Now check your seeds!!

[duketaylor]

Duke must move to a 2. Amazing 2nd half. Love our chances!!

[Forrest]

Agreed, and I'm having a really, really difficult time figuring out how the lost-two-out-of-three Cheats could be seeded higher than the Blue Devils.

[sbroc012]

I'm baffled how everyone says UNC is a 1 seed lock. They had one of the easier schedules in the ACC and now have lost to Duke twice. And there is no way Louisville should be ahead of Duke.

[bleedingblue88]

Joe Lunardi has us as the top #3 seed right now. If we win tomorrow, he says we'll probably replace Baylor as a #2.

[hibby91]

I just don't understand the love for Baylor. They haven't done anything significant in a long time.

[CameronCrazy'11]

I don't see how unc can be a 1-seed, particularly if UCLA and Villanova win their conference tournaments. 7 losses overall. No good wins away from Chapel Hill. If we win tomorrow, we have 8 losses to their 7, with many better wins than them away and on neutral courts.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Cheats haven't won a meaningful game away from the whine and cheese shop all year. I don't understand the love for the losers.

[CDu]

It is all inertia. These pundits have had it in their heads that so-and-so is a certain seed. It is hard to shake that logic.

I would put our resume up against UNC's for sure. We have more impressive wins, more impressive road/neutral wins, and the head-to-head edge. And we are the hotter team. And we have the injury benefit in several of our losses.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

It is all inertia. These pundits have had it in their heads that so-and-so is a certain seed. It is hard to shake that logic.

I would put our resume up against UNC's for sure. We have more impressive wins, more impressive road/neutral wins, and the head-to-head edge. And we are the hotter team. And we have the injury benefit in several of our losses.
I'd love to see the two side by side "blind" resumes for Duke and the cheats. The differential (in favor of the good guys) must be glaring.

[weezie]

It is all inertia. These pundits have had it in their heads that so-and-so is a certain seed. It is hard to shake that logic.

I would put our resume up against UNC's for sure. We have more impressive wins, more impressive road/neutral wins, and the head-to-head edge. And we are the hotter team. And we have the injury benefit in several of our losses.

And better eye-candy too. Team and fans.

[FerryFor50]

I'd love to see the two side by side "blind" resumes for Duke and the cheats. The differential (in favor of the good guys) must be glaring.

Someone posted this up on the Twitterz.

7249

[pamtar]

I don't see how unc can be a 1-seed, particularly if UCLA and Villanova win their conference tournaments. 7 losses overall. No good wins away from Chapel Hill. If we win tomorrow, we have 8 losses to their 7, with many better wins than them away and on neutral courts.

Based on what the committee is supposed to use for seeding it's really a no-brainer that we should be a No 1 seed if we win tomorrow. Our conference schedule is miles ahead of UNC's, as is our OOC. If they include injuries and loss of K in their decision our argument is even stronger. UNC is a great team but their best wins are Florida State at home and UofL at home. They also got destroyed by Miami and GT on the road. Our worst loss is NCSU, and to be fair, that was before they quit on the season.

[toooskies]

Someone posted this up on the Twitterz.

7249

Here is a page that illustrates the games themselves. Duke has stronger top 50 wins, but also more top 50 losses. For me it's a toss-up, until the loss to NCST weighs us down. Duke needs the win tomorrow to justify elevation to the #1 or a strong #2.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/team-comparison/UNC/DUKE

[eddiehaskell]

WHO CARES about 1 more loss. They have nearly identical overall records, both won H2H at home and Duke won convincingly on a neutral court despite playing a good team and really good team the previous two days.

The pundits can't simply crown UNC a #1 seed 4 weeks ago and refuse to change their mind...can they?

[Olympic Fan]

I have a friend who likes to play mind games.

Earlier today (before the UNC game) he posed this:

"If you could give Duke five more wins -- and ONLY five more wins -- which games would you choose to win?"

I thought about it ... my first inclination was to apply all five wins to the NCAA Tournament, but that means losing in the title game -- and losing to UNC in the ACC semifinals.

I could have picked two more wins in Brooklyn, which would have been an ACC championship ... but it also means losing in the Elite Eight.

In the end, I decided to take one more win in Brooklyn -- it's the UNC game after all! -- and four wins in the NCAA, which would get Duke to the Final Four (not that much difference between losing in the semis and the finals). It would mean another championship banner -- for a regional title.

Of course, it's just a mind game. I'm greedy ... I want to win Saturday, THEN win six more. Wow, that would change how we view this season!

PS With the win ... and FSU's apparent loss, Duke will have 12 top 50 wins as of tonight -- the most in the country. And the Devils can make it 13 tomorrow.

[MarkD83]

I have a friend who likes to play mind games.

Earlier today (before the UNC game) he posed this:

"If you could give Duke five more wins -- and ONLY five more wins -- which games would you choose to win?"

I thought about it ... my first inclination was to apply all five wins to the NCAA Tournament, but that means losing in the title game -- and losing to UNC in the ACC semifinals.

I could have picked two more wins in Brooklyn, which would have been an ACC championship ... but it also means losing in the Elite Eight.

In the end, I decided to take one more win in Brooklyn -- it's the UNC game after all! -- and four wins in the NCAA, which would get Duke to the Final Four (not that much difference between losing in the semis and the finals). It would mean another championship banner -- for a regional title.

Of course, it's just a mind game. I'm greedy ... I want to win Saturday, THEN win six more. Wow, that would change how we view this season!

PS With the win ... and FSU's apparent loss, Duke will have 12 top 50 wins as of tonight -- the most in the country. And the Devils can make it 13 tomorrow.

You sure he did not mean 5 more wins in March after tonight? Yes I will take all 5 wins in March.

[Troublemaker]

The pundits can't simply crown UNC a #1 seed 4 weeks ago and refuse to change their mind...can they?

One thing to keep in mind about this. If anyone is rooting for Duke to become the #2 seed in the East like me, it might be better for UNC to get that #1 seed.

Ideally, we'd be ranked higher than them and would be in just as much contention for a #1 seed, but for whatever reason, that's not happening. It looks like 2 is as high as we can go. Given that, we don't want UNC to be a #2 seed because then that might mean THEY get the 2 seed in the East and get to play in Madison Square Garden, which is a friendly place to Duke.

(Note: I don't think I'd like a potential matchup with Villanova in Elite 8, but oh well, can't have everything. Elite 8 games are supposed to be tough, and the matchup might not even happen.)

[Bluedog]

One thing to keep in mind about this. If anyone is rooting for Duke to become the #2 seed in the East like me, it might be better for UNC to get that #1 seed.

Ideally, we'd be ranked higher than them and would be in just as much contention for a #1 seed, but for whatever reason, that's not happening. It looks like 2 is as high as we can go. Given that, we don't want UNC to be a #2 seed because then that might mean THEY get the 2 seed in the East and get to play in Madison Square Garden, which is a friendly place to Duke.

I agree. I'm rooting for UNC to be the 1 in the south because I don't want Duke there as it's likely to be unfriendly. And we'd probably have to match up (if we're a 3) against Kentucky there in the Sweet Sixteen too. I don't really want a possible Kansas matchup in Kansas City either though. I'm hoping for the East or West. UNC being the 1 in the South makes that more likely. (Although what's the rule about teams from same conference being on top four lines exactly? I could be off...)

[Troublemaker]

I agree. I'm rooting for UNC to be the 1 in the south because I don't want Duke there as it's likely to be unfriendly. And we'd probably have to match up (if we're a 3) against Kentucky there in the Sweet Sixteen too. I don't really want a possible Kansas matchup in Kansas City either though. I'm hoping for the East or West. UNC being the 1 in the South makes that more likely. (Although what's the rule about teams from same conference being on top four lines exactly? I could be off...)

You have it right. If UNC is in the South, Duke won't be there.

And yeah, like you, I'd rather have UNC deal with the hordes of Kentucky fans descending onto Memphis.

[53n206]

Count on a few of the "seeders" to look at the top seeded teams and determine which of them has the best chance to beat Duke. Any bets on FSU being in the same brackets as us and------- you pick the No 1 seed? And playing in a hostile environment.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The pundits can't simply crown UNC a #1 seed 4 weeks ago and refuse to change their mind...can they?

Sure the pundits can. Lucky for us, the pundits aren't on the committee, they are just media wonks looking for internet clicks.

I really will never understand why anyone puts any credence in Joey Brackets, et al. It's like arguing about whether Mighty Mouse can beat up Superman.

Come Sunday, if you give me conference tournament results and a handful of composite rankings, I could select and seed as well as Lunardi on my laptop in 45 minutes. Until then, who gives a rip?

Let's see where the actual committee puts teams on Sunday. Then we can start a thread discussing the merits or lack thereof.

Let's go Duke!

[OldPhiKap]

This is part of the problem with early seedlings made public by the committee. Things sorta get baked in a month before the season and tournaments finish. Why won't UNC drop? Because they were essentially locked in after the regular season regardless of tourney results.

[dyedwab]

Here is a page that illustrates the games themselves. Duke has stronger top 50 wins, but also more top 50 losses. For me it's a toss-up, until the loss to NCST weighs us down. Duke needs the win tomorrow to justify elevation to the #1 or a strong #2.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/team-comparison/UNC/DUKE

The NC State loss, on some level, is the single thing that has us consider a lower seed that an obviously close to comparable UNC team that we beat twice.

I wouldn't call it a flaw, but in almost all of these ratings systems, "bad" losses or wins against bad teams that are too close tend to have a longer hangover for good teams than, say, big road wins. (I looked at this in 2015 when we played Utah in tourney and they were rated right next to us in Kenpom, even though we had better wins and they had worse losses. Essentially, the system penalized us for some less than overwhelming wins against bad teams. It logically follows that losses to those teams have worse effects on seeding, etc.)

[gocanes0506]

Yea the State and Cuse collapses are costing the team at a shot at a #1 seed.

[OldPhiKap]

Lunar Di said last night that we were the top 3 seed right now, but his bracket has us 2nd in the East. FWLIW.

[davekay1971]

Yea the State and Cuse collapses are costing the team at a shot at a #1 seed.

True. But we may look back on those losses as pivotal growth points on our way to K's 6th natty.

At this point I don't care much about our seed. I suspect, however, if we play against ND the way we have done so far in this tournament, no 1 seed will want to see us in their region, regardless of whether we're a 2, 3, or (unlikely now, I guess) 4 seed.

[OldPhiKap]

True. But we may look back on those losses as pivotal growth points on our way to K's 6th natty.

At this point I don't care much about our seed. I suspect, however, if we play against ND the way we have done so far in this tournament, no 1 seed will want to see us in their region, regardless of whether we're a 2, 3, or (unlikely now, I guess) 4 seed.

Yup, yup and yup.

We're in good shape for the Tourney. Bring it.

[Duke79UNLV77]

I would put the Quack Attack as a 1 and ahead of UNC if it wins tonight. They've looked very impressive when I've seen them, and they should get some credit for Brooks being injured for early season losses the PAC 12 isn't deep, but I do think it's strong at the top.

I think we should have already moved above a 2, win or lose today. No one else has more quality wins.

[Indoor66]

Sure the pundits can. Lucky for us, the pundits aren't on the committee, they are just media wonks looking for internet clicks.

I really will never understand why anyone puts any credence in Joey Brackets, et al. It's like arguing about whether Mighty Mouse can beat up Superman.

Come Sunday, if you give me conference tournament results and a handful of composite rankings, I could select and seed as well as Lunardi on my laptop in 45 minutes. Until then, who gives a rip?

Let's see where the actual committee puts teams on Sunday. Then we can start a thread discussing the merits or lack thereof.

Let's go Duke!

That rationality will not play with the must speculate now crowd.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Lunardi has moved Duke up to a two.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Lunardi has moved Duke up to a two.

He also claims the 1 seeds are "locked." I look forward to his explanations tomorrow when the ACTUAL committee moves Duke up to a #1 seed after the dismantle the Irish by 60.

Seriously, I don't understand how this guy gets so much attention. It is like if I described myself as an "expert" in telling you who was going to win basketball games. If I updated you every 5 minutes in last night's game and told you that "UNC is going to win. No, UNC is going to win big. No wait, Duke might win. Oh, yes, definitely Duke is going to win this game." - and then right before the buzzer I predicted "Duke will win by 11." And after the game, I tweet out that I'm the only person who guessed the final score of the game within one point, so therefore I am an expert.

Do you think ESPN would build a cult of personality around that?

[drhbre]

One thing that is strongly in Duke's favor is Road/Neutral Court Wins:

Current AP Top 25 Road/Neutral Wins:

Duke-UNC, Notre Dame, Louisville, Virginia, Florida
UNC-None

Losses need to factor in, but all of UNC's good wins are at home.

[Eakane]

One thing that is strongly in Duke's favor is Road/Neutral Court Wins:

Current AP Top 25 Road/Neutral Wins:

Duke-UNC, Notre Dame, Louisville, Virginia, Florida
UNC-None

Losses need to factor in, but all of UNC's good wins are at home.

I agree that our resume is slightly better than UNC's, but before the tournament, we lost 3 of our last 4, and we are still weighed down by the home loss to NC State. Whether they quit or not afterwards (they did), that was still a bad loss. Having one stinker does not disqualify you from a top seed (KU still getting one despite losing to TCU), but throwing in 7 more just sounds two-ish to me. IMO we deserve the top 2 seed, and what matters more to me is region. If we win tonight, and maybe even if we don't, I think we're looking at a 2 seed in the east or south (unc goes to one, Duke to the other). That's vastly better for us than having to go play the regionals on the left coast.

What we've accomplished in Brooklyn, with or without the crown, has not only improved our seeding and destination, it has altered the teams self-identity. The emergence of Jackson and (finally!) Giles makes us much more dangerous, and once again a serious Title contender. We are peaking at the right time!!

[Indoor66]

He also claims the 1 seeds are "locked." I look forward to his explanations tomorrow when the ACTUAL committee moves Duke up to a #1 seed after the dismantle the Irish by 60.

Seriously, I don't understand how this guy gets so much attention. It is like if I described myself as an "expert" in telling you who was going to win basketball games. If I updated you every 5 minutes in last night's game and told you that "UNC is going to win. No, UNC is going to win big. No wait, Duke might win. Oh, yes, definitely Duke is going to win this game." - and then right before the buzzer I predicted "Duke will win by 11." And after the game, I tweet out that I'm the only person who guessed the final score of the game within one point, so therefore I am an expert.

Do you think ESPN would build a cult of personality around that?

Probably! :cool:

[Nugget]

This is part of the problem with early seedlings made public by the committee. Things sorta get baked in a month before the season and tournaments finish. Why won't UNC drop? Because they were essentially locked in after the regular season regardless of tourney results.

I don't think this is correct. I think the Committee has made pretty clear historically that they value regular season titles in the top conferences more highly than a 3 day tournament. That approach has less to recommend it in these days of unbalanced schedules, but it still exists. The "pundits" are merely acccurately reading what the Committee will do.

[chriso]

Duke must move to a 2. Amazing 2nd half. Love our chances!!

First time poster here from the Pacific Northwest and lifelong Duke fan since the Dawkins days. I have been following these threads for a few years now. Agreed we are at least a 3 seed but unsure if a 2 is possible. Maybe with a win today.Great team win yesterday, and I agree that our upside is tied to Harry and Grayson, so it was amazing to see all our gears working against North Carolina. Let me just say that Gonzaga and UCLA are for real, as I've seen then play numerous times this year, and we all know that Oregon can play. But we may not be sent out west now. Thank you for adding me and let's win the ACC today!!!

[gocanes0506]

Although they won't end up this way, I like the current brackets. Duke matches up much better with Nova than any of the other 1s. Nova has a hard upper end of the bracket (miami, wvu, and uva up there) UNC has an easy bracket and Kansas' is tough.

[Olympic Fan]

A few predictions/observations:

-- I think it's pretty simple -- if Duke wins tonight, the Devils will be a No. 2 seed ... if they lose tonight, Duke will be a No. 3 seed.

-- When you are doing the Duke-UNC comparisons, keep in mind that UNC is officially 26-7 (not 27-7). Their win over non-Div. 1 Chaminade does not count

-- Duke now has 12 top 50 wins -- more than anybody in college basketball. With a win over Notre Dame (a 13th top 50 win) Duke will finish with the most top 50 wins, no matter what happens anywhere else.

-- I think over the years, the committee gives less weight to conference tournaments than what happened in the regular season. Not a hard and fast rule, just my impression (and I've followed the committee closely). I'm not saying the tourney results don't matter, but the committee usually doesn't moves teams off the top line because of a tourney loss. It happens, but only when it's real close.

-- I do have a hard time seeing how the Pac 12 champ (Oregon or Arizona) fails to get a No. 1 seed. As I posted in another thread, it's kind of awkward -- either team would rather be a No. 2 in the West than No. 1 in the South. It's kind of like 1989 when UNC beat Duke in the finals and Duke still got to favorable path in Greensboro (the committee decided both were No. 2 seeds, but UNC was the best No. 2 seed and they didn't want them in the same regional as overall No. 1, Georgetown. In those days, the s-curve ruled).

-- Next to Duke's destination/path, my biggest interest when the field is announced Sunday is going to be Syracuse ... in (as Lunardi insists) or out (as Jerry Palm predicts). Great matchup of the two most highly ballyhooed bracketologists. BTW: Mtn. Devil, that was a brilliant analysis of what "Joey Brackets" does and why its so phony.

[BigWayne]

Personally, I'm hoping we win today and deserve a 1 or 2 seed, but get screwed by the committee and given a 3 seed in the West regional. But I do live 25 minutes from the site of the West regional. YMMV.

[superdave]

This Unc team is not as good as last year's team. Brice Johnson and Marcus Paige were really good. But their reputation is better this year for some reason. They are not a 1 seed. Not with 7 losses, two of which are to a team that makes a better case as a 1 seed. 7 losses is kind of a letdown to be honest. I just hope they have a letdown and get knocked out early. They can all go to hell. GTHC

At this point, I'd love to be a 1 or 2 seed, and avoid being a 3, but I would also rather get favorable other top seeds in our bracket. Spread and kick teams, pick and roll teams, etc should be placed in other regions, thank you.

[gofurman]

A few predictions/observations:

-- I think it's pretty simple -- if Duke wins tonight, the Devils will be a No. 2 seed ... if they lose tonight, Duke will be a No. 3 seed.

-- When you are doing the Duke-UNC comparisons, keep in mind that UNC is officially 26-7 (not 27-7). Their win over non-Div. 1 Chaminade does not count

-- Duke now has 12 top 50 wins -- more than anybody in college basketball. With a win over Notre Dame (a 13th top 50 win) Duke will finish with the most top 50 wins, no matter what happens anywhere else.

-- I think over the years, the committee gives less weight to conference tournaments than what happened in the regular season. Not a hard and fast rule, just my impression (and I've followed the committee closely). I'm not saying the tourney results don't matter, but the committee usually doesn't moves teams off the top line because of a tourney loss. It happens, but only when it's real close.

-- I do have a hard time seeing how the Pac 12 champ (Oregon or Arizona) fails to get a No. 1 seed. As I posted in another thread, it's kind of awkward -- either team would rather be a No. 2 in the West than No. 1 in the South. It's kind of like 1989 when UNC beat Duke in the finals and Duke still got to favorable path in Greensboro (the committee decided both were No. 2 seeds, but UNC was the best No. 2 seed and they didn't want them in the same regional as overall No. 1, Georgetown. In those days, the s-curve ruled).

-- Next to Duke's destination/path, my biggest interest when the field is announced Sunday is going to be Syracuse ... in (as Lunardi insists) or out (as Jerry Palm predicts). Great matchup of the two most highly ballyhooed bracketologists. BTW: Mtn. Devil, that was a brilliant analysis of what "Joey Brackets" does and why its so phony.

Historically conf tourneys carry less weight than reg season. And that's how it should be. Unfortunately unbalanced schedule makes the reg season a little odd. But the bracket guys have to be pretty prepared to hand over the final version within a few hours of conf tournament conclusion so they have said that most things are set with a flex for maybe moving a team one line

Esp back when acc finished on Sunday. That was a quick turn to the final
Bracket Sunday night

[Reilly]

... I don't understand how this guy gets so much attention. It is like if I described myself as an "expert" in telling you who was going to win basketball games. If I updated you every 5 minutes in last night's game and told you that "UNC is going to win. No, UNC is going to win big. No wait, Duke might win. Oh, yes, definitely Duke is going to win this game." - and then right before the buzzer I predicted "Duke will win by 11." And after the game, I tweet out that I'm the only person who guessed the final score of the game within one point, so therefore I am an expert ...


... Mtn. Devil, that was a brilliant analysis of what "Joey Brackets" does and why its so phony.

Compare the stories of legend Bill Brill riding into the press room on a luggage cart or whatever to unveil his mock bracket on an ACC Tourney Saturday night with the nonsensical dorkiness that espn inflicts on us for weeks on end with Lunardi = a microcosm of the decline of American sport and life.

[DukeDevilDeb]

Compare the stories of legend Bill Brill riding into the press room on a luggage cart or whatever to unveil his mock bracket on an ACC Tourney Saturday night with the nonsensical dorkiness that espn inflicts on us for weeks on end with Lunardi = a microcosm of the decline of American sport and life.

"The win gives Duke a chance to end up as high as a two-seed. The Blue Devils looked a lot like the team we were expecting to see way back in November, when they were voted the preseason No. 1. Despite all the injuries, Duke has a very strong resume as well. They have 12 RPI top 50 wins, which is more than any other team, including the Tar Heels. The Blue Devils’ eight losses will keep them from challenging from the top line, even if they are the ACC Tournament champions."

Go Duke!

[throatybeard]

That's fair. It pays to beat NC State at home.

[duke4ever19]

Gary Parrish gives a brief argument for Duke as a 1-seed in his latest Top-25-and-1.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/college-basketball-rankings-duke-eyes-no-1-seed-jumps-five-spots-in-top-25-and-1/

Not the first place I've heard this. Seth Davis has also been floating the same idea.

Obviously, it would be an unprecedented move by the committee, based on the number of losses we have. I doubt we climb that high, but boy wouldn't that "Duke favoritism" train would get rolling in a hurry. :)

[Ggallagher]

Gary Parrish gives a brief argument for Duke as a 1-seed in his latest Top-25-and-1.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/college-basketball-rankings-duke-eyes-no-1-seed-jumps-five-spots-in-top-25-and-1/

Not the first place I've heard this. Seth Davis has also been floating the same idea.

Obviously, it would be an unprecedented move by the committee, based on the number of losses we have. I doubt we climb that high, but boy wouldn't that "Duke favoritism" train would get rolling in a hurry. :)

Bilas made the same point this morning suggesting that a win over Notre Dame means Duke has to be considered as a 1-seed. He made it sound pretty simple. We would have the best record against top 50 teams and we won the head to head battle with UNC. His opinion is that the four currently best teams should be given one-seeds. JWill and Uncle Fester disagreed - no surprise.

[arnie]

Bilas made the same point this morning suggesting that a win over Notre Dame means Duke has to be considered as a 1-seed. He made it sound pretty simple. We would have the best record against top 50 teams and we won the head to head battle with UNC. His opinion is that the four currently best teams should be given one-seeds. JWill and Uncle Fester disagreed - no surprise.

If we win, I'd rather be a 2-seed in a bracket with the weakest #1. I guess I'm just weary of all the Duke hate and the firestorm in the Triangle would be intense if we stole the prize from you know who.

[NYBri]

If we win, I'd rather be a 2-seed in a bracket with the weakest #1. I guess I'm just weary of all the Duke hate and the firestorm in the Triangle would be intense if we stole the prize from you know who.

Not living presently in the Triangle, I say, let's steal that #1 and let the firestorm begin. :cool:

[Kedsy]

Obviously, it would be an unprecedented move by the committee, based on the number of losses we have.

I don't think an 8-loss team has ever been a #1 (at least not in the 64-team era), but four 7-loss teams have been #1 seeds (2000 Michigan State; 2001 Illinois; 2012 Michigan State; 2016 Virginia). Plus, the pundits all seem to think 7-loss UNC is a lock for a #1. Why would 7 losses be OK but 8 losses be an automatic disqualifier?

Note, I'm not saying Duke deserves a #1; we're #12 in Pomeroy, #8 in Sagarin, and #9 in the RPI -- though those will all go up if we beat Notre Dame, we won't be top 4 in any of those computer metrics. But Parrish is right that our resume is arguably better than several teams supposedly being considered for a #1 seed.

[NM Duke Fan]

I have seen articles that show Duke as the top number two seed. So if that is the case, then a jump from the number 5 on the S-curve to the number 4 spot on the S-curve does not seem all that much of an earthquake. I suspect the odds are quite against it, but when one does look carefully at the overall records there is certainly some justification for this event. In any case, this team has moved up the S-curve in the last few games. And it was the ACC Tournament which enabled this feat. So much for those of us, including me, who wondered if it was not better just to bomb out and rest. The team instead has used this period to further tine-tune its play and rotation, and it does not look exhausted. And I doubt it will look that way tonight either, with some of the starters having had a bit of rest. The main thing is that the team now goes into the Big Dance with increased momentum and confidence, peaking at the right time, when for much of the season it looked like it would never quite get in synch!

[BD80]

I have a friend who likes to play mind games.

Earlier today (before the UNC game) he posed this:

"If you could give Duke five more wins -- and ONLY five more wins -- which games would you choose to win?"

I thought about it ... my first inclination was to apply all five wins to the NCAA Tournament, but that means losing in the title game -- and losing to UNC in the ACC semifinals.

I could have picked two more wins in Brooklyn, which would have been an ACC championship ... but it also means losing in the Elite Eight.

In the end, I decided to take one more win in Brooklyn -- it's the UNC game after all! -- and four wins in the NCAA, which would get Duke to the Final Four (not that much difference between losing in the semis and the finals). It would mean another championship banner -- for a regional title.

Of course, it's just a mind game. I'm greedy ... I want to win Saturday, THEN win six more. Wow, that would change how we view this season!

PS With the win ... and FSU's apparent loss, Duke will have 12 top 50 wins as of tonight -- the most in the country. And the Devils can make it 13 tomorrow.

Easy question ... 5 MORE wins

Give me a win in the game against Kansas. A win in the game at carolina. A win at home against Stated, that one ticked me off.

A win tonight for the ACC Championship.

A win 3 weeks from Monday for the Natty.

[vick]

I don't think an 8-loss team has ever been a #1 (at least not in the 64-team era), but four 7-loss teams have been #1 seeds (2000 Michigan State; 2001 Illinois; 2012 Michigan State; 2016 Virginia). Plus, the pundits all seem to think 7-loss UNC is a lock for a #1. Why would 7 losses be OK but 8 losses be an automatic disqualifier?

Note, I'm not saying Duke deserves a #1; we're #12 in Pomeroy, #8 in Sagarin, and #9 in the RPI -- though those will all go up if we beat Notre Dame, we won't be top 4 in any of those computer metrics. But Parrish is right that our resume is arguably better than several teams supposedly being considered for a #1 seed.

I don't think the committee relies that much on (or should rely on) metrics like Pomeroy, Sagarin, etc., where wins and losses aren't important. Although I don't think they are explicit about it, my sense is that the committee is moving toward more of a "strength of record" concept, where you use the better metrics than RPI (like Pomeroy) to determine strength of schedule, but evaluate teams based on how they actually won and lost games against that schedule. This strikes me as the right approach (definitely for inclusion into the field), though I am fine with double checking against Pomeroy/Sagarin/etc. when seeding to make sure things aren't imbalanced.

(Speaking of, if anyone knows how kenpom now derives win probability from efficiency margin, I might try to put together a quick estimate of strength of record for the 1 seed contenders)

[gam7]

If we win, I'd rather be a 2-seed in a bracket with the weakest #1. I guess I'm just weary of all the Duke hate and the firestorm in the Triangle would be intense if we stole the prize from you know who.

And the weakest #1 is _______? I am not sure who we'd want to be matched up with as a 1. But, I have convinced myself that I'm more concerned about the teams vying for 2s and 3s. That's who we would be slated to play in the sweet 16, and there are some VERY dangerous teams that will be on those lines.

[subzero02]

During the CBS triple header broadcast today, they interviewed an NCAA vice president who said the outcomes of both the Pac-12 tournament and the ACC tournament would influence the 1 seed discussion.

[NM Duke Fan]

During the CBS triple header broadcast today, they interviewed an NCAA vice president who said the outcomes of both the Pac-12 tournament and the ACC tournament would influence the 1 seed discussion.

Interesting! That would imply to me that Duke obtaining a number one seed is not out of the question in his mind.

[Indoor66]

During the CBS triple header broadcast today, they interviewed an NCAA vice president who said the outcomes of both the Pac-12 tournament and the ACC tournament would influence the 1 seed discussion.

That would be Dave Gavett.

[dball]

That would be Dave Gavett.

Dan Gavitt

[sagegrouse]

Dan Gavitt

Son of the legendary Dave Gavitt, founder of the Big East, head coach and AD at Providence College.

[WVDUKEFAN]

No way is Gonzaga a 1 seed.

[NSDukeFan]

If we win, I'd rather be a 2-seed in a bracket with the weakest #1. I guess I'm just weary of all the Duke hate and the firestorm in the Triangle would be intense if we stole the prize from you know who.

I would be ok if everyone thought Duke had an easy bracket while winning the tournament.

[NM Duke Fan]

A bit more detail here:

When asked if the committee was set on their No. 1 seeds, Gavitt indicated that results from the last couple of days had destabilized that part of the bracket. In particular, he noted that there were six teams in play for those four spots and that the Pac-12 and ACC title games could have an impact.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/bracketology-oregon-jumps-to-a-no-1-seed-and-duke-could-too-if-it-beats-notre-dame/

[uh_no]

A bit more detail here:

When asked if the committee was set on their No. 1 seeds, Gavitt indicated that results from the last couple of days had destabilized that part of the bracket. In particular, he noted that there were six teams in play for those four spots and that the Pac-12 and ACC title games could have an impact.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/bracketology-oregon-jumps-to-a-no-1-seed-and-duke-could-too-if-it-beats-notre-dame/

so you're saying lunardi has no idea what he's talking about? shocked.

He touts his % of right picks, but

1) any idiot can get most of the teams correct by taking conference champions and top 25 teams (and he does!)
2) he's somewhere around 50/50 on bubble teams. You could do as well with a flip of the coin
3) his seedings/matchups/placements generally aren't close.

He speaks as he has intimate knowledge about what the committee will do, and then complains when they're output doesn't match his prediction.

That doesn't mean he has no value, though. He does know the bracketing rules inside and out, and generally tries to observe ebbs and flows of committee groupthink.

Anyway, lunardi says "1 seeds are locked" committee says "6 teams in play for 1 seed"
Thesis: generally ignore what joe lunardi says

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

#1 seeds still locked, Joey Brackets?

[bleedingblue88]

I would love to be #2 seed in Gonzaga's bracket. Whoever wins the Pac 12 championship tonight deserves a #1 seed over Duke or UNC in my opinion.

[rtnorthrup]

I don't know what seed we will get, but the Greenville regional is Fri/Sun so assuming we get placed there, we will get an extra day of rest this week.

[Tripping William]

I don't know if we'll be a 1 or not, but it would be a COMPLETE TRAVESTY if the Heels are.

[chriso]

I would love to be #2 seed in Gonzaga's bracket. Whoever wins the Pac 12 championship tonight deserves a #1 seed over Duke or UNC in my opinion.

I now think with our win and UCLA loss we'll be the 2 seed out west. What a gutty win!

[juise]

I agree with those who have said that I want nothing to do with Duke in the West. ESPN has Duke #2 in the East. I think that seems pretty reasonable. Let the PAC12 winner take the #1 in the South and put Duke in the Wast and UNC in the South. Hopefully UK loses tomorrow and is out of the mix for a #2.

[arnie]

I now think with our win and UCLA loss we'll be the 2 seed out west. What a gutty win!

Gonzaga the 1 and UCLA the 3?

[juise]

Gonzaga the 1 and UCLA the 3?

Two road games. No thank you. Anything but the West, please.

[Listen to Quants]

Two road games. No thank you. Anything but the West, please.

Yeah, 'road' games would be less than good. On the other hand, if you believe the quantitative analysis rankings, the PAC is overrated (and Gonzaga ain't). All interesting.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

I agree with those who have said that I want nothing to do with Duke in the West. ESPN has Duke #2 in the East. I think that seems pretty reasonable. Let the PAC12 winner take the #1 in the South and put Duke in the Wast and UNC in the South. Hopefully UK loses tomorrow and is out of the mix for a #2.

Since the NCAAT expanded to 64 teams in 1985, 9 times Duke has been placed in the East Regional.

Their record:

32-2 with 7 Final Four appearances.

So, yeah, playing in the East matters to Duke.

[gam7]

Palm has us as the 3rd overall seed in the tournament (in the South). Ahead of Gonzaga.

[WWBD]

I think we'll be a #1 seed.
I think UNC will be a #2 seed.
I think they'll be in Oregon's bracket.
I would gladly trade places with them.

[gam7]

Without Boucher, I'm thinking Oregon's not as scary.

[WWBD]

Without Boucher, I'm thinking Oregon's not as scary.

My point.

[bleedingblue88]

Arizona is handling Oregon so far, I wouldn't want to be in their region.

[gam7]

My point.

Right you are. I misread it!

[Hingeknocker]

It's going to be very interesting what happens with the Pac-12 teams. Right now, it's looking very likely that Arizona is going to beat Oregon for the Pac-12 title. Based on today's reports out of the bracket room, it seemed that the Pac-12 Champ would have a case for a 1 seed, but I don't see how Arizona's resume gets them there. I think that means Gonzaga has #1 in the West, and the only question is #1 in the South. We have a good case.

As for the 2 seeds, I do think Arizona will now be #2 in the West. Oregon - without Boucher - might have trouble staying on the 2 line? UCLA might take another 2 seed somewhere, an ACC team will definitely be a 2 seed, and there could be multiple ACC teams on the 2 line, Kentucky will have a case for a 2 seed (and will likely howl if Duke takes #1 in the South), West Virginia's metrics look like the resume of a #1 seed (from Kenpom, at least). It's a lot!

I think the parity among teams up and down the bracket, but particularly at the top means this is going to be the most interesting Selection Show I've seen in a while. All the more reason to be so satisfied that we have played our way onto the 2 line, and maybe even a 1 seed!

[-jk]

There is history for dropping a highly ranked team with a late, season-ending injury.

-jk

[pfrduke]

There is history for dropping a highly ranked team with a late, season-ending injury.

-jk

Chris Boucher is not Kenyon Martin though

[Utley]

How does the top 2 get seeded? Do they get the weakest 1, their regional preference or something else?

[pfrduke]

How does the top 2 get seeded? Do they get the weakest 1, their regional preference or something else?

Regional preference, unless it's the same region as the overall number 1.

[Hingeknocker]

How does the top 2 get seeded? Do they get the weakest 1, their regional preference or something else?

I believe the stated process from the committee is that the top 2 seed is seeded by regional preference. None of the bracket principles would stop a 2 seed from being placed in any region, as far as I know.

Edit: pfrduke beat me, and had the correct answer. I forgot about them avoiding grouping the best overall 1 seed and best 2 seed.

[Eternal Outlaw]

Nicole Auerbach‏Verified account @NicoleAuerbach 2h2 hours ago
More
Duke has more wins vs. the RPI top 25 this week (3) than Oregon has all season (2, entering tonight's game).

Stewart Mandel‏Verified account @slmandel 2h2 hours ago
More
Stewart Mandel Retweeted Stewart Mandel
Most impressive part of Duke's resume: Six Top 25 wins away from Cameron. Put that in perspective, Oregon/Arizona have two Top 25 Ws total.

[stickdog]

http://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2017/03/11/duke-wins-the-acc-tournament-may-end-up-as-fourth-no-1-seed/

The win puts Duke in a spot where they could very well end up being a No. 1 seed. I know people don’t want to hear that, but it’s the truth. The Blue Devils have more top 50 wins than any other team in the country with 13, and eight of those 13 wins came away from home. They have eight top 25 wins — six away from home — and four top ten wins — with three away from home. They are 26-8 on the season and they have beaten North Carolina in two out of the three matchups between the two teams, including in Brooklyn on Friday night.

After everything Duke has been through this season, the injuries and the trips and the internal turmoil, they are on track to enter the tournament precisely where we thought they would: At the top of their region.

[chriso]

Gonzaga the 1 and UCLA the 3?

Indeed. I think Arizona or Oregon go somewhere else. But I'm just guessing at this point. This team is peaking at the right time. At halftime of the Clemson game I thought we might be a 5 or a 6 seed if we lost. What a difference a few days makes!

[Troublemaker]

Which spot does everyone prefer? #1 in South or #2 in East?



East
MidWest
West
South


Villanova
Kansas
Gonzaga
Duke / UNC


Duke / UNC
Oregon
Arizona
Kentucky


UCLA
Louisville
FSU
Baylor


WVU
Florida
Notre Dame
Butler

[Faison1]

I haven't read the entire thread, but I would find it hard to believe they are going to move any or Villinova, Gonzaga, and Kansas from the 1 seed. That would leave UNC to lose the spot.

If Kentucky wins tomorrow, they have a higher BPI/RPI than us, correct?

Frankly, as Coach K says, who cares about seeding? It would be nice to get a Friday game for the additional time off, but the rest of it really doesn't matter.

2 seed in the East starting in Greeneville sounds really good to me...is that what everyone is hoping for?

[pfrduke]

Which spot does everyone prefer? #1 in South or #2 in East?



East
MidWest
West
South


Villanova
Kansas
Gonzaga
Duke / UNC


Duke / UNC
Oregon
Arizona
Kentucky


UCLA
Louisville
FSU
Baylor


WVU
Florida
Notre Dame
Butler




If those are the options, playing in MSG > playing Kentucky in Memphis. Although the road to the elite 8 would be a little easier in the South, I think (UCLA doesn't play any defense but their win-in-a-shootout potential is scary).

[BigZ]

My guess is we are either a 2 w Kansas bracket or a 1 with Kentucky as 2 and UNC in Kansas bracket. They won't admit it but the committee wants big matchups so having Kansas Kentucky Duke UNC has a combination in 2 brackets builds interest or maybe Unc as a 2 in Nova bracket

[Troublemaker]

I haven't read the entire thread, but I would find it hard to believe they are going to move any or Villinova, Gonzaga, and Kansas from the 1 seed. That would leave UNC to lose the spot.

If Kentucky wins tomorrow, they have a higher BPI/RPI than us, correct?

Frankly, as Coach K says, who cares about seeding? It would be nice to get a Friday game for the additional time off, but the rest of it really doesn't matter.

2 seed in the East starting in Greeneville sounds really good to me...is that what everyone is hoping for?

That's what I was aiming for until several posts with links made me believe that Duke actually could get a #1. Now I'm debating it.

Memphis would be full of Kentucky fans, right? It's a tough choice.

[Troublemaker]

If those are the options, playing in MSG > playing Kentucky in Memphis. Although the road to the elite 8 would be a little easier in the South, I think (UCLA doesn't play any defense but their win-in-a-shootout potential is scary).

Agreed totally. I think I lean towards #2 in the East still. But yes, UCLA is scary. If we get 2 in the East, I would hope it's Baylor not UCLA as the 3 seed.

[pfrduke]

Agreed totally. I think I lean towards #2 in the East still. But yes, UCLA is scary. If we get 2 in the East, I would hope it's Baylor not UCLA as the 3 seed.

The tough thing is that if we really are being considered the top 2 seed, it will be hard to end up in the east, since Villanova is (I think) virtually guaranteed of being the #1 overall. So the committee will have to have 5 teams ahead of us to get into that slot.

[Utley]

Regional preference, unless it's the same region as the overall number 1.

So how,would,that play out for us. Wouldn't our regional preference be in the East - where Villanova - #1 would be?

[pfrduke]

So how,would,that play out for us. Wouldn't our regional preference be in the East - where Villanova - #1 would be?

I think it means South, unless UNC is #1 there, which then means Midwest. I'm starting to think that #2 in the Midwest is the most likely scenario.

[WWBD]

Just keep in mind. The committee likes to get its seeding right. It's a point of pride. Whoever is the #1 to our #2 is going to be PISSED.

[gam7]

If those are the options, playing in MSG > playing Kentucky in Memphis. Although the road to the elite 8 would be a little easier in the South, I think (UCLA doesn't play any defense but their win-in-a-shootout potential is scary).

I don't know - playing no one tougher than Butler (assuming chalk) to get to the regional final sounds pretty good to me...

[ice-9]

I'd prefer for Duke to be a 1 seed regardless. Worrying about the Elite 8 is just too far away -- there will be at least 2 very tough games that Duke can easily lose and I'd rather we maximize the chances of getting past those 2 games.

I also think we deserve to be a 1 seed. That's of course different from actually getting it, but here's my reasoning. The wins and the body of work everyone knows about. But is there any doubt that Duke is right now the best team in the ACC? We beat Florida State, Louisville, UNC and Notre Dame in the last 11 days; these are 4 of the ACC's best teams. Everyone agrees that the conference is also by far the best in the country, and the best team in the best conference with a body of work like ours should be represented at the top line. Add the fact our losses can be partially explained by injuries and Coach K's surgery and IMO we have a compelling argument to be a 1 seed.

[subzero02]

I'd prefer to be a 1 seed in the south based on troublemaker's projections.

[HK Dukie]

I want no part of Nova till the final 4. They look just as good as last year.

No other region scares me. Gonzaga plays well in advanced stats but I think there is some inflation in the apparent quality of their wins (St Mary's is not the 13th best team in the country and they got 3 wins vs them). KenPom tends to overrate teams with low numbers of possessions (Virginia). Overall KenPom is the best quant system but there appear to be some correlated aberrations this year after some formula changes.

Whether KenPom is right or wrong, get a #1 or #2, go out West or stay East, this Duke team is the one team no opposing fan wants in their bracket. Can't wait for this tourney to begin!

[juise]

I was glad to see that the Greenville subregional games are Friday/Sunday. That extra day off is well-deserved.

[chriso]

[QUOTE=HK Dukie;961015]I want no part of Nova till the final 4. They look just as good as last year.



Still think we'll be a 2 seed out west but I'm so giddy over yesterday I think we can take anyone. And remember ones sometimes don't even make it to the Elite 8 so we just have to beat who's in front of us. What a tournament. I was in Tallahassee this year and the things the fans were yelling at Grayson were obscene. It's like the level of hate Red Sox fans have for the Yankees. I really don't get it. But it makes nights like last night all the sweeter. Thank you again for including me. K has thrown the freshman into the fire and it is finally paying off. This run has me thinking number 6!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I would love Duke to be a one seed just to hear the general tooth-gnashing of the media about something not related to Grayson, K, Harry, or the draft. The media can whine for a week, and Duke can rest, practice, and get ready for kicking butts.

[chriso]

I would love Duke to be a one seed just to hear the general tooth-gnashing of the media about something not related to Grayson, K, Harry, or the draft. The media can whine for a week, and Duke can rest, practice, and get ready for kicking butts.
I like the idea of flying under the radar as a 2. As much as Duke can fly under the radar. :cool:

[Indoor66]

Dan Gavitt

Same family - and when I saw him I thought he had gotten a lot thinner....:cool:

[Indoor66]

I think I'll post my projection about 7:00 PM EDT this evening.

[NM Duke Fan]

Extensive article by Matt Norlander on whether or not Duke deserves a one seed:

The Blue Devils (27-8) will be front and center for the biggest debate on Selection Sunday. Should Duke be a No. 1? Will Duke be a No. 1? Does Duke even want to be a No. 1 if that means the Blue Devils go to the South Regional (Memphis) rather than the East (Madison Square Garden)?

It’s going to be Duke vs. North Carolina vs. Arizona. And it’s going to be spectacular. We almost never have No. 1 seed debates for three teams. And Duke’s usually firmly in or firmly out. Are we having a great March already or what?

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-makes-acc-history-and-a-case-for-ncaa-seeding-thats-sure-to-be-debated/

[FadedTackyShirt]

Devils and the Holes will both play in Greenville on Friday. Neither will get the late game (~9:45 PM), but is the 12:15 or 3 tip better? One's a lock for the 7 PM tip.

[barjwr]

I think I'll post my projection about 7:00 PM EDT this evening.

You and Lunardi . . .

[Wander]

That's fair. It pays to beat NC State at home.

I've been saying all season long that this game is going to cost us a seed line, and I still believe it. The loss to a horrible NC State team will be the difference between a 1 and 2 seed.

[chriso]

You and Lunardi . . .
Not sure why I have Syracuse on the brain but I hope they get in. As for Duke I was re-watching the game and noticed how good Amile looked. He's moving better and Frank looks very comfortable at the point. Feel very good moving forward! :D

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I've been saying all season long that this game is going to cost us a seed line, and I still believe it. The loss to a horrible NC State team will be the difference between a 1 and 2 seed.

Better than the difference between a 4 and a 5 seed.

[Furniture]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/784485563931975684/xau1WpWT_bigger.jpg


(https://mobile.twitter.com/RealJayWilliams)
31m (https://mobile.twitter.com/RealJayWilliams/status/840932218604277761)Jay Williams‏ @RealJayWilliams (https://mobile.twitter.com/RealJayWilliams)
I think Duke bc of their # of quality wins SHOULD be a 1 seed but the reality is that they WON'T. They will be high on the 2 line. @espn (https://mobile.twitter.com/espn)

[SCMatt33]

Extensive article by Matt Norlander on whether or not Duke deserves a one seed:

The Blue Devils (27-8) will be front and center for the biggest debate on Selection Sunday. Should Duke be a No. 1? Will Duke be a No. 1? Does Duke even want to be a No. 1 if that means the Blue Devils go to the South Regional (Memphis) rather than the East (Madison Square Garden)?

It’s going to be Duke vs. North Carolina vs. Arizona. And it’s going to be spectacular. We almost never have No. 1 seed debates for three teams. And Duke’s usually firmly in or firmly out. Are we having a great March already or what?

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-makes-acc-history-and-a-case-for-ncaa-seeding-thats-sure-to-be-debated/

First, that's some selective memory if he thinks that Duke is firmly in or firmly out. The last time that everyone thought Duke was firmly in as a 1 seed was 2006. In 2010 there was a huge debate Duke, West Virginia, and Ohio State for the last 1 (Syracuse only got bumped down to 4 overall at the last minute because of Arinze Onuaku's injury status). The ACC that year very much resembled the big ten this year outside of Duke and Maryland at home was our only top 25 win despite a slew of top 50 and top 100 wins. In 2011, Duke was actually firmly in as a 1 unbeknownst to the whole world who thought we were playing for a 1 seed against UNC in the title game that afternoon. In 2015, there was a big debate between Duke, Wisconsin and UVA for 2 spots. Wisconsin and UVA had good overall resumes, but Wisconsin had that Rutgers loss and UVA had a not 100% Justin Anderson. Duke hadn't actually won anything (conference regular season or tourney) ultimately, Duke beating both of those teams in their own buildings was the ace in the hole.

The other thing Norlander neglect to mention is the possibility of Baylor being a fly in the ointment. If they somehow hold on to a 2 seed above Louisville and Oregon (presuming nova, zags, Kansas, UNC, Duke, UK, and Arizona are 1-7 in some order and UNC is a 1 and Duke a 2) Duke could get boxed into the Midwest region because we can't go south and Baylor can't go Midwest for conference considerations. Depending on the exact order, it could also be that Baylor goes south and UK gets boxed into Midwest so that's something to keep an eye on.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Pretending Joe Lunardi can predict the NCAA brackets is like pretending your thermometer can predict the weather.

[duketaylor]

I think we'll get a 2 seed and uncheats get the 1 for winning the regular season-just a hunch. I also think we'll be the 2 in the East w/Villanova. ISU moves up quite a bit, I think URI gets in, maybe knocking KSU out. I think Ill St gets in, meaning Syracuse is in jeopardy. I'm gonna spend some time during the VCU game doing some seeding/prep work.
Way to GO DEVILS!!

[brevity]

Pretending Joe Lunardi can predict the NCAA brackets is like pretending your thermometer can predict the weather.

Neither have predictive value, but thermometers can actually measure the present temperature. Joe Lunardi is making up numbers to tell you how hot or cold something is.

Now, had you compared Lunardi to a rectal thermometer, I would have agreed with you.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Neither have predictive value, but thermometers can actually measure the present temperature. Joe Lunardi is making up numbers to tell you how hot or cold something is.

Now, had you compared Lunardi to a rectal thermometer, I would have agreed with you.

You must blah blah... well stated

[CharlestonDave]

A Great Tournament for Duke and for Coach K.

I just do not know how many times we can be down 8, 11, 13 points and come back to win in the NCAA tournament. I hope that I am wrong

[Tripping William]

A Great Tournament for Duke and for Coach K.

I just do not know how many times we can be down 8, 11, 13 points and come back to win in the NCAA tournament. I hope that I am wrong

Six. :o

[Mrezt]

I truly hope Duke gets the 1 seed because the tears would be delicious. Hell, they may even claim the Russians hacked the selection committee computers

[vick]

As a rough estimation of 1-seed "worthiness," I went back and ran the "strength of record" analysis I mentioned previously. Basically, I plugged the 1-seed contenders' schedules into an Excel sheet, used Kenpom rankings to run 10,000 simulations of how a team with the 10th best offense and defense (which would be about the 3rd best team overall--in other worse, an average 1-seed) would perform against that schedule, and compared that to the actual number of wins the team had. The lower the odds this hypothetical team beats the actual number of wins, the better the team's record is. Here were my results:

1. Gonzaga 7.9%
2. Villanova 12.2%
3. Kansas 12.8%
4. Arizona 40.6%
5a. Kentucky (if they win today) 43.9%
5. Duke 57.9%
6. UNC 61.8%
7. Kentucky (current number of wins) 63.3%

That...feels right? It's comforting for the metric that the three "locks" (Gonzaga, Villanova, Kansas) are all comfortably the three best. I was a little surprised that Arizona ranks that highly given how down Kenpom is on them, and the PAC-12 as a whole, but they do have a high "luck" (wins in excess of prediction from scoring margin) number, so that probably makes sense.

Anyway, long story short, I think there's pretty strong empirical support for Duke being a contender for the fourth 1-seed even if you don't account for injuries or late-season momentum at all.

[tbyers11]

Which spot does everyone prefer? #1 in South or #2 in East?



East
MidWest
West
South


Villanova
Kansas
Gonzaga
Duke / UNC


Duke / UNC
Oregon
Arizona
Kentucky


UCLA
Louisville
FSU
Baylor


WVU
Florida
Notre Dame
Butler



If these are the 2 options, I'll take the 1 in the South. I'd take Butler over UCLA as Sweet 16 matchup in a heartbeat. I don't think UCLA has the experience or defense to win the whole thing but their offensive firepower scares the crap out of me in a 1 game matchup.

Chalk doesn't always hold so we can't assume it is a binary Nova/UK debate for a potential E8 game. Kentucky fans travel everywhere so the location doesn't matter too much to me. I also think Nova is a better team than UK. We'd obviously have trouble staying in front of Fox for UK (who doesn't) but I like our other matchups with UK

[Tripping William]

I truly hope Duke gets the 1 seed because the tears would be delicious. Hell, they may even claim the Russians hacked the selection committee computers

I'm trying to be objective here (I really am, even though I know I can't fully do it), but fear of this outcome, to me, is the only principled basis on which Duke would not get a One. I don't like or agree with the guiding principle here, of course, but I don't see another criteria leading to that outcome. (Yes, I'm probably setting myself up for being Kedsied, but, so it goes.)

[WWBD]

ESPN running a covert hit piece right now:
"Is Duke worthy of a #2 seed?"
As if we're still being considered as a 3 by anyone!

[azzefkram]

I would love to be #2 seed in Gonzaga's bracket. Whoever wins the Pac 12 championship tonight deserves a #1 seed over Duke or UNC in my opinion.

Oregon had 7 games in conference against BC level competition. Their best win (arizona @ home) is equivalent to our FSU win at home. Arizona had 8 games in conference against BC level competition. Their best win was last night. Oregon and Arizona have better W-L records but against a much weaker schedule.

[Wander]

As a rough estimation of 1-seed "worthiness," I went back and ran the "strength of record" analysis I mentioned previously. Basically, I plugged the 1-seed contenders' schedules into an Excel sheet, used Kenpom rankings to run 10,000 simulations of how a team with the 10th best offense and defense (which would be about the 3rd best team overall--in other worse, an average 1-seed) would perform against that schedule, and compared that to the actual number of wins the team had. The lower the odds this hypothetical team beats the actual number of wins, the better the team's record is. Here were my results:

1. Gonzaga 7.9%
2. Villanova 12.2%
3. Kansas 12.8%
4. Arizona 40.6%
5a. Kentucky (if they win today) 43.9%
5. Duke 57.9%
6. UNC 61.8%
7. Kentucky (current number of wins) 63.3%

That...feels right? It's comforting for the metric that the three "locks" (Gonzaga, Villanova, Kansas) are all comfortably the three best. I was a little surprised that Arizona ranks that highly given how down Kenpom is on them, and the PAC-12 as a whole, but they do have a high "luck" (wins in excess of prediction from scoring margin) number, so that probably makes sense.


Cool analysis. That's exactly what I would have too - Gonzaga, Villanova, Kansas, and Arizona as the 1 seeds, and Duke, UNC, and Kentucky all as 2 seeds.

[duke2x]

Which spot does everyone prefer? #1 in South or #2 in East?



East
MidWest
West
South


Villanova
Kansas
Gonzaga
Duke / UNC


Duke / UNC
Oregon
Arizona
Kentucky


UCLA
Louisville
FSU
Baylor


WVU
Florida
Notre Dame
Butler



I would prefer the East. We have one comparative point of data with Villanova: they beat UVA at home by 2.

I'm also going to raise another possible debate. I think Gonzaga may have cost themselves a #1 seed by losing at home to a NIT-BYU squad. I understand the difficulties they face as a WCC team and know they have had a really wonderful season. The media loves them as much as UNC, but Gonzaga really doesn't pass the eye test relative to Louisville, a #2-#3 seed in my book. I could see Villanova-Duke-KS-UNC from East to West with Gonzaga and Arizona as the top #2s in that order. (Gonzaga did beat AZ when AZ had major injuries.) That does give UNC Gonzaga as their #2 seed.

I am prepared to be disappointed like I was with the 2008 pod assignments and 2016 lacrosse bracket.

[Wander]

I'm also going to raise another possible debate. I think Gonzaga may have cost themselves a #1 seed by losing at home to a NIT-BYU squad. I understand the difficulties they face as a WCC team and know they have had a really wonderful season. The media loves them as much as UNC, but Gonzaga really don't pass the eye test relative to Louisville, a #2-#3 seed in my book. I could see Villanova-Duke-KS-UNC from East to West with Gonzaga and Arizona as the top #2s in that order. (Gonzaga did beat AZ when AZ had major injuries.) That does give UNC Gonzaga as their #2 seed.


A 32-1 team that has wins away from home over the Big 12 and Pac 12 tournament champions isn't going to miss out on a 1 seed. It's a lock.

[tbyers11]

As a rough estimation of 1-seed "worthiness," I went back and ran the "strength of record" analysis I mentioned previously. Basically, I plugged the 1-seed contenders' schedules into an Excel sheet, used Kenpom rankings to run 10,000 simulations of how a team with the 10th best offense and defense (which would be about the 3rd best team overall--in other worse, an average 1-seed) would perform against that schedule, and compared that to the actual number of wins the team had. The lower the odds this hypothetical team beats the actual number of wins, the better the team's record is. Here were my results:

1. Gonzaga 7.9%
2. Villanova 12.2%
3. Kansas 12.8%
4. Arizona 40.6%
5a. Kentucky (if they win today) 43.9%
5. Duke 57.9%
6. UNC 61.8%
7. Kentucky (current number of wins) 63.3%

That...feels right? It's comforting for the metric that the three "locks" (Gonzaga, Villanova, Kansas) are all comfortably the three best. I was a little surprised that Arizona ranks that highly given how down Kenpom is on them, and the PAC-12 as a whole, but they do have a high "luck" (wins in excess of prediction from scoring margin) number, so that probably makes sense.

Anyway, long story short, I think there's pretty strong empirical support for Duke being a contender for the fourth 1-seed even if you don't account for injuries or late-season momentum at all.

Can't spork you, but thanks for the awesome breakdown.

[moonpie23]

the committee does take injuries and special circumstances into account.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7-tskP0OzI

[Papa John]

Neither have predictive value, but thermometers can actually measure the present temperature. Joe Lunardi is making up numbers to tell you how hot or cold something is.

Now, had you compared Lunardi to a rectal thermometer, I would have agreed with you.

Indeed... The fascination with Lunardi's "bracketology" perplexes me. His projections are absolutely meaningless early in the season because the games haven't yet been played, and by the time we reach this point, his projections aren't really any different or better than your average college basketball fan might put together on any given day. And, at the end of the day, his projections are irrelevant anyway, because the committee ultimately determines the brackets, so it doesn't really matter what Lunardi thinks, projects, or says. I think he's a waste of ABC/Disney/ESPN's money (at a time when ESPN can't really afford to be wasting money). They'd fare much better, in my opinion, investing what they pay Lunardi in a data geek and a programmer on contract to develop a data-generated bracketology program. It would be less expensive, wouldn't have annual salary costs (maintenance costs wouldn't be all that much and they could have the developer tweak the formula regularly to improve it), and would likely be more accurate.

[uh_no]

It would be less expensive, wouldn't have annual salary costs (maintenance costs wouldn't be all that much and they could have the developer tweak the formula regularly to improve it), and would likely be more accurate.

yes, but would your algorithm build click-bait predictions into it's bracket?

controversy drives clicks. lunardi can drive controversy.

[bluedev_92]

Bilas & Williams both making arguments this morning on ESPN for Duke being a 1 seed. I believe Williams was previously not in this camp. Predictably, Seth G. was the only hold out. Even he, however, admitted it was a possibility.

[tux]

I think a 2-seed feels about right to me for Duke. It's just hard to put UNC as a 1-seed given that Duke won the ACC and beat UNC 2 out of 3 games, the last on a neutral court. But I love how the media is already making hay over just the prospect of Duke moving up. And that's my main concern about Duke being a 1-seed. I think it will just create a ton of distractions for the team, and a ton of undeserved backlash that will be aimed at Duke and not really the committee. Duke has a ton of momentum heading into next week -- so I'd rather Duke be a #2 in the East or South...

No one should be wishing for a trip out West. Playing a west coast team in the regional finals with the entire crowd against them has never been a good recipe for Duke. Stay in the South or East and play whoever happens to be in the way. KY, Villanova, ... doesn't matter to me. Duke can get beat by almost any team in the field and they can beat any team in the field... but better to avoid a true road game and the potential jet lag.

[Papa John]

yes, but would your algorithm build click-bait predictions into it's bracket?

controversy drives clicks. lunardi can drive controversy.

Of course it would. The projections themselves create the click bait controversies for those interested in pontificating at the margins of who are the last to get in and be cut, as well as where folks are seeded. My point is, you don't need to pay Lunardi to come up with the projection. Lunardi's entire schtick is easily automated, performed by a robot.

EDIt: Not to mention it's absolutely pointless, because the dialog surrounding these hypothetical (and meaningless in and of themselves) projections has no real intrinsic value. Now, if you create an automated bracketology system and put something akin to fantasy football alongside it, where fans are able to make their projections and periodically adjust them as the season progresses in pursuit of something ($$$, perhaps), then this whole exercise might not be so moronically pointless. But until that happens, you're better off ignoring Lunardi and other "bracketologists," watching the season unfold, waiting for the committee to announce the brackets, then engage in the more meaningful dialog about resumes of the margin teams and seed differentials.

[BandAlum83]

[QUOTE=HK Dukie;961015]I want no part of Nova till the final 4. They look just as good as last year.



Still think we'll be a 2 seed out west but I'm so giddy over yesterday I think we can take anyone. And remember ones sometimes don't even make it to the Elite 8 so we just have to beat who's in front of us. What a tournament. I was in Tallahassee this year and the things the fans were yelling at Grayson were obscene. It's like the level of hate Red Sox fans have for the Yankees. I really don't get it. But it makes nights like last night all the sweeter. Thank you again for including me. K has thrown the freshman into the fire and it is finally paying off. This run has me thinking number 6!

#2 in the west will most assuredly be a PAC team.

[Mrezt]

I'm trying to be objective here (I really am, even though I know I can't fully do it), but fear of this outcome, to me, is the only principled basis on which Duke would not get a One. I don't like or agree with the guiding principle here, of course, but I don't see another criteria leading to that outcome. (Yes, I'm probably setting myself up for being Kedsied, but, so it goes.)

Maybe I just need my coffee, but are you saying that the only way the committee doesn't give Duke the 1 seed is because they know they will face backlash because of it? Just making sure I understand correctly!

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

Bilas & Williams both making arguments this morning on ESPN for Duke being a 1 seed. I believe Williams was previously not in this camp. Predictably, Seth G. was the only hold out. Even he, however, admitted it was a possibility.

This team doesn't expect any favors anywhere. They just show up and play the hand they are dealt. As K pointed out, they'd rather play than practice and having to play four games gave them more chances to do just that. They are STILL improving and that's the fun part!
Love, Ima

[sagegrouse]

Extensive article by Matt Norlander on whether or not Duke deserves a one seed:

The Blue Devils (27-8) will be front and center for the biggest debate on Selection Sunday. Should Duke be a No. 1? Will Duke be a No. 1? Does Duke even want to be a No. 1 if that means the Blue Devils go to the South Regional (Memphis) rather than the East (Madison Square Garden)?

It’s going to be Duke vs. North Carolina vs. Arizona. And it’s going to be spectacular. We almost never have No. 1 seed debates for three teams. And Duke’s usually firmly in or firmly out. Are we having a great March already or what?

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/duke-makes-acc-history-and-a-case-for-ncaa-seeding-thats-sure-to-be-debated/

This is such B.S. about Duke as a number one seed. There was a huge amount of I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.ing in both 2010 and 2015 about Duke's no. one seed.

[El_Diablo]

The tough thing is that if we really are being considered the top 2 seed, it will be hard to end up in the east, since Villanova is (I think) virtually guaranteed of being the #1 overall. So the committee will have to have 5 teams ahead of us to get into that slot.

I don't follow. We could be the highest 2-seed (#5 overall) and still land in the same region as the #1 overall seed. For example, we were #6 overall in 2013 and placed in the same region as the overall #1 (Louisville).

In fact, I think if we end up as #5 overall then the East region (with Villanova) is the most likely scenario. The committee can balance out the region with weaker a 3-seed and 4-seed.

[sagegrouse]

Oregon had 7 games in conference against BC level competition. Their best win (arizona @ home) is equivalent to our FSU win at home. Arizona had 8 games in conference against BC level competition. Their best win was last night. Oregon and Arizona have better W-L records but against a much weaker schedule.

What, pray tell, is BC?

[jimsumner]

What, pray tell, is BC?

Boston College? As in Boston College-level quality of competition.

[BD80]

What, pray tell, is BC?

Boston College. The ACC little sister in basketball.

[sagegrouse]

As a rough estimation of 1-seed "worthiness," I went back and ran the "strength of record" analysis I mentioned previously. Basically, I plugged the 1-seed contenders' schedules into an Excel sheet, used Kenpom rankings to run 10,000 simulations of how a team with the 10th best offense and defense (which would be about the 3rd best team overall--in other worse, an average 1-seed) would perform against that schedule, and compared that to the actual number of wins the team had. The lower the odds this hypothetical team beats the actual number of wins, the better the team's record is. Here were my results:

1. Gonzaga 7.9%
2. Villanova 12.2%
3. Kansas 12.8%
4. Arizona 40.6%
5a. Kentucky (if they win today) 43.9%
5. Duke 57.9%
6. UNC 61.8%
7. Kentucky (current number of wins) 63.3%

That...feels right? It's comforting for the metric that the three "locks" (Gonzaga, Villanova, Kansas) are all comfortably the three best. I was a little surprised that Arizona ranks that highly given how down Kenpom is on them, and the PAC-12 as a whole, but they do have a high "luck" (wins in excess of prediction from scoring margin) number, so that probably makes sense.

Anyway, long story short, I think there's pretty strong empirical support for Duke being a contender for the fourth 1-seed even if you don't account for injuries or late-season momentum at all.

Hi, Vick. I have a few questions about your analysis. You gave Gonzaga an imposing score based on what? You said simulated results based on a KenPom #10 team and compared it with actual wins. But, Gonzaga played the weakest schedule of any of the contenders, so why does this mean anything? Perhaps you adjusted for strength of schedule in determining that Gonzaga had the best record in the country by your analysis. Or, perhaps I misread and you simulated wins based on Gonzaga's reputed qualities as a team.

Alternatively, perhaps you are accepting KenPom rankings as the ultimate arbiter of the quality of a team. You must be kidding! KenPom does not adjust for injuries or match-ups and, while I have heard that he provides heavier wright to more recent results, he is still presenting results based on the season as a whole. And, if you are using KenPom in that way, why does Arizona, ranked #22 by KenPom, get a top four ranking.

I'm sorry, but I am still at a loss...

Kindly,
Sage

[CameronBornAndBred]

Indeed... The fascination with Lunardi's "bracketology" perplexes me. His projections are absolutely meaningless early in the season because the games haven't yet been played, and by the time we reach this point, his projections aren't really any different or better than your average college basketball fan might put together on any given day. And, at the end of the day, his projections are irrelevant anyway, because the committee ultimately determines the brackets, so it doesn't really matter what Lunardi thinks, projects, or says. I think he's a waste of ABC/Disney/ESPN's money (at a time when ESPN can't really afford to be wasting money). They'd fare much better, in my opinion, investing what they pay Lunardi in a data geek and a programmer on contract to develop a data-generated bracketology program. It would be less expensive, wouldn't have annual salary costs (maintenance costs wouldn't be all that much and they could have the developer tweak the formula regularly to improve it), and would likely be more accurate.
While I agree with you, you just spent a whole post talking about him and his employer, and you are one of millions doing the same thing. In a way, you just made the argument for why ESPN keeps him front and center for a better part of the year.

[vick]

Hi, Vick. I have a few questions about your analysis. You gave Gonzaga an imposing score based on what? You said simulated results based on a KenPom #10 team and compared it with actual wins. But, Gonzaga played the weakest schedule of any of the contenders, so why does this mean anything? Perhaps you adjusted for strength of schedule in determining that Gonzaga had the best record in the country by your analysis. Or, perhaps I misread and you simulated wins based on Gonzaga's reputed qualities as a team.

What I did was simulate how a top team would do against Gonzaga's schedule, which is, as you note, weaker than the other top seeds. The question of course is how much weaker--the point of the analysis is to get a sense of whether a good team is more likely to go 32-1 against Gonzaga's schedule or 26-7 against UNC's schedule. So I am definitely adjusting for strength of schedule in this analysis.


Alternatively, perhaps you are accepting KenPom rankings as the ultimate arbiter of the quality of a team. You must be kidding! KenPom does not adjust for injuries or match-ups and, while I have heard that he provides heavier wright to more recent results, he is still presenting results based on the season as a whole. And, if you are using KenPom in that way, why does Arizona, ranked #22 by KenPom, get a top four ranking.

I'm sorry, but I am still at a loss...

Kindly,
Sage

I am using Kenpom as the arbiter of the team's "true" strength. This is indeed a weakness! Whether you should account for injuries is somewhat of a philosophical question more than anything (I tilt toward no), and he does weight more recent results more heavily. As to why Arizona is ranked higher than their Kenpom rating, it is because they have won more games against their own schedule than their Kenpom ranking would suggest--hence the high "luck" factor.

Personally, if I had to pick a weakness of this quick and dirty analysis, it would be that a lot of the potential losses from a good team playing Gonzaga's schedule come from St. Mary's (#13 in Kenpom), who they played three times. If you believe St. Mary's is a good bit weaker than that, then Gonzaga's schedule is softer than this analysis would suggest. Personally I would have Villanova overall #1, but I would be shocked if Gonzaga, Kansas, or Villanova aren't #1 seeds, and I don't think there will even be much discussion otherwise.

[kAzE]

I think we absolutely deserve the 4th #1 seed. You cannot convince me that UNC, Baylor, or Gonzaga deserve it more than we do when you factor in our strength of schedule, injuries, and what we just just accomplished this past week with a healthy roster. Duke and Arizona should BOTH be #1s, over Gonzaga. Get it right, selection committee.

[Olympic Fan]

Actually, today will offer a great showdown between the two most prominent (not necessarily the best) Bracketologists.

Joe Lunardi (ESPN) and Jerry Palm (CBS) are in disagreement over two major issues:

(1) Palm has Duke as a No. 1 seed and UNC as a No. 2; Lunardi has UNC as a No. 1 and Duke as a No. 2

Either could be right, but I think Lunardi has boxed himself in a corner. He's been saying for almost a week that the No. 1s are set in stone. He can't changed now, even though it's clear there is a legitimate debate (one of the committee members said Friday that six teams were in contention for the four No. 1 slots).

(2) Palm has Syracuse out of the field -- not even close to being in; Lunardi has Syracuse as the third from last team in.

Very interesting move in Lunardi's last four in -- through yesterday, he had Syracuse just ahead of Wake Forest in his last four out list. Today -- days after either has played -- he flipped them. Wake is now fourth from the bottom with Syracuse third. I wonder what changed?

It will be interesting to see which of the two comes closest to reality. But the split illustrates why we should not take either of these two guys seriously.

Personally, I think the battle between Duke, UNC and Arizona for a No. 1 seed is interesting. And at the bottom of the bracket, I think Wake is in and Syracuse out ... I think the real question is Vanderbilt or Illinois State for the final spot.

PS More reason to hate the NC State game -- flip that one outcome and Duke is a no-brainer No. 1.

[devildeac]

Not sure why I have Syracuse on the brain but I hope they get in. As for Duke I was re-watching the game and noticed how good Amile looked. He's moving better and Frank looks very comfortable at the point. Feel very good moving forward! :D

If Syracuse gets in, would they get to play in Greensboro, err, Greenville?

;):rolleyes:

[devildeac]

Neither have predictive value, but thermometers can actually measure the present temperature. Joe Lunardi is making up numbers to tell you how hot or cold something is.

Now, had you compared Lunardi to a rectal thermometer, I would have agreed with you.

Ahh, another comparison of Lunardi and a hot, humid, smelly environment.

[Bluedog]

PS More reason to hate the NC State game -- flip that one outcome and Duke is a no-brainer No. 1.

Oddly enough, if we beat NC State, we wouldn't have as many quality wins on our résumé because we wouldn't have had to go through Louisville and UNC. So, not saying it didn't hurt us, but can't look at it in a vacuum. If we got a double bye and on other side of bracket, our wins wouldn't be as good in the tourney (and we may have lost of course).

[BandAlum83]

A Great Tournament for Duke and for Coach K.

I just do not know how many times we can be down 8, 11, 13 points and come back to win in the NCAA tournament. I hope that I am wrong

You aren't wrong: you DON'T know how many times we can come back from 8 or more down.

I would rather not find out. I'd prefer to lead from the first basket to final buzzer.

[Olympic Fan]

I am torn between wanting Syracuse -- and Wake Forest -- to get in the field.

On one hand, I want to see the ACC do as well as possible in the tournament -- it helps Duke if the ACC is perceived as the best conference. I'll pull for every ACC team, except the Cheats.

It would be great to get 10 teams in the field. On the other hand, but putting our marginal teams in sets up more losses. Last year, we got shorted with just seven bids ... but six of those teams made the Sweet 16. Had Clemson or Virginia Tech gotten in and gone down quickly, our record would have been as good.

I'm thinking that if Wake Forest and/or Syracuse gets in, they start with the play-in round in Dayton.

That's a winnable games for each of them to start ... then it gets tough for them.

I think Wake Forest and Syracuse are good enough to win a game or two. So I'm going to pull for them to get bids.

But they'd better win at least one or I'll be put out at them!

[BlueDevilBrowns]

Seth Davis on the CBS halftime show just said he feels Duke is "comfortably" on the 1 Line...

I find this somewhat significant because CBS gets the Committee's official bracket a few hours ahead of the actual release to the public.

So for Seth to be so confident in Duke's seeding makes me wonder if they've been tipped off in some way already.

[devildeac]

I am torn between wanting Syracuse -- and Wake Forest -- to get in the field.

On one hand, I want to see the ACC do as well as possible in the tournament -- it helps Duke if the ACC is perceived as the best conference. I'll pull for every ACC team, except the Cheats.

It would be great to get 10 teams in the field. On the other hand, but putting our marginal teams in sets up more losses. Last year, we got shorted with just seven bids ... but six of those teams made the Sweet 16. Had Clemson or Virginia Tech gotten in and gone down quickly, our record would have been as good.

I'm thinking that if Wake Forest and/or Syracuse gets in, they start with the play-in round in Dayton.

That's a winnable games for each of them to start ... then it gets tough for them.

I think Wake Forest and Syracuse are good enough to win a game or two. So I'm going to pull for them to get bids.

But they'd better win at least one or I'll be put out at them!

Wake, yes. Syracuse, no. But, I'd chip in to send Boeheim a pint of Q from Stamey's. :rolleyes:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/18869202/greensboro-grasshoppers-hold-jim-boeheim-no-value-night

Calling it "Jim Boeheim (No) Value Night"

"The Greensboro Grasshoppers, the Class A affiliate of the Miami Marlins, will give away $20 worth of food and drinks to anyone who shows up with a driver's license that lists Syracuse on it."

[BandAlum83]

Oddly enough, if we beat NC State, we wouldn't have as many quality wins on our résumé because we wouldn't have had to go through Louisville and UNC. So, not saying it didn't hurt us, but can't look at it in a vacuum. If we got a double bye and on other side of bracket, our wins wouldn't be as good in the tourney (and we may have lost of course).

Personally, I think this is a really great point. Everything that happens puts us on an alternate path. If we hadn't lost, would the team have gelled in the same way? That loss was a cold hard slap to the face! Did that change the way the kids looked at themselves /the team?

If we don't have the challenge of 4 in 4 against the level of competition, do we somehow not rise to the challenge that was in front of us?

If we don't lose to NCSU, do we not go on a 7 game win streak?

It's like the talk of 'if Matt had only made 4 more 3s during the season. Against, NC, Matt had a miss the ended up in an O rebound and a Grayson 2. Get my point?

The what-ifs contain so many variables that aren't typically considered and generally non-quantifiable.

I'll give you another one. If grayson hadn't tripped the guy in the Elon game, would Frank have developed the way he did? Would Luke have been the POY candidate he was?

If a BBALL coach flaps his gums in syracuse, does it cause a FT to clank in Blacksburg?

[gam7]

We can look at all of the numbers and resumes until our faces turn blue, but I think the determining factor - and a factor that we cannot predict - is whether and to what extent the committee discounts Duke losses because of injuries/absences. Before the ACC tournament, it would have been hard to discount our losses much because we hadn't really shown that we were worthy of a much higher seed at full strength. With the ACC tournament performance, we have shown what a full strength team is capable of. I have to think this would result in the committee's discounting our losses due to injuries/absences more than they would have otherwise.

[BandAlum83]

BTW, on Lunardi.

Yesterday he said something along the lines of

"I've said all along an ACC team would get a #1 seed.UNC won it outright and is a lock for the #1."

Since when is finishing 1st in the unbalanced-schedule ACC "winning it outright?"

The winner of the ACC Tournament is the ACC Champion and the recipient of the league's automatic bid to the, NCAAT.

Joey's been in his bunker a little to long.

[NashvilleDevil]

Seth Davis on the CBS halftime show just said he feels Duke is "comfortably" on the 1 Line...

I find this somewhat significant because CBS gets the Committee's official bracket a few hours ahead of the actual release to the public.

So for Seth to be so confident in Duke's seeding makes me wonder if they've been tipped off in some way already.

But then you remember it is Seth Davis and he has a history of not being correct.

[Indoor66]

You and Lunardi . . .

Neither one of us is a fool. We want to get it right.:rolleyes::cool:

[Wander]

Lunardi is already wrong no matter what happens. He said that the #1 seeds were locks a week ago, which the committee has explicitly said was not the case. Even if the four #1 seeds happens to line up with Lunardi's, he was wrong about the process.

[uh_no]

Seth Davis on the CBS halftime show just said he feels Duke is "comfortably" on the 1 Line...

I find this somewhat significant because CBS gets the Committee's official bracket a few hours ahead of the actual release to the public.

So for Seth to be so confident in Duke's seeding makes me wonder if they've been tipped off in some way already.

On the other hand, Seth Davis said it....so I'd put good money on us being a 3 seed....

[Indoor66]

If a BBALL coach flaps his gums in syracuse, does it cause a FT to clank in Blacksburg?

Absolutely not, but Jerry Tarkanian turns in his grave and Cleveland State goes on probation.

[uh_no]

Absolutely not, but Jerry Tarkanian turns in his grave and Cleveland State goes on probation.

Every time it happens, a UNC player goes to class. don't make UNC players have to attend class!! It's just not right!

[Olympic Fan]

First, I doubt Seth Davis has any inside info ... at the time he said this, there were still about four tourneys going on, including the SEC and the Big Ten (which hadn't started).

I know that CBS does get the bracket a bit early -- but not hours early. I gues it's barely possible that they could have been tipped as to the four No. 1s -- but I doubt it.

On a different subject. I was happy to see Rhode Island win the A-10 and clinch a bid.

That means that AT LEAST 16 of Duke's 35 opponents this season will be in the field (Kansas, Rhode Island, Florida and UNC -- three games, Louisville -- two games, Florida State 2 games, Notre dame 2 games, Miami 2 games, VPI and Virginia). If Wake makes it as they should. That ups it to 18 opponents. Syracuse would make it 19. Am I missing anybody?

Very likely that more than half of Duke's games will be against NCAA teams.

[BlueDevilBrowns]

But then you remember it is Seth Davis and he has a history of not being correct.


On the other hand, Seth Davis said it...so I'd put good money on us being a 3 seed...

I can't disagree with y'all's opinion of Seth's accuracy.

But the timing does make we wonder, being only a few hours away from the official reveal.

Plus, he termed it "comfortably" on the 1 line, as if it's not close.

Idk, it probably means nothing, but it did pique my interest nonetheless.

[pfrduke]

I don't follow. We could be the highest 2-seed (#5 overall) and still land in the same region as the #1 overall seed. For example, we were #6 overall in 2013 and placed in the same region as the overall #1 (Louisville).

In fact, I think if we end up as #5 overall then the East region (with Villanova) is the most likely scenario. The committee can balance out the region with weaker a 3-seed and 4-seed.

I believe that one of the seeding rules (not sure if it's official or unofficial), is that the overall #1 cannot get paired with the top ranked #2. Your example is not inconsistent with that, as we were not the top ranked #2. Aside from that limitation, regional preference takes precedence to the s-curve, although there may be some shifts to maintain balance among the 4 regions' respective top 4 seeds.

[OldPhiKap]

I don't see how the ACC champ this year is not a #1 seed.

[uh_no]

I don't see how the ACC champ this year is not a #1 seed.

because people don't like to think, and fewer losses = better team. forget that duke has more ROAD top 25 wins than nova and gonzaga have anywhere...combined.

[Devilwin]

Bleacher Report says Duke vaulted past Kansas for a number one seed..:cool:

[Papa John]

While I agree with you, you just spent a whole post talking about him and his employer, and you are one of millions doing the same thing. In a way, you just made the argument for why ESPN keeps him front and center for a better part of the year.

Excellent point! It's why I normally don't dip my toes into these types of discussions—it feeds oxygen to the fire... Hey, I'm only human... ;)

[G man]

A good little article.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/bracket-watch-projections-predictions-bracketology-ncaa-tournament-mandel-031217%3Famp%3Dtrue

[rsvman]

Jerry Palm is known to be one of the least accurate bracket predictors on the planet. So if he says we're a one, it's likely that we're a two.

[Troublemaker]

I believe that one of the seeding rules (not sure if it's official or unofficial), is that the overall #1 cannot get paired with the top ranked #2. Your example is not inconsistent with that, as we were not the top ranked #2. Aside from that limitation, regional preference takes precedence to the s-curve, although there may be some shifts to maintain balance among the 4 regions' respective top 4 seeds.

You're right. I remember them mentioning that guideline when they revealed the top 16 a few weeks back.

This might be the true choice then:




East
MidWest
West
South


Villanova
Kansas
Gonzaga
Duke / UNC


Oregon
Duke / UNC
Arizona
Kentucky


Louisville
UCLA
FSU
Baylor


WVU
Florida
Notre Dame
Butler




In which case, give me the #1 in the South.

Roy Williams would not be happy if UNC gets the #2 in Kansas' region.

[Olympic Fan]

I was just watching the pre-Selection show on CBS Sports when a hockey game broke out on the set.

Well, no blows were thrown, but the talking heads were shouting at each other -- over whether Syracuse is an at large team or not.

Steve Lappas and Wally Sczerbiak (sp?) both thought Syracuse should be in ... Danny Granger thought not. They started shouting about whether Syracuse or Illinois State deserved a spot.

Finally, they went to Jerry Palm, who told them they were arguing over the relative strength of NIT teams -- neither was getting in. Then he said of Syracuse, "if they get in, it would be the worst selection ever -- by a wide margin."

Pretty strong consensus that Duke will be a No. 1 seed ... some discussion as to whether UNC could pass Gonzaga as the fourth No. 1.

They then came back with another panel that took up the Syracuse debate. Ex-UNC stiff Brendon Haywood loves the 'Cuse ... ex-Virginia coach Pete Gillen essentially said that a team that lost to BC and lost by 30 at home to St. Johns has no place in the tourney.

That panel also agreed that Duke was a solid No. 1.

Again, take it for what it's worth, but the Syracuse debate was hilarious.

[kmspeaks]

While I agree with you, you just spent a whole post talking about him and his employer, and you are one of millions doing the same thing. In a way, you just made the argument for why ESPN keeps him front and center for a better part of the year.


Excellent point! It's why I normally don't dip my toes into these types of discussions—it feeds oxygen to the fire... Hey, I'm only human... ;)

Does ESPN make money from us typing Lunardi's name on DBR though? I would never click on anything Lunardi related, he gets the mute/change channel button faster than Dickie V, and I'm not going to watch ESPN's bracketology hoopla so what does it matter if I commiserate with some like minded Duke fans that the whole thing is stupid? What really kills me is that ESPN has started to refer to Lunardi's predictions as if they actually mean something. They sometimes refer to teams as in the tournament or a certain seed without the "according to Joe Lunardi" qualifier.

[Reilly]

... Roy Williams would not be happy if UNC gets the #2 in Kansas' region.

So you're saying he *would* give a sh ...

[El_Diablo]

I believe that one of the seeding rules (not sure if it's official or unofficial), is that the overall #1 cannot get paired with the top ranked #2. Your example is not inconsistent with that, as we were not the top ranked #2. Aside from that limitation, regional preference takes precedence to the s-curve, although there may be some shifts to maintain balance among the 4 regions' respective top 4 seeds.

The rules provide that the committee "may" relax the geographic preferences rules in such a situation (but are not required to do so). But you're right that there may be a strong unofficial bias against having the top #1 and top #2 in the same region, so they could ship us to the Midwest if it were Villanova #1 overall and Duke #5 overall. Putting us out west would be a pretty bad violation of the geographic seeding principle if we were the top #2 seed, so that would seem unlikely, especially when there would likely be one or two Pac-12 teams on the #2 seed line that would be much better geographic fits out west, and the rules make clear that the South region would be off the table for Duke as a #2 if UNC has the #1 seed there.

It's also possible that the committee, faced with such a situation, could simply slide us down to #6 to avoid the potential controversy of having #1 and #5 in the same region.

[Kedsy]

That means that AT LEAST 16 of Duke's 35 opponents this season will be in the field (Kansas, Rhode Island, Florida and UNC -- three games, Louisville -- two games, Florida State 2 games, Notre dame 2 games, Miami 2 games, VPI and Virginia). If Wake makes it as they should. That ups it to 18 opponents. Syracuse would make it 19. Am I missing anybody?

Michigan State?

[slower]

Bleacher Report says Duke vaulted past Kansas for a number one seed..:cool:

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Would be great, though.

[DukieInBrasil]

I'm too lazy to look up official data and stuff, but i think Duke has a good argument for a #1 seed.
More wins vs. top-50 and top-25 teams (independent of ranking index) of any team. That's big.
Duke has a high RPI, BPI, KenPom ranking itself.
All but 3 of Duke's losses came w/o at least one prominent contributor; Tatum, Giles, Jefferson, Allen have all missed games that Duke ended up losing. 3 of Duke's losses came w/o their head coach, as well. All of those losses will get a huge discount from the committee. Duke beat 4 teams in OOC who will be in the tourney (Grand Canyon, Rhode Island, Florida, MSU), and did all of that w/o their full roster (Giles didn't play until after the Florida game).
Of the 3 losses that fall outside of that caveat, only one was bad, at home. To State. Losing on the road to a team that is/was widely considered a candidate for a #1 seed, and one that this team has beaten twice, will not be viewed harshly. The loss at Syracuse, a NCAA bubble team, will be looked at a little more harshly, but not much.
Although they say they don't chart last 10 games performance, Duke's run to the ACC Tournament championship has to give them huge credit. 1) they beat 4 quality teams in a row, 3 of whom are almost guaranteed to make the Sweet 16, and any or all of them could potentially be Final 4 teams (and have been within the last 3 years). Clemson is no slouch, despite their poor record in the ACC, and i bet they could even win a game or 2 in the NCAA this year. 2) They started to look like the team everyone was predicting they would be at the beginning of the season.
I know lots of people will howl, whine and gnash their teeth if Duke gets a #1 seed, but who are the 4 other teams that clearly deserve one instead? Villanova will get one of them. Kansas and UCLA both lost in their tournament semis. Gonzaga is a clearly over-rated team who played nobody of consequence during the year, other than a similarly over-rated St Mary's. Oregon lost to AZ in the PAC-# Final, so AZ might get a #1 seed, but coming out of the weak PAC-# hardly proves they're the best option for the 4th #1 seed.
All in all though, i think K would be happier to be the #2 seed and stay local than be a #1 seed and travel far.

[NYBri]

Eye test to me and to anyone else paying attention says, "That's a number one seed."

[TexHawk]

Does ESPN make money from us typing Lunardi's name on DBR though? I would never click on anything Lunardi related, he gets the mute/change channel button faster than Dickie V, and I'm not going to watch ESPN's bracketology hoopla so what does it matter if I commiserate with some like minded Duke fans that the whole thing is stupid? What really kills me is that ESPN has started to refer to Lunardi's predictions as if they actually mean something. They sometimes refer to teams as in the tournament or a certain seed without the "according to Joe Lunardi" qualifier.

An example of the Lunardi math:
Out here in Kansas, some folks are overly worried about a possible matchup with Wichita State in Round 2. Wichita State would have a geographic advantage for the game (2 hours closer to Tulsa), AND the regionals in KC, if they were to beat KU. Right or wrong, the idea on its own breeds some anxiety. This week Lunardi has swapped WSU in and out of that 8/9 spot every day. And Wichita State hasn't played since last Sunday. Every other team in the 8/9 spots has not had a overly bad or good week (outside of KU, I guess), so there is nothing logical that would change the matchup. Every Lunardi update spurs pages and pages of discussion on KU forums, with people linking to ESPN (while blasting him usually). I am not proud of my fellow fans for this, but they wouldn't be the first to fall for this kind of link baiting.

In some ways, Duke's week is a perfect storm of this. Objective predictors picked you guys anywhere from 2-5 coming into the week, with an outside shot at a 1. Most teams don't have spreads like that, so there are a ton of possible brackets. And when you the lovers & haters that come with being Duke, folks are clamoring for anything to back their feelings up.

ESPN doesn't need every single person to click, just a few. There is data science involved that proves this kind of strategy works over the long run. If it didn't, you would not be seeing Lunardi on your TV this weekend.

[MarkD83]

An example of the Lunardi math:
Out here in Kansas, some folks are overly worried about a possible matchup with Wichita State in Round 2. Wichita State would have a geographic advantage for the game (2 hours closer to Tulsa), AND the regionals in KC, if they were to beat KU. Right or wrong, the idea on its own breeds some anxiety. This week Lunardi has swapped WSU in and out of that 8/9 spot every day. And Wichita State hasn't played since last Sunday. Every other team in the 8/9 spots has not had a overly bad or good week (outside of KU, I guess), so there is nothing logical that would change the matchup. Every Lunardi update spurs pages and pages of discussion on KU forums, with people linking to ESPN (while blasting him usually). I am not proud of my fellow fans for this, but they wouldn't be the first to fall for this kind of link baiting.

In some ways, Duke's week is a perfect storm of this. Objective predictors picked you guys anywhere from 2-5 coming into the week, with an outside shot at a 1. Most teams don't have spreads like that, so there are a ton of possible brackets. And when you the lovers & haters that come with being Duke, folks are clamoring for anything to back their feelings up.

ESPN doesn't need every single person to click, just a few. There is data science involved that proves this kind of strategy works over the long run. If it didn't, you would not be seeing Lunardi on your TV this weekend.

My only observation about Bracketology is that if Lunardi puts it in writing than it is NOT what the final bracket looks like. He might get the seeds correct but the actual bracket is influenced by too many intangible factors such as making sure top seeds are not at a disadvantage such as the KU WSU issue.

[tux]

Regardless of Lunardi's reputation etc., I'd love to see Duke land exactly where he has them now: the 2 seed in the East. Not only does Duke get a chance to play in NYC, but the East winner plays the West winner in the final four. Right now, he has that probably being Gonzaga (1) or Arizona (2). That puts Kansas, KY, UNC, and Oregon on the other side --- not scared of any of those teams per se, but #2 in the East would be great for Duke IMO.

[Channing]

Regardless of Lunardi's reputation etc., I'd love to see Duke land exactly where he has them now: the 2 seed in the East. Not only does Duke get a chance to play in NYC, but the East winner plays the West winner in the final four. Right now, he has that probably being Gonzaga (1) or Arizona (2). That puts Kansas, KY, UNC, and Oregon on the other side --- not scared of any of those teams per se, but #2 in the East would be great for Duke IMO.

And, frankly, of the possible number 1 seeds, is like to see Gonzaga first, then Villanova, then Arizona.

[royalblue]

Ok my 2 cents
No way Duke is in with the #1 overall Nova
If I'm wrong about Nova being #1 overall then maybe

I hope
East Nova uncch
South Duke Baylor
Midwest UK KU
West Zags AZ

I think
Nova Baylor
Duke UK
KU uncch
Zags AZ

Duke and uncch are interchangeable on the I think but the top 50 wins more top road wins and 2 of 3 count more than the
( irregular season )

Unless the committee gets some balls and puts Duke and uncch both in the south and says figure
It out on your own :)

[sagegrouse]

The ACC is by far the strongest conference, I would argue, and this status has two implications. First, that one should expect a lot of losses from even the top teams emerging from this head. The top team in the ACC deserves special consideration for a number one seed.

I would give it to Duke -- due to head-to-head competition, more wins against top teams, and the perceived current strength of the Duke team versus earlier in the season.

Delving more deeply (BTW, has anyone ever seen a "delve?"), UNC's conference record (15-5 counting the ACC's) is superior overall to Duke's (14-7) , although not better than Duke's against the top six teams, where UNC is 5-3 and Duke is 7-3. (UNC gets an advantage if the "better teams" category is expanded to include Miami, Cuse and VPI.) At the same time, UNC had a real advantage in home games. Against the Top Six, UNC did not play a road game that wasn't counter-balanced by a home game. It also, for example, had only home games against Louisville and Notre Dame (well, Greensboro actually). Duke had "away games only" against Louisville, Virginia and Notre Dame, winning two out of three, and did not have a "home games only" against a Top Six team. Against the Top Six, Duke's only losses were at Louisville, UNC and FSU. UNC's only losses were at Duke and Virginia, but UNC in the regular season had five home games and two away games against the Top Six. Duke had only two home games and five away games.

[Olympic Fan]

Michigan State?

Good catch ... I missed the Spartans. They are down this year, but they will be in the field.

So that's 17 games against NCAA opponents for sure ... possibly as many as 20 (depending on Wake and Syracuse).

[OldPhiKap]

The ACC is by far the strongest conference, I would argue, and this status has two implications. First, that one should expect a lot of losses from even the top teams emerging from this head. The top team in the ACC deserves special consideration for a number one seed.

I would give it to Duke -- due to head-to-head competition, more wins against top teams, and the perceived current strength of the Duke team versus earlier in the season.

Delving more deeply (BTW, has anyone ever seen a "delve?"), UNC's conference record (15-5 counting the ACC's) is superior overall to Duke's (14-7) , although not better than Duke's against the top six teams, where UNC is 5-3 and Duke is 7-3. (UNC gets an advantage if the "better teams" category is expanded to include Miami, Cuse and VPI.) At the same time, UNC had a real advantage in home games. Against the Top Six, UNC did not play a road game that wasn't counter-balanced by a home game. It also, for example, had only home games against Louisville and Notre Dame (well, Greensboro actually). Duke had "away games only" against Louisville, Virginia and Notre Dame, winning two out of three, and did not have a "home games only" against a Top Six team. Against the Top Six, Duke's only losses were at Louisville, UNC and FSU. UNC's only losses were at Duke and Virginia, but UNC in the regular season had five home games and two away games against the Top Six. Duke had only two home games and five away games.

As usual, spot on.

[curtis325]

The ACC is by far the strongest conference, I would argue, and this status has two implications. First, that one should expect a lot of losses from even the top teams emerging from this head. The top team in the ACC deserves special consideration for a number one seed.

I would give it to Duke -- due to head-to-head competition, more wins against top teams, and the perceived current strength of the Duke team versus earlier in the season.

Delving more deeply (BTW, has anyone ever seen a "delve?"), UNC's conference record (15-5 counting the ACC's) is superior overall to Duke's (14-7) , although not better than Duke's against the top six teams, where UNC is 5-3 and Duke is 7-3. (UNC gets an advantage if the "better teams" category is expanded to include Miami, Cuse and VPI.) At the same time, UNC had a real advantage in home games. Against the Top Six, UNC did not play a road game that wasn't counter-balanced by a home game. It also, for example, had only home games against Louisville and Notre Dame (well, Greensboro actually). Duke had "away games only" against Louisville, Virginia and Notre Dame, winning two out of three, and did not have a "home games only" against a Top Six team. Against the Top Six, Duke's only losses were at Louisville, UNC and FSU. UNC's only losses were at Duke and Virginia, but UNC in the regular season had five home games and two away games against the Top Six. Duke had only two home games and five away games.


Duke is 15-7.

[Wander]

Delving more deeply (BTW, has anyone ever seen a "delve?"), UNC's conference record (15-5 counting the ACC's) is superior overall to Duke's (14-7) , although not better than Duke's against the top six teams, where UNC is 5-3 and Duke is 7-3. (UNC gets an advantage if the "better teams" category is expanded to include Miami, Cuse and VPI.) At the same time, UNC had a real advantage in home games. Against the Top Six, UNC did not play a road game that wasn't counter-balanced by a home game. It also, for example, had only home games against Louisville and Notre Dame (well, Greensboro actually). Duke had "away games only" against Louisville, Virginia and Notre Dame, winning two out of three, and did not have a "home games only" against a Top Six team. Against the Top Six, Duke's only losses were at Louisville, UNC and FSU. UNC's only losses were at Duke and Virginia, but UNC in the regular season had five home games and two away games against the Top Six. Duke had only two home games and five away games.

The problem is that this analysis omits the phrase "NC State." Without that loss, I would agree that it's a relatively easy call to put Duke ahead of UNC.

[stickdog]

Here is my analysis of the number one seeds:

Villanova is the only rock solid lock. They get the overall number one hands down.

Kansas has the second best combination of resume, RPI and won-loss record, but Kansas is just 21st in strength of schedule.

Kansas has just 2 wins against top 10 RPI teams (one against Duke without Tatum & Giles) and a 6-2 record against top 25 RPI teams.

Duke has 4 wins against top 10 RPI teams and a 8-4 record against top 25 RPI teams.

Moreover, Kansas has played just 10 games against top 50 RPI competition to Duke's 18. But I still like Kansas for the second overall seed.

As for the third and fourth overall seeds, the candidates in my mind are Duke, Gonzaga, UNC, Arizona, and Kentucky. Nobody else has any argument.

Duke has the strongest resume by far.

Top 10 RPI records: Duke 4-3, Gonzaga 2-0, UNC 2-3. Kentucky 2-3, Arizona 1-2 (including a loss to Gonzaga)

Top 15 RPI records: Duke 5-4, UNC 3-3, Gonzaga 2-0, Kentucky 2-3, Arizona 1-3 (including a loss to Gonzaga)

Top 20 RPI records: Duke 5-4, Gonzaga 5-0 (three vs. St. Mary's), UNC 4-4, Arizona 3-4 (including a loss to Gonzaga), Kentucky 2-4

Top 25 RPI records: Duke 7-4, Gonzaga 6-0 (three vs. St. Mary's), UNC 5-4, Arizona 3-4 (including a loss to Gonzaga), Kentucky 2-4

Top 40 RPI records: Duke 10-4, UNC 8-4, Gonzaga 6-0 (three vs. St. Mary's), Kentucky 5-4. Arizona 3-4 (including a loss to Gonzaga)

Top 50 RPI records: Duke 12-5, UNC 11-5, Gonzaga 6-0 (three vs. St. Mary's), Kentucky 6-4. Arizona 5-4 (including a loss to Gonzaga)

Top 75 RPI records: Duke 16-5, UNC 14-5, Kentucky 10-4, Gonzaga 8-1 (three vs. St. Mary's), Arizona 8-4 (including a loss to Gonzaga)

Duke > UNC and Gonzaga > Arizona & Kentucky

The only question in my mind is Gonzaga or UNC for the 4th number one seed.

[Skitzle]

My thoughts,

1) I'm ok with, in fact, I kind of wouldn't mind, not being a 1 seed.

2) I'm more ok with getting a 1 seed having UNC be a 2 seed and watching Cheat fans squirm.

[OldPhiKap]

The problem is that this analysis omits the phrase "NC State." Without that loss, I would agree that it's a relatively easy call to put Duke ahead of UNC.

I think the committee is more concerned with how the seeds will do against tourney competition than whether they had an abhorrent loss. But we shall see.

[tbyers11]

I think the committee is more concerned with how the seeds will do against tourney competition than whether they had an abhorrent loss. But we shall see.

Agreed. Bad losses seem to have more wait for bubble teams than ranking of high seeds.

Also, UNC's loss to GT (although road vs home) was nearly as bad as Duke's to NCST. NCST hadn't completely given up when they beat us.

We'll see in a few minutes

[Owen Meany]

Agreed. Bad losses seem to have more wait for bubble teams than ranking of high seeds.

Also, UNC's loss to GT (although road vs home) was nearly as bad as Duke's to NCST. NCST hadn't completely given up when they beat us.

We'll see in a few minutes

Anyone notice the teams up above the guys heads on CBS. No Duke, FWIW. Zags UNC Nova Kansas

[elvis14]

#2 in the East to play Troy

[elvis14]

#2 in the East to play Troy

If we win and Marquette (10) wins we play vs Wojo. Also have Baylor #3 and SMU (Semi) on our side of the bracket

[royalblue]

I'm wrong and shocked just not right

[hallcity]

#2 in the East to play Troy

I'm good with it. Hope the team gets to MSG which has been good to Duke, to put it mildly. Should be lots of Duke fans there.

[moonpie23]

I'm good with this........

[Tripping William]

Hosed, but no excuses now. Win the ones in front of us (over Troy then maybe Wojo then maybe Baylor then maybe Nova).

[Wander]

I think the committee is more concerned with how the seeds will do against tourney competition than whether they had an abhorrent loss. But we shall see.



Agreed. Bad losses seem to have more wait for bubble teams than ranking of high seeds.


No offense, but you guys are sort of just making up rules. There's no magic bullet - good wins, bad losses, strength of schedule, etc etc all matter for all teams. If we only had 5 losses or so, NC State wouldn't sink us, but having 8 losses which included this one terrible loss is too much to ask for a 1 seed.

But a #2 seed in this region is a great place to be.

[Kjeffrey]

Hosed, but no excuses now. Win the ones in front of us (over Troy then maybe Wojo then maybe Baylor then maybe Nova).

Completely agree. Apparently they must have AZ as the strongest overall 2 seed. I am not sure how they justify that given their resume compared to Duke's. I know I'm not objective but did they look at wins against top 25 or 50?

[hsheffield]

If we are a #2 seed, how could we not be the first #2?

I'm truly asking...

or does anyone know if Seth Davis is right and they don't put the overall #2 with the overall #1?

[tbyers11]

No offense, but you guys are sort of just making up rules. There's no magic bullet - good wins, bad losses, strength of schedule, etc etc all matter for all teams. If we only had 5 losses or so, NC State wouldn't sink us, but having 8 losses which included this one terrible loss is too much to ask for a 1 seed.

But a #2 seed in this region is a great place to be.

You're making up rules too. We just have different ones than you do

[elvis14]

In Midwest, Kansas is 1 and L'ville is 2. Am I the only one that thinks L'ville has been over ranked all year (and especially now)?

[Lulu]

Hosed, but no excuses now. Win the ones in front of us (over Troy then maybe Wojo then maybe Baylor then maybe Nova).

Did we get hosed? or Villanova? They have to be ticked

[Tripping William]

Did we get hosed? or Villanova? They have to be ticked

Both did.

[Lulu]

Yeah, overall #1 Villanova get Duke, and Kansas get Louiville, who we just beat handing L'ville as many losses as us

[flyingdutchdevil]

In Midwest, Kansas is 1 and L'ville is 2. Am I the only one that thinks L'ville has been over ranked all year (and especially now)?

I think Louisville is an excellent team. Kansas has a tough road. Oregon - even without Boucher - is a threat.

[Tripping William]

Heels as 1. Complete travesty

[hallcity]

Are we going to hear Syracuse and WFU?

[Kjeffrey]

Are we going to hear Syracuse and WFU?

I would be shocked if Wake doesn't get in but who knows?

[Tripping William]

Play-in for Wake

[Utley]

If we are a #2 seed, how could we not be the first #2?

I'm truly asking...

or does anyone know if Seth Davis is right and they don't put the overall #2 with the overall #1?

I think they went with Arizona.

[OldPhiKap]

Play-in for Wake

And Syracuse likely out -- last four in are all on the table already

[Tripping William]

And Syracuse likely out -- last four in are all on the table already

Boeheim now has time to come visit Greensboro

[OldPhiKap]

Boeheim now has time to come visit Greensboro

Is the NIT championship still played at MSG? If so, I bet Jimmy prefers that to Arizona anyway.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Don't be a mid major. They all got screwed.

[tbyers11]

Don't be a mid major. They all got screwed.

Wichita St as a 10 was ludicrous. IMO, they should be about a 6

[flyingdutchdevil]

Wichita St as a 10 was ludicrous. IMO, they should be about a 6

Did you see Gomzaga's bracket? That's what you get for losing one game....

holy cow. Mark few just have pissed off the wrong person

[throatybeard]

So if I went back to 1930 and shot Hitler, would Boeheim still be a whiny brat?

[pfrduke]

Committee chair just said we weren't even compared against teams on the 1 line. Started the week as the top 4 seed and had the largest jump, but "got stopped along the way."

[Olympic Fan]

Final score:

Lunardi 1-1; Palm 1-1

Lunardi had UNC as a 1 and Duke as a 2 ... Palm had Syracuse out

[hallcity]

Committee chair just said we weren't even compared against teams on the 1 line. Started the week as the top 4 seed and had the largest jump, but "got stopped along the way."

I'm happy being in the East but that explanation was awfully unsatisfying. It was basically "we made up our minds on the one seeds a week ago and you couldn't really expect us to reconsider that, could you?"

[OldPhiKap]

I'm happy being in the East but that explanation was awfully unsatisfying. It was basically "we made up our minds on the one seeds a week ago and you couldn't really expect us to reconsider that, could you?"

This is why announcing the seeds as you go for weeks sucks. It locks things in prematurely.

Oh well, we stay in the East. Play who is in front of you. We got this.

[barjwr]

"We compared those teams [on adjacent seed lines] to each other all along the way."

No, you didn't. You didn't compare a 2 seed (Duke) to a 1 seed (unc) today. What a lousy explanation.

[Kjeffrey]

I'm happy being in the East but that explanation was awfully unsatisfying. It was basically "we made up our minds on the one seeds a week ago and you couldn't really expect us to reconsider that, could you?"

I just said the same thing in chat. He made it sound like Duke didn't have top 25 wins until the ACC tournament. On a different note, last year they admitted they considered Boeheim's absence when Cuse lost games. Apparently when Duke lost 3 games without Coach K that didn't matter. I don't think a 2 seed is bad but I can't understand Carolina being a 1. The only explanation is the committee made up their minds, released the 1 seeds a month ago and were unwilling to change their minds.

[Eternal Outlaw]

Committee chair just said we weren't even compared against teams on the 1 line. Started the week as the top 4 seed and had the largest jump, but "got stopped along the way."

Reasoning seemed odd when pressed, mentioned non conference but their best win was Wisconsin, an 8 seed to us beating a 4 seed Florida? Does UNC have a second best win that compares with our 11 seed Rhode Island for non conference?

[pfrduke]

I just said the same thing in chat. He made it sound like Duke didn't have top 25 wins until the ACC tournament. On a different note, last year they admitted they considered Boeheim's absence when Cuse lost games. Apparently when Duke lost 3 games without Coach K that didn't matter. I don't think a 2 seed is bad but I can't understand Carolina being a 1. The only explanation is the committee made up their minds, released the 1 seeds a month ago and were unwilling to change their minds.

Inertia is a powerful force.

[Kjeffrey]

Reasoning seemed odd when pressed, mentioned non conference but their best win was Wisconsin, an 8 seed to us beating a 4 seed Florida? Does UNC have a second best win that compares with our 11 seed Rhode Island for non conference?

I don't think so but their non conference SOS was better than Duke's. However, given their much weaker conference SOS it actually ends up that Duke's overall SOS was higher.

[Dukehky]

Reasoning seemed odd when pressed, mentioned non conference but their best win was Wisconsin, an 8 seed to us beating a 4 seed Florida? Does UNC have a second best win that compares with our 11 seed Rhode Island for non conference?

Also beat Michigan State...

[Wander]

Despite thinking that we deserved a 2 seed, the chairman's logic was totally idiotic. Who cares what the seeds would have been at some point in the past?

[Ballboy1998]

Despite thinking that we deserved a 2 seed, the chairman's logic was totally idiotic. Who cares what the seeds would have been at some point in the past?

Yeah while I think you could make a defense of the current seeding, that was an embarrassing showing that basically amounted to saying "We made the bracket on Wednesday. Do you really expect us to work all weekend?!?!"

[Kjeffrey]

Yeah while I think you could make a defense of the current seeding, that was an embarrassing showing that basically amounted to saying "We made the bracket on Wednesday. Do you really expect us to work all weekend?!?!"

And don't forget. "They moved from the 4 line to the 2 line and then we couldn't compare them to any of the 1s because one of the 2s won both the regular and conference championships."