kentucky. I'd also like to see Notre Dame or UNC take s shot at Kentucky before the final four.

dukelifer
03-15-2015, 02:09 PM
That's fine. They won their league and will probably win their conference tournament. And that's why they'll get a 1-seed and deservedly so. But you can't convince me that Wisconsin has a better resume than UVA when you look at quality wins vs. quality losses.

Wisconsin is 3-2 vs. the RPI Top 25 and has only one win against the RPI top 20 (Oklahoma). Wisconsin didn't beat a single top 25 team on the road.

UVA is 5-3 vs. the RPI top 25 with all 5 wins vs. the RPI top 20 (with 4 of them on the road - ND, UNC, VCU, MD).

Both UVA and Wisconsin have 3 losses. UVA lost to RPI 4 (Duke), 11 (UNC) and 20 (Louisville). Wisconsin lost to RPI 4 (Duke), 9 (Maryland), and 175 (Rutgers). Even without Kaminsky and Jackson, that's a horrible loss.

If you want to extrapolate it out even further, UVA was 8-3 vs. top 50 (Wisconsin was 8-2). UVA was 14-3 vs. top 100 (Wisky was 17-2).

The only thing I see going for Wisconsin is more top 100 wins and winners of their conference. The B1G is much softer than the ACC this year. I mean Wisconsin played Purdue in the semis and Michigan State in the finals. Neither of those teams are ranked. I have a lot more confidence that UVA would win the B1G than I do Wisconsin winning the ACC tournament.

In the end, Wisconsin will be a 1-seed but show me where Wisconsin has better wins or better losses than UVA does.
They probably don't but they are playing better right now. That probably matters in the end. If UVa was healthy they likely are the second best 1 seed and have another ACC tourney title. But their current state despite a very good resume will be a factor in seeding and I would be shocked if the committee has not already made the decision by now to give Wisconsin a 1 seed.

Les Grossman
03-15-2015, 04:11 PM
head says 2 East

gurufrisbee
03-15-2015, 04:44 PM
The correct thing would be that if Wisconsin loses Virginia gets the 1 seed, because I'm still far from convinced that Virginia doesn't deserve a 1 seed more than them anyways. They WON the regular season title for the strongest conference there is.

Of the top eight teams the only ones I feel like are really threats if Duke is playing well are Kentucky, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Gonzaga. It doesn't seem like there is a chance Nova is in our same bracket. I'm really hoping we get Kansas or Arizona as the two seed - although with Iowa St and Notre Dame out there the three seeds have some real worry to them too. Man if we could get Kansas-Maryland as the 2-3 and then get to the elite eight against a 6 or 7 seed, that would be nice.