For some reason the OT: College Basketball Thread has been closed

Call me madcap, but maybe it's because this is a baseball forum? Crazy, I know!

I'm not sure what's a more tiresome discussion, 'which region is toughest' (this isn't pool play) or a guy telling me about all five of his bracket entries.

The advanced stats LOOOOOVE Florida, none of the non-statistically inclined pundits and analysts do. Makes for an interesting test case.

Call me madcap, but maybe it's because this is a baseball forum? Crazy, I know!

I heard there was a lawn somewhere here, but should I stay on it or not? Hmmmm.

The advanced stats LOOOOOVE Florida, none of the non-statistically inclined pundits and analysts do. Makes for an interesting test case.

Florida had a pretty nice year: Some quality non-con wins and their non-con losses were tough. Think the pundits are unfairly dinging them for losing any games in the SEC, which is not a good conference. Also, they don't have any good non-con road wins, but lost their only two opportunities (at Arizona and K-State) by a combined total of 7 points. Not a Gator fan, by any means, but the criticism is a little off, IMO.

I know whenever I get together with a bunch of baseball fans, we immediately ostracize anyone who brings up a topic unrelated to baseball.

I'm betting a penny on Liberty...so I can win $41,646,927.91!

Also, they don't have any good non-con road wins, but lost their only two opportunities (at Arizona and K-State) by a combined total of 7 points.

That pretty much seems to be the dominant narrative with Florida and the knock against them. There's a lot of "lost by a painfully small number of points" on this resume, while there is literally no "won by a painfully small number of points". It's silly in some ways (UF overcame a 10-point second half deficit to beat Alabama, but because they did too good a job making up the points and won by 10 it's not a "close" game and doesn't count), but it's been a consistent enough issue that even the most passionate Florida fans have to worry about it.

As a Canuck, I'm excited to be going to my first college hoops games ever, the sweet 16 and elite 8 games in LA.

Tips?

My Final Four: Bob Jones University, Renesselaar Polytechnic Institute, Michigan, and Devry Institute of Technology.

I think Florida is good, probably one of the best five or six teams this year. But I kinda doubt that they are head and shoulders above the field, as the efficiency numbers seem to indicate. Ken Pomeroy himself as also stated as much.

I'm not sure what's a more tiresome discussion, 'which region is toughest'

What is most annoying -- to me at least -- is that the consensus seems to be that the West region is the weakest, yet they have four of the KenPom top 10 teams in their bracket. As pointed out by someone in the NBA thread -- Gonzaga (#4 KenPom) may have to go through 8-seed Pittsburgh (#7 KenPom), 5-seed Wisconsin (#7) and 2-seed Ohio State (#5) to get to Atlanta.

Of course, KenPom rankings aren't gospel -- like WAR in baseball they are a good place to start the discussion, as opposed to the final say -- and I strongly suspect that his numbers are seeing something in Pittsburgh that just isn't there in reality.

The reason the 'which is toughest' is so annoying is the fact that it doesn't matter, this isn't pool play, the 1 seed in any region doesn't have to play the 2 and the 3 seed, and in some years plays neither.

The relative 'strength' of a 4 and a 5 is meaningless in terms of 'toughest bracket, the #1 only has to play one of them, presumably the winner of the 4/5 game is the 'better team' at least on that day.

so this guy on ole miss who apparently specializes in being a jack8ss. is he any good?

Here's draftexpress's list of prospects by team.
Massey ratings (aggregator).

EDIT:
Neat - I was never on that (BJ Young) page.
Revised link.

so this guy on ole miss who apparently specializes in being a jack8ss. is he any good?

Henderson takes the old "quantity has a quality all its own" approach to shooting, but when you can drain a decent percentage of a crapton of shots, it has value. And he can hit some high degree of difficulty shots. Pretty decent passer. Not a particularly good defender, but he likes to poke and reach, which means he creates a fair number of steals and intercepts some passes. Not much size, not a good ball handler.

Always a chance he'll go 3 of 18 and shoot Ole Miss out of the tournament, but since they're barely worthy of being there in the first place that's hardly a disaster.

Der, the Draft Express link goes to a page on BJ Young.

Thanks CFBF - replacement link works.

According to the Der K link, the two teams team with the most draft prospects on their roster are both #8 seeds.... Pittsburgh and North Carolina each have 10 so-called prospects.

Pitt spent about a decade as a #1 through #3 seed, got knocked out in the Sweet Sixteen every year and the only guys who ever made it in the pros were Dejuan Blair, Sam Young and Aaron Gray. Maybe this change is what they need.

Watching UK play at Robert Morris is funny to me.

According to the Der K link, the two teams team with the most draft prospects on their roster are both #8 seeds.... Pittsburgh and North Carolina each have 10 so-called prospects.

As a long time Pitt season ticket holder, let me just say that list is ridiculous. It includes a player who has already transferred from Pitt, to Fairfield no less, (Gilbert), and numerous guys who have no chance to see the inside of an NBA arena without buying a ticket. Trey Zeigler, for example, is a guy who mostly plays the two (with a little one and three thrown in) who has not attempted a three pointer all season. Not one. How is a two guard who won't even shoot the ball from beyond about 12-15 feet any sort of an NBA prospect?

The only Pitt player who is a surefire NBA player is Adams. He's a big, athletic seven footer who is from New Zealand and has not played a lot of basketball, so he is very raw. But all the tools are there. When he can start just playing the game instead of having to think the game he is going to be a very good one.

I wouldn't read too much into whether or not a player has a link - that meant it was thought at one time that it would be worth it to create a page. I looked at guys in the top 100...

Watching UK play at Robert Morris is funny to me.

Watching UK lose is funnier.

Anybody else a little disappointed about MTSU? Where are the Murray States of yesteryear?

The only Pitt player who is a surefire NBA player is Adams. He's a big, athletic seven footer who is from New Zealand and has not played a lot of basketball, so he is very raw. But all the tools are there. When he can start just playing the game instead of having to think the game he is going to be a very good one.

Confirming. He already has an NBA body as a freshmen, and is a legit seven footer with impressive athleticism; not the stereotypical big clumsy white guy. If he stays healthy and works on his game, he's pretty much a lock for at least an NBA bench guy career. Depending on how he turns his tools into skills, he could be a star.

[24] No -- St. Mary's is really really good. I'm curious to see how this tournament plays out. My suspicion is that it is incredibly well-selected and seeded. But we'll see how that holds up to reality.

There are two lower seeds that are Vegas favorites - Minnesota over UCLA, and Pitt over Wichita State.

There are a lot of others that are pretty close. Two point spreads or lower: Illinois over Colorado (1), Notre Dame over Iowa State (1), San Diego State over Oklahoma (1.5), Memphis over St. Mary's (1.5), Creighton over Cincy (2).

The biggest first round spread seems to be Louisville over NC A&T (26.5) although Indiana does not have an opponent yet.

cf

thanks. wisconsin's losses to the likes of davidson and cornell have been due to shooters getting hot and their defensive approach of surrendering the mid-range jumpter biting them big time

[27] Ken Pomeroy rankings:

Minnesota (11 seed): 23
UCLA: (6 seed): 46

I'll take the underseeded team over the overseeded team every time.

Pitt (8 seed): 7
Wichita State (9 seed): 32

Wichita State is seeded roughly correctly. I don't get the Pitt seeding -- are they getting punished for their non-conference SOS?

What's the general consensus on Jim Boeheim (as a coach, not a person)? On the Syracuse blogs and forums that I frequent, I never see intelligent, critical analysis of his strengths and weaknesses. Even the mildest criticisms are dismissed with inane responses like, "Have you won 900 games?".

My opinion is that having won so many games, appeared in three title games and won one, and being one of the few coaches who have built an elite program, he has to be considered a great coach, or at least a very good one. On the other hand, he has weaknesses (some early Tournament exits, a relatively weak stretch in the 90s, occasional failures to make tactical adjustments), and some of these flaws (namely, a rigid over-reliance on the zone) have intensified in recent years.

In any case, I rank him in the second tier of elite coaches, below Izzo, Krzyzewski, Calhoun, et. al.

[30] Sounds about right. You can't argue too much with his results. I think the flaws are legitimate, but I think that also gets into coaching theorycrafting.

That's pretty much how I feel, Metternich... though I'm not so opposed to the rigid reliance on the zone.

their defensive approach of surrendering the mid-range jumpter biting them big time

Well, Henderson will take mid-range jumpers if you give them to him. Frankly, he'll take them even if you don't, so that's something on which to keep an eye.

I wonder how much the use of the zone is Boeheim (successfully) playing the long-term EV of his strategy. One of my thoughts on your initial post was "I wonder if he'd do worse if he tried to do more?"

Where are the Murray States of yesteryear?

St. Mary's

Finally, officially:

Butler
Xavier
Creighton

are joining

Georgetown
Villanova
Providence
St. John's
DePaul
Marquette
Seton Hall

in the new Big East. Creighton was a happy surprise, but I can understand the Midwest contingent wanting another school in that direction.

Julius Randle--#2 player in country--commits to UK over Kansas who had been the favorite. By the 247 composite, they have commitments from #2, 4, 5, 9, 11 and 15 in the country and are in the final 2 or 3 for the #1 player, Andrew Wiggins. Though I doubt they get Wiggins.

On the other hand, he has weaknesses (some early Tournament exits, a relatively weak stretch in the 90s, occasional failures to make tactical adjustments), and some of these flaws (namely, a rigid over-reliance on the zone) have intensified in recent years.

What great coach hasn't had early tourney exits? Duke seems to be the best at avoiding this, but even they've been snakebit (Lehigh, West Virginia, Providence, Cal). Roy was always getting upset early at KU (UTEP, Rhode Island, Virginia). Jim Calhoun had early losses to San Diego and NC State. For years it seems Lute Olsen's Wildcats were a good bet to get upset.

When you're consistently great, you're going to have a lot of first round exits simply because you have more chances to be upset. It also sticks out in our mind more because its surprising.

Boeheim is absolutley one of the great of all-time. The thing about great coaches is how high the standards get. You say he had a soft stretch in the 90s, but when was this? Only twice in that decade did they fail to make the tourney, and one of those years was right after he reached the National Championship game, the other was a probation year. And I'm not saying you or Syracuse fans are unique in that regard, fans at Duke, UNC, KU, UCLA, UConn and Kentucky and a few other schools are like that too. Anything less than a Final Four year is considered a down year. But its the fact those standards are so unbelievably high that is why Boeheim deserves to be in that upper echelon of coaches.

Going back to [24] though, the inability of the Ohio Valley Conference (or teams in it) to build on their tournament success is a bit disappointing.

What tourney success has the OVC had to build on? Yeah, Morehead State won a game recently. So did Murray State. Other than that ... uh?

Their best shot at getting into the Sweet 16 might be this year with a veteran and talented Belmont squad (though while I think they can beat Arizona, Michigan State will be a tall task).

Finally, officially:

Butler, Xavier, Creighton in the new Big East. Creighton was a happy surprise, but I can understand the Midwest contingent wanting another school in that direction.

I wish there was some way that Gonzaga could get in on that, but geography seems to preclude it. There just doesn't seem to be any way the Zags can improve their conference situation, short of adding and developing a football program (a daunting task).

[41] The basketball teams could probably afford the travel (though it would be a drag), but there's more sports than just basketball. Yeah, the WCC is Gonzaga, St. Mary's, and a lot of dreck. Gonzaga is in a lousy position conference-wise, but they seem to be making the most of it.

[40] Am I confusing the OVC with the MVC?

[40] Am I confusing the OVC with the MVC?

The MVC is one of the best mid-major conferences in the country. They frequently get teams seeded pretty high (#4-8). Northern Iowa recently knocked off Kansas and made the Sweet 16. Southern Illinois, Wichita State, and Bradley have all made the Sweet 16 recently.

The OVC usually gets seeded in the #12-14 territory. Murray State has had a strong program and I think has been seeded higher than that at times. Morehead State pulled off an upset in 2011, but the conference is not one of the stronger mid-majors as a whole. The addition of Belmont should raise the profile a bit though.

[40] Am I confusing the OVC with the MVC?

Probably not, Morehead State and Murray State are in the OVC. They have both been in the OVC for as long as I can remember; fairly recently the conference has experienced some member movement but it is still relatively compact as far as geography is concerned. The MVC has probably had 30 different members in the past 50 years; Creighton and Wichita State likely have the longest tenure of any of the current schools. Losing Creighton to the Big East will definitely hurt the MVC as Creighton has consistently been one of their top basketball programs. I don't know if the MVC will try to poach some other school or not, but having a 9 team conference isn't the best thing in the world.

Southern Illinois, Wichita State, and Bradley have all made the Sweet 16 recently.

What happened to Southern Illinois? The Salukis were one of the top mid-major programs in the nation for a considerable stretch of time, and then all of a sudden they dropped off the map and they've been among the dregs of that conference for several years now.

I wish there was some way that Gonzaga could get in on that, but geography seems to preclude it

This is college athletics. Geography wouldn't preclude it if they were in Gonzaga, Mongolia.

Julius Randle--#2 player in country--commits to UK over Kansas who had been the favorite. By the 247 composite, they have commitments from #2, 4, 5, 9, 11 and 15 in the country and are in the final 2 or 3 for the #1 player, Andrew Wiggins. Though I doubt they get Wiggins.

No, but I bet they can land Bean.

When you're consistently great, you're going to have a lot of first round exits simply because you have more chances to be upset. It also sticks out in our mind more because its surprising.

These are both good points, and I really don't even know if Boeheim has more early exits than other coaches with comparable appearances and seedings.

You say he had a soft stretch in the 90s, but when was this?

I guess I was using that as shorthand for the period from SU's probation in the early 90s to the mid-00s, when Boeheim started consistently pulling in top 10 recruiting classes. Of course, this is pretty ridiculous given that this period included a national title and another championship game appearance. I just tend to discount those two years (probably unfairly) because neither team dominated in the regular season, and one relied so heavily on one historically great college player.

I mean, this period isn't weak by most standards; it just didn't have the regular season success of the last five years or the late 80s. And, like you say, calling this period "weak" speaks to the high standards expected of elite coaches.

The zone comments are interesting. What's the argument--that the performance advantage gained by exclusively playing and practicing zone outweighs the situational benefit conferred by selectively playing man? I could see that, but I suspect that Boeheim's shift to literally never playing man stems more from old age-related stubbornness and bad memories of the LeMoyne debacle than a careful consideration of the strategic pros and cons.

I don't get the Pitt seeding -- are they getting punished for their non-conference SOS?

Pretty much. They don't have any quality wins outside of the Big East, and only two quality road wins in conference (at Georgetown and at Cincinnati). They played poorly in the Big East tournament game against Syracuse. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them lose to Wichita State.

Roy Williams has been whining about the North Carolina seed, but basically their situation is similar - no good out-of-conference wins (plus a bad loss at Texas) and no quality road wins in conference (unless you want to count Maryland).

I think the NCAA is in the process of cracking down on teams that don't play good games out of conference.

-- MWE

This is college athletics. Geography wouldn't preclude it if they were in Gonzaga, Mongolia.

Preclude is the wrong word, I suppose. But if it were not for geographical considerations, the Zags would certainly have been invited to join the new conference. They have had as much success, and arguably are a bigger "brand", than any of the other schools in the conversation.