NCAA South collector thread (Virginia #1 seed, Cincy #2)

[JasonEvans]

Post your thoughts about the South region here. And don't forget to vote in the poll for who will win the region.

-Jason

[TexHawk]

I understand if people are scared away from UVA and Tony Bennett because of the tourney history, but I have no idea why those same people would run toward Sean Miller.

[FerryFor50]

If UVA ends up playing Cincy, that's gonna be some ugly basketball.

#1 kenpom D vs. #2 kenpom D. Neither team great offensively. Both are physical teams.

[jv001]

Go Hoos!

[Jim3k]

Cats are at full strength. Ayton is no longer a freshman. No one can stop him. Not even Virginia. Plus, Boise is in their Time Zone, a factor which should never be ignored.

[FerryFor50]

Cats are at full strength. Ayton is no longer a freshman. No one can stop him. Not even Virginia. Plus, Boise is in their Time Zone, a factor which should never be ignored.

Ayton is a bit foul prone, so that could be something to watch. But I could see Kentucky taking out Zona.

[ipatent]

But I could see Kentucky taking out Zona.

It'll be a good game if Kentucky plays like it has the past few games.

[FerryFor50]

It'll be a good game if Kentucky plays like it has the past few games.

They've turned it on a bit, for sure. But, they beat a couple teams that had injury issues and then squeaked by Tennessee. So I'm not sold on them yet.

[jhmoss1812]

Cats are at full strength. Ayton is no longer a freshman. No one can stop him. Not even Virginia. Plus, Boise is in their Time Zone, a factor which should never be ignored.

If both advance, UVA would play Arizona in Atlanta, not Boise.

[robed deity]

I know Ayton is a freak, but I'm not totally sold on Arizona. They haven't played anyone very good in a while, and when they did, they had some bad losses. I think UVA would win comfortably should it get to that point.

[TexHawk]

They've turned it on a bit, for sure. But, they beat a couple teams that had injury issues and then squeaked by Tennessee. So I'm not sold on them yet.
They also lost by double digits to a 6 seed, one week ago. I guess "turning it on" means beating unranked Georgia, unranked Alabama, and Tennessee. Prior to today, they had only played 4 games against ranked teams all year, and they lost 3 of them.

[Troublemaker]

I know Ayton is a freak, but I'm not totally sold on Arizona. They haven't played anyone very good in a while, and when they did, they had some bad losses. I think UVA would win comfortably should it get to that point.

It would be the most motivated Bennett has ever been. Punks like the Miller brothers and Chris Mack dilute the Packline brand by trying to imitate the Bennetts' defense. But the Packline is a family recipe, and only the Bennetts know the secret ingredients to build it. When family honor is at stake, you bet on that team.

[FerryFor50]

They also lost by double digits to a 6 seed, one week ago. I guess "turning it on" means beating unranked Georgia, unranked Alabama, and Tennessee. Prior to today, they had only played 4 games against ranked teams all year, and they lost 3 of them.

Georgia was unimpressive. But Alabama was a decent win. However, they were missing a key player.

Tennessee was a great win and UK got hot from outside the past few games. If they can keep up the shooting, they'll be tough.

[Jim3k]

It'll be a good game if Kentucky plays like it has the past few games.

Heck, I could see Davidson taking out Kentucky. Classic 5-12 game.

[ipatent]

But Alabama was a decent win. However, they were missing a key player.

Kentucky has also been missing a player... Jared Vanderbilt.

I don't see them getting by Virginia, but if they continue to hit threes they will be a tough out. Gilgeous-Alexander is playing his best ball of the year and they are playing through him.

[Jim3k]

If both advance, UVA would play Arizona in Atlanta, not Boise.

Heh. I knew when I wrote that, someone would say something, impervious to the obvious. Just to clarify, I was only referring to the first weekend.

And again to state the obvious, in Atlanta, if they both get there, Virginia will have the Time Zone advantage. Unless...Arizona goes straight to Atlanta; in that case they should be diurnally adjusted.

[brevity]

I understand if people are scared away from UVA and Tony Bennett because of the tourney history, but I have no idea why those same people would run toward Sean Miller.

Wow. Until your comment, I hadn't realized the slim postseason history of the coaches of the top 4 teams in this region. Rick Barnes is the only coach among them with a Final Four (Texas in 2003), and now he coaches Tennessee, which has never been. (Kind of like Jim Larrañaga with 6-seed Miami.)

[luvdahops]

Cats are at full strength. Ayton is no longer a freshman. No one can stop him. Not even Virginia. Plus, Boise is in their Time Zone, a factor which should never be ignored.

If Virginia can beat us in Cameron, they can beat Arizona. Wilkins, Salt, Hunter and Diakite are all strong frontcourt defenders. They may not stop Ayton, but they can certainly slow him down.

[gotoguy]

Go Ramblers!

[Jim3k]

If Virginia can beat us in Cameron, they can beat Arizona. Wilkins, Salt, Hunter and Diakite are all strong frontcourt defenders. They may not stop Ayton, but they can certainly slow him down.

Change the FT shooting a little bit (we only hit 5 of 11), you get a different outcome. I don't think the 2 pt UVa-Duke game is a valid predictor for UVa-UofA.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

If Virginia can beat us in Cameron, they can beat Arizona. Wilkins, Salt, Hunter and Diakite are all strong frontcourt defenders. They may not stop Ayton, but they can certainly slow him down.

Virginia certainly can beat them, but I submit that there are reasons to suspect that Arizona and Kentucky both are much stronger than a normal 4-5 seed. Arizona is now on a mission, and everybody knows they have elite talent, and size, much more so than Virginia. They really rallied around each other after the Ayton/Miller suspension weekend. I consider them a threat to go all the way. Motivation like that means a lot in sudden death situations.

And Kentucky has just figured out how to play with this collection of players. Calipari said as much Sunday, seemed more relaxed than I've ever seen him, and you can tell that he knows they have found something. Again, this is a team with elite talent that has under achieved so far, but have recently figured it out.

Virginia's biggest advantage is that Bennett had his team figured out from day one, and they've become the classic situation where the whole is greater than just the sum of the parts. With both UK and Zona, their "sum of the parts" is greater than Virginia's - and now it's a case of whether or not the "whole" of UK or UA is greater than the whole of Virginia.

I suppose today there's no way, even for a top seed, not to get an opponent that scares you in the Sweet 16. But whoever emerges from this pairing would have me into the vodka were they in Duke's region. (and no, i don't see a Davidson upset in the "Wildcat" region. )

I would also add that we think Duke might have "found something" in the second half against the Cheats in Durham. If that's the case, and I pulled for someone else, then I wouldn't want to be facing Duke in the tournament either. Beware of teams that suddenly "figure it out' now - as well as those with a burning sense of being wronged.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Virginia certainly can beat them, but I submit that there are reasons to suspect that Arizona and Kentucky both are much stronger than a normal 4-5 seed. Arizona is now on a mission, and everybody knows they have elite talent, and size, much more so than Virginia. They really rallied around each other after the Ayton/Miller suspension weekend. I consider them a threat to go all the way. Motivation like that means a lot in sudden death situations.

And Kentucky has just figured out how to play with this collection of players. Calipari said as much Sunday, seemed more relaxed than I've ever seen him, and you can tell that he knows they have found something. Again, this is a team with elite talent that has under achieved so far, but have recently figured it out.

Virginia's biggest advantage is that Bennett had his team figured out from day one, and they've become the classic situation where the whole is greater than just the sum of the parts. With both UK and Zona, their "sum of the parts" is greater than Virginia's - and now it's a case of whether or not the "whole" of UK or UA is greater than the whole of Virginia.

I suppose today there's no way, even for a top seed, not to get an opponent that scares you in the Sweet 16. But whoever emerges from this pairing would have me into the vodka were they in Duke's region. (and no, i don't see a Davidson upset in the "Wildcat" region. )

I would also add that we think Duke might have "found something" in the second half against the Cheats in Durham. If that's the case, and I pulled for someone else, then I wouldn't want to be facing Duke in the tournament either. Beware of teams that suddenly "figure it out' now - as well as those with a burning sense of being wronged.

Yes, again (sorry for beating this drum again) let's remember what a difference a few plays make... If Grayson doesn't get a little cheeky at the end of the half and Duke finds a way to win the UNC game after that abysmal first ten minutes, we are a team that EVERYONE is watching closely and no one wants any part of. But, things fall a different way, we don't win that game and have to stay home and watch UVa knock off the Heels, and are left with a sense of "who knows where we go from here."

UVa definitely earned the top tournament seed. They also did nothing to deserve this absurd bracket. Beating UNC should have earned a much better prize, IMHO.

[DarkstarWahoo]

Beware of teams that suddenly "figure it out' now - as well as those with a burning sense of being wronged.

This is what I'm hoping happens with the Wahoos now. Opinions differ on Jerome and Guy, and I get that, but I think it's safe to say they have healthy confidence and (especially in Jerome's case) play with a chip on their collective shoulders. This is fuel for the fire. I hate that my team, as the #1 overall seed, got a bracket like this, but that team rarely gets to play the "Nobody believed in us!" card. This team can legitimately say that.

[FerryFor50]

This is what I'm hoping happens with the Wahoos now. Opinions differ on Jerome and Guy, and I get that, but I think it's safe to say they have healthy confidence and (especially in Jerome's case) play with a chip on their collective shoulders. This is fuel for the fire. I hate that my team, as the #1 overall seed, got a bracket like this, but that team rarely gets to play the "Nobody believed in us!" card. This team can legitimately say that.

Do you think winning the ACCT and getting the number 1 overall seed is enough to put a chip on their shoulders? Do these guys even care who gets put in their brackets?

[Troublemaker]

UVa definitely earned the top tournament seed. They also did nothing to deserve this absurd bracket.

Can some of our many UVA posters chime in? Are you guys on board with this narrative that your bracket is absurd and you got screwed?

I mean, basically it just comes down to that you have to play ONE of Kentucky and Arizona (not BOTH), right? So potentially a tough S16 game, but I'm not even sure either team matches up all that well with UVA. And if it's Arizona, they will be playing on the East Coast in UVA's region.

UVA fans, you are happy with your 2 and 3 seeds, right? Thus, this bracket ain't so bad for you at all, right?

[DarkstarWahoo]

Do you think winning the ACCT and getting the number 1 overall seed is enough to put a chip on their shoulders? Do these guys even care who gets put in their brackets?

I’m sure they’re a whole lot more confident than I am.

I’m also heartened by the way we played against another team with elite NBA talent - the Duke Blue Devils. Y’all’s conclusions and reasoning may differ, but to my eyes, it took a full 20 minutes before you guys found your footing against us. K got y’all squared away in the second half, but he’s a way better coach than Miller. And you guys see us every year!

[DarkstarWahoo]

Troublemaker - sorry, did not see your post. I do recognize that it’s not a doubleheader against UK and Zona, and I do like our 2 and 3. The outrage on my end is largely that I view our path as being significantly harder than that of the 2 seed in our own region. That ain’t right.

At the end of the day, you have to beat somebody sometime. We can’t get UMBCs all the way to San Antonio.

[robed deity]

This is what I'm hoping happens with the Wahoos now. Opinions differ on Jerome and Guy, and I get that, but I think it's safe to say they have healthy confidence and (especially in Jerome's case) play with a chip on their collective shoulders. This is fuel for the fire. I hate that my team, as the #1 overall seed, got a bracket like this, but that team rarely gets to play the "Nobody believed in us!" card. This team can legitimately say that.

Sure, but the difficulty of the bracket is way overblown. Arizona and Kentucky are talented teams, yes, but UVA will handle either. And Cincy as the 2 is probably the preferred one over Purdue. A great defensive team but they have trouble making shots against average defenses, let alone you guys'.

[FerryFor50]

I’m sure they’re a whole lot more confident than I am.

I’m also heartened by the way we played against another team with elite NBA talent - the Duke Blue Devils. Y’all’s conclusions and reasoning may differ, but to my eyes, it took a full 20 minutes before you guys found your footing against us. K got y’all squared away in the second half, but he’s a way better coach than Miller. And you guys see us every year!

Yea, but every year lately, it's a new set of guys having to learn the same lessons over and over. :)

Meanwhile, your guys are all 10th year seniors.

It's a blessing and a curse.

[FerryFor50]

Sure, but the difficulty of the bracket is way overblown. Arizona and Kentucky are talented teams, yes, but UVA will handle either. And Cincy as the 2 is probably the preferred one over Purdue. A great defensive team but they have trouble making shots against average defenses, let alone you guys'.

I don't think the committee got the seeding of UK or Arizona wrong; they both had their struggles this season and played unevenly. Before the SEC tournament, UK was likely looking at a 5 or 6 seed.

I think UVA actually benefits from UK and Zona beating the bejeezus out of each other before they have to play the physically taxing defense that UVA plays.

[Troublemaker]

Troublemaker - sorry, did not see your post. I do recognize that it’s not a doubleheader against UK and Zona, and I do like our 2 and 3. The outrage on my end is largely that I view our path as being significantly harder than that of the 2 seed in our own region. That ain’t right.

At the end of the day, you have to beat somebody sometime. We can’t get UMBCs all the way to San Antonio.

Agreed.

Let's also play the "Would you trade places with another #1" game?

I don't think any UVA fan trades places with Xavier. UNC/Michigan are a tougher 2/3 than Cincy/Tenn, and having Gonzaga (#8 kenpom) as your 4 seed on the West coast is as tough or more tough than playing UK/Zona on the East Coast. So, UVA would not trade with Xavier.

Would UVA trade with Kansas? It's closer, but I think the presence of Michigan St on the other side of the region makes you guys say "no thanks." And Duke isn't chopped liver, either. The 4/5 of Auburn/Clemson is probably easier than Kentucky/Zona, but that's about it. I don't think UVA trades with Kansas.

UVA would very likely trade with Villanova. I recognize that. But keep in mind the 8 seed VaTech and the 5 seed WVU are the two teams that have vanquished you this season. Still, UVA would make the trade.

So, basically, if I'm right, UVA does not trade places with two of its fellow 1-seeds, leaving only Nova's region as more desirable. I'd say UVa got a fair shake, all things considered.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

UVa definitely earned the top tournament seed. They also did nothing to deserve this absurd bracket. Beating UNC should have earned a much better prize, IMHO.

Agreed, and I got whipped pretty snarkily by some of the old heads around here for suggesting it. I was also assured that none of the UVa people would agree with my take (and yours). It appears they do agree with us.....DarkStar included.

Also, writer Mike DeCourcy agrees, saying this: "The Cavaliers were handed a bracket, particularly their half of the South, that feels a teensy bit like the one the committee hung on undefeated Wichita State in 2014. The message seems to be: You think you're something because you dominated the ACC with only a single defeat in 21 games? Ha! Prove it."

The Wichita 2014 is a great analogy - as a 1 seed, they got 8th seeded Kentucky in the second round. UK had a disappointing season, but they were extremely talented, far more so than Wichita, and this was a screw job to Wichita, who like UVa, had earned better. Right now UVa is a better team than either Arizona or UK, but both of them are more talented, and it's not what UVa earned.....

I mean, if Mountain, DeCourcy, and Darkstar agree....who can quibble?

[luvdahops]

Change the FT shooting a little bit (we only hit 5 of 11), you get a different outcome. I don't think the 2 pt UVa-Duke game is a valid predictor for UVa-UofA.

Of course Duke had chances to win that game. But we didn't. The point that UVA clearly demonstrated they could compete with us, despite a clear difference in size and talent. And Duke and Arizona have very, very similar profiles:

Ayton = Bagley
Trier = Allen
Rustic = Carter (probably the weakest analogy)
Akins = Trent
Jackson-Cartwright = Duval
Starters all play heavy minutes
Limited contributions (at least offensively) from the bench
Strong rebounding and shot blocking, but so-so ballhandling
Not a lot of 3-point threats (6.9 made 3s per game vs 8.3 for Duke)

Duke has higher KenPom ratings in both offense (#3 vs #15) and defense (#7 vs #70)

Arizona is more experienced than Duke and has been playing well, but within a historically weak Pac-12. They have only 3 wins over ranked teams all season (Arizona State 2x and Texas A&M), and in my view, are coming in to the tournament much less battle tested than squads from the ACC, Big East and Big 12. And perhaps the SEC, too.

[FerryFor50]

Of course Duke had chances to win that game. But we didn't. The point that UVA clearly demonstrated they could compete with us, despite a clear difference in size and talent. And Duke and Arizona have very, very similar profiles:

Ayton = Bagley
Trier = Allen
Rustic = Carter (probably the weakest analogy)
Akins = Trent
Jackson-Cartwright = Duval
Starters all play heavy minutes
Limited contributions (at least offensively) from the bench
Strong rebounding and shot blocking, but so-so ballhandling
Not a lot of 3-point threats (6.9 made 3s per game vs 8.3 for Duke)

Duke has higher KenPom ratings in both offense (#3 vs #15) and defense (#7 vs #70)

Arizona is more experienced than Duke and has been playing well, but within a historically weak Pac-12. They have only 3 wins over ranked teams all season (Arizona State 2x and Texas A&M), and in my view, are coming in to the tournament much less battle tested than squads from the ACC, Big East and Big 12. And perhaps the SEC, too.

At the time they played UVA, Duke's defense was still man to man and getting shredded most nights.

[DarkstarWahoo]

Arizona is more experienced than Duke and has been playing well, but within a historically weak Pac-12.
That's no way to speak of the Conference of Champions!

[Bluedog]

I don't think the committee got the seeding of UK or Arizona wrong; they both had their struggles this season and played unevenly. Before the SEC tournament, UK was likely looking at a 5 or 6 seed.

I think UVA actually benefits from UK and Zona beating the bejeezus out of each other before they have to play the physically taxing defense that UVA plays.

UK did get a 5 seed even after the tournament. ;) As far as UVa benefiting from UK and Zona tiring each other out, I'd agree if it was the same weekend, but they'll have a week's rest before having to play UVa.

[kmspeaks]

Agreed, and I got whipped pretty snarkily by some of the old heads around here for suggesting it. I was also assured that none of the UVa people would agree with my take (and yours). It appears they do agree with us....DarkStar included.

Also, writer Mike DeCourcy agrees, saying this: "The Cavaliers were handed a bracket, particularly their half of the South, that feels a teensy bit like the one the committee hung on undefeated Wichita State in 2014. The message seems to be: You think you're something because you dominated the ACC with only a single defeat in 21 games? Ha! Prove it."

The Wichita 2014 is a great analogy - as a 1 seed, they got 8th seeded Kentucky in the second round. UK had a disappointing season, but they were extremely talented, far more so than Wichita, and this was a screw job to Wichita, who like UVa, had earned better. Right now UVa is a better team than either Arizona or UK, but both of them are more talented, and it's not what UVa earned....

I mean, if Mountain, DeCourcy, and Darkstar agree...who can quibble?

So you want the committee to seed based on projected talent rather than on the court results? Well then Duke should have been the overall #1 and we got screwed. Maybe Kentucky and Arizona should be better, given what we think about their rosters, than they have all year, but their record is still what it is so unless you think they were improperly seeded based on that I'm not really sure what the problem is.

[DarkstarWahoo]

At the time they played UVA, Duke's defense was still man to man and getting shredded most nights.

I was going to post something about how they played zone against UVA, then I went and looked at the game video and lo and behold, you're right. There's a lot of man there. It looks like there may have been a shift to zone in the second half? Bennett certainly had Hunter hanging out around the free-throw line for a while, which he did against Syracuse as well. Was that when K made the shift? I need a Duke mythology expert here.

[FerryFor50]

I was going to post something about how they played zone against UVA, then I went and looked at the game video and lo and behold, you're right. There's a lot of man there. It looks like there may have been a shift to zone in the second half? Bennett certainly had Hunter hanging out around the free-throw line for a while, which he did against Syracuse as well. Was that when K made the shift? I need a Duke mythology expert here.

Duke was tinkering with man and zone most of the first part of the year before K decided to go full zone late in the season. So it's possible they played some zone that game.

[TexHawk]

Let's also play the "Would you trade places with another #1" game?

This is my thinking as well. As a KU fan, if we get that far, I do prefer Auburn/Clemson to UK/Zona, but that's it. Preseason rankings are flawed, but Duke & MSU were 1 and 2 for a reason. UVA's 2/3 (Cincy and Tennessee) were #13 and unranked. UVA obviously couldn't play Clemson, but their other choices for 4/5 were Gonzaga, West Virginia, Wichita State, or Ohio State. One of those teams gave UVA one of their two losses, and advanced metrics think very highly of Gonzaga. Was it a good draw? No, but it's not terrible, and it's balanced by an easier E8 matchup, if they win.

And can someone break down this "Zona is on a mission because they are angry at the NCAA" thing? A- The NCAA hasn't done anything, so can we amend it to "Zona is on a mission because they are angry at the FBI (or ESPN)"? B- In the 5 games since the scandal broke, they lost to Oregon, then beat 5 unranked teams. By KP, those team were 84, 241, 110, 48, 40.

For the record, (imo) Zona has a *much* better case to go far than UK, primarily because the Ayton/Atkins/Trier combo hasn't really played much together, and when they have, they've been pretty good. Just 3 losses all season, I think. But you still have the Sean Miller factor, and maybe I'm just biased because I've seen slow, disciplined teams fluster him the last few tournaments (Xavier, Wichita State, Wisconsin x 2).

[FerryFor50]

UK did get a 5 seed even after the tournament. ;) As far as UVa benefiting from UK and Zona tiring each other out, I'd agree if it was the same weekend, but they'll have a week's rest before having to play UVa.

Ah my mistake. Was thinking UK was a 4 seed. :)

But regardless, they played themselves up a bit higher with the SEC tournament.

Also didn't realize they got a week off before playing UVA. So, ultimately, my point stinks. :D

[rsvman]

Agreed, and I got whipped pretty snarkily by some of the old heads around here for suggesting it. I was also assured that none of the UVa people would agree with my take (and yours). It appears they do agree with us....DarkStar included.

Also, writer Mike DeCourcy agrees, saying this: "The Cavaliers were handed a bracket, particularly their half of the South, that feels a teensy bit like the one the committee hung on undefeated Wichita State in 2014. The message seems to be: You think you're something because you dominated the ACC with only a single defeat in 21 games? Ha! Prove it."

The Wichita 2014 is a great analogy - as a 1 seed, they got 8th seeded Kentucky in the second round. UK had a disappointing season, but they were extremely talented, far more so than Wichita, and this was a screw job to Wichita, who like UVa, had earned better. Right now UVa is a better team than either Arizona or UK, but both of them are more talented, and it's not what UVa earned....

I mean, if Mountain, DeCourcy, and Darkstar agree...who can quibble?

And Wichita State was almost up to the challenge. If I remember correctly, it required an heroic buzzer-beater three from one of the Harrison twins to secure the victory. And was it an overtime game?!?

[HereBeforeCoachK]

So you want the committee to seed based on projected talent rather than on the court results? Well then Duke should have been the overall #1 and we got screwed. Maybe Kentucky and Arizona should be better, given what we think about their rosters, than they have all year, but their record is still what it is so unless you think they were improperly seeded based on that I'm not really sure what the problem is.

I don't know that it's a problem, it's called an opinion - and one that is widely shared, including by Virginia fans and those who earn a living discussing such things. And I don't know that it's a seeding issue - it's more of a bracketing issue. I never said Arizona and Uk were under seeded at a 4 or a 5, I just said there is good reason to think that they might be the most dangerous 4,5 in the bracket, and that the overall #1 seed should not have to face that.

I guess the only problem is that you misunderstand the point that I, MountainDevil, Darkstar, Mike DeCourcy and others are making.

[DarkstarWahoo]

This is my thinking as well. As a KU fan, if we get that far, I do prefer Auburn/Clemson to UK/Zona, but that's it. Preseason rankings are flawed, but Duke & MSU were 1 and 2 for a reason. UVA's 2/3 (Cincy and Tennessee) were #13 and unranked. UVA obviously couldn't play Clemson, but their other choices for 4/5 were Gonzaga, West Virginia, Wichita State, or Ohio State. One of those teams gave UVA one of their two losses, and advanced metrics think very highly of Gonzaga. Was it a good draw? No, but it's not terrible, and it's balanced by an easier E8 matchup, if they win.

And can someone break down this "Zona is on a mission because they are angry at the NCAA" thing? A- The NCAA hasn't done anything, so can we amend it to "Zona is on a mission because they are angry at the FBI (or ESPN)"? B- In the 5 games since the scandal broke, they lost to Oregon, then beat 5 unranked teams. By KP, those team were 84, 241, 110, 48, 40.

For the record, (imo) Zona has a *much* better case to go far than UK, primarily because the Ayton/Atkins/Trier combo hasn't really played much together, and when they have, they've been pretty good. Just 3 losses all season, I think. But you still have the Sean Miller factor, and maybe I'm just biased because I've seen slow, disciplined teams fluster him the last few tournaments (Xavier, Wichita State, Wisconsin x 2).

I think some of my reaction was also due to Lunardi's prediction from earlier in the day for UVA - Cincy, Tennessee, Texas Tech and Ohio State at 2-5. I was ready to sign off on that instantly. Maybe (almost certainly) there's some name-brand bias in that and in my current feelings.

Also, not making fun of you, but I recently learned - like, this morning - that it's Rawle Alkins, not Rawle Atkins. What percentage of time do you think the average Internet fan gets that right? Especially once you factor in autocorrect, it's probably, what, 25 percent?

[TexHawk]

Also, not making fun of you, but I recently learned - like, this morning - that it's Rawle Alkins, not Rawle Atkins. What percentage of time do you think the average Internet fan gets that right? Especially once you factor in autocorrect, it's probably, what, 25 percent?

WHAT?

Apparently I've made that mistake a dozen times since last night.

[tbyers11]

I think some of my reaction was also due to Lunardi's prediction from earlier in the day for UVA - Cincy, Tennessee, Texas Tech and Ohio State at 2-5. I was ready to sign off on that instantly. Maybe (almost certainly) there's some name-brand bias in that and in my current feelings.

Also, not making fun of you, but I recently learned - like, this morning - that it's Rawle Alkins, not Rawle Atkins. What percentage of time do you think the average Internet fan gets that right? Especially once you factor in autocorrect, it's probably, what, 25 percent?


WHAT?

Apparently I've made that mistake a dozen times since last night.

I also made the same mistake on Alkins' name earlier this year.

However, my main reason for posting was to point out that we have a Virginia poster and a Kansas poster discussing the finer points of spelling an Arizona players name on DBR.

That's pretty cool. Thanks for coming by and hanging around.

[DarkstarWahoo]

I also made the same mistake on Alkins' name earlier this year.

However, my main reason for posting was to point out that we have a Virginia poster and a Kansas poster discussing the finer points of spelling an Arizona players name on DBR.

That's pretty cool. Thanks for coming by and hanging around.

It's a testament to the folks here and the community y'all have built. Thanks for having us.

[kmspeaks]

I don't know that it's a problem, it's called an opinion - and one that is widely shared, including by Virginia fans and those who earn a living discussing such things. And I don't know that it's a seeding issue - it's more of a bracketing issue. I never said Arizona and Uk were under seeded at a 4 or a 5, I just said there is good reason to think that they might be the most dangerous 4,5 in the bracket, and that the overall #1 seed should not have to face that.

I guess the only problem is that you misunderstand the point that I, MountainDevil, Darkstar, Mike DeCourcy and others are making.

I guess if I don't agree with your opinion I have to be misunderstanding? My apologies if I'm reading something into it that's not there but your last sentence comes off as snarky and dismissive. I'm just here to talk basketball with my friends, not "win" a debate.

There's no true S-curve when it comes to seeding, geography and other match up rules take precedence, but UVA got the lowest 2 (#8 Cincinnati) and 4 (#16 Arizona) seed, the 2nd 3 seed (#10 Tennessee) and the top 5 seed (#17 Kentucky).

4/5 Seed Totals
Midwest (Auburn/Clemson): 32
East (Wichita St/WVU): 32
South (Arizona/Kentucky): 33
West (Gonzaga/Ohio St): 35

If we assume the committee ranked teams correctly maybe Virginia wants Gonzaga/Ohio State instead but I don't know if that could even happen without violating some bracketing rules. If you want to say UVA was unlucky because their 4/5 might be capable of playing better than a typical 4/5 due to the talent on the roster, fine. I have a harder time with saying UVA got screwed since that implies the committee did something wrong and maybe even, as DeCourcy seems to suggest, did it intentionally.

[Wahoo2000]

Can some of our many UVA posters chime in? Are you guys on board with this narrative that your bracket is absurd and you got screwed?

I mean, basically it just comes down to that you have to play ONE of Kentucky and Arizona (not BOTH), right? So potentially a tough S16 game, but I'm not even sure either team matches up all that well with UVA. And if it's Arizona, they will be playing on the East Coast in UVA's region.

UVA fans, you are happy with your 2 and 3 seeds, right? Thus, this bracket ain't so bad for you at all, right?

I'm apparently in the minority among not just my own team's fans (not speaking about you, Darkstar, just Hoos fanbase in general), but among cbb fans in general in NOT thinking we were screwed in any way.

Did we get the BEST possible scenario? Absolutely not. But to only have to play one game on the road to the FF vs a team who is thought to be a "title contender" is about what I'd expect. And I'd actually rather be playing a UK/AZ winner than having a scenario of having to play one or more of Michigan/MSU PLUS those other guys. It could have been worse - what if UK was still in that 4/5 side AND Arizona was the 3 on the other side? Or worse yet, UK and Zona stay where they are, but MSU or Michigan was our 3 seed? There are MUCH worse paths to travel. And to be totally honest, if we're going to have to play a team that has us at a severe talent deficit, I'd rather it be the 1st game of the weekend than the second. That's really all this hubbub is about (to me, anyway) - we basically have S16 and EE likely opponents reversed in terms of expected quality. No big deal.

I'm sure UK/Zona will be a very tough out for our guys should that matchup happen. Still, if we CAN finally break through and get to a FF, nobody will be able to say that we just had a "gimme" path.

As an aside, I can only imagine the slugfest that a UVA-Cincy regional final would be. The o/u could be 87 and I'd still bet under.

[TexHawk]

I also made the same mistake on Alkins' name earlier this year.

However, my main reason for posting was to point out that we have a Virginia poster and a Kansas poster discussing the finer points of spelling an Arizona players name on DBR.

That's pretty cool. Thanks for coming by and hanging around.

High five!

No knock on you guys, but I'd prefer to hang out in just about any non-KU forum in the counry this week. Half of our fanbase is convinced we don't have a shot against Penn.

[W&LHoo]

I'm apparently in the minority among not just my own team's fans (not speaking about you, Darkstar, just Hoos fanbase in general), but among cbb fans in general in NOT thinking we were screwed in any way.

Did we get the BEST possible scenario? Absolutely not. But to only have to play one game on the road to the FF vs a team who is thought to be a "title contender" is about what I'd expect. And I'd actually rather be playing a UK/AZ winner than having a scenario of having to play one or more of Michigan/MSU PLUS those other guys. It could have been worse - what if UK was still in that 4/5 side AND Arizona was the 3 on the other side? Or worse yet, UK and Zona stay where they are, but MSU or Michigan was our 3 seed? There are MUCH worse paths to travel. And to be totally honest, if we're going to have to play a team that has us at a severe talent deficit, I'd rather it be the 1st game of the weekend than the second. That's really all this hubbub is about (to me, anyway) - we basically have S16 and EE likely opponents reversed in terms of expected quality. No big deal.

I'm sure UK/Zona will be a very tough out for our guys should that matchup happen. Still, if we CAN finally break through and get to a FF, nobody will be able to say that we just had a "gimme" path.

As an aside, I can only imagine the slugfest that a UVA-Cincy regional final would be. The o/u could be 87 and I'd still bet under.

I basically agree with Darkstar and Wahoo - we didn't get a great bracket, but we didn't get screwed either.

Zona/Kentucky are obviously tougher than we'd want to meet in the sweet 16, but the rest of the bracket doesn't worry me. Even Arizona doesn't give me much pause. I'd certainly rather not play Kentucky in Atlanta (where their fanbase is legion), but you don't get to hang banners for winning the easy games.

[Ian]

Duke was tinkering with man and zone most of the first part of the year before K decided to go full zone late in the season. So it's possible they played some zone that game.

Duke's comeback in the second half was when they switched to zone. Forced a turnover that gave them the ball with the chance to tie only to Duval foolishly try a homerun pass that was intercepted.

[Phoenix22]

A Dukie from Arizona here.

Yes Ayton is a beast. I would take him #1 in the draft (but prefer Bagley for college). In order to beat the Virginia D he is going to have to play way above the rim and dominate like he did down the stretch against USC's zone. The problem is he is dependent on the guards to get him the ball and they often forget about him for long stretches and he is relegated to offensive rebounds - which he is very good at of course. Ristic will be key to opening up some space down low for him to maneuver. Trier has never passed the ball once in his life. Virginia's D would be very disruptive for UA's inconsistent guards, but it would be a very interesting match up - if it comes to that. Go Cats!

I have been waiting for a rematch since '11! Go Duke!

[HereBeforeCoachK]

4/5 Seed Totals
Midwest (Auburn/Clemson): 32
East (Wichita St/WVU): 32
South (Arizona/Kentucky): 33
West (Gonzaga/Ohio St): 35
.

If one of these regions doesn't jump out at you, then I don't know what to tell ya. I would also add, FWIW, that the consensus of those who cover this sport for a living is that UK/Zona as 4-5 is a ridiculous pairing in one regional, let alone with the over all number one seed. I don't want to name names specifically, because you can always pick apart names, but a whole lotta people see this the same way. It was my initial feeling.

Two blue bloods with a whole lot of talent, and the indications they are starting to put that talent together right now, are in one pairing. The other pairings are all good teams, some are very tough teams, but the top talent in the entire 4-5 line is in the South. Most of the historical success is in the South. Talent is not everything, but it's a huge factor. Tradition also, but less so.

As for Auburn, they are no where near a 4 quality team now...a key injury has really sent them backward. Clemson has one of the worst NCAAT history resumes around. Wichita and WVU are both tough well coached teams, and are problems, but neither has anywhere near the raw talent as do Arizona and Kentucky. Gonzaga / Ohio State may be the toughest besides the South, because I think Gonzaga is under seeded.

As a Duke fan, who also likes to see the ACC teams do well, I think Duke got the best of the 4/5s, while Virginia got the worst. As a 2 seed, the 4/5 isn't a factor for Duke until the Elite 8, if then, anyway. There's a very high likelihood that Virginia will see one of these in the Sweet 16. That's a helluva sweet 16 match up.

Speaking of which, I think Duke caught a bit of a raw deal in the Sweet 16 potential also, as Michigan State seems to me to be a very strong 3. I"m not thrilled with the X factor of Oklahoma either.

[kmspeaks]

If one of these regions doesn't jump out at you, then I don't know what to tell ya. I would also add, FWIW, that the consensus of those who cover this sport for a living is that UK/Zona as 4-5 is a ridiculous pairing in one regional, let alone with the over all number one seed. I don't want to name names specifically, because you can always pick apart names, but a whole lotta people see this the same way. It was my initial feeling.

Two blue bloods with a whole lot of talent, and the indications they are starting to put that talent together right now, are in one pairing. The other pairings are all good teams, some are very tough teams, but the top talent in the entire 4-5 line is in the South. Most of the historical success is in the South. Talent is not everything, but it's a huge factor. Tradition also, but less so.

As for Auburn, they are no where near a 4 quality team now...a key injury has really sent them backward. Clemson has one of the worst NCAAT history resumes around. Wichita and WVU are both tough well coached teams, and are problems, but neither has anywhere near the raw talent as do Arizona and Kentucky. Gonzaga / Ohio State may be the toughest besides the South, because I think Gonzaga is under seeded.

As a Duke fan, who also likes to see the ACC teams do well, I think Duke got the best of the 4/5s, while Virginia got the worst. As a 2 seed, the 4/5 isn't a factor for Duke until the Elite 8, if then, anyway. There's a very high likelihood that Virginia will see one of these in the Sweet 16. That's a helluva sweet 16 match up.

Speaking of which, I think Duke caught a bit of a raw deal in the Sweet 16 potential also, as Michigan State seems to me to be a very strong 3. I"m not thrilled with the X factor of Oklahoma either.

Jump out how? Just by name recognition?

Here are the 4/5 seeds using Ken Pom
West: 8 Gonzaga, 15 Ohio State = 23
East: 20 Wichita St, 13 WVU = 33
Midwest: 16 Auburn, 19 Clemson = 35
South: 21 Arizona, 18 Kentucky = 41

So if you ask Ken, UVA got the easiest 4/5 combo by a pretty large margin. Maybe Arizona and/or Kentucky is able to finally put all that talent together and present a tough challenge, maybe not. Either way I don't see how the committee "screwed" Virginia based on the actual results this season. In fact, if I'm understanding the bracketing procedures (https://www.ncaa.com/content/di-principles-and-procedures-selection) correctly, there would need to be some strange twists and turns for Arizona to not be in the South since they were the last 4 seed.

[akg4y]

If UVA ends up playing Cincy, that's gonna be some ugly basketball.

#1 kenpom D vs. #2 kenpom D. Neither team great offensively. Both are physical teams.


UVA's offense is #21 on Kenpom now after being above 40 most of the season. Don't confuse 'deliberate and efficient' with 'not great.'
As a comparison, Arizona's is 15, Kentucky 25, West Virginia 14.

[akg4y]

Can some of our many UVA posters chime in? Are you guys on board with this narrative that your bracket is absurd and you got screwed?

I mean, basically it just comes down to that you have to play ONE of Kentucky and Arizona (not BOTH), right? So potentially a tough S16 game, but I'm not even sure either team matches up all that well with UVA. And if it's Arizona, they will be playing on the East Coast in UVA's region.

UVA fans, you are happy with your 2 and 3 seeds, right? Thus, this bracket ain't so bad for you at all, right?


In our HALF of the south region we have 6 conference champions, 3 of which also won the regular season championship for their conference, and 3 of which are P5 conference champions. That's a little ridiculous considering the most any other half-region has is 2 from a power conference (one of which only won the regular season - Auburn), and 6/8 of the half-regions have only 1 P5 conference champion. On top of that Arizona & Kentucky are the 7th and 8th most popular picks to win it all so 3 of the 8 favorites are in our half-region, leaving 5 in the remaining 7 half-regions. That is absurd.

[akg4y]

Agreed.

Let's also play the "Would you trade places with another #1" game?

I don't think any UVA fan trades places with Xavier. UNC/Michigan are a tougher 2/3 than Cincy/Tenn, and having Gonzaga (#8 kenpom) as your 4 seed on the West coast is as tough or more tough than playing UK/Zona on the East Coast. So, UVA would not trade with Xavier.

Would UVA trade with Kansas? It's closer, but I think the presence of Michigan St on the other side of the region makes you guys say "no thanks." And Duke isn't chopped liver, either. The 4/5 of Auburn/Clemson is probably easier than Kentucky/Zona, but that's about it. I don't think UVA trades with Kansas.

UVA would very likely trade with Villanova. I recognize that. But keep in mind the 8 seed VaTech and the 5 seed WVU are the two teams that have vanquished you this season. Still, UVA would make the trade.

So, basically, if I'm right, UVA does not trade places with two of its fellow 1-seeds, leaving only Nova's region as more desirable. I'd say UVa got a fair shake, all things considered.


In my opinion the answer to most of your questions is yes I would trade. The difference is how likely you are to lose earlier in the tourney... We have much higher odds of now losing in the Sweet 16 which would be a huge disappointment versus if we were in basically any other 1 seed spot. I would gladly trade a round 3 game vs AZ/KY for a round 4 game vs UNC or Purdue rather than Cinci. Duke, maybe not but mostly because they know our style.

There are 2 other things being overlooked here:
#1 Arizona plays a pack line defense so they are much better equipped to prepare for us than basically any other top team in the country.
#2 Since this is a Round 3 game there are more days to prepare for us than if it was a round 4 game against a tough team in which there would basically only be 1 day to prepare.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Jump out how? Just by name recognition?

Here are the 4/5 seeds using Ken Pom
West: 8 Gonzaga, 15 Ohio State = 23
East: 20 Wichita St, 13 WVU = 33
Midwest: 16 Auburn, 19 Clemson = 35
South: 21 Arizona, 18 Kentucky = 41

So if you ask Ken, UVA got the easiest 4/5 combo by a pretty large margin. Maybe Arizona and/or Kentucky is able to finally put all that talent together and present a tough challenge, maybe not. Either way I don't see how the committee "screwed" Virginia based on the actual results this season. In fact, if I'm understanding the bracketing procedures (https://www.ncaa.com/content/di-principles-and-procedures-selection) correctly, there would need to be some strange twists and turns for Arizona to not be in the South since they were the last 4 seed.

Kenpom stats are awesome for the long haul. For a one game situation, virtually worthless. On talent and size and potential, Zona and UK are far superior to any other 4/5. Not on performance so far, admittedly, but on potential and talent, no contest. BTW, every Virginia fan agrees with me, as do most people in the business. Crunch your numbers all you want....analytics are made for the long haul - they were NEVER intended to be a one game analysis.

[robed deity]

In my opinion the answer to most of your questions is yes I would trade. The difference is how likely you are to lose earlier in the tourney... We have much higher odds of now losing in the Sweet 16 which would be a huge disappointment versus if we were in basically any other 1 seed spot. I would gladly trade a round 3 game vs AZ/KY for a round 4 game vs UNC or Purdue rather than Cinci. Duke, maybe not but mostly because they know our style.

There are 2 other things being overlooked here:
#1 Arizona plays a pack line defense so they are much better equipped to prepare for us than basically any other top team in the country.
#2 Since this is a Round 3 game there are more days to prepare for us than if it was a round 4 game against a tough team in which there would basically only be 1 day to prepare.

You guys are worried for nothing. UVA will take either apart. And it will be a rout if Guy continues to make shots like he has been.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

In my opinion the answer to most of your questions is yes I would trade. The difference is how likely you are to lose earlier in the tourney... We have much higher odds of now losing in the Sweet 16 which would be a huge disappointment versus if we were in basically any other 1 seed spot. I would gladly trade a round 3 game vs AZ/KY for a round 4 game vs UNC or Purdue rather than Cinci. Duke, maybe not but mostly because they know our style.
.

I know exactly how you feel, and have been trying, with mixed results, to explain why. You made a point that surely is key, but one I didn't even try and bang my head explaining...which is the fact that you certainly would rather your bracket get really dicey in round 4 versus round 3, for numerous reasons. It's not that Virginia shouldn't have to face an Arizona or Kentucky type team along the way, it's that facing that in the Sweet 16 is too early for an overall number one seed, which should mean something.

The committee, and some others, are perhaps slaves to the numbers, using them in ways more precise than even Ken Pom would suggest - while ignoring the eye test and common sense. The use of analytics started big time in baseball, where they were designed to pan out over 162 games...in basketball, they can give some guidance over a six game test potentially, and certainly over a 35 game season - but they are useless when trying to analyze one game match ups, let alone the intangibles.

I feel for ya, because I know how I'd feel if Duke was overall number one, and got that draw.

[tbyers11]

Kenpom stats are awesome for the long haul. For a one game situation, virtually worthless. On talent and size and potential, Zona and UK are far superior to any other 4/5. Not on performance so far, admittedly, but on potential and talent, no contest. BTW, every Virginia fan agrees with me, as do most people in the business. Crunch your numbers all you want...analytics are made for the long haul - they were NEVER intended to be a one game analysis.

If analytics aren't intended for a single game analysis why are they the basis of betting lines?

KenPom is within 1-1.5 points of the Vegas betting line ~95% of the time.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

If analytics aren't intended for a single game analysis why are they the basis of betting lines?

KenPom is within 1-1.5 points of the Vegas betting line ~95% of the time.

Betting lines are designed to predict public opinion, NOT to predict outcomes of games. And betting lines have been around since Ken Pom's great great great grandfather was a child......

[akg4y]

I think what it comes down to is if Arizona was placed as the lowest #3 and Texas Tech was dropped to the highest #4, nobody would have a problem with that because of performance over the last 10-12 games, and in all honestly it would make more sense.
Same for Kentucky, they should have been #4 in place of Auburn based on Auburn's injury and Kentucky's performance at the end of the season. That would have switched things around a bit and maybe we would have ended up with KY as our 4 and AZ as our 3 but even in that scenario I think it would have been better.

Someone above mentioned that they werent sure if this was a seeding issue but rather bracketing, but it was absolutely a seeding issue. The brackets are 98% determined solely by the rules with minimal leeway in order to provide 'balance.' Arizona and KY were placed exactly where they should have been based on the seeding order but the issue is they both should have been seeded slightly higher because end of year performance for these teams with one-and-dones is far more important than the first 15 games. The end of year KY/AZ teams would beat the beginning of year KY/AZ teams to a pulp.

Regardless, it is what it is, and our team needs to just play their game if they reach the sweet 16 and we should be fine. I think we will handle KY relatively easily, my main concern is with Arizona because they have the consensus #1 lottery pick AND they play the pack line which gives them 2 huge advantages coming into a first-time matchup with our defense.

[tbyers11]

Betting lines are designed to predict public opinion, NOT to predict outcomes of games. And betting lines have been around since Ken Pom's great great great grandfather was a child...

Yes, betting lines try to get even money on both sides. However, if you don't think the opening lines are set to be pretty darn close to the predicted outcomes of games I don't know what to tell you.

And those opening lines are not set by some magic guru. They are based on analytics and have been since Ken Pom was still a meteorologist

[HereBeforeCoachK]

.... but the issue is they both should have been seeded slightly higher because end of year performance for these teams with one-and-dones is far more important than the first 15 games. The end of year KY/AZ teams would beat the beginning of year KY/AZ teams to a pulp.
.

This is a very salient point. Calipari even said he had no idea how to use his talent until the last couple of weeks. Meanwhile, the committee is steeped in this whole body of work notion, which they apparently interpreted to mean that every single game is weighed equally. That's not what whole body of work means in real life. Even Bilas figured this out, saying something to the effect that whole body of work should indeed include the trend line. And of course it should. Common sense.

When this common sense is shredded on one and done heavy teams, the skew is more intense.

[robed deity]

Regardless, it is what it is, and our team needs to just play their game if they reach the sweet 16 and we should be fine. I think we will handle KY relatively easily, my main concern is with Arizona because they have the consensus #1 lottery pick AND they play the pack line which gives them 2 huge advantages coming into a first-time matchup with our defense.

There's the Arizona pack line and then there's the Virginia pack line. Similar in name only. I'm pretty sure Virginia's wouldn't give up 98 to Oregon.

[Troublemaker]

Regardless, it is what it is, and our team needs to just play their game if they reach the sweet 16 and we should be fine. I think we will handle KY relatively easily, my main concern is with Arizona because they have the consensus #1 lottery pick AND they play the pack line which gives them 2 huge advantages coming into a first-time matchup with our defense.

Was Elvis ever this concerned about his impersonators?

I think it's actually Zona who should be worried that UVA plays the Packline and is, in fact, coached by its innovator.

[kmspeaks]

Kenpom stats are awesome for the long haul. For a one game situation, virtually worthless. On talent and size and potential, Zona and UK are far superior to any other 4/5. Not on performance so far, admittedly, but on potential and talent, no contest. BTW, every Virginia fan agrees with me, as do most people in the business. Crunch your numbers all you want...analytics are made for the long haul - they were NEVER intended to be a one game analysis.

So the seed numbers/bracket rules say UVA got a pretty fair draw, Kenpom says they got a fair draw, but you and the UVA fans agree they didn't because the committee had some reason to try and screw them so that's that? You already said Arizona and Kentucky were seeded fairly so I'm not really sure what you wanted the committee to do here. We'd end up with a huge mess if we evaluated teams on not just their resume but what we think their resume "should" be.


I think what it comes down to is if Arizona was placed as the lowest #3 and Texas Tech was dropped to the highest #4, nobody would have a problem with that because of performance over the last 10-12 games, and in all honestly it would make more sense.
Same for Kentucky, they should have been #4 in place of Auburn based on Auburn's injury and Kentucky's performance at the end of the season. That would have switched things around a bit and maybe we would have ended up with KY as our 4 and AZ as our 3 but even in that scenario I think it would have been better.

Someone above mentioned that they werent sure if this was a seeding issue but rather bracketing, but it was absolutely a seeding issue. The brackets are 98% determined solely by the rules with minimal leeway in order to provide 'balance.' Arizona and KY were placed exactly where they should have been based on the seeding order but the issue is they both should have been seeded slightly higher because end of year performance for these teams with one-and-dones is far more important than the first 15 games. The end of year KY/AZ teams would beat the beginning of year KY/AZ teams to a pulp.

Regardless, it is what it is, and our team needs to just play their game if they reach the sweet 16 and we should be fine. I think we will handle KY relatively easily, my main concern is with Arizona because they have the consensus #1 lottery pick AND they play the pack line which gives them 2 huge advantages coming into a first-time matchup with our defense.

Arizona was the last #4 though so that's not just flipping two teams ranked one above the other. On the second bolded part we are agreed, you can make a case there was a seeding mistake, you can't say there was a bracketing issue.

[kshepinthehouse]

Yes, betting lines try to get even money on both sides. However, if you don't think the opening lines are set to be pretty darn close to the predicted outcomes of games I don't know what to tell you.

And those opening lines are not set by some magic guru. They are based on analytics and have been since Ken Pom was still a meteorologist

HereBeforeCoachK I hate to tell you but tbyers11 is unequivocally correct. Betting lines and KenPom are great predictors of outcomes of head to head matchups. I’ve used both and I’m not sure there is something better out there to predict the winners of individual games.

[-jk]

HereComesCoachK I hate to tell you but tbyers11 is unequivocally correct. Betting lines and KenPom are great predictors of outcomes of head to head matchups. I’ve used both and I’m not sure there is something better out there to predict the winners of individual games.

Even if the initial lines are skewed towards covering the public's betting tendencies, the end lines seem to be really good...

-jk

[HereBeforeCoachK]

So the seed numbers/bracket rules say UVA got a pretty fair draw, Kenpom says they got a fair draw, but you and the UVA fans agree they didn't because the committee had some reason to try and screw them so that's that? You already said Arizona and Kentucky were seeded fairly so I'm not really sure what you wanted the committee to do here. We'd end up with a huge mess if we evaluated teams on not just their resume but what we think their resume "should" be.

.

Couple clarifications are in order.

First of all, I never said anything about the committee's intent, not on this issue. I think UVa got a bad draw. Call it bad luck. I never said they intentionally did this.

Second, kenpom's numbers say it's correct, but would Ken Pom himself say, with all the intangibles, and so on, that it is right? I don't think we know that for sure. How do you contemplate intangibles, or do you think intangibles are not a factor.

Third, Ken pom does not, and cannot measure talent. Ken pom does not, far as I know, take into account the trend a team is on. Ken pom does not, as far as I know, take into account the fact that young teams change more dramatically from early season to late season than older teams. Ken Pom numbers are awesome, but they can smack you in a one game situation, in a situation like the NCAAT where there are intangibles out the wazoo.

Fourth, there are people who say Arizona and UK were mis seeded - too low by one seed each. I tend to agree...again, trend lines late in the season.

Fifth, some of this is my gut feel, which has served me well betting on games in a counter intuitive way for 40 years.

[akg4y]

Was Elvis ever this concerned about his impersonators?

I think it's actually Zona who should be worried that UVA plays the Packline and is, in fact, coached by its innovator.

Yeah I didn't mean it gives them an advantage *over* us, it gives them an advantage over another team without experience with the packline playing us. They can at least try to simulate our defense reasonably well in practice.

[kshepinthehouse]

Couple clarifications are in order.

First of all, I never said anything about the committee's intent, not on this issue. I think UVa got a bad draw. Call it bad luck. I never said they intentionally did this.

Second, kenpom's numbers say it's correct, but would Ken Pom himself say, with all the intangibles, and so on, that it is right? I don't think we know that for sure. How do you contemplate intangibles, or do you think intangibles are not a factor.

Third, Ken pom does not, and cannot measure talent. Ken pom does not, far as I know, take into account the trend a team is on. Ken pom does not, as far as I know, take into account the fact that young teams change more dramatically from early season to late season than older teams. Ken Pom numbers are awesome, but they can smack you in a one game situation, in a situation like the NCAAT where there are intangibles out the wazoo.

Fourth, there are people who say Arizona and UK were mis seeded - too low by one seed each. I tend to agree...again, trend lines late in the season.

Fifth, some of this is my gut feel, which has served me well betting on games in a counter intuitive way for 40 years.

Do you have a better predictive model that you would suggest?

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Even if the initial lines are skewed towards covering the public's betting tendencies, the end lines seem to be really good...

-jk

True, the initial lines are what the house thinks will generate equal money on each team. How the betting really plays out determines the end lines. The lines keep moving to motivate equal money to each team. What will be interesting is to see how the lines are if Virginia plays Arizona - or Kentucky - but especially Arizona. I'm betting by tip off, Arizona is favored. Any action?

I also think there's a reasonable chance that Michigan State will end up being favored against Duke or Kansas, if either of those happen....not with the initial line, but with the ultimate line.

[akg4y]

So the seed numbers/bracket rules say UVA got a pretty fair draw, Kenpom says they got a fair draw, but you and the UVA fans agree they didn't because the committee had some reason to try and screw them so that's that? You already said Arizona and Kentucky were seeded fairly so I'm not really sure what you wanted the committee to do here. We'd end up with a huge mess if we evaluated teams on not just their resume but what we think their resume "should" be.



Arizona was the last #4 though so that's not just flipping two teams ranked one above the other. On the second bolded part we are agreed, you can make a case there was a seeding mistake, you can't say there was a bracketing issue.

I never said they had some reason to 'screw' us (not sure if others have said that)... what I do think is that the Committee made a mistake in seeding both KY & AZ, an opinion shared by most everyone who is looking at this bracket and seed list. If you look at the seeds between Texas Tech and Arizona they are Auburn, Wichita St, and Gonzaga. Auburn we already said should have been a 5 and Kentucky should have been a 4. Arizona should have been moved in front of Texas Tech, becoming #12, with Kentucky/Texas Tech/Wichita St/Gonzaga as the 4s, and Auburn as a 5 due to the fact they had a significant injury at the end of the season which has made them considerably less formidable. Texas Tech ended the season 7-5 whereas Arizona 9-3 and won their conference tourney. KY I would absolutely be okay with as a 5 seed, harder to justify them above Gonzaga or Wichita St but the injury change for Auburn I think justifies it.

[kshepinthehouse]

True, the initial lines are what the house thinks will generate equal money on each team. How the betting really plays out determines the end lines. The lines keep moving to motivate equal money to each team. What will be interesting is to see how the lines are if Virginia plays Arizona - or Kentucky - but especially Arizona. I'm betting by tip off, Arizona is favored. Any action?

I also think there's a reasonable chance that Michigan State will end up being favored against Duke or Kansas, if either of those happen...not with the initial line, but with the ultimate line.

Barring injury I can’t really see any of those scenarios being true. I could definitely see late money coming in on Arizona or Michigan St. in the matchups above, but I can’t envision the line favoring either, especially Arizona. I don’t think Virginia will be an underdog according to the line, at any point during the tournaments, once again barring injury. Just my two cents

[kshepinthehouse]

I never said they had some reason to 'screw' us (not sure if others have said that)... what I do think is that the Committee made a mistake in seeding both KY & AZ, an opinion shared by most everyone who is looking at this bracket and seed list. If you look at the seeds between Texas Tech and Arizona they are Auburn, Wichita St, and Gonzaga. Auburn we already said should have been a 5 and Kentucky should have been a 4. Arizona should have been moved in front of Texas Tech, becoming #12, with Kentucky/Texas Tech/Wichita St/Gonzaga as the 4s, and Auburn as a 5 due to the fact they had a significant injury at the end of the season which has made them considerably less formidable. Texas Tech ended the season 7-5 whereas Arizona 9-3 and won their conference tourney. KY I would absolutely be okay with as a 5 seed, harder to justify them above Gonzaga or Wichita St but the injury change for Auburn I think justifies it.

I agree with most of this except I would like to throw in the fact that Texas Tech’s slide coincides with their senior All American point guard getting injured. When healthy, Texas Tech is most definitely a top 12 team.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Barring injury I can’t really see any of those scenarios being true. I could definitely see late money coming in on Arizona or Michigan St. in the matchups above, but I can’t envision the line favoring either, especially Arizona. I don’t think Virginia will be an underdog according to the line, at any point during the tournaments, once again barring injury. Just my two cents

Would it be ironic to ask you to bet....on the bets? LOL :cool:

[kshepinthehouse]

Would it be ironic to ask you to bet...on the bets? LOL :cool:

Will definitely be interested when they come out. I will admit I don’t have as much knowledge about basketball lines since they come out so late. It’s much easier to study football lines in my opinion. I think if Virginia is an underdog I would have to bet Virginia. Although, conversely, I would be scared as to why they were the underdog. Who know?

But I am glad to hear conversations about stats, predictive models, offensive efficiency, etc. These things tell much more of a story than what the average fan sees.

[Troublemaker]

True, the initial lines are what the house thinks will generate equal money on each team. How the betting really plays out determines the end lines. The lines keep moving to motivate equal money to each team. What will be interesting is to see how the lines are if Virginia plays Arizona - or Kentucky - but especially Arizona. I'm betting by tip off, Arizona is favored. Any action?

I also think there's a reasonable chance that Michigan State will end up being favored against Duke or Kansas, if either of those happen...not with the initial line, but with the ultimate line.

Sure, I'd take some of that. It would be next to impossible for Arizona to be favored over UVA at any point.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I think if Virginia is an underdog I would have to bet Virginia. Although, conversely, I would be scared as to why they were the underdog. Who know?
.

If they are an underdog, it's because the bettors believe UVa got screwed in the bracket, and they're willing to put money where their mouth is, so to speak. Period.

That is unless Guy breaks an ankle or something horrible and can't play - that's an entirely different situation. And since he got rid of his man bun, I like him again, and hope that doesn't happen.

But I do think if Virginia plays Arizona, there will be a lot of people picking Arizona to win, not just cover, whatever the spread is. I also expect the line to move towards Zona as the week unwinds. I also think the initial line will be smaller than expected, because I think Vegas would expect money on Zona. We may get this little object lesson for real in a week.

[DarkstarWahoo]

I also don’t think the committee went into the bracket process with any ill intent beyond maximizing ratings and interest. When I allow myself to go into the most tinfoil-hat parts of my mind, I can see the contours of something like “Well, either the boring team with the offense everyone hates or two of the bandit programs, one of which is heavily implicated by the Feds, will be out of the tournament after this.” But I don’t think that really happened. (I especially don’t think the committee would do anything that would minimize any opportunity for the Kentucky fan base to spend money.)

[kmspeaks]

I don't know that it's a problem, it's called an opinion - and one that is widely shared, including by Virginia fans and those who earn a living discussing such things. And I don't know that it's a seeding issue - it's more of a bracketing issue. I never said Arizona and Uk were under seeded at a 4 or a 5, I just said there is good reason to think that they might be the most dangerous 4,5 in the bracket, and that the overall #1 seed should not have to face that.

I guess the only problem is that you misunderstand the point that I, MountainDevil, Darkstar, Mike DeCourcy and others are making.


Couple clarifications are in order.

First of all, I never said anything about the committee's intent, not on this issue. I think UVa got a bad draw. Call it bad luck. I never said they intentionally did this.

Second, kenpom's numbers say it's correct, but would Ken Pom himself say, with all the intangibles, and so on, that it is right? I don't think we know that for sure. How do you contemplate intangibles, or do you think intangibles are not a factor.

Third, Ken pom does not, and cannot measure talent. Ken pom does not, far as I know, take into account the trend a team is on. Ken pom does not, as far as I know, take into account the fact that young teams change more dramatically from early season to late season than older teams. Ken Pom numbers are awesome, but they can smack you in a one game situation, in a situation like the NCAAT where there are intangibles out the wazoo.

Fourth, there are people who say Arizona and UK were mis seeded - too low by one seed each. I tend to agree...again, trend lines late in the season.

Fifth, some of this is my gut feel, which has served me well betting on games in a counter intuitive way for 40 years.

Which one is it? Were they mis-seeded or not? I haven't gone through everyone's team sheets but I suppose you could make the argument that Arizona and/or Kentucky deserved a higher seed. What you can't do, at least not logically, is argue that they were seeded correctly and the bracket was done improperly based on those seeds. The committee does not take into account intangibles or talent or whatever other subjective measure you want to talk about when seeding teams and I don't think they should either. What this boils down to is you believe Arizona and Kentucky are better than they have played this year, ok fine, but what would you like the committee to do? "Reward" UVA with 4/5 seeds who actually have better resumes but less future NBA players on the roster?

I think Kem Pom does partially account for trends by giving the most recent games more weight in his calculations.

[TexHawk]

Which one is it? Were they mis-seeded or not? I haven't gone through everyone's team sheets but I suppose you could make the argument that Arizona and/or Kentucky deserved a higher seed. What you can't do, at least not logically, is argue that they were seeded correctly and the bracket was done improperly based on those seeds. The committee does not take into account intangibles or talent or whatever other subjective measure you want to talk about when seeding teams and I don't think they should either. What this boils down to is you believe Arizona and Kentucky are better than they have played this year, ok fine, but what would you like the committee to do? "Reward" UVA with 4/5 seeds who actually have better resumes but less future NBA players on the roster?

I think Kem Pom does partially account for trends by giving the most recent games more weight in his calculations.

Yea, I suspect the vast vast majority of CBB fans would despise an alternate universe where the committee takes subjective things like talent into consideration. That would require a level of research that is way too cumbersome and prone to bias and media coverage. Instead, I dunno, maybe Arizona and Kentucky should have won more games.

I don't think any knowledgeable basketball fan looks at at Kansas and Xavier as two of the top 4 teams in the country, but resumes are resumes. We can argue over the merits of the committee's criteria, we all hate the quadrant thing, but could you imagine if they used something like "MSU has more lottery picks than Xavier"? Yikes.

[FerryFor50]

UVA's offense is #21 on Kenpom now after being above 40 most of the season. Don't confuse 'deliberate and efficient' with 'not great.'
As a comparison, Arizona's is 15, Kentucky 25, West Virginia 14.

UVA's pace is part of the efficiency. If UVA were required to score a bunch to catch up, they'd be hosed.

If they meet, we'll see how UVA's screen and curl offensive sets stack up to the grabbing and clutching of Cincy's defense.

[sagegrouse]

Which one is it? Were they mis-seeded or not? I haven't gone through everyone's team sheets but I suppose you could make the argument that Arizona and/or Kentucky deserved a higher seed. What you can't do, at least not logically, is argue that they were seeded correctly and the bracket was done improperly based on those seeds. The committee does not take into account intangibles or talent or whatever other subjective measure you want to talk about when seeding teams and I don't think they should either. What this boils down to is you believe Arizona and Kentucky are better than they have played this year, ok fine, but what would you like the committee to do? "Reward" UVA with 4/5 seeds who actually have better resumes but less future NBA players on the roster?

I think Kem Pom does partially account for trends by giving the most recent games more weight in his calculations.

As some "sage" has said for years and years, the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee is on a "fool's errand" in that there are no meaningful interconference games after January 1 (except the Big 12-SEC challenge), which is when teams begin to jell. Therefore, the TSC has no good way to judge the quality of teams among conferences. Who can blame them if there is a little randomness in their selections and seedings?

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Which one is it? Were they mis-seeded or not? I haven't gone through everyone's team sheets but I suppose you could make the argument that Arizona and/or Kentucky deserved a higher seed. What you can't do, at least not logically, is argue that they were seeded correctly and the bracket was done improperly based on those seeds. The committee does not take into account intangibles or talent or whatever other subjective measure you want to talk about when seeding teams and I don't think they should either. What this boils down to is you believe Arizona and Kentucky are better than they have played this year, ok fine, but what would you like the committee to do? "Reward" UVA with 4/5 seeds who actually have better resumes but less future NBA players on the roster?

I think Kem Pom does partially account for trends by giving the most recent games more weight in his calculations.

There still seems to be a disconnect, conflating the fact that Virginia got a raw deal with the idea that the committee should be blamed for it. Those are separate, if related ideas. I will say, again, that Virginia got a raw deal, but I am not blaming the committee for any ill intent in this area - although Mike DeCourcy did blame them for that. DeCourcy also makes the case that both AZ and UK are one seed too low, and he backs it up. Right or wrong, DeCourcy cannot be dismissed as a mere fan on a forum.

As for Ken Pom, there is nothing on his site (where he explains in detail how he does what he does) that indicates any weighting of more recent games. Now, that doesn't mean he doesn't weight them differently, it just means it's clearly not a major issue to him, if an issue at all, since he didn't mention it.

I would submit strongly that if he doesn't weight more recent games as more important, then that is a flaw in his system, which in many ways is genius.

On that trend issue, we also know the committee chair, Rasmussen, flatly said there is no weighting of recent trends, and he tried to defend that as sound. That would not be proof, but it would be more evidence, that Ken Pom does not value trends. It's also proof that Rasmussen doesn't fully understand the nuances in the concept of whole body of work. There is nothing inherent in that notion that precludes any weighting whatsoever.

And I think that's indefensible, so I would blame the committee for that. Not intent, but incompetence to a degree.

The two most egregious errors on that involve ASU and Oklahoma getting in. Charles Barkely pretty brilliantly took Rasmussen apart on that issue. It was almost uncomfortable to watch. Charles was ticked, and Rasmussen was rattled. As for Arizona and Kentucky, valuing recent trends would've very likely raised them each a notch. Meanwhile, 4 seed Auburn would be much lower, given a terrible trend. There is nobody in the nation that would think today 5 seed Kentucky is easier to beat than 4 seed Auburn.

And yes, I can also ding the committee a little bit for putting two trending teams as 4/5 in the same bracket - because there is some subjectivity here, and to ignore trends in that final micro seeding is again a flaw.

But to circle all the way back, intent or not, flawed or not, or just dumb luck - the main thrust is that the Hoos got screwed in the opinion of many vis a vis the 4/5 in their bracket, independent of the why's.

[tbyers11]

As for Ken Pom, there is nothing on his site (where he explains in detail how he does what he does) that indicates any weighting of more recent games. Now, that doesn't mean he doesn't weight them differently, it just means it's clearly not a major issue to him, if an issue at all, since he didn't mention it.

I would submit strongly that if he doesn't weight more recent games as more important, then that is a flaw in his system, which in many ways is genius.


KenPom absolutely weights recent games. His blog is hard to search but one of his most recent methodology updates is here (https://kenpom.com/blog/ratings-explanation/)

Relevant part quoted here


The inputs into the pythagorean equation are the team’s adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies. Any time you see something “adjusted” on this site, it refers to how a team would perform against average competition at a neutral site. For instance, a team’s offensive efficiency (points scored per 100 possessions) is adjusted for the strength of the opposing defenses played. I compute an adjusted offensive efficiency for each game by multiplying the team’s raw offensive efficiency by the national average efficiency and dividing by the opponent’s adjusted defensive efficiency. The adjusted game efficiencies are then averaged (with more weighting to recent games) to produce the final adjusted offensive efficiency.

I've never found a description of how exactly KP weights recent games but he does it.

[TexHawk]

And yes, I can also ding the committee a little bit for putting two trending teams as 4/5 in the same bracket - because there is some subjectivity here, and to ignore trends in that final micro seeding is again a flaw.


What are those trends specifically? Zona is 8-2 in their last 10, UK is 7-3. Both Gonzaga (10-0) and Wichita State (8-2) are trending similarly or better on the same seed line.

[dtl5g]

If they are an underdog, it's because the bettors believe UVa got screwed in the bracket, and they're willing to put money where their mouth is, so to speak. Period.

That is unless Guy breaks an ankle or something horrible and can't play - that's an entirely different situation. And since he got rid of his man bun, I like him again, and hope that doesn't happen.

But I do think if Virginia plays Arizona, there will be a lot of people picking Arizona to win, not just cover, whatever the spread is. I also expect the line to move towards Zona as the week unwinds. I also think the initial line will be smaller than expected, because I think Vegas would expect money on Zona. We may get this little object lesson for real in a week.


Count me as a UVa fan who believes we got a little bit hosed.

I don't know if it was intentional or not because of our perceived boring style, but the fact is that Arizona is the #6 most likely team to win it all according to Vegas. http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-basketball/odds/futures/ They are viewed by Vegas as more likely to win it all than Kansas or Xavier, both 1 seeds. And honestly, I would rather play Kansas or Xavier right now than Arizona.

And they are our FOUR SEED. Meanwhile, Kentucky is tied for #12 most likely to win it all (which would correspond with the 3/4 seed line), and they are our 5 seed.

If any ill intent were to be inferred from the committee, it might be that the teams that it appears were directly implicated in cheating (Michigan State, Louisville, USC, Arizona, Kentucky, and Oklahoma State) based on the FBI allegations and subsequent leaks, all sort of got screwed. Michigan State drew Duke which has had their number; Louisville, USC and Ok. St. did not make it off the bubble; and Arizona drew the SEC champion Kentucky in the second round with Virginia in Atlanta in the 3rd if they get by Kentucky. Meanwhile, Kentucky drew Arizona in Idaho, and then have to play Virginia, who would appear to match up pretty well against them.

That said, it is obvious to me that Arizona is by far the worst #4 draw, not just for us, but for just about any team in the country. They don't look great in the computer rankings because the PAC 12 had such an awful OOC schedule, but what these teams were doing in November/December has little to do with how they are in March. This draw is very reminiscent to when UVa drew Michigan State as a 4 seed way back when. That year, Michigan State was preseason #1 in the country, had a bunch of injuries and lost some games to bad teams in December, and then got everybody back in February and was playing like a #1 overall pick and won the B1G tournament (and indeed Obama predicted them to win the championship that year as part of his bracket reveal) when we got them as our four seed. And they beat us in a game that probably should've been a final four game, not a sweet 16 game.

TL;DR: when your #4 seed is one of the gambling favorites to win the entire tournament, you are sort of getting screwed. And now this has happened two out of the three times we were #1 seeds. At least back in 2014 we were a fringe #1 pick, as we had a really bad loss @ Tennessee by 30 or whatever. But this year, we should not have gotten Arizona in the damn third round as the #1 overall seed. If it was an honest mistake, then the Committee really needs to revamp its procedures.

[Wahoo2000]

All this "got screwed" stuff is overplayed. Everywhere you see it, the term "got screwed" should be replaced with "was unlucky".

"Got screwed" implies intent by the committee, which is really nonsense if you understand the process.

A) The seed lines are created first, LONG before the bracketing is done. There's no way to know that putting KY or Zona as a 4 or 5 seed would mean they end up in the same bracket, or grouped with any specific #1. Also, the seeding/selection doesn't take into account "talent" at ALL, and "trends" to a very limited degree (this is the ONLY are where I can accept a little argument with the seeding process). The idea behind the seeding process is to remove as much bias/eye-test type of crap as possible from the process, which I applaud. If that means occasionally a team with a ton of talent who underperformed through the majority of the season gets seeded lower where they'll have a more challenging road........... well, isn't that appropriate?

B) Somebody on reddit took the seed line and followed the established bracketing principles to almost EXACTLY replicate the tournament field/setup. Nobody went "off script" to get KY or AZ in the south with UVA. There was no "conspiracy" to get several conference champs in one region, that's just how it worked out.

-------

Last, and as a related, but separate issue - I really don't get all the crying from people over the UVA bracket. I would call the East an easier bracket, sure. Midwest/West..... VERY similar if there's some. Now if you, as a UVA fan, have some huge issue with the S16 game being more like an E8 game, with the E8 game being more like a S16 game......... come on. We're not going to get any more or less crap for going out in the S16 or E8. It's FF or bust as far as "respect". And for every advantage you can think of to playing the more challenging game as the second/short rest game of the week, I can think of one where it's more advantageous to have the rest/prep on our side going into a S16 game that is more challenging.

[dtl5g]

Last, and as a related, but separate issue - I really don't get all the crying from people over the UVA bracket. I would call the East an easier bracket, sure. Midwest/West... VERY similar if there's some. Now if you, as a UVA fan, have some huge issue with the S16 game being more like an E8 game, with the E8 game being more like a S16 game.... come on. We're not going to get any more or less crap for going out in the S16 or E8. It's FF or bust as far as "respect". And for every advantage you can think of to playing the more challenging game as the second/short rest game of the week, I can think of one where it's more advantageous to have the rest/prep on our side going into a S16 game that is more challenging.

I think we got clearly the toughest path of the #1 seeds. I don't spend a lot of time looking at the bottom part of the South. Both Cincinnati and Tennessee have both been playing good ball, and I don't believe are substantially worse than any of the other #2s or #3s. JMO. Either way, if you're worried about any specific matchup in the elite 8 game, I think you're probably wasting your time looking too far ahead as it's likely whatever team you're worried about won't even make it that far.

Trust me, I did not complain about Michigan State being our #2 in 2016, because I knew there was a good likelihood they wouldn't make it that far, and even if they did, it's an elite 8 game. Gotta expect a tough game there. When we got #10 Syracuse, I couldn't believe our good fortune, to not only play a #10, but to play an ACC rival that we had completely owned since they joined the ACC (ugh).

However, especially for our team, when so many are saying "they'll just flame out early in the NCAA tournament again," I would've preferred an easier ride to the elite 8. If we have to play a solid team there, fine. You're supposed to. But I really do not want us to lose in the sweet 16, and I think a lot of other UVa fans feel the same way. And by getting the tough team EARLIER, you are also reducing the chance that someone else will knock that tough team out.

Again, when you are the overall #1 (we have now fallen to second gambling favorite to win it all after the brackets were released - that should ALSO tell you something), you should not be playing the #6 favorite to win it all in round 3. I have no reason to believe that the Committee "tried" to screw us (intent/conspiracy theory), but the fact is that we are taking this one in the tailpipe.

[Wahoo2000]

I think we got clearly the toughest path of the #1 seeds. I don't spend a lot of time looking at the bottom part of the South. Both Cincinnati and Tennessee have both been playing good ball, and I don't believe are substantially worse than any of the other #2s or #3s. JMO. Either way, if you're worried about any specific matchup in the elite 8 game, I think you're probably wasting your time looking too far ahead as it's likely whatever team you're worried about won't even make it that far.

Trust me, I did not complain about Michigan State being our #2 in 2016, because I knew there was a good likelihood they wouldn't make it that far, and even if they did, it's an elite 8 game. Gotta expect a tough game there. When we got #10 Syracuse, I couldn't believe our good fortune, to not only play a #10, but to play an ACC rival that we had completely owned since they joined the ACC (ugh).

However, especially for our team, when so many are saying "they'll just flame out early in the NCAA tournament again," I would've preferred an easier ride to the elite 8. If we have to play a solid team there, fine. You're supposed to. But I really do not want us to lose in the sweet 16, and I think a lot of other UVa fans feel the same way. And by getting the tough team EARLIER, you are also reducing the chance that someone else will knock that tough team out.

Again, when you are the overall #1 (we have now fallen to second gambling favorite to win it all after the brackets were released - that should ALSO tell you something), you should not be playing the #6 favorite to win it all in round 3. I have no reason to believe that the Committee "tried" to screw us (intent/conspiracy theory), but the fact is that we are taking this one in the tailpipe.

For the first bolded part, agree to disagree. I will feel pretty much NO difference between bowing out in S16 or E8. ANYTHING short of FF will have the EXACT same reactions from "haters" that believe there's a fundamental flaw in our style that will forever keep us from advancing to the FF (until we do, and then they'll say it's impossible to win a TITLE that way). Nature of the beast.

For the second part - it's again, NOT the committee's job to seed/place teams based on their POTENTIAL. It's their job to seed/place teams based on what they've actually accomplished. This occasionally means that a team with crazy talent that underachieved will be seeded well below their "odds" to win the title.

I can't believe out of ALL the fanbases, it's Virginia fans who are looking primarily at the NAME on the jerseys and the DRAFT STOCK of players in evaluating a team, rather than how they have actually played and performed. It's what we have RAILED against as a group for the last 4-5 seasons, and now it's 99.9999999% how we're judging the quality of KY and AZ. Hypocrites, all of us, I tell you.

[kmspeaks]

All this "got screwed" stuff is overplayed. Everywhere you see it, the term "got screwed" should be replaced with "was unlucky".

"Got screwed" implies intent by the committee, which is really nonsense if you understand the process.

A) The seed lines are created first, LONG before the bracketing is done. There's no way to know that putting KY or Zona as a 4 or 5 seed would mean they end up in the same bracket, or grouped with any specific #1. Also, the seeding/selection doesn't take into account "talent" at ALL, and "trends" to a very limited degree (this is the ONLY are where I can accept a little argument with the seeding process). The idea behind the seeding process is to remove as much bias/eye-test type of crap as possible from the process, which I applaud. If that means occasionally a team with a ton of talent who underperformed through the majority of the season gets seeded lower where they'll have a more challenging road....... well, isn't that appropriate?

B) Somebody on reddit took the seed line and followed the established bracketing principles to almost EXACTLY replicate the tournament field/setup. Nobody went "off script" to get KY or AZ in the south with UVA. There was no "conspiracy" to get several conference champs in one region, that's just how it worked out.

-------

Last, and as a related, but separate issue - I really don't get all the crying from people over the UVA bracket. I would call the East an easier bracket, sure. Midwest/West.... VERY similar if there's some. Now if you, as a UVA fan, have some huge issue with the S16 game being more like an E8 game, with the E8 game being more like a S16 game..... come on. We're not going to get any more or less crap for going out in the S16 or E8. It's FF or bust as far as "respect". And for every advantage you can think of to playing the more challenging game as the second/short rest game of the week, I can think of one where it's more advantageous to have the rest/prep on our side going into a S16 game that is more challenging.

Wish I could spork you because this is what I've been trying to say. Maybe Virginia got unlucky if Arizona/Kentucky plays up to their supposed potential but otherwise they got exactly the 4/5 seeds they should have based on seeding and bracketing procedures.

[dtl5g]

For the first bolded part, agree to disagree. I will feel pretty much NO difference between bowing out in S16 or E8. ANYTHING short of FF will have the EXACT same reactions from "haters" that believe there's a fundamental flaw in our style that will forever keep us from advancing to the FF (until we do, and then they'll say it's impossible to win a TITLE that way). Nature of the beast.

For the second part - it's again, NOT the committee's job to seed/place teams based on their POTENTIAL. It's their job to seed/place teams based on what they've actually accomplished. This occasionally means that a team with crazy talent that underachieved will be seeded well below their "odds" to win the title.

I can't believe out of ALL the fanbases, it's Virginia fans who are looking primarily at the NAME on the jerseys and the DRAFT STOCK of players in evaluating a team, rather than how they have actually played and performed. It's what we have RAILED against as a group for the last 4-5 seasons, and now it's 99.9999999% how we're judging the quality of KY and AZ. Hypocrites, all of us, I tell you.

Haters are going to hate us if we get to the final game and lose on a buzzer-beating 80 footer. Getting to a final four might help a little bit (at least we'd be better than Zona), but we really need a championship to shut people up. That said, losing in the sweet 16 game is fairly embarrassing as a #1 overall seed. Losing in the elite eight shows that we had a little bit of a run and fell just short.

I am not one of those people who "rails against" Kentucky or Arizona being highly rated teams, or anything like that. I think both programs are cheating, and I don't think teams with a bunch of one and dones (including Duke) are going to be consistent enough to win regular season championships for the most part, but I absolutely think all of those teams are going to be underrated in March if you are just looking at the complete body of work the same without looking at recent form. This is common knowledge. Young teams will be rusty in November and will peak in March. And if the NCAA is not paying attention to which teams are hot, then they are shirking their responsibility to make fair brackets.

At the end of the day, I am OK, I guess, with the committee punishing those two teams with 4 and 5 seeds because they underperformed in the early regular season. I still wouldn't agree with it given their records and the fact that they are both coming off conference championship titles, but I guess I can get behind the seed lines.

But to put BOTH OF THOSE teams in our bracket seems like a shafting. They both won their conference championships, have been playing much better as of late, and WRT Arizona, now have a full and healthy squad. If is obvious that both teams, with young players, are much better now than they were in November, when they suffered the losses that ultimately pushed their seed lines down. And really, either the bracketing OR the seeding should reflect that.

When Kentucky was a 8 seed in 2014 after underachieving for most of the year and got matched with a #1 seed Wichita State in Round 2, I absolutely believed that Wichita State got the shaft. Even though Kentucky was actually on a late-season slide. Because it just seemed unfair to dump them on Wichita State when Wichita State was the scrappy team of seniors and good fundamental team, and it was obvious a matchup with any other 8/9 seed would've been preferable for Wichita State. But Wichita State was not the overall #1 that year. So shafting them was maybe a bit justified given that SOMEONE at the 1 slot had to get Kentucky. In any event, it did sort of seem intentional, as has some of our matchups we have gotten. Maybe it's just a bad coincidence, and they really are just seeding these teams blindly and then following the s curve. However, I seriously doubt that is what is happening.

Like I said before, the NCAA has no reason to try to punish UVA, so if they are actually trying to punish anybody it is probably UK/Arizona. And I suppose we are just the collateral damage. If we win, no harm, no foul. If we lose in the sweet 16, it will be even more fodder for the haters. "Been a #1 or #2 seed four times in last 5 years and have only made the Elite 8 once, where they choked like Mama Cass."

[TexHawk]

And if the NCAA is not paying attention to which teams are hot, then they are shirking their responsibility to make fair brackets.

I could maybe sorta think about getting on board with this if we defined "hot". Gonzaga is a 4 seed, 10-0 in their last 10, with an average margin of victory of 16 points. Wichita State is a 4 seed, 8-2 in their last 10. Both were not matched up with UVA, so by definition "not hot"? Kentucky is considered "hot", even though they got blown out on the road by Florida 4 games ago?

And before we go down the road of "Gonzaga/WSU are not in P5 conferences", Arizona's last 6 wins were over KP 40, 48, 110, 241, 84, 94. WSU has a win over #4 KP in that same stretch.

[Wahoo2000]

I could maybe sorta think about getting on board with this if we defined "hot". Gonzaga is a 4 seed, 10-0 in their last 10, with an average margin of victory of 16 points. Wichita State is a 4 seed, 8-2 in their last 10. Both were not matched up with UVA, so by definition "not hot"? Kentucky is considered "hot", even though they got blown out on the road by Florida 4 games ago?

And before we go down the road of "Gonzaga/WSU are not in P5 conferences", Arizona's last 6 wins were over KP 40, 48, 110, 241, 84, 94. WSU has a win over #4 KP in that same stretch.

^^^This^^^

Nobody fears AZ or KY because they've been "hot", it's because we know they have an absurdly high level of individual talent that is CAPABLE of beating a team like UVA even if we play our best. Unfortunately, how much "talent", or how high a "ceiling" a team has is not something that the committee takes into account (thankfully, IMO, or a program like UVA would have to be head and shoulders above a blueblood year after year just to get a similar seed ranking).

As an aside, I feel that if UVA plays similarly to how they performed in the ACCT, we'll be just fine aside from AZ or KY playing BY FAR their best game of the year (which is unlikely, but probably more likely than any other 4 or 5 beating us if we're on our "A" game...... which I guess is why people are pissed even though the committee followed its established principles just about 100%).

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

^^^This^^^

Nobody fears AZ or KY because they've been "hot", it's because we know they have an absurdly high level of individual talent that is CAPABLE of beating a team like UVA even if we play our best. .

I understand that you are using "capable" to mean "if everything thing breaks right and this other talented team starts to click," but I disagree with the idea that either of these teams could beat this year's UVa at the "best."

Your best is incredibly good this year. If your premise is that both teams are truly playing their best, how many points does UA/UK score each half against UVa's "best" version of their defense?

My thought is that if UVa plays truly their best basketball, they will have no problem getting to the Final Four. Acknowledging that it is a big "if."

[jv001]

Virginia doesn't have to fear anyone. They played in the best conference in college basketball this season and lost one game. They are regular season champions and the ACCT Champs as well. They beat the Cheats twice and Duke once and those two teams can play with anyone. I know a team can get hot in one game and take out a very good team but that's what it's going to take to beat the Cavs. They are the real deal. GoCavs and GoDuke!

[dtl5g]

I could maybe sorta think about getting on board with this if we defined "hot". Gonzaga is a 4 seed, 10-0 in their last 10, with an average margin of victory of 16 points. Wichita State is a 4 seed, 8-2 in their last 10. Both were not matched up with UVA, so by definition "not hot"? Kentucky is considered "hot", even though they got blown out on the road by Florida 4 games ago?

And before we go down the road of "Gonzaga/WSU are not in P5 conferences", Arizona's last 6 wins were over KP 40, 48, 110, 241, 84, 94. WSU has a win over #4 KP in that same stretch.

Wichita State's and Gonzaga's schedules are nowhere near the difficult of Arizona's and Kentucky's. So yeah, you sort of have to go down the road of "Gonzaga/WSU are not in P5 conferences".

Gonzaga has won 14 straight since January 20, and the only top 100 ken pom of that entire bunch were BYU 3 times and beating St. Mary's once. Neither of those are even tournament teams. Gonzaga is benefitting from beating Ohio State, Texas, and Creighton in the OOC schedule. Those are their only 3 wins of the year against tournament teams and none of them were true road games (and Ohio State and Texas were not very good in the OOC season).

Wichita State did have a very nice win against Cincinnati, but their schedule was also much easier than Kentucky's or Arizona's. And Arizona had a better record than Wichita State against a much harder schedule.

Just don't think that Wichita State/Gonzaga are comparable to Arizona, sorry. In any event, I would agree that those two teams are the rest of the best 4/5 seeds. And Auburn, Clemson, Ohio State, and West Virginia are pretty much garbage compared to Kentucky/Arizona at this point. I realize that WVU beat us, but they got a very friendly whistle at their place, we were cold, and they were hot, they have gone on a slide since then, and I would absolutely love to play that team again. Zona/UK, I think we can beat them if we play well, but they are the clear 2 best teams of all the 8 teams on the 4/5 lines.

And Vegas agrees with me, for the most part (they have Gonzaga and UK tied). Here are the odds for all the 4/5 seeds to win it all:

Arizona - 12-1
Kentucky - 28-1
Gonzaga - 28-1
WVU - 40-1
Wich. St. - 45-1
Auburn - 65-1
Ohio State 80-1
Clemson 200-1


You guys can talk about their November wins/losses and advanced metrics all you want, but you're ignoring the obvious staring you in the face. We were supposed to get the easiest 4th seed and perhaps the hardest 5th seed. Not the two best teams out of that 8 team group who were both preseason top 5 teams with multiple lottery picks including the obvious #1 overall pick in the NBA draft this spring who has been absolutely on fire.

And if the committee isn't trying to judge based on how GOOD THE TEAMS ACTUALLY ARE NOW (i.e., how the teams have been playing recently and taking into account injuries and returns from suspensions/injuries), then the entire thing may as well be picked by a computer. If that were the case, at least I could be very confident that even if the brackets didn't always end up "fair" it was just because of luck and not because there were a bunch of lobbyists behind the scenes for certain teams rigging it in an attempt to benefit certain teams and hurt others.

[DarkstarWahoo]

If the Hunter injury rumors are true, and I’m pretty sure they are, you can probably get a little more confident in a flameout.

[robed deity]

If the Hunter injury rumors are true, and I’m pretty sure they are, you can probably get a little more confident in a flameout.

Eek, what are the rumors? That would be a huge blow.

[DarkstarWahoo]

Wrist surgery, out for tournament.

[devildeac]

Wrist surgery, out for tournament.

Awful news if true.

At least y'all can't blame Grayson :p.

Maybe blame "u"nc or tv teddy:rolleyes::o?

[jv001]

Awful news if true.

At least y'all can't blame Grayson :p.

Maybe blame "u"nc or tv teddy:rolleyes::o?

The Cavs won't blame Grayson, but ESPN will and TV Teddy will call a foul on Duke from his living room. GoDuke!

[HereBeforeCoachK]

What are those trends specifically? Zona is 8-2 in their last 10, UK is 7-3. Both Gonzaga (10-0) and Wichita State (8-2) are trending similarly or better on the same seed line.

If you lock yourself into a ten game trend, or any number of games, then perhaps none. Again, that's being overly formulaic and being afraid of any subjectivity. But a deeper dive into your points:

Kentucky is 7-2 in the last 9, and dominant in their last 3. The tenth game back was at Auburn, before Auburn's injury problems, and part of a 1-3 late middle season slump that is clearly over now. Considering their competition, their last ten is much more impressive than Wichita's last ten. Their last 3, far far more impressive than Wichita's last 3,when Wichita lost 2 of 3. And remember, Wichita is seeded ahead of them. No contest.

Arizona is 8-1 in their last 9 as well, the only loss being at Oregon, in the Sean Miller suspension game. In other words, post suspension issues, Zona is 5-0 and won all games by double digits. There is every reason to believe that Zona's season "re set" at that point.

Gonzaga is seeded a 3 and UK a 5, so it's not even a valid comparison. Their schedule is comparatively weak also. And if you want to say they're under seeded a bit at the 3, that's certainly reasonable. And by the way, since you brought up the Zags and the Shockers, if Zona and UK were 3/4 instead of 4/5, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And I'll guarantee you this...every Wahoo on here, or anywhere, would trade Wichita and Zag for UK and Zona right now, even up. Are they all crazy?

[robed deity]

Wrist surgery, out for tournament.

Awful, if true. He does a lot for you guys. Wasn't it a wrist for Anderson a few years ago? Really bad luck.

[dtl5g]

If you lock yourself into a ten game trend, or any number of games, then perhaps none. Again, that's being overly formulaic and being afraid of any subjectivity. But a deeper dive into your points:

Kentucky is 7-2 in the last 9, and dominant in their last 3. The tenth game back was at Auburn, before Auburn's injury problems, and part of a 1-3 late middle season slump that is clearly over now. Considering their competition, their last ten is much more impressive than Wichita's last ten. Their last 3, far far more impressive than Wichita's last 3,when Wichita lost 2 of 3. And remember, Wichita is seeded ahead of them. No contest.

Arizona is 8-1 in their last 9 as well, the only loss being at Oregon, in the Sean Miller suspension game. In other words, post suspension issues, Zona is 5-0 and won all games by double digits.

Gonzaga is seeded a 3 and UK a 5, so it's not even a valid comparison. Their schedule is comparatively weak also. And if you want to say they're under seeded a bit at the 3, that's certainly reasonable. And by the way, since you brought up the Zags and the Shockers, if Zona and UK were 3/4 instead of 4/5, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And I'll guarantee you this...every Wahoo on here, or anywhere, would trade Wichita and Zag for UK and Zona right now, even up. Are they all crazy?

Without Hunter, assuming that news is true, we should be an underdog against either Kentucky or Arizona. Not positive Vegas will view it that way, but the smart money would be on UK/Zona if it's a pick 'em. Feel free to make a few bucks off our pain.

This blows.

[DarkstarWahoo]

Confirmed: http://www.virginiasports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/031318aad.html

Anderson had a broken finger, I believe, and an appendectomy. And Anthony Gill sprained his ankle during the first Michigan State loss.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Without Hunter, assuming that news is true, we should be an underdog against either Kentucky or Arizona. Not positive Vegas will view it that way, but the smart money would be on UK/Zona if it's a pick 'em. Feel free to make a few bucks off our pain.

This blows.

Man that sucks. Very sorry to hear this.

[devildeac]

Without Hunter, assuming that news is true, we should be an underdog against either Kentucky or Arizona. Not positive Vegas will view it that way, but the smart money would be on UK/Zona if it's a pick 'em. Feel free to make a few bucks off our pain.

This blows.


Confirmed: http://www.virginiasports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/031318aad.html

Anderson had a broken finger, I believe, and an appendectomy. And Anthony Gill sprained his ankle during the first Michigan State loss.

If y'all gonna continue posting on DBR, the correct terminology for a situation like this is:

It's over.

(:()

[proelitedota]

[redacted] UVA is cursed.

[CameronDuke]

When exactly in the ACC Tournament did Hunter sustain the broken wrist? I am pretty sure he played vs UNC but cannot remember if he left the game due to an injury? I don't remember that's for sure.

This hurts UVa tremendously but don't count them out from making a final four or winning it all, still. Arizona and Kentucky aren't world beaters and neither is Cincinatti or Tennessee. Their starting 5 still can defend and Hall, Jerome, and Guy will give any defense fits with their methodical offense. Tony Bennett will come up with a contingency plan. Maybe Jay Huff will get some more minutes. Diakite is also more than capable of shouldering some more minutes. And Salt and Wilkins still can defend the paint better than anyone in the country. This hurts UVa bad but it isn't the end of the world.

[dtl5g]

When exactly in the ACC Tournament did Hunter sustain the broken wrist? I am pretty sure he played vs UNC but cannot remember if he left the game due to an injury? I don't remember that's for sure.

This hurts UVa tremendously but don't count them out from making a final four or winning it all, still. Arizona and Kentucky aren't world beaters and neither is Cincinatti or Tennessee. Their starting 5 still can defend and Hall, Jerome, and Guy will give any defense fits with their methodical offense. Tony Bennett will come up with a contingency plan. Maybe Jay Huff will get some more minutes. Diakite is also more than capable of shouldering some more minutes. And Salt and Wilkins still can defend the paint better than anyone in the country. This hurts UVa bad but it isn't the end of the world.

I wish I could agree with you. We could much easier withstand the loss of Guy than the loss of Hunter, IMO. At this point we just have to imagine that we are the #5 seed and Arizona is the #1 seed and hope for the best. Any given game we probably have a chance, but it will be very tough to beat a bunch of good teams in a row. We have a huge hole in the defense now, that is for sure. Jay Huff is not the answer. The answer is more Salt and more Diakite and maybe let Anthony eat up some guard minutes and play Hall some at the 4. None of these are very good answers.

[akg4y]

When exactly in the ACC Tournament did Hunter sustain the broken wrist? I am pretty sure he played vs UNC but cannot remember if he left the game due to an injury? I don't remember that's for sure.

This hurts UVa tremendously but don't count them out from making a final four or winning it all, still. Arizona and Kentucky aren't world beaters and neither is Cincinatti or Tennessee. Their starting 5 still can defend and Hall, Jerome, and Guy will give any defense fits with their methodical offense. Tony Bennett will come up with a contingency plan. Maybe Jay Huff will get some more minutes. Diakite is also more than capable of shouldering some more minutes. And Salt and Wilkins still can defend the paint better than anyone in the country. This hurts UVa bad but it isn't the end of the world.

Probably the hard foul in the Clemson game where he landed horizontally on his arm.

DAMMIT. We are seriously cursed.

[CameronDuke]

I wish I could agree with you. We could much easier withstand the loss of Guy than the loss of Hunter, IMO. At this point we just have to imagine that we are the #5 seed and Arizona is the #1 seed and hope for the best. Any given game we probably have a chance, but it will be very tough to beat a bunch of good teams in a row. We have a huge hole in the defense now, that is for sure. Jay Huff is not the answer. The answer is more Salt and more Diakite and maybe let Anthony eat up some guard minutes and play Hall some at the 4. None of these are very good answers.

Sorry, man. It just flat out stinks for UVa. If Bennett can overcome this injury and still get this team to a final four (not likely now), he gets even more respect in my book. And I didn't think I could respect him anymore. Keep the faith though, brother. Crazier things have happened. Survive and advance.

[brevity]

If the Hunter injury rumors are true, and I’m pretty sure they are, you can probably get a little more confident in a flameout.


Probably the hard foul in the Clemson game where he landed horizontally on his arm.

So you're saying that a team that loses a key player in the semifinals of their conference tournament can't still make a Final Four run?

Sure they can. It happened last year. (https://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/03/28/oregon-final-four-chris-boucher-injury)

[Tom B.]

DeAndre Hunter is out for the Tournament.

http://www.virginiasports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/031318aad.html

Update: Oops, I see this is already being discussed in the South Region thread. My bad.

[DukieInBrasil]

That is a huge loss, and has a huge impact on their team in a lot ways. He scored at a decent clip (in such a slow offense) and is a versatile defender.
What are the chances they let him play with a cast on, just for his defense, should they reach the Final 4?

[Truth&Justise]

WOW. That is just awful. He's a big part of what has made them such a special team. I thought he would be one of the breakout stars of this tournament.

[OldPhiKap]

DeAndre Hunter is out for the Tournament.

http://www.virginiasports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/031318aad.html

Update: Oops, I see this is already being discussed in the South Region thread. My bad.

Thanks for putting this as a separate thread, it deserves one.

Really hate this.

[House G]

Wow, that guy’s a player. Should I revise my bracket?

[UrinalCake]

Absolutely hate it for him and for the team. They are having an amazingly dominant season, the kind that doesn’t come around often, and are among the favorites to win it all. To be in this position and then lose a key player is just devastating.

They still have Bennett on the sidelines and thus they still have a chance. But this is a huge blow.

[Truth&Justise]

Wow, that guy’s a player. Should I revise my bracket?

I'm going to. Without him, I don't think they have the athleticism to stop Arizona or Kentucky.

Hunter reminded me of a better version of freshman Mikal Bridges on the 2016 'Nova team. Losing him is huge.

[chrishoke]

He hurt it during the ACC tournament. Anyone know how?

[DukieInKansas]

I hope he heals quickly and completely. It will be interesting to see how they work around this loss.

[richardjackson199]

This is very bad for my pie bet. But thems the breaks, no pun intended. I hope he heals fully and quickly.

UVA will not be able to beat Arizona with Ayton, Alkins, and Trier without Hunter IMO. But they've been doubted all season, so we'll see.

Poor Bennett - guy can't catch a break with his perceived NCAA tourney failure.

[freshmanjs]

This is very bad for my pie bet. But thems the breaks, no pun intended. I hope he heals fully and quickly.

UVA will not be able to beat Arizona with Ayton, Alkins, and Trier without Hunter IMO. But they've been doubted all season, so we'll see.

Poor Bennett - guy can't catch a break with his perceived NCAA tourney failure.

Yeah -- agree. The Eagles also can't catch a break. No way they win without Wentz.

[akg4y]

So you're saying that a team that loses a key player in the semifinals of their conference tournament can't still make a Final Four run?

Sure they can. It happened last year. (https://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/03/28/oregon-final-four-chris-boucher-injury)

Nobody is saying we can't, but we expected to before this. Now nobody will be surprised if we lose to AZ or KY.

We should still win the first 2 games, if we win that 3rd game I like our chances against the other half of our bracket still and even against the top 3 from the West.
Beating Duke, MSU, and Nova seem like the biggest hurdles without him.

[kako]

So you're saying that a team that loses a key player in the semifinals of their conference tournament can't still make a Final Four run?

Sure they can. It happened last year. (https://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/03/28/oregon-final-four-chris-boucher-injury)

Yes, it's possible. The Giants back in the day when Simms went down, and the Eagles won this year when Wentz went down. Oregon indeed made the FF last year. But the question is, did you bet on that before, and would you bet on it now? That's a tough one. I had UVA winning it all because of their defense and their scoring this year. Without Hunter, that last part takes a hit. He only scores 9ppg, but in UVAs offense that's higher than your usual 9ppg. I think if I stay with UVA winning, I'm doing it emotionally and not with my head. I already know I can't be unemotional about Duke. I can't let myself get emotional about UVA, too, as I'm sure to lose my pool. Could they still win? Sure. Will they? Maybe, but more likely not. Odds say it's now Nova.

I had UK beating Zona, then losing to UVA. So now logic tells me to take UK to beat UVA in the S16, and then UK plays Cinci, with Cinci going to the FF. I had UVA beating the Zags, with UVA beating Duke to take it all. Will need to think this through.

[devildeac]

Similar post in South Regional thread:

It's over. :o

[Ian]

He was a key cog in their machine, he was not the leader or the star. I think it hurts their chances a little but for me they're still the favorites to reach the FF from that region

[richardjackson199]

UVA's chance of winning dropped from 18% to 14%

Ahhh stats :cool:

[weezie]

He was a key cog in their machine, he was not the leader or the star. I think it hurts their chances a little but for me they're still the favorites to reach the FF from that region

Agreed. I'd bet they'll rally.

[Dev11]

Similar post in South Regional thread:

It's over. :o

Merged. Carry on, kids.

[elvis14]

This sucks for UVa. I hope they play well. I know they were the #1 team coming in but one thing to keep in mind is that with or without Hunter, Duke is winning this tournament. Knowing that, at least you don't have to have those "we would have won unless" thoughts that we have had to have with Kyrie, AmileX2, Ryan Kelly, etc (and don't even get me started on Luol Deng) :). Seriously though, I'm sorry about the injury. UVa is a good team with good fans and I hate that you have this kind of injury this late in the season.

[wavedukefan70s]

This could propel them through the tourney.do it for De'Andre.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Yeah -- agree. The Eagles also can't catch a break. No way they win without Wentz.

Can't prove the rule by the exception.......sure, Virginia can win, but their chances just went down. Their margin of error shrunk. The Eagles winning with Foles was the exception....that's why it's such a big time story.

[left_hook_lacey]

UVA's chance of winning dropped from 18% to 14%

Ahhh stats :cool:

I smell pie.

[rsvman]

Hands:UVa::feet:Duke

Sucks for them, for real.

[rsvman]

No way to avoid the software turning a colon followed by a capital D into a smiley face. SMH.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Hands:UVa::feet:Duke

Sucks for them, for real.

It is bad....I hate it for them.
Maybe for us, Trevon will be okay, and we'll be healthy. Last season we had, just off the cuff, about 5-6 years worth of injuries in one season. It was terrible. Maybe we're due for a clean run for a while.

[jv001]

Nobody is saying we can't, but we expected to before this. Now nobody will be surprised if we lose to AZ or KY.

We should still win the first 2 games, if we win that 3rd game I like our chances against the other half of our bracket still and even against the top 3 from the West.
Beating Duke, MSU, and Nova seem like the biggest hurdles without him.

But you have the coach that can get them team ready for this. He's the 2nd best coach in the country. GoDuke!

[richardjackson199]

I smell pie.

Ha, you might be smelling my pie. Their odds of making Elite 8 are still substantially higher than 14-18% :p

[left_hook_lacey]

Ha, you might be smelling my pie. Their odds of making Elite 8 are still substantially higher than 14-18% :p

But trending in the right direction. :)

[Wahoo2000]

Been off the message boards mostly since news broke. I had a little pity-party for my school and team. It was pathetic. In retrospect, it was dumb to go overboard with all these "it's not fair" thoughts - what team goes an ENTIRE season without facing some kind of adversity? I really believe we still have the tools to get to the FF, but our margin for error went from "not big" to "razor thin".

For the last 20ish games, Hunter has been a force for us. He was our highest usage player (though still only at about 25% when on the floor). He was shooting 50/47/72 from FG/3PT/FT and had the highest FTRate on the team by a mile (almost double the next closest guy). He also rebounded and defended very well for a wing player put in the post.

We'll probably need our remaining top 7 players to ALL play at or near their best basketball to win 4+ games, but it is definitely possible. Especially if we get Jerome, Guy, and Hall ALL shooting well from deep. Those guys have all been GREAT shooters at times this year, but seemingly rarely all at the SAME time. We'll need that for probably 2 straight games in the second weekend (assuming we're not upset the first weekend) unless AZ/KY/Cinci/whoever just doesn't come to play (which I don't expect).

If those guys DON'T all shoot well, we'll need Diakite (and maybe Salt) to contribute much more offensively than expected. Diakite is VERY close to flipping the switch. He's been very good offensively in the last 8 or so games when he gets significant minutes - at a usage and efficiency rate right up there with Hunter. He's also a better rebounder than Hunter. He has MAJOR fouling issues though, so not sure how much his role can possibly expand as his foul rate has him being about a 22-25 mpg tops.

I anticipate the "slack" from Hunter's loss to be absorbed pretty evenly by Guy/Jerome/Hall/Diakite. I hope those 3 perimeter guys in particular are well rested, because given Nigel Johnson not really looking like a guy Bennett trusts, I think all 3 will be out there 37-40 min in pretty much every game (maybe not round 1).

[PackMan97]

That's some NC State level *$#! right there. If there is a team that can pull it off without one of their best players, it's UVa.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Been off the message boards mostly since news broke. I had a little pity-party for my school and team. It was pathetic. In retrospect, it was dumb to go overboard with all these "it's not fair" thoughts - what team goes an ENTIRE season without facing some kind of adversity? I really believe we still have the tools to get to the FF, but our margin for error went from "not big" to "razor thin".

For the last 20ish games, Hunter has been a force for us. He was our highest usage player (though still only at about 25% when on the floor). He was shooting 50/47/72 from FG/3PT/FT and had the highest FTRate on the team by a mile (almost double the next closest guy). He also rebounded and defended very well for a wing player put in the post.

We'll probably need our remaining top 7 players to ALL play at or near their best basketball to win 4+ games, but it is definitely possible. Especially if we get Jerome, Guy, and Hall ALL shooting well from deep. Those guys have all been GREAT shooters at times this year, but seemingly rarely all at the SAME time. We'll need that for probably 2 straight games in the second weekend (assuming we're not upset the first weekend) unless AZ/KY/Cinci/whoever just doesn't come to play (which I don't expect).

If those guys DON'T all shoot well, we'll need Diakite (and maybe Salt) to contribute much more offensively than expected. Diakite is VERY close to flipping the switch. He's been very good offensively in the last 8 or so games when he gets significant minutes - at a usage and efficiency rate right up there with Hunter. He's also a better rebounder than Hunter. He has MAJOR fouling issues though, so not sure how much his role can possibly expand as his foul rate has him being about a 22-25 mpg tops.

I anticipate the "slack" from Hunter's loss to be absorbed pretty evenly by Guy/Jerome/Hall/Diakite. I hope those 3 perimeter guys in particular are well rested, because given Nigel Johnson not really looking like a guy Bennett trusts, I think all 3 will be out there 37-40 min in pretty much every game (maybe not round 1).

Yeah, of all the teams who are favorites, your squad is likely most able to absorb an bench injury.

Also, this time of year, everyone has injuries - disclosed and undisclosed.

Having said all that.... It sucks, man. Go out there and win anyway!

[OldPhiKap]

Everywhere you see it, the term "got screwed" should be replaced with "was unlucky".



True, because I always heard that "getting screwed" was the same as "getting lucky."


(Sorry, I'll show myself out now. . . .)

[luvdahops]

True, because I always heard that "getting screwed" was the same as "getting lucky."


(Sorry, I'll show myself out now. . . .)

Well played, sir

[weezie]

True, because I always heard that "getting screwed" was the same as "getting lucky."


(Sorry, I'll show myself out now. . . .) :cool:

Watch out for that door knob on the way out....

[El_Diablo]

Loyola-Chicago with a dagger vs. Miami!

[ice-9]

Sigh, the one upset pick everyone and their mother made, but I the clever contrarian didn’t.

After all even with Miami only giving a measly 2-3 points that’s still more than a toss-up.

[dudog84]

Kentucky's first game since 1988 without a 3-pointer. Wow. 1,047 games (if you're counting).

[rsvman]

Buffalo shooting the three very well. Up 8 on zona now.

[Troublemaker]

lol, Zona. After all that bellyaching about them being a 4 seed, I'm glad to see this is happening to them.

The statistics never bore out that they were a team on fire. Two games ago, they were taken to overtime by UCLA. How is that a team that's peaking?

Zona came into this game ranked #71 on defense. Think about how fast Duke went from 100+ on defense to top-30 (and now top-10). Where was the proof that Zona was improving rapidly?

I call Bull on all that. A bunch of Bulls.

[tbyers11]

lol, Zona. After all that bellyaching about them being a 4 seed, I'm glad to see this is happening to them.

The statistics never bore out that they were a team on fire. Two games ago, they were taken to overtime by UCLA. That's not a team that's peaking.

Zona came into this game ranked #71 on defense. Think about how fast Duke went from 100+ on defense to top-30 (and now top-10). Where was the proof that Zona was improving rapidly?

I call Bull on all that. A bunch of Bulls.

Yeah. I don't think Arizona is going to be favored against UVA

[ice-9]

IIRC J-Will had Arizona winning the whole thing. LOL!

[Bluegrassdevil1]

Arizona is getting destroyed.

Wow.

[Troublemaker]

I actually do agree with the committee's detractors that Arizona was the worst 4-seed of all-time. But just not in the way they were thinking about it.

I'd be surprised if this weren't the largest margin of victory ever by a 13 over a 4.

[luvdahops]

lol, Zona. After all that bellyaching about them being a 4 seed, I'm glad to see this is happening to them.

The statistics never bore out that they were a team on fire. Two games ago, they were taken to overtime by UCLA. How is that a team that's peaking?

Zona came into this game ranked #71 on defense. Think about how fast Duke went from 100+ on defense to top-30 (and now top-10). Where was the proof that Zona was improving rapidly?

I call Bull on all that. A bunch of Bulls.

This. Would add that I noted up thread that the Pac-12 was historically weak this year. Seems pretty well borne out by none of their 3 teams making it out of the first round, and their champion being demolished by a #13 seed.

[UrinalCake]

That was a crazy awesome performance by Buffalo. Wow. Just completely dominated the whole game. They swarmed Ayton with smaller guards. played great defense all around and on offense have five guys who can drive and shoot. The type of team that gives higher seeded teams nightmares.

Congrats to them, as Arizona's season from hell is finally over.

[Wander]

Really glad the University of Arizona doubled down in its blind defense of Sean Miller for this. LOL.

[Bluegrassdevil1]

That was an extremely impressive effort by Buffalo.

Please. Please. Please. Repeat the performance on Saturday.

[Phoenix22]

As a Dukie from AZ that was painful. Can they still fire Miller? There was no game plan or adjustment. They barely tried to get Ayton the ball. Out played, out hustled, out coached. Damn.

Go Duke!

[bedeviled]

I'd be surprised if this weren't the largest margin of victory ever by a 13 over a 4.SURPRISE!!! (http://americansportsnet.com/news/featured/greatest-moments-david-robinson-navy-sank-lsu-in-1985-ncaa-tournament)

[ice-9]

Jeff Borzello:


Here's Arizona's projected roster for 2018-19 as it stands: Alex Barcello, Brandon Randolph, Dylan Smith, Emmanuel Akot, Ira Lee, Chase Jeter. That's it.

Six players returning, no current commitments

Crazy!

Chase wanted more playing time, he's got it.

[UrinalCake]

^ that’s insane. Coming into this season they had arguably the #1 team (especially before Bagley reclassified), they were landing more top recruits than any program not named Duke or Kentucky, they had a hot young coach who also coached the junior national team and therefore had a pipeline of prospects to bring into the school, and they were as well positioned as anybody for sustained success. Now they’re a dumpster fire.

[bedeviled]

Side story #1 from Buffalo vs Arizona game:
Rawle Alkins surprised everyone by committing to Buffalo on Oct 9, 2015 via Twitter

Proud to say that I have Committed to play my college basketball at the University of Buffalo #GOBULLS ⚫️ pic.twitter.com/ZLp09gL0mw
— Rawle Alkins (@Iam_RawleAlkins) October 9, 2015

Later updates:

Checked up on Rawle Alkins' tweet. He hasn't committed to Buffalo, a source says. "He's messing with everyone."
— Evan Daniels (@EvanDaniels) October 9, 2015

Sorry guys people at my school was playing with my phone ain't nothing wrong with buffalo great program but no i am not really committed
— Rawle Alkins (@Iam_RawleAlkins) October 9, 2015

Aye, don't be playing with us like that!!!
— Julius Hodge (@Follow24Hodge) October 9, 2015

Shoulda stuck with the committment!

Side story #2: UB has a Speedo Guy UB Naked Guy (http://www.ubspectrum.com/article/2018/02/the-life-of-a-nude-icon) who wears a blue speedo at games. It appears he came to this fandom organically without knowing the Duke history. And, kudos to him for staying true to character at Buffalo football games...outside...in the cold...in a speedo.

[bedeviled]

Is this a good time to remember that the Pac-12 was 1-8 in football bowl games this year?

[dukelifer]

Jeff Borzello:



Crazy!

Chase wanted more playing time, he's got it.

If Miller leaves- Jeter may be able to move again.

[devildeac]

I'll venture a guess now that our UVA fans are reeeeaaaally hacked off that the committee put Buffalo in their region.

:rolleyes:;)

[jv001]

I have not checked the news this morning but the late night announcers were calling out 2 of the Arizona players for announcing they were going pro right after losing. I guess one of them was Ayton. GoDuke!

[HereBeforeCoachK]

^ that’s insane. Coming into this season they had arguably the #1 team (especially before Bagley reclassified), they were landing more top recruits than any program not named Duke or Kentucky, they had a hot young coach who also coached the junior national team and therefore had a pipeline of prospects to bring into the school, and they were as well positioned as anybody for sustained success. Now they’re a dumpster fire.

And apparently they are losing all starters and have zero signees for next season.

[andyw715]

Is this a good time to remember that the Pac-12 was 1-8 in football bowl games this year?


Results from the Upstate NY / Pac-12 Challenge

St Bonaventure def UCLA
Syracuse def ASU
Buffalo def Arizona

[TexHawk]

I actually do agree with the committee's detractors that Arizona was the worst 4-seed of all-time. But just not in the way they were thinking about it.

I'd be surprised if this weren't the largest margin of victory ever by a 13 over a 4.

It's got to be one of the largest routs suffered by a 1-4 seed in the 1st round ever, right? I've only been religiously watching the tournament since the mid-90s, and I can't think of any off the top of my head. Cinderellas usually look to take the air out of the ball when they have a late lead, which limits blowouts, but Buffalo kept attacking. Kudos to them.

Arizona has to fire Miller asap, no? There's a stink on the program, he has no incoming recruits. Take the L, re-group for a couple years under a squeaky-clean mid-major coach.

[UrinalCake]

I have not checked the news this morning but the late night announcers were calling out 2 of the Arizona players for announcing they were going pro right after losing. I guess one of them was Ayton. GoDuke!

Ayton and Trier did announce (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22785548/deandre-ayton-allonzo-trier-arizona-wildcats-say-entering-nba-draft)last night. Ayton went so far as to say he decided after high school that he would only play one year in college. I know that's true for most of these guys including Bagley and probably Carter, but you don't have to say that out loud and especially not right after you lose. It's a real kick in the head to their fans.

The article also says that Alkins will be gone, though I wasn't aware he had officially announced.

[luvdahops]

I have not checked the news this morning but the late night announcers were calling out 2 of the Arizona players for announcing they were going pro right after losing. I guess one of them was Ayton. GoDuke!

Gotta believe that a sense of "I want the hell out of here" contributed to Zona's dismal performance last night. As I've made clear in prior posts, I thought they were, if anything, somewhat over rated coming in, and certainly not underseeded. But I never expected them to get spanked like that in the Round 64. Seems like the theory that players would be more motivated and brought closer by the FBI / Miller saga was off by 180 degrees or so.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Seems like the theory that players would be more motivated and brought closer by the FBI / Miller saga was off by 180 degrees or so.

Clearly it was off 180 degrees here, and i'll take my medicine as one advancing that theory. These dynamics clearly are a factor in many cases, a circling of the wagons and drawing a team together - and they were 5-0 since Miller returned. But clearly, these guys just mailed it in yesterday and mentally, were already in the NBA.

[dudog84]

Clearly it was off 180 degrees here, and i'll take my medicine as one advancing that theory. These dynamics clearly are a factor in many cases, a circling of the wagons and drawing a team together - and they were 5-0 since Miller returned. But clearly, these guys just mailed it in yesterday and mentally, were already in the NBA.

While I get your point (and others), it just doesn't make sense. I just checked a couple of mock drafts, and there are no other Arizona players in the first round. With a little effort, I could give you a lot of examples of players who moved up a lot of spots (think Steph Curry) due to their play in the NCAAs.

Even Ayton, who was #1 in the two mocks I checked, could drop a spot or two (and lose a lot of money and bragging rights) after a performance like last night's.

If that's what happened, it's very short-sighted by the players.

[TexHawk]

While I get your point (and others), it just doesn't make sense. I just checked a couple of mock drafts, and there are no other Arizona players in the first round. With a little effort, I could give you a lot of examples of players who moved up a lot of spots (think Steph Curry) due to their play in the NCAAs.

Even Ayton, who was #1 in the two mocks I checked, could drop a spot or two (and lose a lot of money and bragging rights) after a performance like last night's.

If that's what happened, it's very short-sighted by the players.

Yup, it's fair to look in the direction of the FBI scandal, but I dunno, maybe the Arizona players just aren't as good as we thought, with a coach who is clearly not as good as we thought. Miller struggled in the tournament long before this scandal came to light.

I admittedly didn't watch much of Arizona this year, and last night they were not at their best, but it's laughable that anyone thought that team would have a chance against UVA.

[devildeac]

89-68. Sad.

8206

reduced to peanuts:

8207

:o:rolleyes:

[CDu]

I did NOT see that coming. I thought Buffalo had a chance to win as Arizona hasn't been impressive this year, but I certainly didn't think they'd win in a blowout. What a disappointing season in general for the Wildcats. They had a lot of talent, but really never played like it this year. And they went out with a wimper yesterday.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Even Ayton, who was #1 in the two mocks I checked, could drop a spot or two (and lose a lot of money and bragging rights) after a performance like last night's.


You agree with most of your post, but I don't think any NBA scouts changed their take on Ayton last night. He could have dribbled the ball off his own foot fifteen times last night, and scouts would have already formed their opinions and would not budge.

Buffalo flat out looked like the better team last night. Their offense was better, their defense was scrapper, they got nearly every loose ball, and hit better shots. As time wound down and the pressure built, they looked better prepared and quite composed. Very impressive.

If Buffalo can play like that tomorrow, Kentucky had better shape up or they will find themselves watching from home next weekend.

It's like everyone said when the brackets were announced... UVa got screwed by being put in the same bracket as, erm, Buffalo.

[dudog84]

I did NOT see that coming. I thought Buffalo had a chance to win as Arizona hasn't been impressive this year, but I certainly didn't think they'd win in a blowout. What a disappointing season in general for the Wildcats. They had a lot of talent, but really never played like it this year. And they went out with a wimper yesterday.

Preseason #3, with the second-most #1 votes. But played in a terrible conference, got terrible outside news (non-injury related) in the middle of the season, and clearly were not prepared/ready for the postseason.

[dudog84]

You agree with most of your post, but I don't think any NBA scouts changed their take on Ayton last night. He could have dribbled the ball off his own foot fifteen times last night, and scouts would have already formed their opinions and would not budge.

Buffalo flat out looked like the better team last night. Their offense was better, their defense was scrapper, they got nearly every loose ball, and hit better shots. As time wound down and the pressure built, they looked better prepared and quite composed. Very impressive.

If Buffalo can play like that tomorrow, Kentucky had better shape up or they will find themselves watching from home next weekend.

It's like everyone said when the brackets were announced... UVa got screwed by being put in the same bracket as, erm, Buffalo.

Freudian slip? :)

If Bagley has a monster tournament, shows a lot of heart, I think a lot of pro teams would move him above Ayton. There's not that big of a gap. Ayton is not a LeBron.

Edit: Not the correct use of the term. Should've wrote "why wouldn't I" or something in that vein.

[weezie]

...But clearly, these guys just mailed it in yesterday and mentally, were already in the NBA.

I also picked AZ to advance but I think they showed that they were not the brightest bunch of pennies in the bucket as opposed to already in NBA. They just seemed to be not very smart.

In any case, big fat old see ya! And passing on Ayton below 3 pick would be shocking.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Freudian slip? :)

If Bagley has a monster tournament, shows a lot of heart, I think a lot of pro teams would move him above Ayton. There's not that big of a gap. Ayton is not a LeBron.

Edit: Not the correct use of the term. Should've wrote "why wouldn't I" or something in that vein.

Yes, but that's up to Bagley, not Ayton.

Yes, I made a typo. But my point stands - no one is rearranging their draft boards based on Ayton's lackluster performance last night.

[dudog84]

I also picked AZ to advance but I think they showed that they were not the brightest bunch of pennies in the bucket as opposed to already in NBA. They just seemed to be not very smart.

In any case, big fat old see ya! And passing on Ayton below 3 pick would be shocking.

That's why I wrote "spot or two". It's more the other guys that cost themselves.

[dudog84]

Yes, but that's up to Bagley, not Ayton.

Yes, I made a typo. But my point stands - no one is rearranging their draft boards based on Ayton's lackluster performance last night.

I wasn't dissing you, I just thought it was funny. Geez.

Further, ANY decision is a combination of factors.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I wasn't dissing you, I just thought it was funny. Geez.

Further, ANY decision is a combination of factors.

Oh, I didn't mean to suggest I took it as a dis. It is funny - and I'm usually the first to point and laugh at typos, misspellings, and poor grammar.

All's well, we are on the same team. Go Duke!

I do stand by my point, that any one game doesn't affect draft stock. At least, not this late in the process. But you are more than welcome to disagree.

I'd draft Bagley #1 all day everyday and twice on Sundays.

[rsvman]

Yes, but that's up to Bagley, not Ayton.

Yes, I made a typo. But my point stands - no one is rearranging their draft boards based on Ayton's lackluster performance last night.

Agree, but I think that sometimes the NCAA Tournament works the OTHER way; for example, a player who would be projected to be a second-rounder might move himself up into the first round by an outstanding performance on college basketball's biggest stage.

I'd argue that if Duval keeps playing like he did yesterday (and here's hoping that he does) he could improve his draft stock over the course of the tournament, particularly if we advance all the way to the title game or become champs.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Agree, but I think that sometimes the NCAA Tournament works the OTHER way; for example, a player who would be projected to be a second-rounder might move himself up into the first round by an outstanding performance on college basketball's biggest stage.

I'd argue that if Duval keeps playing like he did yesterday (and here's hoping that he does) he could improve his draft stock over the course of the tournament, particularly if we advance all the way to the title game or become champs.

Yes, and I suspect that's dudog84's point as well. Tyus Jones likely did this a few years ago.

[Wander]

Preseason #3, with the second-most #1 votes. But played in a terrible conference, got terrible outside news (non-injury related) in the middle of the season, and clearly were not prepared/ready for the postseason.

I guess. But I think they had the profile of a team ripe for an early upset outside of all that. In fact, they reminded me a bit of the 2012 and 2014 Duke teams that got upset - a OAD talent surrounded by upperclassmen guys who never really blended together well, a really bad defensive kenpom ranking (for their seed), and played very poorly at the end of the season. All with a coaching downgrade compared to Duke.

[dudog84]

As a bonus, Skip Bayless (who I can't stand more than Stephen a. Smith) picked Arizona to win it all, and is subsequently being taken to task for it on twitter. So twitter does have some use.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/03/ncaa-tournament-2018-march-madness-skip-bayless-arizona-champions-oops-twitter-reaction

[luvdahops]

As a bonus, Skip Bayless (who I can't stand more than Stephen a. Smith) picked Arizona to win it all, and is subsequently being taken to task for it on twitter. So twitter does have some use.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/03/ncaa-tournament-2018-march-madness-skip-bayless-arizona-champions-oops-twitter-reaction

I hate Bayless, too. As they say, not the sharpest tool in the shed. But definitely the biggest.

[-jk]

I hate Bayless, too. As they say, not the sharpest tool in the shed. But definitely the biggest.

Bayless has annoyed me since the '86 final four. Can't summon the energy to "hate" him...

-jk

[Wahoo2000]

What a comeback for Nevada against Texas. Martin twins were c-l-u-t-c-h in OT.

On the Texas side.... Man. Shaka is recruiting well and getting the guys he wants, but that program doesn't seem to really be moving forward. Not sure of his contract status, but could see things starting to heat up if they don't have at least a "semi-breakout" year in 18-19.

Edited to add: There's also the Andrew Jones situation, which I forgot about for a second. Could somewhat mitigate this year's results as that's a hard thing for the kids to deal with. Definitely a major distraction, and one that can't be helped.

[dukelifer]

UVA not looking like the number one number one yet

[howardlander]

UVA not looking like the number one number one yet

No they are not, but I'd still be pretty surprised If they lost.

[BlueandWhite]

No they are not, but I'd still be pretty surprised If they lost.

They can’t hit the broad side of a barn. UMBC’s defense has caused UVA problems. If I’m Bennett I am worried going into halftime.

[bbosbbos]

UVA is overall #1. I will not argue with that.

[dukelifer]

No they are not, but I'd still be pretty surprised If they lost.

They can be a bad offensive team at times. Right now they look VERY nervous out there. Tough to be the hunted.

[weezie]

I think it's great. Shake this dance up a little.

[duke4ever19]

Who else isn't surprised?

[jbay201]

wow UVA about to lose to worst 16 seed. i guess that injury really killed them. there is no absolutely no way they make the final four if they are struggling with his team.

[Bluedog]

wow UVA about to lose to worst 16 seed. i guess that injury really killed them. there is no absolutely no way they make the final four if they are struggling with his team.

Texas Southern, LIU-Brooklyn and NCCU actually are considered worse 16 seeds by most measures. 😉 And hard to say they're "about to lose" considering it's tied at the half. But agreed that they'll need to improve significantly on that half if they want to make it far. Seems like nerves.

[richardjackson199]

Who else isn't surprised?

Left Hook Lacey isn't surprised. But this game and any future games aren't over yet. Survive and advance. :cool:

[duke4ever19]

Left Hook Lacey isn't surprised. But this game and any future games aren't over yet. Survive and advance. :cool:

Agreed.

Like Barkley said, at some point, you won't hold someone under 70 points. UVA is supposed to win this game, and probably will, but I just don't trust them vs a team like Buffalo, who can easily go on a 3-point barrage.

[jbay201]

buffalo makes it to the final four i believe. going to be fun to see them beat up UK!

[rsvman]

UVa looking a little rattled.

[pfrduke]

Nigel Johnson is having an awful game so far.

[dukelifer]

UVa looking a little rattled.

More than rattled. If someone does not step up- they could lose this.

[subzero02]

Oy Vey...UVA...

[jbay201]

wow up 7! going to be first seed to lose to 16. big time injury costs teams...ppl always underestimate these BIG TIME IMO. It's college and backups aren't going to magically shine in the tourney after barely playing during the regular season. UVA kept their bench pretty short.

[bbosbbos]

I think UVA will catch up very quickly.

[Bluegrassdevil1]

Let's all take a breath here. A sixteen has never pulled it off. UVA has only lost TWICE. The Wahoos are a strong team.

But...

I am totally okay with being incorrect.

[jbay201]

I think UVA will catch up very quickly.

lol UMBC is up 11! this is awesome i don't even what the school stands for and they have a legit midget on their team LOL!

[YmoBeThere]

This is kind of embarrassing for the rest of the ACC.

[Bluedog]

UMBC just passed over 50% likelihood to win according to ESPN's win probability... Not that it's perfect, but interesting.

[dukelifer]

I think UVA will catch up very quickly.

They need someone to get on a roll and I am not sure who it will be. UVA has not had to fight back like this with this pressure all year. They are feeling it.

[jbay201]

[QUOTE=YmoBeThere;1054517]This is kind of embarrassing for the rest of the ACC.[/QUOTE

as long as duke keeps doing well...i could care less if every other ACC team gets blown out by 50 points!

[InSpades]

An 11 point lead (possibly soon to be 14) over UVA... is that like a 25 point lead against a normal team?

They have to turn up the tempo... like it or not.

[dukelifer]

This is kind of embarrassing for the rest of the ACC.

Also given that the other ACC teams may go down today.

[YmoBeThere]

Let's all take a breath here. A sixteen has never pulled it off. UVA has only lost TWICE. The Wahoos are a strong team.

But...

I am totally okay with being incorrect.

Quite honestly, I would love for UVA to lose.
1) So the #16 seed has never beaten a #1 seed would go awake
2) So any comparisons of UVA to Duke will die
3) So Guy will realize he should have kept the man bun

[YmoBeThere]

[QUOTE=YmoBeThere;1054517]This is kind of embarrassing for the rest of the ACC.[/QUOTE

as long as duke keeps doing well...i could care less if every other ACC team gets blown out by 50 points!

You've misused the phrase.

[Wander]

Just watched UVA not take a fast break opportunity when two UMBC players were on the floor or in the stands... UVA's style of play is the main reason why I think this upset has a chance of actually holding.

[gocanes0506]

2) So any comparisons of UVA to Duke will die

Wouldn’t it only strengthen it? We’ve had some pretty embarrassing first rounder exits recently.

[dukelifer]

Wouldn’t it only strengthen it? We’ve had some pretty embarrassing first rounder exits recently.

This would top anything as it would be the first 16 to beat a 1.

[bbosbbos]

Time running very fast...

[howardlander]

Is it wrong that I am starting to root for UMBC? It's just not so easy when you are expected to win

[dukelifer]

Just watched UVA not take a fast break opportunity when two UMBC players were on the floor or in the stands... UVA's style of play is the main reason why I think this upset has a chance of actually holding.

They aren’t coming back unless Guy goes nuts from 3. This is not looking good.

[jbay201]

Wouldn’t it only strengthen it? We’ve had some pretty embarrassing first rounder exits recently.

we never lost as a 1 seed! plenty of 2s have gone down including mizzou one of the years we lost early. this is historic...should end UVA bball program and put a rest of the packline defense as a legit weapon!

[YmoBeThere]

Wouldn’t it only strengthen it? We’ve had some pretty embarrassing first rounder exits recently.

Duke's reputation under Coach K was built over decades, not over the last few seasons. Plus titles in '10 and '15 keep the bar much higher than anythjng UVA has done under Bennett.

[rsvman]

They are going to have to get the ball into the basket. Their shooting is just terrible.

[MarkD83]

So would you rather have the top offense or top defense

[subzero02]

More than rattled. If someone does not step up- they could lose this.

If this were a boxing match, UVA would be on its 2nd or 3rd standing 8 count...

[Trey21]

i'm sorry that i'm petty but if this is the first 1 seed that falls. I couldn't be happier. Uva has gotten so MUCH praise over the last 3-5 years and they really haven't done jack when it really matter. I know Hunter is out, but you gotta start questioning Bennett's schemes. This is pathetic.

[gocanes0506]

Duke's reputation under Coach K was built over decades, not over the last few seasons. Plus titles in '10 and '15 keep the bar much higher than anythjng UVA has done under Bennett.

Everyone’s reputation is what we have done lately. That is the time we are in.

[cbarry]

My bracket is already busted. Would LOVE to see UVA lose!! I only had them going to he 2nd road anyway!

come on UMBC— this would be the biggest upset in the history of basketball if this continues...!!


They aren’t coming back unless Guy goes nuts from 3. This is not looking good.

[dukelifer]

So would you rather have the top offense or top defense

You need offense. They just don’t have many options

[Duke79UNLV77]

UMBC lost by 43 to Albany and by 28 to Vermont this year.

I’m afraid UNCheat will have a free path to the Final like 2 years ago.

[WHOneedsSOX]

Wow this is amazing. If UMBC gets to 55 I'm pretty sure they'll win.

Lot of time left still though.

[bbosbbos]

UMBC lost by 43 to Albany and by 28 to Vermont this year.

I’m afraid UNCheat will have a free path to the Final like 2 years ago.

I do not like that. But very likely.

[gocanes0506]

So would you rather have the top offense or top defense

Defense. Every team has bad offensive days a few times a season. A good defense will keep you in the game during the rough offensive days.

Having a rough O day but your D sucks? Game over.

[UrinalCake]

Interesting trick being employed by UMBC when inbounding the ball. The inbounder will just set the ball on the ground, while the guy he's passing it to doesn't touch it. The game clock continues to run (thus burning off time) but the shot clock doesn't start until they touch the ball, so they don't have to worry about a ten second violation. I don't think I've ever seen that before.

[gam7]

Wow this is amazing. If UMBC gets to 55 I'm pretty sure they'll win.

Lot of time left still though.

They are doing a really smart thing when they are inbounding the ball. They are taking their time and then not touching it until absolutely necessary (meaning shot clock isn't starting). In the meantime, the game clock keeps running that whole time.

Justise used to take advantage of that trick all the time. I don't understand why it doesn't happen way, way more.

[MarkD83]

I don't think uva can score 16 puts in 8 min

[dukelifer]

Holy cow- they are hitting and UVA is not