WBB: Duke 64, Mississippi State 56

[dudog84]

Let's go ladies!!!

I have a quibble. Actually more than a quibble, though I'm sure nobody cares much about my quibbles.

Has anyone else noticed that the 5 seed in our region is ranked #12?

The 5 seeds in the other regions are Ohio State (ranked #23), Texas (not ranked and only got 6 votes...most galling, Cal is the 4 seed here and is ranked #24), and Oklahoma (not ranked and didn't even get a single vote).

You gotta play who you gotta play, but this is ridiculous. Don't get me started on UNC getting the Greensboro region when we swept them.

[uh_no]

Let's go ladies!!!

I have a quibble. Actually more than a quibble, though I'm sure nobody cares much about my quibbles.

Has anyone else noticed that the 5 seed in our region is ranked #12?

The 5 seeds in the other regions are Ohio State (ranked #23), Texas (not ranked and only got 6 votes...most galling, Cal is the 4 seed here and is ranked #24), and Oklahoma (not ranked and didn't even get a single vote).

You gotta play who you gotta play, but this is ridiculous. Don't get me started on UNC getting the Greensboro region when we swept them.

and despite that, unc still had a 3 games better record. that's why they're there and we're not. the season is more than the 2 h2h games we played.

Further, the national rankings are irrelevant for seeding purposes. all that matters is the committee's 1-64 ranking, which presumably had them much lower than #12.

Of all the years to complain about getting screwed, with the performance this team put on most of the season, THIS isn't one of them. You had a case when we were playing MSU in michigan, but not this year.

[throatybeard]

Mississippi State contacts are telling me that if this game had been in Starkville, the attendance would be much higher. They've convinced me.

[Kedsy]

Mississippi State contacts are telling me that if this game had been in Starkville, the attendance would be much higher. They've convinced me.

It's tough when the men's team is playing in Charlotte starting a few minutes after this game ends. Just bad luck for attendance purposes.

[dudog84]

and despite that, unc still had a 3 games better record. that's why they're there and we're not. the season is more than the 2 h2h games we played.

Further, the national rankings are irrelevant for seeding purposes. all that matters is the committee's 1-64 ranking, which presumably had them much lower than #12.

Of all the years to complain about getting screwed, with the performance this team put on most of the season, THIS isn't one of them. You had a case when we were playing MSU in michigan, but not this year.

Nonsense. You don't like the AP, maybe you think coaches know something about the game. Mississippi State #14, Ohio State #23, Texas unranked (19 votes), Oklahoma unranked (0 votes). It's not even close to being comparable. But go ahead and defend the committee.

As for this team's performance, I'm not unhappy with what they've accomplished. Start the season without a true point guard. Lose two top-10 recruits to injury (Lynee and Oderah) as well as Sierra. One bad loss, to Boston College. Losses to #7 Texas A&M and #12 Nebraska without Elizabeth, #1 South Carolina, #2 UConn, #4 Notre Dame, #2 Notre Dame. And Florida State, who ended up #7. Wins against #8 Kentucky, #21 Syracuse, #12 UNC, #8 Louisville, #15 UNC. That's a heckuva schedule.

[_Gary]

Right now our girls are getting hosed by the refs. Very one-sided on the physicality of things. When MS gets physical, no call. But let Elizabeth Williams do the exact same thing and she gets whistled. Not cool right now.

[_Gary]

Nice to see Coach P check on Cooper after she went down hard and was crying out loud in pain. :rolleyes:

[_Gary]

The ladies have really picked up the "D" and are looking great right now. Just keep it up for 7 more minutes and we're advancing!

[dukelifer]

The ladies have really picked up the "D" and are looking great right now. Just keep it up for 7 more minutes and we're advancing!

Need to keep the focus

[dukelifer]

Need to keep the focus

Bricking free throws big time -

[dukelifer]

Bricking free throws big time -

Controversial call there- wow

[dukelifer]

Controversial call there- wow

Duke doing everything to give this game away.

[SCMatt33]

Refs definitely missed the call. Gave Miss St some makeup calls, but too late.

[killerleft]

Controversial call there- wow

Duke certainly got all the call on that one!

How do such intelligent young women make such boneheaded plays?

[dukelifer]

Duke certainly got all the call on that one!

How do such intelligent young women make such boneheaded plays?

Women advancing with a horrible performance from the line. I would say this team has done very well this season given all the losses. Still got a chance to advance.

[OZ]

How do such intelligent young women make such boneheaded plays?

I have noticed that intelligent young men often do the same thing.

[_Gary]

Tough game to watch going down the stretch. But for the really bad call with a minute left, we might have really been in trouble since we couldn't hit free throws for anything. That was just brutal. If you add in the potential free throws that we didn't even get to shoot because of the front-end misses in the bonus, it would have probably been even that much worse.

But having said all that - survive and advance!

[killerleft]

Sweet Sixteen! Great run to get that big lead. Whatever happened after was horrible, capped by the two fouls by our seniors close to the end. Free throw shooting was a breath of landfill stench;). Becca was lucky the ref called the body-up foul prior to her stupid arm-flail push that could still have been called a flagrant foul. Survive and advance, anyone?

Great to see Kendall come back! Onward!!

[killerleft]

I have noticed that intelligent young men often do the same thing.

To that extent? Sure, the odds say you must be correct. If you leave out the 'often' part.

[dukelifer]

Sweet Sixteen! Great run to get that big lead. Whatever happened after was horrible, capped by the two fouls by our seniors close to the end. Free throw shooting was a breath of landfill stench;). Becca was lucky the ref called the body-up foul prior to her stupid arm-flail push that could still have been called a flagrant foul. Survive and advance, anyone?

Great to see Kendall come back! Onward!!

That play was the difference. Duke was bricking free throws and that call would have allowed them to cut it to 4 or 3. Instead the coach get a T- Becca hits 3 of 4 and that was the separation needed. Very lucky.

[OZ]

To that extent? Sure, the odds say you must be correct. If you leave out the 'often' part.



Well, I could mention a ninja leg kick on a drive or a leg grab after a floor scramble...but, I won't.

[killerleft]

Well, I could mention a ninja leg kick on a drive or a leg grab after a floor scramble...but, I won't.

I see the issue. You're talking one play, I'm talking a whole slew of 'em.

[wandalee]

The coaching staff made a good adjustment at the half to guard M. State's guards. It helped cut down on their 3 pointers in the 2nd.

In the last 10 minutes we cut down on the turnovers and played well. We need that team for the next game. We just have to make FTs!

[Henderson]

Well, I could mention a ninja leg kick on a drive or a leg grab after a floor scramble...but, I won't.

Thanks for the forbearance.

[killerleft]

The coaching staff made a good adjustment at the half to guard M. State's guards. It helped cut down on their 3 pointers in the 2nd.

In the last 10 minutes we cut down on the turnovers and played well. We need that team for the next game. We just have to make FTs!

I think I read that we only had 3 turnovers in the second half? Excellent! Can that be right?

[Indoor66]

I think I read that we only had 3 turnovers in the second half? Excellent! Can that be right?

Must be a coaching error.... :mad::cool:

[jimsumner]

and despite that, unc still had a 3 games better record. that's why they're there and we're not. the season is more than the 2 h2h games we played.

Further, the national rankings are irrelevant for seeding purposes. all that matters is the committee's 1-64 ranking, which presumably had them much lower than #12.

Of all the years to complain about getting screwed, with the performance this team put on most of the season, THIS isn't one of them. You had a case when we were playing MSU in michigan, but not this year.

Duke had a better record in the ACC and a better RPI in large part because Duke's SOS was 4th in the NCAA, Carolina's 9th. So thinking that Duke deserved Greensboro is based on more than just h2h.

[uh_no]

Duke had a better record in the ACC and a better RPI in large part because Duke's SOS was 4th in the NCAA, Carolina's 9th. So thinking that Duke deserved Greensboro is based on more than just h2h.

That's fair, a much better argument than OP made.

[dudog84]

That's fair, a much better argument than OP made.

Well, the OP didn’t make an argument. It was a throwaway line (“Don’t get me started…”). I felt it was more important to address your assertion that the #12 team in the country was no better than 2 unranked teams.

Re UNC, overall record is incredibly simplistic. Any ACC observer knows that Duke was stronger in ACC play than UNC, although I appreciate Mr. Sumner pointing it out. So for argument’s sake, let me also point out that Duke played #1 seeds four times, UNC once. UNC played only two significant out-of-conference teams (one of whom has already lost to an 11 seed), both at home. Further, Duke lost by 6 points in the ACC Tournament semifinals to the #2 team in the country. UNC lost in the quarterfinals.

Better?

[aswewere]

I think I read that we only had 3 turnovers in the second half? Excellent! Can that be right?

They averaged creating 22 turnovers a game we had ONLY 17 Wow. This was probably the biggest win
for our program this year for lots of reasons. With two freshman that would probably be ranked in the top
20 players in the nation around for 3 more years lets enjoy. --- Peace

[Kedsy]

With two freshman that would probably be ranked in the top 20 players in the nation around for 3 more years lets enjoy. --- Peace

Agreed. If Becca and Azurá continue to develop and next year's freshmen guards live up to the hype and our current crop of five 6'3/6'4 frontcourt players can stay healthy, Duke will be a formidable force for the next several years.

[Mike Corey]

Great win. Survive and advance.

Let's keep it going.

[Duvall]

UNC envies Duke's late-game execution. This is impressive.

[aswewere]

We made the New York Times, they must be tired of writing about the snow.

Link http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/sports/ncaabasketball/dukes-arena-hasnt-been-as-crazy-lately-for-the-womens-team.html?emc=edit_tnt_20150323&nlid=17640090&tntemail0=y&_r=0

[dudog84]

Let's hear it for ACC women! Also got 5 teams in the Sweet 16, no other conference got more than 2.

Duke plays Maryland (our old friend) on Saturday, time TBD.

[burnspbesq]

Let's hear it for ACC women! Also got 5 teams in the Sweet 16, no other conference got more than 2.

Duke plays Maryland (our old friend) on Saturday, time TBD.

Apparently the presence of Justices Kagan and Sotomayor (both Princeton grads) jinxed the Tigers.

[dudog84]

Duke-Maryland at 4:30 Saturday on ESPN. Hooray, no more watching jumpy ESPN3 images on my computer screen.

Since Maryland is no longer in the ACC, I know nothing about them. Anyone have any insight?

Mods, time for this to go in a new thread?

[AIM4excellence]

Duke had a better record in the ACC and a better RPI in large part because Duke's SOS was 4th in the NCAA, Carolina's 9th. So thinking that Duke deserved Greensboro is based on more than just h2h.

The placement of Duke in Spokane was to put Duke with a lower #1 seed than S. Carolina in Greensboro. UNC, being considered lower than Duke due to head to head and strength of schedule, was placed with the tougher #1 seed. There are more UNC fans in the state than Duke fans, so the idea of larger turnout for Carolina was a bonus to putting them in Greensboro. Duke actually got the easier bracket.

[jimsumner]

The placement of Duke in Spokane was to put Duke with a lower #1 seed than S. Carolina in Greensboro. UNC, being considered lower than Duke due to head to head and strength of schedule, was placed with the tougher #1 seed. There are more UNC fans in the state than Duke fans, so the idea of larger turnout for Carolina was a bonus to putting them in Greensboro. Duke actually got the easier bracket.

I suspect that your secondary reason may have been more of a primary reason.

[AIM4excellence]

I suspect that your secondary reason may have been more of a primary reason.

Do you agree that S.Carolina was rated the 2nd/3rd best #1 seed, with Maryland the 4th? If so, it does make sense (competition wise) to put the higher rated #4 Duke with the lower rated Maryland, with the lower #4 seed UNC getting the higher rated #1 S.Carolina. Of course they wanted one of Duke or UNC in Greensboro as they wanted more tushes in the seats, but a good argument can be made that this choice was based on S curve rather than attendance.

[jimsumner]

Do you agree that S.Carolina was rated the 2nd/3rd best #1 seed, with Maryland the 4th? If so, it does make sense (competition wise) to put the higher rated #4 Duke with the lower rated Maryland, with the lower #4 seed UNC getting the higher rated #1 S.Carolina. Of course they wanted one of Duke or UNC in Greensboro as they wanted more tushes in the seats, but a good argument can be made that this choice was based on S curve rather than attendance.

Let me put it this way; Duke wanted to be in Greensboro.

[AIM4excellence]

Let me put it this way; Duke wanted to be in Greensboro.

So, do you think the dwindling attendance at DWB games impacted their decision? Duke still draws more than UNC women in Chapel Hill. I do think UNC draws more to Greensboro based on the eye test from many, many years going to ACC tourney in G'boro.

[dudog84]

I think I found out why Duke is in Spokane and UNC is in Greensboro. It has nothing to do with rankings, schedule, RPI, or fan bases. It’s all about matchups.

According to this article, UNC beat South Carolina in the Sweet 16 last year. And though we usually think about Duke-Maryland through the men’s rivalry, there were plenty of hot games on the women’s side. Outside of any game where one of our girls went down to injury, the worst game I ever watched was the National Championship in 2006. Last second 3 by Maryland to tie the game and then we lost in overtime.

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/tournament/2015/story/_/id/12548985/first-impressions-sweet-16

All that said, I’m warming to us playing in Spokane. Yes, I think Maryland is probably the weaker #1 seed though I don’t know much about either team. And at least they’re not a west coast team so there’s no home court advantage (Gonzaga gets that). We both have to travel the same distance.

Plus I’m not sure South Carolina wouldn’t have the fan advantage on us in Greensboro. They’re not distracted by a men’s team in Columbia :), so they've got pretty good fan support all year. Though we were disadvantaged by the scheduling of the men’s games, the crowds in Cameron were disappointing last weekend. And I still remember South Carolina’s fans being every bit as loud as ours in December. I doubt I’ll watch UNC-USC (though I might check in to test my theory), but if I were a betting man I’d put money on South Carolina’s fans being louder than UNC’s in Greensboro.

[uh_no]

I think I found out why Duke is in Spokane and UNC is in Greensboro. It has nothing to do with rankings, schedule, RPI, or fan bases. It’s all about matchups.

According to this article, UNC beat South Carolina in the Sweet 16 last year. And though we usually think about Duke-Maryland through the men’s rivalry, there were plenty of hot games on the women’s side. Outside of any game where one of our girls went down to injury, the worst game I ever watched was the National Championship in 2006. Last second 3 by Maryland to tie the game and then we lost in overtime.

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/tournament/2015/story/_/id/12548985/first-impressions-sweet-16

All that said, I’m warming to us playing in Spokane. Yes, I think Maryland is probably the weaker #1 seed though I don’t know much about either team. And at least they’re not a west coast team so there’s no home court advantage (Gonzaga gets that). We both have to travel the same distance.

Plus I’m not sure South Carolina wouldn’t have the fan advantage on us in Greensboro. They’re not distracted by a men’s team in Columbia :), so they've got pretty good fan support all year. Though we were disadvantaged by the scheduling of the men’s games, the crowds in Cameron were disappointing last weekend. And I still remember South Carolina’s fans being every bit as loud as ours in December. I doubt I’ll watch UNC-USC (though I might check in to test my theory), but if I were a betting man I’d put money on South Carolina’s fans being louder than UNC’s in Greensboro.
I think you've thought more about this than the committee thought about the entire bracket combined. The committee imo, came up with their rankings 1-64, and slotted then into the bracket the first way that fit.

[AIM4excellence]

I think you've thought more about this than the committee thought about the entire bracket combined. The committee imo, came up with their rankings 1-64, and slotted then into the bracket the first way that fit.

So, we're back to the S-curve - the way the tournament is "supposed to be" bracketed.

[dudog84]

I think you've thought more about this than the committee thought about the entire bracket combined. The committee imo, came up with their rankings 1-64, and slotted then into the bracket the first way that fit.

No, I just choose to read a little bit before posting any stray thought that pops into my head. Groundbreaking, I'll admit.

To think the committee doesn’t consider matchups and storylines when they’re putting together this entertainment is naïve.

[uh_no]

No, I just choose to read a little bit before posting any stray thought that pops into my head. Groundbreaking, I'll admit.

To think the committee doesn’t consider matchups and storylines when they’re putting together this entertainment is naïve.

perhaps you're not familiar with the birthday paradox?

With a relatively small set of items, it's highly likely that 2 of them have something in common.

You have 64 teams. Put them in 32 first round matchups, with 64 potential second round mathups....there are BOUND to be "matchups and storylines" even if you randomly selected the bracket...

Say each team in the tournament has something in common with just ONE other team (absurdly small estimate). The probability of two teams with something in common meeting in the first round is

1-(63/64)^32...or something like 40%

Lets take a more realistic estimate...that teams have something in common with, say, 5 other teams (it can be anything, player transferred, some coach relationship between the schools, similar geography, they played eachother sometime in the past 20 years and it was a big game)

1-(59/64)^32...that's something like 93% chance that there is some first round "storyline"...and that's just the FIRST ROUND!

If you want to toss in the second round it's something like (and the math is approximate here....i'd need to spend some time to come up with the exact numbers...but we're looking for a ballpark)

1-(59/64)^128...or 99.997% chance that there will be some "storyline" in the first two rounds...

So you say it's "naive" to think that the committee doesn't consider matchups when a randomly generated bracket is virtually assured to have "storylines" anyway?

I'll take my naive math. You can take your baseless assertions.

[duke09hms]

perhaps you're not familiar with the birthday paradox?

With a relatively small set of items, it's highly likely that 2 of them have something in common.

You have 64 teams. Put them in 32 first round matchups, with 64 potential second round mathups....there are bound to be "matchups and storylines" even if you randomly selected the bracket...

Say each team in the tournament has something in common with just one other team (absurdly small estimate). The probability of two teams with something in common meeting in the first round is

1-(63/64)^32...or something like 40%

lets take a more realistic estimate...that teams have something in common with, say, 5 other teams (it can be anything, player transferred, some coach relationship between the schools, similar geography, they played eachother sometime in the past 20 years and it was a big game)

1-(59/64)^32...that's something like 93% chance that there is some first round "storyline"...and that's just the first round!

If you want to toss in the second round it's something like (and the math is approximate here....i'd need to spend some time to come up with the exact numbers...but we're looking for a ballpark)

1-(59/64)^128...or 99.997% chance that there will be some "storyline" in the first two rounds...

So you say it's "naive" to think that the committee doesn't consider matchups when a randomly generated bracket is virtually assured to have "storylines" anyway?

I'll take my naive math. You can take your baseless assertions.

science ftw!