PDA

View Full Version : Pre-bracket speculation!! Post here!



TwoDukeTattoos
03-15-2008, 06:42 PM
Please understand that my post is not about the Clemson loss or about the ACC tourney at all. The subject of my post is simple: our eventual journey throught the Big Dance.

Like all Duke fans, I certainly wanted us to win the ACC tourney. However, it hasn't been my focus at all. I have felt strongly through the 2nd half of the season that we are an incredibly legit Big Dance team to be reckoned with. ACC games can be easier to win because you've played everyone at least once, many twice, so hours upon hours of tape and experience has led to close game and upsets. This truth is not entirely applicable to Big Dance play. And I think that's what makes this Duke team special.

True, every opponent and crowd member will smell blood regardless of the gym we show up in, however, I feel that given our depth and athleticism that we will overcome everyone. We may not blow teams out, but it won't matter. We'll still win games. I haven't felt this strongly about a Duke team since 01 (and I called that Tourney win all the way - even when we were down by astronomical amounts against UMD)

This weekend, K played 10 guys in both games. It's impressive to think that even with 10 guys playing minutes, we still lead the entire game and beat a hot GT by 12, and lost by only 4 to a legit Clemson. I take that as a win in this tourney because it further builds our Big Dance resume. This team is fresh, talented, and hungry and we will do big things during Big Dance 08.

Last year this way my hope. This year it is my certainty.

Balance. Depth. Offensive and defensive officiency. National Title.

Go Duke.. March on.

houstondukie
03-15-2008, 06:49 PM
we are an inevitable cold spell away from an early exit

TwoDukeTattoos
03-15-2008, 06:57 PM
we are an inevitable cold spell away from an early exit

Evidently folks haven't visited Pomroy's site. Of the last four national champions (since he began keeping the data) each national champion has ranked in at least the top 12 in offensive AND defensive effiecency. This year to date, only three teams are in that category: UCLA, Kansas, and Duke. Please understand that Pomroy is not ranking offenses and defenses - rather he is ranking efficiencies. "Efficiencies" is the key word. Please visit the site for his formula. It makes perfect sense. True, it's arguable, as is everything in life (even stats), still it's the most solid angle I've ever seen. If you couple that with the fact that the last three national champions have all had five players averaging double figure scoring, and of the three Pomroy teams, Duke is the only team with five players averaging in double figures - wow - you feel pretty good about our chances.

True, nothing I have said is a "crystal ball" predictor. However, it would give a betting man reason to place at least some stock on Duke.

wisteria
03-15-2008, 07:02 PM
I wish I could share your confidence.
I've experienced so much heartache in March these years that I try not to hurt myself again by hoping too much.

dukelifer
03-15-2008, 07:10 PM
Please understand that my post is not about the Clemson loss or about the ACC tourney at all. The subject of my post is simple: our eventual journey throught the Big Dance.

Like all Duke fans, I certainly wanted us to win the ACC tourney. However, it hasn't been my focus at all. I have felt strongly through the 2nd half of the season that we are an incredibly legit Big Dance team to be reckoned with. ACC games can be easier to win because you've played everyone at least once, many twice, so hours upon hours of tape and experience has led to close game and upsets. This truth is not entirely applicable to Big Dance play. And I think that's what makes this Duke team special.

True, every opponent and crowd member will smell blood regardless of the gym we show up in, however, I feel that given our depth and athleticism that we will overcome everyone. We may not blow teams out, but it won't matter. We'll still win games. I haven't felt this strongly about a Duke team since 01 (and I called that Tourney win all the way - even when we were down by astronomical amounts against UMD)

This weekend, K played 10 guys in both games. It's impressive to think that even with 10 guys playing minutes, we still lead the entire game and beat a hot GT by 12, and lost by only 4 to a legit Clemson. I take that as a win in this tourney because it further builds our Big Dance resume. This team is fresh, talented, and hungry and we will do big things during Big Dance 08.

Last year this way my hope. This year it is my certainty.

Balance. Depth. Offensive and defensive officiency. National Title.

Go Duke.. March on.

If Henderson is okay- Duke has a chance- I agree. And I agree you have to give some credit to K for playing his bench - A LOT. Folks, Clemson is playing pretty good ball of late. They cannot and will not beat UNC because of the history- but they SHOULD have beaten them twice and if they had done that - they might have been the number 2 seed in the conference and a solid 3 seed themselves. Let's do not fool ourselves- Clemson is a VERY good team and Mays is healthy for the first time this season- and he is a huge X-factor. Duke lost to a team that can easily be a final four team- like Ga Tech in 2004. They just need to get their confidence. They have all the parts to be very dangerous.

gofurman
03-15-2008, 07:37 PM
Kansas
Georgetown
- - -
Texas
Duke
Xavier
Wisconsin
Louisville

would be in contest for a two seed

I say
Gerogetown has one by doing well in BE tourney
Kansas has one locked up


Texas will hopefully lose to Kansas
Xavier lost to St Joes so that helps
Wisconsin doing well but lost bad to Duke
Louisville lost in the tourney early

So I think Duke can still get a 2 seed

Agree?
I don't think UT losing matters as they may just move region but still be a one seed?

I think Texas losing is key. If they beat Kansas then I think Texas gets a 2 and Kansas stays at a 2 thus eliminating one of the 2 seeds?

coastal1
03-15-2008, 07:42 PM
This weekend, K played 10 guys in both games. It's impressive to think that even with 10 guys playing minutes, we still lead the entire game and beat a hot GT by 12, and lost by only 4 to a legit Clemson. I take that as a win in this tourney because it further builds our Big Dance resume.

This is beyond absurd. K coached to win the games.

coastal1
03-15-2008, 07:45 PM
#2 almost certainly, but Duke is not a top 8 team right now. The early Wiscy win makes it easy though

houstondukie
03-15-2008, 07:46 PM
I guess the 2004 Final Four run doesn't count any more. Duke lost the ACC tourney that year as well.

That 2004 team with Duhon, Ewing, Redick, Deng, and Shelden would run this team out of the gym.

With that said, I haven't given up on this team yet. It's all about the matchups and some luck. Hopefully we'll get some rest in the next week and we'll be ready and hungry.

PS, Duke missed one free throw today (16 for 17).

PSS How did L. Thomas play 14 minutes today and not get a single point, rebound, block, steal, or shot attempt? If not for the 2 fouls he would have no recorded stat.

Troublemaker
03-15-2008, 07:48 PM
Duke will likely get a 2 seed. Here's a real-time RPI site: http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html

Duke is 27-5, RPI #8, RPI SOS #7
Stanford is 26-7, RPI #15, RPI SOS #56
Wisconsin is 28-4, RPI #12, RPI SOS #61, and a blowout loss to Duke
Xavier is 27-6, RPI #9, RPI SOS #23, and the best team from a bad conference and not a conference tournament winner.

I don't see anyone else as a contender for the last 2 seed.

Highlander
03-15-2008, 07:50 PM
#3 I think. Texas goes ahead of us by virtue of making the finals of their tourney, where we didn't. Wisconsin passes us if they win their tourney, regardless of our early season win over them. Kansas and GTown take the other two spots.

Our early season win over Wisconsin would be a tiebreaker in my mind, but it's not a tie if they win out and we don't even make the finals.

I bet we're in Memphis's bracket if we're the last #2, b/c mathematically we should be in UNC's if they are the overall #1, but I don't think the committee puts us in the same region (even though they could).

dukelifer
03-15-2008, 07:51 PM
That 2004 team with Duhon, Ewing, Redick, Deng, and Shelden would run this team out of the gym.

With that said, I haven't given up on this team yet. It's all about the matchups and some luck. Hopefully we'll get some rest in the next week and we'll be ready and hungry.

PS, Duke missed one free throw today (16 for 17).

PSS How did L. Thomas play 14 minutes today and not get a single point, rebound, block, steal, or shot attempt? If not for the 2 fouls he would have no recorded stat.

Let's not play that game. That 2004 Duke team would run this year's number 1 tarheels out of the gym. The 2005 tarheels would run the 2008 tarheels out of the gym and this Duke team for sure.

Lance was a bit overmatched today. Booker and Mays are very strong.

Troublemaker
03-15-2008, 07:56 PM
One possible S-curve for the top 3 seeds

1. UNC.........Memphis..........UCLA............Kansa s
2. G'town......Duke..............Texas...........Tenn essee
3. Stanford....Wiscy............Louisville.......Xavi er

houstondukie
03-15-2008, 08:00 PM
Wisconsin has to lose.

Basically, it's 5 teams for 4 spots: Kansas, Texas, Wisconsin, G'town, and Duke.

G'town is a lock - Big East is too good a conference for the champion to get a 3 seed.

Kansas and Texas is tricky.
Kansas is too good not to get a 2 seed (some experts and many on this site think they are the best team in the country).
Texas, if they win the B12 tournament is a lock (they won the B12 regular season) But even if they lose to Kansas, they have wins over Tenn, UCLA, and Kansas. That's wins over 2 #1 seeds and a #2 seed. No other team can say that.

So I think basically it comes down to us and Wisconsin, who we destroyed. But I agree, if Wisconsin wins their conference tourney, we're looking at a 3.

kinghoops
03-15-2008, 08:24 PM
i hate to say this, but 4-4 over the last eight games will get duke a 3 seed.

CDu
03-15-2008, 08:29 PM
i hate to say this, but 4-4 over the last eight games will get duke a 3 seed.

It is worse than that for us. We're 3-4 over the last seven games. I think we're a 2 seed if Wisconsin doesn't win their tournament, and a #3 seed if they do. That said, I could see us being a three seed regardless, assuming the committee decides based on games played through today (due to time constraints).

VaDukie
03-15-2008, 08:53 PM
Wisconsin wins = 3 seed
Wisconsin loses = 2 seed

Troublemaker
03-15-2008, 09:11 PM
CDu, we're 5-2 over the last 7 games and 5-4 over the last 9 games (and obviously 6-4 over "Last 10"), so it's a little bit better than what you have.

I agree with you guys that only Wisconsin could drop Duke to a 3. Root for Illinois tomorrow. If nothing else, I'd hate to see UNC get Wisconsin as their 2 seed. Yuck.

Keep in mind Duke got a surprising 6 seed last season when most of us were predicting lower. SOS counts.

And regardless, Duke needs to play better. 2 seed, 3 seed, whatever.

devildownunder
03-15-2008, 09:18 PM
How did L. Thomas play 14 minutes today and not get a single point, rebound, block, steal, or shot attempt? If not for the 2 fouls he would have no recorded stat.



That is amazing. :(

CDu
03-15-2008, 09:18 PM
CDu, we're 5-2 over the last 7 games and 5-4 over the last 9 games (and obviously 6-4 over "Last 10"), so it's a little bit better than what you have.

I agree with you guys that only Wisconsin could drop Duke to a 3. Root for Illinois tomorrow. If nothing else, I'd hate to see UNC get Wisconsin as their 2 seed. Yuck.

Keep in mind Duke got a surprising 6 seed last season when most of us were predicting lower. SOS counts.

And regardless, Duke needs to play better. 2 seed, 3 seed, whatever.

Ah yes, I overlooked the St John's win and (somehow) the win yesterday. Oops. But 5-4 over the last nine is still a reason for big concern. Especially considering that we needed a collapse by NC St to avoid being under .500 over that stretch.

Agree both about the idea that we'll either be a low #2 or a high #3, depending largely upon the Wisconsin game tomorrow. And I completely agree that we need to play better. The problem I see is that we aren't really playing like a #2/#3 seed at the moment, and haven't been for a while. Aside from the UNC game (which is a rivalry game, so it is bound to be an outlier), we've played more like a #5/#6 seed.

Bob Green
03-15-2008, 09:19 PM
If Wisconsin wins, they will be 10-0 over their last 10 games. They will get a 2 seed. If they lose, they will be 9-1 and still get a 2 seed. Duke & Stanford are both 6-4.

I like Bobby Knight's comments, "Seeding has very little to do with how things are going to playout in the tournament."

CDu
03-15-2008, 09:28 PM
Evidently folks haven't visited Pomroy's site. Of the last four national champions (since he began keeping the data) each national champion has ranked in at least the top 12 in offensive AND defensive effiecency. This year to date, only three teams are in that category: UCLA, Kansas, and Duke. Please understand that Pomroy is not ranking offenses and defenses - rather he is ranking efficiencies. "Efficiencies" is the key word. Please visit the site for his formula. It makes perfect sense. True, it's arguable, as is everything in life (even stats), still it's the most solid angle I've ever seen. If you couple that with the fact that the last three national champions have all had five players averaging double figure scoring, and of the three Pomroy teams, Duke is the only team with five players averaging in double figures - wow - you feel pretty good about our chances.

True, nothing I have said is a "crystal ball" predictor. However, it would give a betting man reason to place at least some stock on Duke.

While it may be that the last three national champions have had characteristics that Duke can match, it is also most certainly true that the last three champions have characteristics that Duke can absolutely not match. Those UF teams and the UNC team had both a penetrating playmaking point guard and phenomenal post talent and post depth. We don't have either of those things.

Kansas: offensively #1, defensively #2
UCLA: offensively #5, defensively #4
Duke: offensively #7, defensively #11

And that's assuming that we don't fall a bit based on today's game. Those two teams above us have been substantially above us in terms of efficiency.

And, I doubt we've been playing top-12 efficiency in the second half of this season.

CrazyCat
03-15-2008, 09:33 PM
Let's not even start comparing the 2004 team with this one. Perhaps I am still upset over our loss today, but if you were to take the 2004 team and have them play this team, this team would still get spanked. I don't even see us making it out of the Sweet Sixteen, let alone getting the big prize.

12_2bretired
03-15-2008, 09:42 PM
Please understand that my post is not about the Clemson loss or about the ACC tourney at all. The subject of my post is simple: our eventual journey throught the Big Dance.

Like all Duke fans, I certainly wanted us to win the ACC tourney. However, it hasn't been my focus at all. I have felt strongly through the 2nd half of the season that we are an incredibly legit Big Dance team to be reckoned with. ACC games can be easier to win because you've played everyone at least once, many twice, so hours upon hours of tape and experience has led to close game and upsets. This truth is not entirely applicable to Big Dance play. And I think that's what makes this Duke team special.

True, every opponent and crowd member will smell blood regardless of the gym we show up in, however, I feel that given our depth and athleticism that we will overcome everyone. We may not blow teams out, but it won't matter. We'll still win games. I haven't felt this strongly about a Duke team since 01 (and I called that Tourney win all the way - even when we were down by astronomical amounts against UMD)

This weekend, K played 10 guys in both games. It's impressive to think that even with 10 guys playing minutes, we still lead the entire game and beat a hot GT by 12, and lost by only 4 to a legit Clemson. I take that as a win in this tourney because it further builds our Big Dance resume. This team is fresh, talented, and hungry and we will do big things during Big Dance 08.

Last year this way my hope. This year it is my certainty.

Balance. Depth. Offensive and defensive officiency. National Title.

Go Duke.. March on.

i love that you made "throught" a word.
this team can make a nice run. its an elite 8 team that is better built for next year. champs in '09

dukie8
03-15-2008, 09:45 PM
i think it all depends on how much the committee weighs "last 10 games" and head-to-head competition. they have been fickle and arbitrarily will weigh a factor more for 1 team than another. it's interesting to note that we beat BOTH teams in the big 10 final. it's hard to imagine the committee sticking the big 10 regular season and tournament winner a 3 seed but that conference was terrible this year.

on a related note, if clemson takes out the heels tomorrow, i think that they could move all the way up to a 3. they then will have beaten 2 top 10 teams this week and will have come in 3rd in the regular season of the top rated conference and won its tournament. the committee overweights the conference tournaments. i, too, agree with bobby knight that it's fun to try and guess the seeds but once the games begin, they don't mean too much.

Kilby
03-15-2008, 09:56 PM
If Henderson is okay- Duke has a chance- I agree. And I agree you have to give some credit to K for playing his bench - A LOT. Folks, Clemson is playing pretty good ball of late. They cannot and will not beat UNC because of the history- but they SHOULD have beaten them twice and if they had done that - they might have been the number 2 seed in the conference and a solid 3 seed themselves. Let's do not fool ourselves- Clemson is a VERY good team and Mays is healthy for the first time this season- and he is a huge X-factor. Duke lost to a team that can easily be a final four team- like Ga Tech in 2004. They just need to get their confidence. They have all the parts to be very dangerous.

I agree with you 100%. With everyone healthy Duke is a hard team to beat and I have always felt that a healthy Henderson was the most important factor in allowing Duke to play their game of slashing or kicking for the three. Maybe its time to let Scheyer play the point. Having a PG that is a danger to beat his man and score or dish would be a real asset to this team. Whatever happens I trust in Coach K.

Jumbo
03-15-2008, 10:02 PM
I'm pretty confident Duke will get a 2. Wisconsin's numbers just don't match up. That said, if we get a 3, it would be lovely to end up with Wisconsin as the 2.

As someone else said, it's not about the seed as much as the matchups.

hondoheel
03-15-2008, 10:15 PM
Can't see Georgetown getting a 2 now.

Troublemaker
03-15-2008, 10:30 PM
Actually, I'm pretty sure G'town maintains their 2 seed. Here's a site that "averages" a ton of brackets so you can get a feel for where teams are getting slotted right now: http://bracketproject.atspace.com/comparison.htm

Okay, let's say Wiscy does get a 2 seed by beating Illinois, knocking Duke down a line. Here's hoping for something like this:

1. UNC........Memphis.........UCLA..........Kansas
2. G'town.....Wiscy.............Texas..........Tennes see
3. Stanford...Duke.............Louisville.......Xavie r

dbd4ever
03-15-2008, 10:31 PM
It's like it was said earlier by Doug Gottlieb, the teams are first ranked from 1 to 65 then they are seeded. At the start of this day we are not the lowest ranked 2 seed. And Georgetown just lost to Pitt. And I don't think it matters that G-town did well because they were expected to win and didn't. That's just like if Carolina loses, no matter what round they lose is an upset. With Tennessee losing they will fall off of the top line and the Big 12 Champion will take that spot. The only thing that will change in the one seeds is if Carolina wins they are the #1 overall seed and if they lose, Memphis will be the #1 overall seed. We should be a 2 seed.

#1's - UNC, Memphis, UCLA, and Kansas/Texas winner
#2's - Kansas/Texas winner, Duke, Tennessee, and Wisconsin
#3's - Georgetown, Pitt, Xavier, and Stanford

Interesting to see what happens to Clemson if they win tomorrow.

Johnny B
03-15-2008, 10:42 PM
Yes.


It seems we are playing "tight", perhaps the expectations that have been getting higher as the season has progressed has affected the players, perhaps especially the younger guys. Shots don't fall when you're tight. I think the team needs to loosen up; realize that it's just a game; enjoyable, sure; want to win, definitely; but just a game. I think Coach needs to help take the pressure off the players, then we will shoot like we did earlier in the season.

devildownunder
03-15-2008, 11:07 PM
i hate to say this, but 4-4 over the last eight games will get duke a 3 seed.


agreed. we don't have any real high-quality wins since the one at UNC. That, plus a very average finish lands us a 3 seed, IMO, no matter what wisky or anyone else does from this point. Had several 2/3 contenders flamed out early in their conference tourneys maybe it's different but not now.

ice-9
03-15-2008, 11:22 PM
Hate to say "I told you so"...well, even if we end up as a 3rd seed let's hope that the committee still places us in the Raleigh pod.

mr. synellinden
03-15-2008, 11:30 PM
East

1. UNC
2. WISC
3. GTOWN
4. DRAKE

WEST

1. UCLA
2. TEXAS
3. XAVIER
4. UCONN

MIDWEST

1. KANSAS (IF WINS TOMORROW) or TENN
2. KANSAS (IF LOSES TOMORROW) or TENN.
3. STANFORD
4. ND

SOUTH

1. MEMPHIS
2. DUKE
3. BUTLER
4. LOUISVILLE


No matter what, it takes 6-0.

grc5
03-15-2008, 11:34 PM
I'd just like to point out that I predicted a #3 seed, and promptly got laughed out of the metaphorical room:http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?p=117310#post117310

Oh, and jyuwono, there is no place for a #3 seed in the Raleigh pod.

Jumbo
03-15-2008, 11:43 PM
agreed. we don't have any real high-quality wins since the one at UNC. That, plus a very average finish lands us a 3 seed, IMO, no matter what wisky or anyone else does from this point. Had several 2/3 contenders flamed out early in their conference tourneys maybe it's different but not now.

But, as Troublemaker does an excellent job of illustrating, there just aren't many compelling contenders fora 2-seed. I can't see Xavier getting one coming out of the A-10. Yes, they are only 2 spots behind Duke in the RPI, but Duke's SOS is much better, Xavier plays in a lousy conference and they just lost to St. Joseph's twice in the last four games.

Stanford? RPI is 16, SOS is 56. Stanford's toughest OOC opponent was Siena -- and the Cardinal LOST that game. Next-toughest was a one-point win at Texas Tech.

Louisville? RPI is 13, 24-8 record, back-to-back losses to finish the season.

Drake? Michigan State? Butler? Pitt? Not a chance.

That leaves Wisconsin. If you like Wisconsin, it's because you believe in poll rankings and rewarding big-conference champions. But here's the thing (and the committee knows this): The Big 10 is AWFUL. It's sixth in RPI. The ACC is first. Wisconsin's RPI is 12th with an SOS of 61. I don't think anyone on the committee believes Wisconsin is a better team than Duke, and a 24-point drubbing in Cameron has to be a factor. In fact, it's pretty much a dream for me to have Duke get a 2-seed and Wisconsin endup as our 3.

While we're at it, here are teams I'd like to avoid: Notre Dame, Louisville, Michigan State, UConn and USC. There are others, but those are at the top of the list. I think in the post-game drama people are forgetting how mediocre much of the country is. People are also forgetting that a) conference games are always tougher b) The ACC is really good and c) Clemson, really, really good. That team is easily capable of a deep Tourney run. I felt as much before this weekend, and nothing has changed my mind (to be fair, they also are capable of being one of those bandwagon teams that gets a terrible matchup in a 4-13 or 5-12 game, misses a bunch of FTs, and gets bounced).

I guess I'm just saying that we shouldn't let today's disappointing outcome cloud our judgment of what's out there around the country and where Duke stands in comparison.

mapei
03-15-2008, 11:46 PM
If Duke can't go to Raleigh, I hope they come to DC so I can see them!

I think Gtown gets its #2 after winning the BE season and then making the finals of the BE tournament (losing to a team that also beat Duke), plus something like 8-2 over their last 10 games with some impressive wins.

Duke's #2 is a long shot and will come down to whether the committee values how a team is playing now more than the season-long numbers. If they value season-long a lot more than recent, Duke may get a low #2. But if they consider the two factors even or value the recent games more, we're a #3 and deserve to be. We're not one of the top 8 teams in the country right now.

Jumbo
03-15-2008, 11:46 PM
Hate to say "I told you so"...well, even if we end up as a 3rd seed let's hope that the committee still places us in the Raleigh pod.

The problem is figuring out what the committee does with Georgetown. They can't play in D.C. The next logical place to put them is Raleigh. So, do they go there, shipping us to D.C.? And what if they're in UNC's region -- they can't then both be in the same pod, right? So where else would they go? Tampa? Birmingham? Georgetown's getting screwed, one way or another. And while I'd like to see Duke in Raleigh, D.C. wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

devildownunder
03-15-2008, 11:52 PM
why can't unc and georgetown be in the same pod? duke and unc have even been in the same pod -- in 2005, i think.

Is there a salient rule I don't know about?

Jumbo
03-16-2008, 12:01 AM
why can't unc and georgetown be in the same pod? duke and unc have even been in the same pod -- in 2005, i think.

Is there a salient rule I don't know about?

I was asking whether UNC and Georgetown -- if they are, say, the 1/2 seeds in the East region -- can also be placed in the same pod. For some reason, I thought the top two seeds from one region could NOT be in a pod together, but I definitely could be wrong. Obviously, the Duke/UNC example wouldn't apply, because they were in different regions.

devildownunder
03-16-2008, 12:07 AM
I was asking whether UNC and Georgetown -- if they are, say, the 1/2 seeds in the East region -- can also be placed in the same pod. For some reason, I thought the top two seeds from one region could NOT be in a pod together, but I definitely could be wrong. Obviously, the Duke/UNC example wouldn't apply, because they were in different regions.

I don't know. I haven't heard anything that says that but am not really in the know on such matters. It seems that, under the pod system, they're willing to do just about anything to get teams playing closer to home, so unless there is something forbidding it, I don't think they'd hesitate.

feldspar
03-16-2008, 12:14 AM
We're gonna be a 3 seed. I have no doubt about this. Not that we don't deserve a 2, but it's just what's going to end up happening.

dukie8
03-16-2008, 12:20 AM
We're gonna be a 3 seed. I have no doubt about this. Not that we don't deserve a 2, but it's just what's going to end up happening.

i don't think it really matters if we are a 2 and wisc is our 3 or we are a 3 and wisc is our 2. odds are one of both of us won't be around for the regional finals anyway.

HK Dukie
03-16-2008, 12:29 AM
No ACC representation could be a contributing factor to a #3.

The diff between 2-3 does matter for 2nd round game (historically), but I don't see much diff between 2-3 seed teams this year (except for the Kansas-Texas loser as a potential #2) so I don't really care beyond that round of 32 game.

Just three, four-team tournaments to go! 6-0 baybe!

wisteria
03-16-2008, 12:33 AM
Wisconsin is going to win tomorrow.

Everyone seems to think either Wisky or us takes the final 2. Is it possible that we both take 2, but g-town falls to 3? They just lost today. They have similar record as us, but their OOC is much worse.

devildownunder
03-16-2008, 01:12 AM
But, as Troublemaker does an excellent job of illustrating, there just aren't many compelling contenders fora 2-seed. I can't see Xavier getting one coming out of the A-10. Yes, they are only 2 spots behind Duke in the RPI, but Duke's SOS is much better, Xavier plays in a lousy conference and they just lost to St. Joseph's twice in the last four games.

Stanford? RPI is 16, SOS is 56. Stanford's toughest OOC opponent was Siena -- and the Cardinal LOST that game. Next-toughest was a one-point win at Texas Tech.

Louisville? RPI is 13, 24-8 record, back-to-back losses to finish the season.

Drake? Michigan State? Butler? Pitt? Not a chance.

That leaves Wisconsin. If you like Wisconsin, it's because you believe in poll rankings and rewarding big-conference champions. But here's the thing (and the committee knows this): The Big 10 is AWFUL. It's sixth in RPI. The ACC is first. Wisconsin's RPI is 12th with an SOS of 61. I don't think anyone on the committee believes Wisconsin is a better team than Duke, and a 24-point drubbing in Cameron has to be a factor. In fact, it's pretty much a dream for me to have Duke get a 2-seed and Wisconsin endup as our 3.

While we're at it, here are teams I'd like to avoid: Notre Dame, Louisville, Michigan State, UConn and USC. There are others, but those are at the top of the list. I think in the post-game drama people are forgetting how mediocre much of the country is. People are also forgetting that a) conference games are always tougher b) The ACC is really good and c) Clemson, really, really good. That team is easily capable of a deep Tourney run. I felt as much before this weekend, and nothing has changed my mind (to be fair, they also are capable of being one of those bandwagon teams that gets a terrible matchup in a 4-13 or 5-12 game, misses a bunch of FTs, and gets bounced).

I guess I'm just saying that we shouldn't let today's disappointing outcome cloud our judgment of what's out there around the country and where Duke stands in comparison.


Rankings don't matter much to me as far as where I think teams will be seeded but finishes in conference tournaments do. I think Pitt has a very real chance of getting a 2 seed based mainly on winning the BE tourney. As you say, there are no real giants out there, so I think the committee will, essentially, just reward the teams that win their conference tournaments. It's what has happened in the past -- to duke's benefit.

And as for our chances, look, if the 3s are dropping we can beat anybody. But that is a big if, especially when teams get a real chance to prepare specifically for us. True, there are no great teams out there but I still think we stand only a puncher's chance. We are still up and fighting, however, thank goodness for that. We can take a closer look at strategies once we see our potential matchups and hear more about henderson's status. And honestly, the seedings are fun to talk about but don't really mean much.

ice-9
03-16-2008, 02:17 AM
grc5, I posted my concerns about us slipping to a 3 seed back in late February! http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7284&page=3&highlight=jyuwono

I wasn't sure what the pod rules are, but if we don't start in Raleigh because we're a 3 seed as opposed to a 2 seed then the impact IS material. As a 2 seed playing essentially at home, I feel relatively confident that Duke will get to the second weekend relatively unscathed and probably quite rested. As a 3 seed needing to travel a greater distance and playing tougher opponents....sure, we'll probably win, but we'll be a lot more drained and tired out by the second weekend.

Being a 2 seed instead of a 3 seed makes a difference!

dukemomLA
03-16-2008, 03:58 AM
YOU CAN NOT PICK DUKE. That being said, name 7 teams which you think could be in the Final Four. (...of course, we all know that Duke might be among them).

My picks (in no particular order): PITT, UCLA, CLEMSON, MEMPHIS, KANSAS, TEXAS, STANFORD.

brevity
03-16-2008, 04:44 AM
Year-in-advance picks: Kansas, Louisville, Memphis, USC
Recently chosen alternates: UCLA, Tennessee, Xavier

The actual brackets may change my mind, but right now, I truly believe the 2008 national champion will be one of these teams. (Southern Cal is clearly the least deserving, but bear in mind I made that choice in April 2007.)

If I can add a few categories...

I don't see it: Texas, Georgetown
I don't wanna see it: UNC, Wisconsin

The1Bluedevil
03-16-2008, 04:58 AM
I'd rather be a 3 seed. That takes Louisville and Nd out of the picture. Teams like USC and A&M are more likely to get 7's then 6's. Michigan State will get a 5 I believe and Pitt moved their way up to a 4 or 5. Only team I can think of that is right on the 6 line that I wouldn't want to see is Marquette.

With 5 minutes left in the game Vitale is saying possible 1 seed and 5 minutes later a 3 seed is likely. Crazy stuff

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 06:02 AM
Being a 2 seed instead of a 3 seed makes a difference!

Would you care to back this statement up. I would argue that being a top #2 versus a bottom #3 is almost exactly the same.

The difference in playing a #15 vs. a #14 seems pretty minimal -- sure #14s tend to win a little bit more than #15s, but it takes some real serious issues for a team that has been as successful as this one to fall to a team that is one of the weakest in the dance.

I have a hard time getting worked up about playing #6 seeds versus #7 seeds too. I can recall years where I looked at the brackets and found that the #7s were all better than the #6s. I doubt any of us can say with any certainty who the #6s will be versus the #7s. Lunardi has the following 4 teams as #6 seeds -- Purdue, Marquette, Texas A&M, Michigan St and the following teams as #7 seeds -- So Cal, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Wash State. Aside from USC (who everyone fears) is there a meaningful difference in those teams? Frankly, those teams just don't scare me that much. Sure, they could beat Duke, but I really like our odds against any of those.

Obviously, there is zero difference in being a weak #2 or a strong #3 when it comes to your Sweet 16 matchup... unless you care a great deal about playing in white versus black/blue.

So, I'd like to hear why you (and others) seem so worried about us being a #3 versus a #2. To me, it makes little difference.

--Jason "I really like Duke's chances in the dance when facing teams unfamiliar with our style of play -- we are not an easy team to prepare for" Evans

Kathy S
03-16-2008, 07:01 AM
As of 1 AM, Joe Lunardi of ESPN has Duke as #3 in West, with UCLA #1 and Wisconsin (!) #2 in the same region.

Other 1-2-3- projections are:

East: UNC, Georgetown, Xavier
Midwest: Kansas, Tennessee, Stanford
South: Memphis, Texas, Pittsburgh

I'm no expert, but assuming Lunardi knows what he's talking about, and I understand his record is pretty good, it looks like the only thing that could elevate us to #2 would be a Wisconsin loss today, but I agree with others that this seems unlikely.

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 07:59 AM
I'd rather be a #3 seed-- that way fewer folks will have us when they make their tournament picks (most people pick "the scratch") so I will do better when I pick us in my office pool ;)

-Jason "if Henderson is healthy and Singler is rested, this team makes big noise in the Dance" Evans

Bluedog
03-16-2008, 08:40 AM
As of 1 AM, Joe Lunardi of ESPN has Duke as #3 in West, with UCLA #1 and Wisconsin (!) #2 in the same region.

Other 1-2-3- projections are:

East: UNC, Georgetown, Xavier
Midwest: Kansas, Tennessee, Stanford
South: Memphis, Texas, Pittsburgh

I'm no expert, but assuming Lunardi knows what he's talking about, and I understand his record is pretty good, it looks like the only thing that could elevate us to #2 would be a Wisconsin loss today, but I agree with others that this seems unlikely.

I agree that it's possible that Wisconsin gets the 2 ahead of us, but, personally, I don't know how anybody in their right mind could possibly think they are a better team than Duke. Wisc is 12 in RPI with SOS of 61, while Duke is 7 with SOS of 8, plus a head-to-head win over Wisc. For the depth of quality wins, let's take a look at the top ten wins by each team.

Wisconsin's top ten wins are Texas (rpi 5), Mich St x2 (15), Indiana x2 (26), Ohio St (48), IL x2 (96), Minnesota x2 (101). Also note that 4 of these wins are beating the same opponent a second time.

Duke's top ten wins are UNC (rpi 2), Wisconsin (12), Clemson (19), Marquette (22), Davidson (31), Miami (34), Temple (50), Cornell (64), Georgia Tech x2 (65).

Duke has just played higher quality opponents throughout, although it's not overwhelming, I suppose. But the head-to-head drubbing should be the tiebreaker in my opinion. Also, their records are very similar (28-4 vs. 27-5) that I don't see how the committee can say that Duke isn't a better team. Beating IL today qualifies them as a 2 seed?! The Big Ten is just AWFUL this year.

Having said all that, I wouldn't be surprised if the committee rewards Wisc with a 2, and gives us a 3. I just wouldn't agree with that decision, but in the end, being the lowest 2 vs. highest 3 is not much of a difference at all. It's all about matchups as others have said, so I wouldn't be that angry, esp if Wisc is our 2.

dukie8
03-16-2008, 09:14 AM
I agree that it's possible that Wisconsin gets the 2 ahead of us, but, personally, I don't know how anybody in their right mind could possibly think they are a better team than Duke. Wisc is 12 in RPI with SOS of 61, while Duke is 7 with SOS of 8, plus a head-to-head win over Wisc. For the depth of quality wins, let's take a look at the top ten wins by each team.

Wisconsin's top ten wins are Texas (rpi 5), Mich St x2 (15), Indiana x2 (26), Ohio St (48), IL x2 (96), Minnesota x2 (101). Also note that 4 of these wins are beating the same opponent a second time.

Duke's top ten wins are UNC (rpi 2), Wisconsin (12), Clemson (19), Marquette (22), Davidson (31), Miami (34), Temple (50), Cornell (64), Georgia Tech x2 (65).

Duke has just played higher quality opponents throughout, although it's not overwhelming, I suppose. But the head-to-head drubbing should be the tiebreaker in my opinion. Also, their records are very similar (28-4 vs. 27-5) that I don't see how the committee can say that Duke isn't a better team. Beating IL today qualifies them as a 2 seed?! The Big Ten is just AWFUL this year.

Having said all that, I wouldn't be surprised if the committee rewards Wisc with a 2, and gives us a 3. I just wouldn't agree with that decision, but in the end, being the lowest 2 vs. highest 3 is not much of a difference at all. It's all about matchups as others have said, so I wouldn't be that angry, esp if Wisc is our 2.

there is no way that objectively the committee can conclude that wisc is better than duke for the reasons that you listed above. the head-to-head blowout should eliminate any doubts. however, the committee historically has been over-impressed with winning bcs conferences and, if wisc wins the b11 today, then it will have won both the b11 regular season and tournament. it will come down to how much the committee discounts the truly horrific b11 this year. as has been mentioned many times, it really doesn't matter if we are the 2 and wisc is the 3 as long as we get paired with them in the sweet 16 because they probably will be the softest sweet 16 matchup for 2s and 3s (if they even get there). as jason noted above, there really is no difference between 6s and 7s and 7s often better than 6s.

kinghoops
03-16-2008, 09:19 AM
wisconsin will be a 2 seed and duke will be a three plain and simple, if you look at the pool of 2 seeds, duke is the only one that did not either win or tie for their conference regular season title, and this will be a factor in the committees decision. i like lunardis seeding of ucla,wis, and duke, maybe geeting out of the area will help this team. for whatever reason, this team has faltered in late feb , early march, and i think starting anew and out of the area will help

grc5
03-16-2008, 09:33 AM
--Jason "I really like Duke's chances in the dance when facing teams unfamiliar with our style of play -- we are not an easy team to prepare for" Evans

Great point. So far only one team has beaten us on their first try (Pitt, and only thanks to a last-second desperation OT three). I think any team we meet in the first and second round is simply going to think that all they need to do to beat Duke is play good defense on the perimiter. Beating Duke is not that simple. I think we'll be able to take care of our business no matter what our seed is.

blazindw
03-16-2008, 10:07 AM
The problem is figuring out what the committee does with Georgetown. They can't play in D.C. The next logical place to put them is Raleigh. So, do they go there, shipping us to D.C.? And what if they're in UNC's region -- they can't then both be in the same pod, right? So where else would they go? Tampa? Birmingham? Georgetown's getting screwed, one way or another. And while I'd like to see Duke in Raleigh, D.C. wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

I agree wholeheartedly, mostly because I live in Chevy Chase and it would be easy for me to go, but a trip to DC will likely be a favorable spot for us just as a trip to Raleigh would be. As most of you already know, there are thousands upon thousands of Duke alumni here in the area.

I think Tennessee will end up a 2 and the Kansas/Texas winner will be a 1. The loser will be a 2, leaving one #2 seed left. I still think that we get it as a result of having the #2 record in the ACC (which is #1 in the RPI for conferences). Our only competition would be Stanford I think, because for Wisconsin, getting blown out by us and winning the Big Ten (further down the line in terms of conference RPI) will not trump our tournament "resume".

dukie8
03-16-2008, 10:07 AM
Great point. So far only one team has beaten us on their first try (Pitt, and only thanks to a last-second desperation OT three). I think any team we meet in the first and second round is simply going to think that all they need to do to beat Duke is play good defense on the perimiter. Beating Duke is not that simple. I think we'll be able to take care of our business no matter what our seed is.

wake beat us in their first and only try.

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 10:37 AM
wake beat us in their first and only try.

Dukie8, you must stop bringing up facts. It is no fair to use those in a debate.

--Jason " ;) " Evans

feldspar
03-16-2008, 10:38 AM
there is no way that objectively the committee can conclude that wisc is better than duke for the reasons that you listed above.

C'mon, dukie8. Take off your Duke-colored glasses and look at this objectively. You and I both know that the committee trends in the direction of "what have you done for me lately." And with Wisconsin likely to win their conference tournament, and Duke not even making it to the finals, with similar (not exact, but similar) records and stats, they're going to give the nod to Wisconsin. Our win over Wisconsin was months ago. That's an eternity in the eyes of the committee.

houstondukie
03-16-2008, 10:41 AM
Bad news: Duke 3 seed
Good news: Wisconsin 2 seed

I'll take it.

Classof06
03-16-2008, 11:23 AM
I've looked at Lunardi's brackets all year long but I must say that I would absolutely shocked if Duke was less than a 2 seed. What are we, 28-5? And before the Committee puts us as a 3 seed and Wisconsin as a 2 seed, they can't ignore the 82-58 stripping that Duke put on Wisconsin in November. I don't care if it was 3 months ago, we destroyed the Badgers.

Anything's possible but I would be both surprised and quite upset if Duke wasn't a 2 seed.

Udaman
03-16-2008, 11:26 AM
Obviously the brackets aren't out yet...but I think this year (despite the talk of parity, and great mid-majors) that the #1 seeds are all going pretty far.

UNC in the East will get all their games in North Carolina. It will be damn tough for them not to make the Final Four. It's the closest thing to a lock that I see.

I also think both Kansas and Memphis should do really well. I'll be surpised if either of them lose before the Final Four.

They are three of my choices. As for the fourth...I see UCLA stumbling. They just haven't looked that dominant, and they play in what I consider to be an overrated conference. Someone else from their bracket will do well.

Who will surpise to the Regional Finals, and who will be let downs? I think the Big East is mediocre at best. The exception to that is Louisville, though they are a major head case. Pac-10 overrated as well. I think Duke and Miami will likely lose before the Regional finals as well. I'm not sold on Texas. The Big Ten is awful.

So that leaves teams like Clemson (really hot), Xavier, Drake and Butler as dangerous teams. I'm also high on the SEC. Either Tenn or Vandy could make some noise.

Can't wait for brackets. By the time I've secondguessed things to death, I'll finish dead in the middle of pretty much everything.

YmoBeThere
03-16-2008, 11:31 AM
I've looked at Lunardi's brackets all year long but I must say that I would absolutely shocked if Duke was less than a 2 seed. What are we, 28-5? And before the Committee puts us as a 3 seed and Wisconsin as a 2 seed, they can't ignore the 82-58 stripping that Duke put on Wisconsin in November. I don't care if it was 3 months ago, we destroyed the Badgers.

Anything's possible but I would be both surprised and quite upset if Duke wasn't a 2 seed.

IMHO, be prepared to be surprised and upset. We didn't close well at the end of the year so won't get the benefit of the doubt. Wisconsin has won 10 of their last 11.

TwoDukeTattoos
03-16-2008, 11:37 AM
Duke finished the last 10 regular season games with a record of 7-3 and, of course, did not win the conference tourney. However, that trend is not necessarily concerning when thinking of national title hopes:

Of the last seven national champions only one team finished the last 10 regular season games undefeated. And four of the last 7 national champions finished their last 10 regular season games with a 7-3 record or worse. Additionally, of the last seven national champions, three DID NOT win their conference tournament.

LAST 10 REGULAR SEASON GAMES:

Duke - 2008, 7-3
Florida 2007, 7-3
Florida 2006, 6-4
UNC 2005, 9-1 (did not win conference tourney)
UConn 2004, 7-3
Syracuse 2003, 9-1 (did not win conference tourney)
Maryland 2002, 10-0 (did not win conference tourney)
Duke- 2001, 7-3

pfrduke
03-16-2008, 11:38 AM
I've looked at Lunardi's brackets all year long but I must say that I would absolutely shocked if Duke was less than a 2 seed. What are we, 28-5? And before the Committee puts us as a 3 seed and Wisconsin as a 2 seed, they can't ignore the 82-58 stripping that Duke put on Wisconsin in November. I don't care if it was 3 months ago, we destroyed the Badgers.

Anything's possible but I would be both surprised and quite upset if Duke wasn't a 2 seed.

We have the most losses of the 5 teams in contention for a 2. We're also the only one that did not at least make the finals of our conference tournament [edit: Tennessee fell short of the finals as well]. I happen to think that the body of work over the course of the season merits a 2 seed for Duke, and a 3 for either Wisconsin or Georgetown. But I would understand if we got a 3.

RelativeWays
03-16-2008, 11:40 AM
I would love for us to play next weekend like we have nothing to lose, because for once, we really don't. Last season, the wheels had come of the bus and we didn't want to be a first round exit to an unknown. Now, we're a better team but without the heavy expectations to win a title, but no alabtrosse of not living up to the Duke name. We've been successful and good, I hope we come out loose and motivated.

dbd4ever
03-16-2008, 11:41 AM
I think we'll be ok as a three because we still start in Raleigh and the best team we'll play through the first round is a 6 seed instead of a 7. Not much difference there. And so far we just swapped places with Wisconsin so we would have a possible rematch with them, with them as a 2 and us as a three. The 1 seed would be UCLA and that would be a matchup in Phoenix. Not a bad draw considering everything that has happened.

Bluedog
03-16-2008, 11:48 AM
Is it not possible that Gtown will be the last 2 (and we'd be the first 3)? That would be a bad scenario, in my opinion. Obviously, the top 2s will be Kansas/Texas loser and Tenn. As long as Wisconsin is in our bracket (as the last 2 or the first 3), I don't really care if we're a 2 or a 3. There's not much of a difference and I'd almost kinda like to be seen as underdogs. But having to play Gtown in the Sweet Sixteen is a much tougher matchup....And also I'd rather not be in UCLA's bracket, but you're going to have to play the best teams eventually, might as well be the Elite 8. And that's a ways down the road, so I'd be ecstatic if we got the opportunity to play them. But I'd prefer seeing Memphis. I'd like to see Memphis as #1, Wisc #2, #6 Mich St in our bracket. I think that would give us a good shot. I do NOT want to see USC, WV, or Marquette as 6s (even though we already beat Marquette).

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 11:49 AM
No offense dude, but you could not wait 5 1/2 hours to post this after the brackets come out? I guess you wanted your picks "on the record" before the pairings were even announced but seeing as you are picking 3 likely #1 seeds and then throwing out 4 or 5 potential names for the other pick... well, it just seems to me like this could have waiting.

Then again -- it is a slow Sunday with no Duke game to be played (grrrrr), so post away!!

--Jason "personally, I'll wait for the brackets, ya know..." Evans

Udaman
03-16-2008, 12:12 PM
Jason - yeah it's the "What Else am I Going to Do" post, no doubt about it.

mr. synellinden
03-16-2008, 12:16 PM
in 1991 we went into the tournament having been spanked by UNC but 20. We had 7 losses. I think it might have included a 3 loss in a row February swoon. We were a comfortable #2 seed that nobody thought much of in terms of the national title discussion. We were young - at least for that era. We had one senior who played meaningful minutes. But we had a remarkable collection of talent that surged in the NCAA tournament.

There is no reason we can't do the same this year.

The positives - Zoubek and McClure are playing their best ball of the year. Zoubek is rebounding and blocking/altering shots and getting putbacks. McClure is playing outstanding defense and making a lot of little plays. He looks significantly more athletic and confident. Our free throw shooting is improving.

Here is what needs to happen for a deep run.

Singler - back to midseason form. Simple. Either he gets his energy and inside/outside game back or not.

Henderson - needs to elevate his game one notch to where he was trending before the injury. Unfortunately, this might be the least likely depending on how bad his wrist is.

Nelson - more consistency. He couldn't finish a lot of drives during the last two games. Maybe he's a little gassed too. Although his offensive rebound/dunk was a thing of beauty and suggest he's still got the hops.

Smith - provide 10-15 minutes off the bench like he did yesterday. He can do this without question if he is healthy. He looked confident yesterday.


Look, Clemson exposed us a little bit because they put tremendous pressure on us defensively with a full court press and outstanding on the ball pressure in the halfcourt. It's the best defense I've seen against us all season. It proved to me that the most dangerous team out there for us is UCLA. I think Clemson proved they are a top 12 caliber team that can play with anyone and we shouldn't view this loss as indicative of an inability to go far in the tourney. If anything, it shows that we can. Singler shoots 1-9 and Thomas puts up a donut and Henderson contributes little offensive and we stay right with a very good team. Even with our struggles the last few games, we are in every game. We fought back against NCSU, fought back against UNC and went down to the wire with Clemson.

Duke still has as good a chance as any team out there to win six in a row.

Believe in Coach K. Believe in Singler, Paulus, Nelson, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas, Zoubek, McClure, Smith and King.

One week from now after we shoot 19 - 42 from three point range in our first two games, all the posts on this board will be about how Duke is back and we can win four more in a row.

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 12:33 PM
I am combining a myriad of threads into one thread here. Sorry folks, but this will make the conversation easier to follow.

--Jason "please post all thoughts on seeds and brackets prior to 6pm in this thread" Evans

RelativeWays
03-16-2008, 12:43 PM
AM I the only one who wants out of Raleigh and Charlotte? We are so hated that it will be easier for us to play without the added pressure of being in ACC country. I know we're hated elsewhere as well, but nowhere near the hate we get in Charlotte and Raleigh.

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 12:48 PM
AM I the only one who wants out of Raleigh and Charlotte? We are so hated that it will be easier for us to play without the added pressure of being in ACC country. I know we're hated elsewhere as well, but nowhere near the hate we get in Charlotte and Raleigh.

Nope, I concur. I think there are pluses and minuses to playing in Charlotte and Raleigh. The Carolina fans will be packed into both places as they have been expecting to be there for a loooong time.

That said, part of being Duke is that almost everyone hates us. If we are playing in Siberia, I bet the crowd would be mostly anti-Duke ;)

--Jason "personally, I want Phoenix as the shooting background will be more like a true basketball area than in the huge stadiums in Houston or Detroit" Evans

dbd4ever
03-16-2008, 01:14 PM
Tell me if I'm way off base on this. If UNC loses today and loses the #1 overall seed, could we end up the three seed in the east bracket?

JasonEvans
03-16-2008, 01:15 PM
Tell me if I'm way off base on this. If UNC loses today and loses the #1 overall seed, could we end up the three seed in the east bracket?

You are wrong in that Carolina will still be the #1 seed in the East even if they lose today.

--Jason IM(ns)HO" Evans

dbd4ever
03-16-2008, 01:17 PM
Why wouldn't the east bracket #1 be rewarded to Memphis? Charlotte is a lot closer to Memphis than Houston.

blazindw
03-16-2008, 02:07 PM
Why wouldn't the east bracket #1 be rewarded to Memphis? Charlotte is a lot closer to Memphis than Houston.

You'd be surprised: Charlotte is actually further from Memphis than Houston is. Houston is 568 miles away, Charlotte 635 miles away (Source: Google Maps).

Also, Memphis in the South is probably better for them since they will likely play in Little Rock for Rounds 1 & 2, and if they make the Final Four, they can just take the 3 hour trip from Houston to San Antonio.

grc5
03-16-2008, 02:15 PM
wake beat us in their first and only try.

im an idiot. so did miami. losing to clemson makes my brain cry

Chard
03-16-2008, 02:16 PM
{place UNC here}

pfrduke
03-16-2008, 02:19 PM
im an idiot. so did miami. losing to clemson makes my brain cry

no, miami got us on the second try. we won the first game at home. but keep trying...:)

_Gary
03-16-2008, 02:23 PM
Well, I think we should just let the Tar Babies play in the Dean Dome through the first two weekends. It's gonna be the same as them playing in Raleigh and Charlotte. Seriously. Can anyone name me a bigger home court-type advantage than the one UNC will have this year?

devildeac
03-16-2008, 02:27 PM
YOU CAN NOT PICK DUKE. That being said, name 7 teams which you think could be in the Final Four. (...of course, we all know that Duke might be among them).

My picks (in no particular order): PITT, UCLA, CLEMSON, MEMPHIS, KANSAS, TEXAS, STANFORD.

I thought you could only have 4 teams playing the final weekend(plus Monday, of course);)

dbd4ever
03-16-2008, 02:35 PM
UCLA, Kansas, Pitt, G'town, Texas, UNC, Tennessee

And the good thing is I believe that Duke can play with or beat all of these teams!! Go Devils!!!

dukelifer
03-16-2008, 02:44 PM
{place UNC here}

This UNC team seems to find ways to win. It is very annoying. They are a final four lock unless Hansblah gets in major foul trouble or gets injured. I don't think they can survive his loss. In the absence of that- and it really pains me to say this- I don't see them losing with this path to San Antonio- dag-gummit.

dukie8
03-16-2008, 02:48 PM
please give them wisc as their 2. it's easy enough in nc, but giving them wisc as their 2 would all but ice it.

has hansbrough ever been in foul trouble? for someone who plays so physical, it is a little odd that he rarely to picks up any fouls. if he were to get in foul trouble, i think unc would be in unchartered territory.

sandinmyshoes
03-16-2008, 02:51 PM
UNC is still vulnerable to a combo of a bad shooting night from the three point line and a team with enough interior depth (or let 'em play refs) to be physical in the paint. It happened last year.

But, if they don't hit that combo, well, it doesn't bear thinking about.

_Gary
03-16-2008, 03:12 PM
please give them wisc as their 2. it's easy enough in nc, but giving them wisc as their 2 would all but ice it.

That wouldn't surprise me at all. Whatever the committee can do to make their little trip to the FF easier, I'm sure they will do.

ClosetHurleyFan
03-16-2008, 03:21 PM
Let's not play that game. That 2004 Duke team would run this year's number 1 tarheels out of the gym. The 2005 tarheels would run the 2008 tarheels out of the gym and this Duke team for sure.

Lance was a bit overmatched today. Booker and Mays are very strong.

Interesting comment about this years heels being run out of gym by 2004 team....tell me why you think that, that the 2004 team would run this 31-2 team out of the gym.....quick glance at match-ups and sorry, I just dont see it........

This is a very good, balanced Carolina team that wins the close games, period.

CarrotTD
03-16-2008, 03:23 PM
AM I the only one who wants out of Raleigh and Charlotte? We are so hated that it will be easier for us to play without the added pressure of being in ACC country. I know we're hated elsewhere as well, but nowhere near the hate we get in Charlotte and Raleigh.

I completely agree; I think I'd rather see us in Duke-friendly DC (with a lot of Duke alums in attendance) than sharing Raleigh with UNC. We'll know soon enough!

dbd4ever
03-16-2008, 03:33 PM
We just might be in D.C.. As of the last bracketology, we are the three seed in the West. We would play San Diego in the first and meet the winner of Vandy and Villanova. Don't know if that's bad or good for a second round game.

weezie
03-16-2008, 03:55 PM
Well, I think we should just let the Tar Babies play in the Dean Dome through the first two weekends. It's gonna be the same as them playing in Raleigh and Charlotte. Seriously. Can anyone name me a bigger home court-type advantage than the one UNC will have this year?

Actually, Duke has a pretty good history in Detroit so that would be fine by me. The state of North Carolina has too many feeble-minded citizens to allow them to ponder more than one variable at a time so like the song says to hell with 'em and I don't care if you say it outside church, inside church or next door at the saloon.
And, of course, none of our NC DBR'ers are to take offense. You are all far superior to your neighbors.

_Gary
03-16-2008, 03:55 PM
Interesting comment about this years heels being run out of gym by 2004 team....tell me why you think that, that the 2004 team would run this 31-2 team out of the gym.....quick glance at match-ups and sorry, I just dont see it........

This is a very good, balanced Carolina team that wins the close games, period.

Not only do I think the 2004 team would run this one out of the gym, but I'm extremely confident the 2001 and 1999 teams would run this one out of the gym. But since we can't line them up and have them play, it's just speculation all the way around.

On another note, can someone please put a muzzle on Stuart Scott. He's so full of himself today it's not even funny. Hating Carolina never felt better, and I'm convinced they and their fans need a double portion of humble pie.

hurleyfor3
03-16-2008, 04:03 PM
Where are the Detroit games, anyway? There are like four or five possible venues. (Is the Silverdome still there?)

2004 Duke would get a ten-point lead up on 2008 unc with six minutes to go, then lose. 2001 and 1999 Duke would kick the crap out of the Heels. 2006 Duke would beat unc pretty handily too, with JJ going for 35 or so. 2002 Duke would suffer the same fate as the 2004 team.

2005 unc would beat 2008 unc, unless the 2005 team were coached by Doh (after all, they were Doh's players).

throatybeard
03-16-2008, 04:06 PM
If UNC is #1 in the s-curve, they're supposed to get the weakest #2.

blazindw
03-16-2008, 04:15 PM
Where are the Detroit games, anyway? There are like four or five possible venues. (Is the Silverdome still there?)


Ford Field. This will also be the site of the Final Four next year.

pfrduke
03-16-2008, 04:16 PM
2006 Duke would beat unc pretty handily too, with JJ going for 35 or so.

Um, really (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22726&SPID=1845&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=245485)? Unless you think the 2006 version of the heels was also handily better than this year's version.