Phase VI: The Atlantic Coast Conference Tournament

[Bob Green]

The regular season is in the record books and the Atlantic Coast Conference Tournament is upon us. As the #5 seed, Duke starts off Wednesday afternoon with the winner of Tuesday's N.C. State vs. Wake Forest game. The ACC Tournament is very special to me due to all the fond memories from my youth. I always go into the tournament hoping for a third game against the Tar Heels. Here is my take on the team entering the post season:

Health: Amile Jefferson is not coming back due to his continued struggles recovering from a broken foot. Matt Jones has tweaked both his ankles down the stretch of the regular season with his performance seemingly affected. Moreover, fatigue will certainly be a factor in the daunting task of winning four games in four days. From Coach K's UNC post game comments:


...we've got to get rested. We have no depth...we have a hard time practicing because we’ve got to get them fresh.

The team absolutely cannot afford to lose anyone to injury at this point. Team health is the Number One factor moving forward.

Rotation: This is a 6.5 player team so the rotation is one and half players short. Eight is enough, seven is a stretch and 6.5 is a huge challenge so it is imperative Chase Jeter bring something to the table during the ACC Tournament if the team is going to have a viable chance to make it to the weekend. I have zero confidence the light will suddenly turn on for Jeter in the ACCT, but I hope I am wrong. Bottom line - seven is better than six and a half.

Schedule: Duke will play the winner of the Wake - N.C. State game on Wednesday at approximately 2:15 pm. Win the first game and we earn a rematch against Notre Dame Thursday afternoon. The bracket alignment sets up a potential rubber match against UNC on Friday night. I'd love for the team to get another shot at Carolina as I'm sure the team would love to get another shot at Carolina so perhaps that will serve as motivation for them to take care of business on Wednesday and Thursday afternoon.

Team Strengths: Taking care of the basketball, shooting 3 PT FGs and, especially, mental toughness are team strengths! Once again, from Coach K:


So, the three-point shooting is complemented by the free throws and that is who, that’s who we are.

More trips to the free throw line are needed. It is how we score, free throws and 3 PT FGs. Perhaps the freedom of movement rules will be emphasized in the post season. One can hope.

As far as mental toughness goes, I'll utilize a Matt Jones quote:


We fought. With everything that we did to lose that game for ourselves, we were able to muster up enough stops to make shots at the end and things like that. But that’s kind of how the team is and how the season’s been. We’ve been fighting from day one, and we just have to continue to fight...

Team Weaknesses: Rebounding! Rebounding! Rebounding! See Jim Sumner's Carolina game recap on the front page of Duke Basketball Report:


Duke did a lot of things well Saturday night against North Carolina.

Rebounding wasn’t one of them. Carolina submerged Duke under a tsunami of rebounds, buried Duke under an avalanche of rebounds, took their lunch money off the glass.You get my point.

Everyone has seen the numbers, 64-29 in favor of Carolina. But is wasn't just last night it has been a consistent theme since Jefferson broke his foot. Clemson outrebounded Duke 36-24; Utah 56-38; Syracuse 49-42.

Defense: Duke is a zone team (Jeez that was hard to type). Given the short rotation and necessity to protect against foul trouble, the Blue Devils will play a lot of zone in the tournament. The good new is the team is pretty good at it, the bad news is playing zone exacerbates the rebounding woes discusssed above.

It is time to go win a championship!

[superdave]

The regular season is in the record books and the Atlantic Coast Conference Tournament is upon us. As the #5 seed, Duke starts off Wednesday afternoon with the winner of Tuesday's N.C. State vs. Wake Forest game. The ACC Tournament is very special to me due to all the fond memories from my youth. I always go into the tournament hoping for a third game against the Tar Heels. Here is my take on the team entering the post season:

Health: Amile Jefferson is not coming back due to his continued struggles recovering from a broken foot. Matt Jones has tweaked both his ankles down the stretch of the regular season with his performance seemingly affected. Moreover, fatigue will certainly be a factor in the daunting task of winning four games in four days. From Coach K's UNC post game comments:



The team absolutely cannot afford to lose anyone to injury at this point. Team health is the Number One factor moving forward.

Rotation: This is a 6.5 player team so the rotation is one and half players short. Eight is enough, seven is a stretch and 6.5 is a huge challenge so it is imperative Chase Jeter bring something to the table during the ACC Tournament if the team is going to have a viable chance to make it to the weekend. I have zero confidence the light will suddenly turn on for Jeter in the ACCT, but I hope I am wrong. Bottom line - seven is better than six and a half.

Schedule: Duke will play the winner of the Wake - N.C. State game on Wednesday at approximately 2:15 pm. Win the first game and we earn a rematch against Notre Dame Thursday afternoon. The bracket alignment sets up a potential rubber match against UNC on Friday night. I'd love for the team to get another shot at Carolina as I'm sure the team would love to get another shot at Carolina so perhaps that will serve as motivation for them to take care of business on Wednesday and Thursday afternoon.

Team Strengths: Taking care of the basketball, shooting 3 PT FGs and, especially, mental toughness are team strengths! Once again, from Coach K:



More trips to the free throw line are needed. It is how we score, free throws and 3 PT FGs. Perhaps the freedom of movement rules will be emphasized in the post season. One can hope.

As far as mental toughness goes, I'll utilize a Matt Jones quote:



Team Weaknesses: Rebounding! Rebounding! Rebounding! See Jim Sumner's Carolina game recap on the front page of Duke Basketball Report:



Everyone has seen the numbers, 64-29 in favor of Carolina. But is wasn't just last night it has been a consistent theme since Jefferson broke his foot. Clemson outrebounded Duke 36-24; Utah 56-38; Syracuse 49-42.

Defense: Duke is a zone team (Jeez that was hard to type). Given the short rotation and necessity to protect against foul trouble, the Blue Devils will play a lot of zone in the tournament. The good new is the team is pretty good at it, the bad news is playing zone exacerbates the rebounding woes discusssed above.

It is time to go win a championship!

With Brandon in foul trouble, we saw some of Chase and Marshall on the floor at the same time. I supposed we could see 2-3 minutes of that per game going forward, due to foul trouble. I think Brandon's playing as many minutes as he can play, with foul trouble being the only limiting factor.

We had one nice stretch of play from Chase last week. If we get that from him this weekend, we can advance. If we dont, well, I dont know.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

With Brandon in foul trouble, we saw some of Chase and Marshall on the floor at the same time. I supposed we could see 2-3 minutes of that per game going forward, due to foul trouble. I think Brandon's playing as many minutes as he can play, with foul trouble being the only limiting factor.

We had one nice stretch of play from Chase last week. If we get that from him this weekend, we can advance. If we dont, well, I dont know.

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I find myself caring much less about the ACC tourney this year. I'm very proud of how this team has rallied under adversity and maintained their toughness at the expense of all their stamina. The extent to which I am concerned with the tournament really is reflected in the fact that I just want one more crack to beat UNC. Beyond that, winning the trophy and cutting down the nets feels inconsequential, and I won't be upset if our team has a few extra days to rest and prep for the Big Dance.

Our NCAA chances are slim, but I don't think anyone will get rich betting against this gritty crew.

[superdave]

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I find myself caring much less about the ACC tourney this year. I'm very proud of how this team has rallied under adversity and maintained their toughness at the expense of all their stamina. The extent to which I am concerned with the tournament really is reflected in the fact that I just want one more crack to beat UNC. Beyond that, winning the trophy and cutting down the nets feels inconsequential, and I won't be upset if our team has a few extra days to rest and prep for the Big Dance.

Our NCAA chances are slim, but I don't think anyone will get rich betting against this gritty crew.

I agree with you on the ACCT. While I hope we get another crack at Unc (they arent that good!), I want this team rested for the NCAAs. As always, one game a time. But I really would like to make it to the second weekend of the tournament because the field is so weak. Duke could get a lucky draw, get hot and be in the Final Four all the sudden. But they need rest. I hope they have some non-practice days built in this week and next.

[jv001]

I agree with you on the ACCT. While I hope we get another crack at Unc (they arent that good!), I want this team rested for the NCAAs. As always, one game a time. But I really would like to make it to the second weekend of the tournament because the field is so weak. Duke could get a lucky draw, get hot and be in the Final Four all the sudden. But they need rest. I hope they have some non-practice days built in this week and next.

It could be said that Duke has a better chance of winning 4 games in the NCAAT than the ACCT. Fatigue will play a big part in the ACCT. I know there are better teams in the NCAAT but with the right draw who knows what could happen. GoDuke!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

It could be said that Duke has a better chance of winning 4 games in the NCAAT than the ACCT. Fatigue will play a big part in the ACCT. I know there are better teams in the NCAAT but with the right draw who knows what could happen. GoDuke!

You read my mind. I almost typed that in my comment above, but felt it would sound ridiculous. At least if it's ridiculous, I'm in good compant.

[NM Duke Fan]

You read my mind. I almost typed that in my comment above, but felt it would sound ridiculous. At least if it's ridiculous, I'm in good compant.

These are my thoughts as well. There is only so much gas in the tank even for the best of us, no matter how young. Especially when nursing injfuries like Matt appears to be. There is also psychological energy. The bigger priority is after this ACC tournament.

[CDu]

We haven't won an ACC title of any kind for several years. I'd be just fine if we win the ACC title and go out in the Round of 32 or Sweet 16 in the NCAAs this year. And I'm not sure that playing four games in four days will be a huge problem for us downstream considering that we'll have almost a week off before playing again afterwards.

[budwom]

You read my mind. I almost typed that in my comment above, but felt it would sound ridiculous. At least if it's ridiculous, I'm in good compant.

I'm all for an early ACC exit....get everyone much needed rest, less chance of aggravating injuries....no one likes to lose, but I just as soon we save our ammo (and health) for the NCAAs.
A four day slog for a team that only plays 6.5 guys just doesn't sound good.

[Wander]

Team Weaknesses: Rebounding! Rebounding! Rebounding! See Jim Sumner's Carolina game recap on the front page of Duke Basketball Report:



Everyone has seen the numbers, 64-29 in favor of Carolina. But is wasn't just last night it has been a consistent theme since Jefferson broke his foot. Clemson outrebounded Duke 36-24; Utah 56-38; Syracuse 49-42.


This isn't really a strategy thing, but our guys desperately need to step up their rebounding. Matt Jones might be the worst rebounder who starts at the 3 out of all 351 Division 1 teams. Maybe that's because of the injury, but he needs to give us something. Ingram and Plumlee need to pick up less fouls so they can stay in the game as long as possible. Hard to really blame our guys with the loss of Jefferson, and we're never going to be a good rebounding team, but we need to find a way to at least be a not-atrociously-horrible rebounding team in the postseason.

[sagegrouse]

If it's all the same to everyone, I am going to root like crazy for Duke in the ACC tournament. We can win this thing, but we will have to play exceptionally well every game. We may not need an A+ effort to beat State or Wake, but an easy win will enable us to rest the starters a bit. On the other hand, both the Pack and the Deacs have played Duke tough this year.

Moreover, not caring about the ACC tournament is a Roy Williams and UNC trait, which I choose not to imitate. The ACC is our neighborhood and we want to be the champion.

Kindly,
Sage

[MarkD83]

I agree with sage. Every team each year plays for championships. Duke is four wins from an acc championship. On the way if they beat unc they also win the season series. Go Duke

[Kedsy]

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I find myself caring much less about the ACC tourney this year. I'm very proud of how this team has rallied under adversity and maintained their toughness at the expense of all their stamina. The extent to which I am concerned with the tournament really is reflected in the fact that I just want one more crack to beat UNC. Beyond that, winning the trophy and cutting down the nets feels inconsequential, and I won't be upset if our team has a few extra days to rest and prep for the Big Dance.

Of Coach K's 12 Final Four teams, every one has at least made the ACC semifinals, and 8 of the 12 made the ACC finals. Six of the 12 Final Four teams were ACC champions.

If Duke plays in the ACC tournament final this season, we will have either 4 or 5 days off before our first NCAA tournament game. The only Duke Final Four team under Coach K that had more than 5 days off was last year's team, which had 6. Only three Duke teams under Coach K had more than 4 days off between their last ACC tournament game and their first NCAA tournament game: 1990 (5 days off); 1994 (5 days off); and 2015 (6 days off).

The other issue to take into account is the farther Duke goes in the ACC tournament, the better seed we'll get in the NCAA tournament.

Here are the historical winning percentages for seeds 2 through 6 in the NCAAT first round:

2-seed: 117-7 (94.4%)
3-seed: 104-20 (83.9%)
4-seed: 99-25 (79.8%)
5-seed: 80-44 (64.5%)
6-seed: 81-43 (65.3%)

Here are the historical winning percentages for seeds 2 through 6 in the NCAAT second round:

2-seed: 79-38 (67.5%)
3-seed: 63-41 (60.6%)
4-seed: 57-42 (57.6%)
5-seed: 41-39 (51.3%)
6-seed: 43-38 (53.1%)

Combining the two above, here are the historical percentages of seeds 2 through 6 making the Sweet 16:

2-seed: 79 of 124 (63.7%)
3-seed: 63 of 124 (50.8%)
4-seed: 57 of 124 (46.0%)
5-seed: 41 of 124 (33.1%)
6-seed: 43 of 124 (34.7%)

Of course the past doesn't necessarily dictate the future, but I'd much rather be a 3-seed or 4-seed (and basically have a 1 in 2 chance of getting to the Sweet 16) than a 5-seed or 6-seed (and have a 1 in 3 chance).

Plus, it's always great to win a championship.

So I'm with sagegrouse and CDu on this one.

[CDu]

Yeah, Kedsy hits on a key point that I think people overlook. Our NCAA tourney seed is not set in stone right now. We could potentially sneak up to the 2 line in an absolute best-case scenario, but could fall to a 5 or 6 in a worst-case scenario. The likely outcome is a 4 or 5 seed, but where we land very much depends on how we do in the ACC tournament. And where we land has a very real impact on our chances in the NCAA tournament.

In addition to it being awesome to win an ACC tournament, I think the benefits of winning the tournament in terms of seeding and perhaps even team confidence outweigh any negatives of exhaustion (especially with the 4-5 day break in between games).

[budwom]

Yeah, Kedsy hits on a key point that I think people overlook. Our NCAA tourney seed is not set in stone right now. We could potentially sneak up to the 2 line in an absolute best-case scenario, but could fall to a 5 or 6 in a worst-case scenario. The likely outcome is a 4 or 5 seed, but where we land very much depends on how we do in the ACC tournament. And where we land has a very real impact on our chances in the NCAA tournament.

In addition to it being awesome to win an ACC tournament, I think the benefits of winning the tournament in terms of seeding and perhaps even team confidence outweigh any negatives of exhaustion (especially with the 4-5 day break in between games).

I disagree to the extent that I don't think our seeding matters all that much. I'd rather be a healthy, rested five seed than an exhausted, limping three seed (but I do understand the argument).

[MCFinARL]

We had one nice stretch of play from Chase last week. If we get that from him this weekend, we can advance. If we dont, well, I dont know.

Agree. We've seen some definite signs in the last couple of games that the light is starting to turn on for Chase, but then some significant regression in his second stint against UNC. Hopefully after this one step back he is ready to take two steps forward.

[gumbomoop]

The likely outcome is a 4 or 5 seed, but where we land very much depends on how we do in the ACC tournament. And where we land has a very real impact on our chances in the NCAA tournament... I think the benefits of winning the tournament in terms of seeding and perhaps even team confidence outweigh any negatives of exhaustion (especially with the 4-5 day break in between games).

In one specific case, maybe the geographical "where" is nearly as important as the bracketological "where." I'd like to avoid Duke being sent to Denver, in case the adjustment to altitude might make it more difficult for our short rotation. Also, the Denver subregion is Thurs-Sat, and it looks like our guys could use a little more rest, especially if we go deep into the ACCT.

[Billy Dat]

I want to see Duke win as many ACC games as possible because I just want to keep watching these guys play together. Whenever the regular season ends, one is reminded just how little time may be left. I am one of those who assume this is it for Marshall, Brandon and Grayson so I'd like as many games as possible...10 would be just fine.

Our Houston Rockets "3s and FTs" offense fits the personnel. In some ways, that "open middle" zone encourages lane touches and 2 pointers and we seem to be playing a "We score 3 while you score 2" strategy. It almost worked on Saturday night.

My gut tells me that, counter-intuitively, this team needs reps rather than rest. I'd love to see them go on a little run and get their mojo back a bit rather than an early exit. We know Amile isn't coming back, we have our squad, let's get some Ws and some of our swagger back.

[Avvocato]

I agree with those that say that there will be plenty of time to rest between the ACC Tournament and the NCAAs. I don't see any (major) correlation to how many games we play in the ACC Tournament and our chances to advance in the NCAAs. The truth is that I don't expect this team to win the ACC, and I'm not sure we even get by Notre Dame. However, I'm excited to see how far this team will go in the ACC tournament. This team's identity is to fight for everything until the final horn goes off. Part of the joy I've had watching this team is seeing how they can pull games out with such a diminished rotation. It's a fun ride and can't wait for Wednesday.

[Kedsy]

I disagree to the extent that I don't think our seeding matters all that much. I'd rather be a healthy, rested five seed than an exhausted, limping three seed (but I do understand the argument).

More numbers:

Number of 5-seeds to make the Final Four since 1985: 6 (out of 124: 4.8%).
Number of 3-seeds to make the Final Four since 1985: 14 (out of 124: 11.3%).

I get that an 11% chance vs. a 5% chance may not sound like much (even though it's more than double), but I do think seeding matters. And I don't think a mere couple extra days off is the difference between "healthy and rested" and "exhausted and limping."

[Wander]

I disagree to the extent that I don't think our seeding matters all that much. I'd rather be a healthy, rested five seed than an exhausted, limping three seed (but I do understand the argument).

Look at the 12 seeds. They are going to be teams like Wichita State (ranked 11th in kenpom), Arkansas-Little Rock (27-4 record), and Monmouth (5-1 against power conference teams). The fact that I'm a Duke fan would be the only thing stopping me from picking the 5-12 upset in any of these matchups. We want as high a seed as possible.

[COYS]

Look at the 12 seeds. They are going to be teams like Wichita State (ranked 11th in kenpom), Arkansas-Little Rock (27-4 record), and Monmouth (5-1 against power conference teams). The fact that I'm a Duke fan would be the only thing stopping me from picking the 5-12 upset in any of these matchups. We want as high a seed as possible.

Exactly! If Duke were absolutely locked into a 4 seed right now, I can see the argument for getting a few extra days of R&R before the NCAAT starts. But the reality is that Duke's seed is still very much in flux. If we go out and win the tournament, it likely means we earn a 3 seed because we will have needed to win some combination of a rematch against ND, a third game against the Heels, and a sweep against UVA. Every team in the NCAAT is tough. Even though some teams are occasionally underseeded or overseeded, by and large the lower seeded teams are simply not as good. Kedsy's winning percentages make that obvious. We have a MUCH better chance of advancing in the NCAAT if we play a lower seeded team in the first round and have a more favorable match up in the second.

As for bringing this back to the Phase post, I really, really, really want to see our offense get back on track. Our defense is not absolutely terrible, but it is not fantastic. Our offense, however, is capable of being the best in the land. However, we have to play more like how we were during our mid-season run of form than how we have played recently. Grayson has been a rock of consistency (seriously, this guy is having an INCREDIBLE season by any standard. Add this season to the seasons that our freshman had last year and I can't think of a recruiting class that has had as much immediate success for Duke, top to bottom). However, Brandon has struggled recently while Derryck and Luke have remained inconsistent (though Luke apparently really likes playing UNC). Also, Matt has seemed just a step slower since his injury. He's been a little slower to get off his three point shot and tentative on drives. I'd love to see us add a few new wrinkles to get Brandon the ball closer to the basket so he doesn't have to create so much off the dribble. Maybe we can run some of those curl plays that we've run for Luke this year and that we used to run frequently for Kyle (we actually ran that play for Tyus a lot last year and he was sensational at hitting a short 10-foot jumper/floater in the lane . . . I wonder if this would work for Grayson, too). Also, if Brandon is being guarded by an opposing PF, I'd like to see him screen for Grayson to see if we can get a switch. As much as I like Brandon taking big guys off the dribble, I also like him backing down and shooting over smaller defenders. Also, Grayson can destroy an opposing PF off the dribble so I feel like that matchup favors us no matter how the opposition defends it. Our easiest shots right now tend to be open threes, which is great, obviously, but I'd like to see us create easier two point shots, too, that don't require drives from the wing just to keep the defense honest.

So let's go out and win this thing! I don't understand not being excited for the ACCT. This team has battled through a lot of adversity and could have wilted midway through the season (imagine adding losses @UNC, home vs. UVA, and home vs. Louisville). While we haven't had the best stretch to end the regular season, we know what we are capable of and we know how small the margins have been (a few extra rebounds and a few extra made baskets and we would be celebrating a sweep vs the Heels). Let's get out there and win a championship so this team can come back to Cameron 10 years from now, look up in the rafters, and see their accomplishment immortalized with a banner.

Edit: I am reminded of the 2010-2011 season. That team had played well but seemed to be limping a bit down the stretch, losing @ VaTech to a not-so-good Hokies squad (a team far worse than Pitt this year), winning a surprisingly tough game against a not-so-great Clemson game at Cameron, before getting run out of the gym against UNC to end the regular season. I know that team was simply better from top to bottom, but they went on to win the ACCT in style, including an absolute demolition of UNC in the Final. I add this just as a reminder that the struggles of the last three games really don't mean anything for certain going into the ACCT.

[gofurman]

Of Coach K's 12 Final Four teams, every one has at least made the ACC semifinals, and 8 of the 12 made the ACC finals. Six of the 12 Final Four teams were ACC champions.

If Duke plays in the ACC tournament final this season, we will have either 4 or 5 days off before our first NCAA tournament game. The only Duke Final Four team under Coach K that had more than 5 days off was last year's team, which had 6. Only three Duke teams under Coach K had more than 4 days off between their last ACC tournament game and their first NCAA tournament game: 1990 (5 days off); 1994 (5 days off); and 2015 (6 days off).

The other issue to take into account is the farther Duke goes in the ACC tournament, the better seed we'll get in the NCAA tournament.

Here are the historical winning percentages for seeds 2 through 6 in the NCAAT first round:

2-seed: 117-7 (94.4%)
3-seed: 104-20 (83.9%)
4-seed: 99-25 (79.8%)
5-seed: 80-44 (64.5%)
6-seed: 81-43 (65.3%)

Here are the historical winning percentages for seeds 2 through 6 in the NCAAT second round:

2-seed: 79-38 (67.5%)
3-seed: 63-41 (60.6%)
4-seed: 57-42 (57.6%)
5-seed: 41-39 (51.3%)
6-seed: 43-38 (53.1%)

Combining the two above, here are the historical percentages of seeds 2 through 6 making the Sweet 16:

2-seed: 79 of 124 (63.7%)
3-seed: 63 of 124 (50.8%)
4-seed: 57 of 124 (46.0%)
5-seed: 41 of 124 (33.1%)
6-seed: 43 of 124 (34.7%)

Of course the past doesn't necessarily dictate the future, but I'd much rather be a 3-seed or 4-seed (and basically have a 1 in 2 chance of getting to the Sweet 16) than a 5-seed or 6-seed (and have a 1 in 3 chance).

Plus, it's always great to win a championship.

So I'm with sagegrouse and CDu on this one.

Kedsy - could you add the ONE seeds to this chart please? I would really appreciate it. I want to see something I have long suspected. Yes, I know a one seed has never lost the very first game vs a 16.. but can you give the percentage of a one seed historically winning the second game .. and making the sweet 16.. like you did for the others?? Thanks !!! This would be much appreciated.

My point I am seeking is that I hear several people say .. "there is little difference in being a one or two see as the 16s and 15s are similar." But I disagree both on that point and even more that one seeds win a lot more than two seeds going forward .. not so much because of the opponent, but because of how good YOU must be to earn a one seed.

(On that note I would love to know what seed our 5 champions have been ! - 91, 92, 01, 10 and 15.. I suspect more were one seeds than not.) Again, while the opponent matters , OUR seeding reflects what we have done and how good we are. I would rest assured our 99 team was a one seed !

[CDu]

Kedsy - could you add the ONE seeds to this chart please? I would really appreciate it. I want to see something I have long suspected. Yes, I know a one seed has never lost the very first game vs a 16.. but can you give the percentage of a one seed historically winning the second game .. and making the sweet 16.. like you did for the others?? Thanks !!! This would be much appreciated.

My point I am seeking is that I hear several people say .. "there is little difference in being a one or two see as the 16s and 15s are similar." But I disagree both on that point and even more that one seeds win a lot more than two seeds going forward .. not so much because of the opponent, but because of how good YOU must be to earn a one seed.

(On that note I would love to know what seed our 5 champions have been ! - 91, 92, 01, 10 and 15.. I suspect more were one seeds than not.) Again, while the opponent matters , OUR seeding reflects what we have done and how good we are. I would rest assured our 99 team was a one seed !

We were a 1 seed in 1992, 2001, 2010, and 2015. We were a 2 seed in 1991. And 1seeds do perform better than 2 seeds. It is not clear whether that has much to do with the path being easier or the fact that 1 seeds are usually better than 2 seeds. Both likely play into it, but how much isn't clear.

[gofurman]

We were a 1 seed in 1992, 2001, 2010, and 2015. We were a 2 seed in 1991. And 1seeds do perform better than 2 seeds. It is not clear whether that has much to do with the path being easier or the fact that 1 seeds are usually better than 2 seeds. Both likely play into it, but how much isn't clear.

CDu, Thanks ! I was just looking that up. Exactly.. people say "its roughly the same to be a 2 as a 1 seed" but that doesn't bear out.. plenty of historical data - I really want to see what Kedsy has as I just have Duke's which isn't enough... For us the 5 Duke champions have been a 2, 1, 1, 1, 1 seed. Like I said, I suspect that at least half - and probably much more than half - of that difference is due to how good that means DUKE (or whomever the one seed ) was vs the difference in playing a 15 or 16 etc.

Maybe a list of national champions and their NCAAT seeds would be in order? That would be awesome !! Anyone have that?? That would pretty much do it. Sure other seeds win - no doubt.. Villanova anyone? But I bet there is a serious correlation in seeding and national titles...

[Kedsy]

Kedsy - could you add the ONE seeds to this chart please? I would really appreciate it. I want to see something I have long suspected. Yes, I know a one seed has never lost the very first game vs a 16.. but can you give the percentage of a one seed historically winning the second game .. and making the sweet 16.. like you did for the others?? Thanks !!! This would be much appreciated.

My point I am seeking is that I hear several people say .. "there is little difference in being a one or two see as the 16s and 15s are similar." But I disagree both on that point and even more that one seeds win a lot more than two seeds going forward .. not so much because of the opponent, but because of how good YOU must be to earn a one seed.

(On that note I would love to know what seed our 5 champions have been ! - 91, 92, 01, 10 and 15.. I suspect more were one seeds than not.) Again, while the opponent matters , OUR seeding reflects what we have done and how good we are. I would rest assured our 99 team was a one seed !

1-seed, 1st round: 124-0 (100%)
1-seed, 2nd round: 107-17 (86.3%)
1-seed, making Sweet 16: 107 of 124 (86.3%)

Since 2-seeds have made the Sweet 16 only 63.7% of the time, you are correct that #1s get there a great deal more often than #2s.

As CDu said, '91 was a 2-seed and the others were #1 (including '99).

[Kedsy]

Maybe a list of national champions and their NCAAT seeds would be in order? That would be awesome !! Anyone have that??

National Champions since 1985 (year the tourney went to 64 teams):

1-seed: 19
2-seed: 4
3-seed: 4
4-seed: 1 (Arizona, 1997)
5-seed: 0
6-seed: 1 (Kansas, 1988)
7-seed: 1 (UConn, 2014)
8-seed: 1 (Villanova, 1985)

So it's a good bet that the national champion will be a 1-seed.

[gofurman]

National Champions since 1985 (year the tourney went to 64 teams):

1-seed: 19
2-seed: 4
3-seed: 4
4-seed: 1 (Arizona, 1997)
5-seed: 0
6-seed: 1 (Kansas, 1988)
7-seed: 1 (UConn, 2014)
8-seed: 1 (Villanova, 1985)

So it's a good bet that the national champion will be a 1-seed.

Thank you all ! Great data. Interesting that difference in making the sweet 16 is HUGE between one and two seeds. 1 seeds make the sweet 16 83% of the tim.. 2 seeds make the sweet 16 at 20 basis points less - 63 % of the time... wow

[Kedsy]

Thank you all ! Great data. Interesting that difference in making the sweet 16 is HUGE between one and two seeds. 1 seeds make the sweet 16 83% of the tim.. 2 seeds make the sweet 16 at 20 basis points less - 63 % of the time... wow

Yeah, I guess part of it is #1 seeds are just better, but I think a fairly large portion of it has to be that the path of the #1 is easier.

[gofurman]

Agreed, its usually some of both in most debates.
In any case, who are you pulling for tomorrow? I am pulling for Wake - Cat Barber is a matchup nightmare for anyone. And State has that 3 point guy (Maverick?) that can get hot. Wake is just a better matchup for Duke I think. Both games with State were 10 points or less. The first matchup w Wake we won by 16...

IMO, State can play some O and D. Wake can really struggle on D

Though I will admit I think Wake is improving.. they had some bad blowouts early - lost to us by 16, ND by 20+, Cuse by almost 30 ... lately its been lose to Pitt in OT, NDame by 11, Duke at Cameron by only 8.

Who would you rather Duke play first? I still prefer Wake.

[Kedsy]

Who would you rather Duke play first? I still prefer Wake.

Well, State is a better team than Wake (Pomeroy says State is #87 in the country and Wake is #128). Going a little deeper, Wake is consistently bad/mediocre (#147 offense/#146 defense), while State is a pretty good offensive team (#38 offense) and a dreadful defensive team (#174 defense). Considering Duke is a better offensive team than defensive, again it sounds like Wake would be an easier game for us.

All that said, if both State and Wake play their normal games, State should win. If Wake pulls off the upset, it would mean they played over their heads. The momentum of doing so the day before could give them positive energy to bring against a Duke team that might be looking ahead to the next game against Notre Dame, or it could mean Wake shot the one bullet in their gun (against State) and they'll lay down against a better Duke team.

I expect State to beat Wake. I think Duke should beat either team, but that a game against either of them is far from a lock. Ultimately, I don't care all that much which team wins tomorrow. In my mind, how far Duke goes in the ACC tournament is mostly up to Duke, at least until we (hopefully) get to the semifinals.

[BD80]

National Champions since 1985 (year the tourney went to 64 teams):

1-seed: 19
2-seed: 4
3-seed: 4
4-seed: 1 (Arizona, 1997)
5-seed: 0
6-seed: 1 (Kansas, 1988)
7-seed: 1 (UConn, 2014)
8-seed: 1 (Villanova, 1985)

So it's a good bet that the national champion will be a 1-seed.

Historically 19-12.

I think this year would be a good year to take the field, the non-number ones.

[wsb3]

These are my thoughts as well. There is only so much gas in the tank even for the best of us, no matter how young. Especially when nursing injfuries like Matt appears to be. There is also psychological energy. The bigger priority is after this ACC tournament.

I agree with you & all the posters that have stated this thinking.

[rocketeli]

I think I'm like a lot of posters here--my head says we aren't going to gain much in the tourney and risk fatigue or further injury (if you thought Matt Jones was slow before...) but my heart wants to shock the world and win it all.

[killerleft]

Exactly! If Duke were absolutely locked into a 4 seed right now, I can see the argument for getting a few extra days of R&R before the NCAAT starts. But the reality is that Duke's seed is still very much in flux. If we go out and win the tournament, it likely means we earn a 3 seed because we will have needed to win some combination of a rematch against ND, a third game against the Heels, and a sweep against UVA. Every team in the NCAAT is tough. Even though some teams are occasionally underseeded or overseeded, by and large the lower seeded teams are simply not as good. Kedsy's winning percentages make that obvious. We have a MUCH better chance of advancing in the NCAAT if we play a lower seeded team in the first round and have a more favorable match up in the second.

As for bringing this back to the Phase post, I really, really, really want to see our offense get back on track. Our defense is not absolutely terrible, but it is not fantastic. Our offense, however, is capable of being the best in the land. However, we have to play more like how we were during our mid-season run of form than how we have played recently. Grayson has been a rock of consistency (seriously, this guy is having an INCREDIBLE season by any standard. Add this season to the seasons that our freshman had last year and I can't think of a recruiting class that has had as much immediate success for Duke, top to bottom). However, Brandon has struggled recently while Derryck and Luke have remained inconsistent (though Luke apparently really likes playing UNC). Also, Matt has seemed just a step slower since his injury. He's been a little slower to get off his three point shot and tentative on drives. I'd love to see us add a few new wrinkles to get Brandon the ball closer to the basket so he doesn't have to create so much off the dribble. Maybe we can run some of those curl plays that we've run for Luke this year and that we used to run frequently for Kyle (we actually ran that play for Tyus a lot last year and he was sensational at hitting a short 10-foot jumper/floater in the lane . . . I wonder if this would work for Grayson, too). Also, if Brandon is being guarded by an opposing PF, I'd like to see him screen for Grayson to see if we can get a switch. As much as I like Brandon taking big guys off the dribble, I also like him backing down and shooting over smaller defenders. Also, Grayson can destroy an opposing PF off the dribble so I feel like that matchup favors us no matter how the opposition defends it. Our easiest shots right now tend to be open threes, which is great, obviously, but I'd like to see us create easier two point shots, too, that don't require drives from the wing just to keep the defense honest.

So let's go out and win this thing! I don't understand not being excited for the ACCT. This team has battled through a lot of adversity and could have wilted midway through the season (imagine adding losses @UNC, home vs. UVA, and home vs. Louisville). While we haven't had the best stretch to end the regular season, we know what we are capable of and we know how small the margins have been (a few extra rebounds and a few extra made baskets and we would be celebrating a sweep vs the Heels). Let's get out there and win a championship so this team can come back to Cameron 10 years from now, look up in the rafters, and see their accomplishment immortalized with a banner.

Edit: I am reminded of the 2010-2011 season. That team had played well but seemed to be limping a bit down the stretch, losing @ VaTech to a not-so-good Hokies squad (a team far worse than Pitt this year), winning a surprisingly tough game against a not-so-great Clemson game at Cameron, before getting run out of the gym against UNC to end the regular season. I know that team was simply better from top to bottom, but they went on to win the ACCT in style, including an absolute demolition of UNC in the Final. I add this just as a reminder that the struggles of the last three games really don't mean anything for certain going into the ACCT.

Thanks, loved this post. The ACC Championship is hard to achieve, and would be a fantastic coup for our young team. Duke plays for trophies and banners, so I hope we can give the title a great run. Brey can wear that ugly unc hat if he wants to, but I took it as some great bulletin board material (well, at least it fired me up!). So let's take care of the WF-NCS winner and start taking names.

As always - Go Duke!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

It's ACC Tourney Day! Does anyone have that same fluttery stomach you used to have on Friday mornings before four games tipped off at noon? Non-stop basketball for the next 2 and a half days, crowning a champion and likely number one seed, then sitting on your hands waiting for the brackets to be announced? Pre-internet, where you tried to fill in your own brackets while they were announced on TV so that you could have a head start in your pools?

I miss the old days.

Let's Go Duke!

[sagegrouse]

It's ACC Tourney Day! Does anyone have that same fluttery stomach you used to have on Friday mornings before four games tipped off at noon? Non-stop basketball for the next 2 and a half days, crowning a champion and likely number one seed, then sitting on your hands waiting for the brackets to be announced? Pre-internet, where you tried to fill in your own brackets while they were announced on TV so that you could have a head start in your pools?

I miss the old days.

Let's Go Duke!

Yes, I do, although the fluttery stomach is being treated with some pills. This is a big deal to me. Moreover, I love the potential Duke story line for the ACC's:

First game against one of our two neighbors, Pack or Deacs, both of whom get sky-high when playing Duke. Beware State, which has a history of making runs in the ACC Tournament.
Second game (Deo volente) against Notre Dame, which has had a lot of success over Duke since joining the conference. With success against the Irish --
Semis against UNC -- oh, my! An incendiary matchup because of the contrast in team styles as well as the rivalry.
Finals against -- anyway, that's enough day-dreaming for now.

What hasn't been said, is that success in the tournament will be a real boost to a very young team as we enter the NCAA's.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yes, I do, although the fluttery stomach is being treated with some pills. This is a big deal to me. Moreover, I love the potential Duke story line for the ACC's:

First game against one of our two neighbors, Pack or Deacs, both of whom get sky-high when playing Duke. Beware State, which has a history of making runs in the ACC Tournament.
Second game (Deo volente) against Notre Dame, which has had a lot of success over Duke since joining the conference. With success against the Irish --
Semis against UNC -- oh, my! An incendiary matchup because of the contrast in team styles as well as the rivalry.
Finals against -- anyway, that's enough day-dreaming for now.

What hasn't been said, is that success in the tournament will be a real boost to a very young team as we enter the NCAA's.

It is true - I was thinking about this the other day when I was advocating for rest over ACC tournament success. Our team has all the grit and toughness in the world, and a couple-three-or-four wins in a row might mean something very different for this group than teams in the past. Give these guys a little momentum and watch out...

Also, something that hasn't really been discussed here, is that they are no longer looking for Amile's return. I think initially it was sort of like "we just have to get through these games til Jefferson comes back." Then it was "we just have to keep winning until we find out when/if he's coming back." Well, he ain't coming back. That might be a bit of a relief to a team that has gelled so well in his absence to not be anchored to this potential/maybe big impending change in the line up.

At least, that's how I would pitch it - if I were an optimist. :D

[NYBri]

I understand the "logic" of an early ACCT departure, but I find it really hard not to root for a WIN each and every time we play. Especially against the ACC rivals.

That said, LET'S GO DEVILS, and a big 9F on Friday night!!!

[hudlow]

It's ACC Tourney Day! Does anyone have that same fluttery stomach you used to have on Friday mornings before four games tipped off at noon? Non-stop basketball for the next 2 and a half days, crowning a champion and likely number one seed, then sitting on your hands waiting for the brackets to be announced? Pre-internet, where you tried to fill in your own brackets while they were announced on TV so that you could have a head start in your pools?

I miss the old days.

Let's Go Duke!

I'd love to have that feeling again. I used to schedule vacation days for the ACCT. It was like a holiday. I knew who I'd be watching the games with. I knew what I'd be eating and drinking. No stones were left unturned, we were prepared for anything.

Expansion and a week long tournament took a lot of the excitement out of The ACCT for me. I know I won't get to see several games because of other obligations and just plain old lack of interest.

I'm still behind Duke 110% and pulling for whoever plays the UNCheats....but as BB said "the thrill is (kinda) gone."

That being said, I still have a little of that kid awaiting Christmas feel deep down inside. And if I'd eat something, my stomach might get the flutters.

I sure hope so.

G O D U K E

A B C

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I'd love to have that feeling again. I used to schedule vacation days for the ACCT. It was like a holiday. I knew who I'd be watching the games with. I knew what I'd be eating and drinking. No stones were left unturned, we were prepared for anything.

Expansion and a week long tournament took a lot of the excitement out of The ACCT for me. I know I won't get to see several games because of other obligations and just plain old lack of interest.

I'm still behind Duke 110% and pulling for whoever plays the UNCheats...but as BB said "the thrill is (kinda) gone."

That being said, I still have a little of that kid awaiting Christmas feel deep down inside. And if I'd eat something, my stomach might get the flutters.

I sure hope so.

G O D U K E

A B C

I think this speaks to my bigger point. There's games I'm not going to watch this week - not just because of conflicts with schedule (though it is a whole lot harder to schedule around this many games) but because I don't yet care much about the ACC fates of Syracuse, BC, or others. Years ago, EVERYONE took the half day Friday, and watched all 7 games whether "your team" was playing or not. I suspect there were a lot fewer empty seats at games too.

Oh well. Get off my lawn, I suppose.

[sagegrouse]

Here are the results of the last 17 ACC Tournaments. Duke wins ten times and is runner-up twice. Time to start another streak.




1999 Duke 96–73 North Carolina Elton Brand
2000 Duke 81–68 Maryland Jason Williams
2001 Duke 79–53 North Carolina Shane Battier
2002 Duke 91–61 NC State Carlos Boozer
2003 Duke 84–77 NC State Daniel Ewing
2004 Md. 95–87 (OT) Duke John Gilchrist
2005 Duke 69–64 Georgia Tech J. J. Redick
2006 Duke 78–76 Boston College J. J. Redick
2007 UNC 89–80 NC State Brandan Wright
2008 UNC 86–81 Clemson Tyler Hansbrough
2009 Duke 79–69 Florida State Jon Scheyer
2010 Duke 65–61 Georgia Tech Kyle Singler
2011 Duke 75–58 North Carolina Nolan Smith
2012 FSU 85–82 North Carolina Michael Snaer
2013 Miami 87–77 North Carolina Shane Larkin
2014 UVa 72–63 Duke Joe Harris
2015 ND 90–82 North Carolina Jerian Grant

[Kedsy]

Here are the results of the last 17 ACC Tournaments. Duke wins ten times and is runner-up twice. Time to start another streak.




1999 Duke 96–73 North Carolina Elton Brand
2000 Duke 81–68 Maryland Jason Williams
2001 Duke 79–53 North Carolina Shane Battier
2002 Duke 91–61 NC State Carlos Boozer
2003 Duke 84–77 NC State Daniel Ewing
2004 Md. 95–87 (OT) Duke John Gilchrist
2005 Duke 69–64 Georgia Tech J. J. Redick
2006 Duke 78–76 Boston College J. J. Redick
2007 UNC 89–80 NC State Brandan Wright
2008 UNC 86–81 Clemson Tyler Hansbrough
2009 Duke 79–69 Florida State Jon Scheyer
2010 Duke 65–61 Georgia Tech Kyle Singler
2011 Duke 75–58 North Carolina Nolan Smith
2012 FSU 85–82 North Carolina Michael Snaer
2013 Miami 87–77 North Carolina Shane Larkin
2014 UVa 72–63 Duke Joe Harris
2015 ND 90–82 North Carolina Jerian Grant


Duke was also runner-up in 1998 (the year before your interesting chart starts). So, looking at your chart, it means either Duke or UNC (or both) has played in the ACC tournament final every year for the past 19 -- the last time neither made the final was 1996.

[lotusland]

We should be OK if the lid comes off the basket on our end.

[Wahoo2000]

National Champions since 1985 (year the tourney went to 64 teams):

1-seed: 19
2-seed: 4
3-seed: 4
4-seed: 1 (Arizona, 1997)
5-seed: 0
6-seed: 1 (Kansas, 1988)
7-seed: 1 (UConn, 2014)
8-seed: 1 (Villanova, 1985)

So it's a good bet that the national champion will be a 1-seed.

Haven't done the research to back it up, but I feel like things have changed since the start of the one-and-done era. Probably not a significant sample size anyway. Generally though, I feel that with the advent of the one and done era, there seems to be less separation between the top 3-4 teams each year and the rest of the field. There just aren't those teams stocked with experienced first-round nba draft talent anymore - which I really miss.

There are exceptions of course. Last season for example, there were probably 6 teams that were truly elite and well separated from the rest of the country. But I definitely feel like it's more common these days to only have 1-2 really GREAT teams in a given year (and sometimes none, like this year). Even those 1-2 "great" teams often seem a bit more vulnerable to off days/upsets due largely to inexperienced, though supremely talented, freshmen playing a huge role.

[Kedsy]

Haven't done the research to back it up, but I feel like things have changed since the start of the one-and-done era. Probably not a significant sample size anyway. Generally though, I feel that with the advent of the one and done era, there seems to be less separation between the top 3-4 teams each year and the rest of the field. There just aren't those teams stocked with experienced first-round nba draft talent anymore - which I really miss.

There are exceptions of course. Last season for example, there were probably 6 teams that were truly elite and well separated from the rest of the country. But I definitely feel like it's more common these days to only have 1-2 really GREAT teams in a given year (and sometimes none, like this year). Even those 1-2 "great" teams often seem a bit more vulnerable to off days/upsets due largely to inexperienced, though supremely talented, freshmen playing a huge role.

I'm not sure this is true. Here's the chart for the last 10 years (since "one and done" was implemented):

1-seed: 7
2-seed: 0
3-seed: 2
7-seed: 1

Here's the chart for the first 10 years of the 64-team tournament:

1-seed: 5
2-seed: 2
3-seed: 1
6-seed: 1
8-seed: 1

So, for all 31 years of the 64-team era, 1-seeds won the championship 61.3% of the time. The weighted average (e.g., counting 1 if the 1-seed won, 3 if the 3-seed won, etc.) of the seeds of all champions was 2.06.

In the last 10 years, 1-seeds won the championship 70% of the time, and the weighted average was 2.00.

In the first 10 years, 1-seeds won the championship 50% of the time, and the weighted average was 2.60.

If anything, it would seem to be the opposite of your feeling. Considering the smaller sample sizes of ten years, however, I doubt the differences are significant, though someone better with statistics than I might be able to give us a more definitive idea of that.

[Wahoo2000]

I'm not sure this is true. Here's the chart for the last 10 years (since "one and done" was implemented):

1-seed: 7
2-seed: 0
3-seed: 2
7-seed: 1

Here's the chart for the first 10 years of the 64-team tournament:

1-seed: 5
2-seed: 2
3-seed: 1
6-seed: 1
8-seed: 1

So, for all 31 years of the 64-team era, 1-seeds won the championship 61.3% of the time. The weighted average (e.g., counting 1 if the 1-seed won, 3 if the 3-seed won, etc.) of the seeds of all champions was 2.06.

In the last 10 years, 1-seeds won the championship 70% of the time, and the weighted average was 2.00.

In the first 10 years, 1-seeds won the championship 50% of the time, and the weighted average was 2.60.

If anything, it would seem to be the opposite of your feeling. Considering the smaller sample sizes of ten years, however, I doubt the differences are significant, though someone better with statistics than I might be able to give us a more definitive idea of that.

Yeah, I don't think 10 is anywhere near significant enough. Maybe measure final 4s instead of titles?

[Kedsy]

Yeah, I don't think 10 is anywhere near significant enough. Maybe measure final 4s instead of titles?

Final Four teams by seed:

TOTAL
------
#1: 51
#2: 26
#3: 14
#4: 13
#5: 6
#6: 3
#7: 2
#8: 5
#9: 1
#10: 0
#11: 3

#1 seeds comprised 41.1% of Final Four teams since 1985.
weighted average: 2.75

Last 10 years
-------------
#1: 16
#2: 6
#3: 3
#4: 6
#5: 2
#7: 2
#8: 2
#9: 1
#11: 2

#1 seeds comprised 40.0% of Final Four teams in the period.
weighted average: 3.3

First 10 years
-------------
#1: 17
#2: 10
#3: 5
#4: 3
#6: 3
#8: 1
#11: 1

#1 seeds comprised 42.5% of Final Four teams in the period.
weighted average: 2.53

So, a small difference. Again, not sure if statistically significant. My guess is not.

There have been 9 teams seeded #5 and below make the Final Four in the past ten seasons, after only 11 such teams doing so in the first 21 years of the 64-team tournament, so that might mean something.

Or it might not.

[sagegrouse]

I'm not sure this is true. Here's the chart for the last 10 years (since "one and done" was implemented):

1-seed: 7
2-seed: 0
3-seed: 2
7-seed: 1

Here's the chart for the first 10 years of the 64-team tournament:

1-seed: 5
2-seed: 2
3-seed: 1
6-seed: 1
8-seed: 1

So, for all 31 years of the 64-team era, 1-seeds won the championship 61.3% of the time. The weighted average (e.g., counting 1 if the 1-seed won, 3 if the 3-seed won, etc.) of the seeds of all champions was 2.06.

In the last 10 years, 1-seeds won the championship 70% of the time, and the weighted average was 2.00.

In the first 10 years, 1-seeds won the championship 50% of the time, and the weighted average was 2.60.

If anything, it would seem to be the opposite of your feeling. Considering the smaller sample sizes of ten years, however, I doubt the differences are significant, though someone better with statistics than I might be able to give us a more definitive idea of that.

Let me offer something I just thought of (which I will probably reject after a good night's sleep). One-and-done for all the best players tips the scales towards the premier programs. Kentucky and Duke (knock on wood) have been successful in signing two-to-three top players every year. In a four-year regime (social scientists talk like that), it would never happen, and the talent would be spread out to more teams. There would be no room and, more importantly, no playing time for that many players. The high percentage of #1 seeds winning the last ten years supports that.

Of course, even if that's true about tipping the recruiting scales, there is another side. It's not that clear that freshman-dominated teams with elite talent are better than upperclass-dominated teams with experience and lesser talent. I didn't find it especially appealing for 19-year-old Duke players competing against 23-year-old Miami players.

[sagegrouse]

Perhaps this has been remarked upon, but there is a striking disparity in the results when the top six teams in the ACC play each other. Here's the record among the six brethren at the top of the ACC regular season:


T2 Miami 5-2 (other ACC 8-3)
T2 UVa 5-2 (8-3)
T5 ND 3-3 (8-4)
T5 Duke 3-4 (8-3)
1 UNC 2-4 (12-0)
4 Lville 2-5 (10-1)

Anyway, stating it positively, UNC was remarkably consistent against the ACC also-rans -- 12-0. But the Tar Heels were only 2-4 against the other top teams.

[Furniture]

"@Duke_MBB: Duke has played in three of the four most-watched games this season across all networks. #GoDuke #MarchOn"
Most watched UNC Duke!

[gep]

Thanks, loved this post. The ACC Championship is hard to achieve, and would be a fantastic coup for our young team. Duke plays for trophies and banners, so I hope we can give the title a great run. Brey can wear that ugly unc hat if he wants to, but I took it as some great bulletin board material (well, at least it fired me up!). So let's take care of the WF-NCS winner and start taking names.

As always - Go Duke!

THIS is why, to me, the ACC Tournament championship is important. GO DUKE!!!!

Worry about the future when you get there. :cool:

[weezie]

Geez, does anybody else feel kind of bad for the bc eagles? Speaking as a veteran of the Detroit Lions 0-16 season, I was sad for the eagle players.

[Doria]

Geez, does anybody else feel kind of bad for the bc eagles? Speaking as a veteran of the Detroit Lions 0-16 season, I was sad for the eagle players.

Sure, I feel bad for them (coincidentally, I am also a long-suffering Lions fan). It was very moving for me when Minnesota beat Maryland at home, to get off the goose egg for the season and they interviewed one of the players who was choking up; I was also impressed that even though Minnesota was, objectively, terrible this season, their gym looked pretty packed for a weeknight game.

Changing subjects, though, this Syracuse-Pitt game is not fun to watch. I think I'm going to have to work until the Duke game and not procrastinate, as I'd half planned to do.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Sure, I feel bad for them (coincidentally, I am also a long-suffering Lions fan). It was very moving for me when Minnesota beat Maryland at home, to get off the goose egg for the season and they interviewed one of the players who was choking up; I was also impressed that even though Minnesota was, objectively, terrible this season, their gym looked pretty packed for a weeknight game.

Changing subjects, though, this Syracuse-Pitt game is not fun to watch. I think I'm going to have to work until the Duke game and not procrastinate, as I'd half planned to do.

Was halfway watching during a lunch break. Saw it was scoreless nearly four minutes in, and also that there were problems with the clock?

Something tells me our Duke game starts closer to 3 than to 2.

[Doria]

Was halfway watching during a lunch break. Saw it was scoreless nearly four minutes in, and also that there were problems with the clock?

Something tells me our Duke game starts closer to 3 than to 2.

The last time I looked up, it was like 13 to 4 with around 10 minutes gone. I think the clock issue wasn't that major--it seemed to only last a couple minutes; they had time to go to the studio and say a few things, before they went back to the game. But I'm only half watching, since I'm technically working (in other words, reading the forums here, while having work open on my computer).

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The last time I looked up, it was like 13 to 4 with around 10 minutes gone. I think the clock issue wasn't that major--it seemed to only last a couple minutes; they had time to go to the studio and say a few things, before they went back to the game. But I'm only half watching, since I'm technically working (in other words, reading the forums here, while having work open on my computer).

Your work sounds like my work today.

Originally planned to take a late lunch for the Duke game. Glad I didn't stick to that plan, or I would get very, very hungry.

[Doria]

Your work sounds like my work today.

Originally planned to take a late lunch for the Duke game. Glad I didn't stick to that plan, or I would get very, very hungry.

Yeah, I have a hard time concentrating before a Duke game. Ugh, maybe one of the teams (probably Syracuse at this point) will get to 30 before the half. Five minutes to go...

Edit: Also, I am very "proud" of the ESPN commentators for learning how to pronounce Gbinije's name. I think JWill said they were saying it "Binoh-je" or something like that. I have no idea how they got that from the name. Aside from the leading "g," it's pretty much how it looks.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yeah, I have a hard time concentrating before a Duke game. Ugh, maybe one of the teams (probably Syracuse at this point) will get to 30 before the half. Five minutes to go...

More productive work day than the Old ACC Tourney Fridays