Jump to content

2011-2012 NCAA Basketball Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 10:19 PM)
Rock, does OSU have any unofficial visitors (bball recruits) at this game tonight? Tremendous atmosphere and the team is playing fantastic.

Not sure ill check, they only have room for like 1 recruit next year, the year after that is Matta's focus with Marc Loving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miami played hard but was outmatched inside. Wouldve been nice to have Reggie Johnson because I think they couldve given Purdue a run for their money tonight.

 

Shane Larkin (Barry's kid) is really starting to come along. He's the best PG on the team and hopefully Larranaga starts giving him more minutes over the veteran Scott. Nice to get him from DePaul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another game that being down how they were, last year's team probably loses. This team has a long way to go. But they f***ing scrap and play hard. I'll take that with a little less talent than talent that underachieves and fails to show up a lot. You can get behind this team, no matter the result.

 

To update my previous post a few days ago, few more arrows.

 

Watching Maniscalco>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Watching McCamey.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 11:53 PM)
Another game that being down how they were, last year's team probably loses. This team has a long way to go. But they f***ing scrap and play hard. I'll take that with a little less talent than talent that underachieves and fails to show up a lot. You can get behind this team, no matter the result.

 

To update my previous post a few days ago, few more arrows.

 

Watching Maniscalco>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Watching McCamey.

 

Maniscalco has been money all year. I'll be interested to see what happens when he gets a 6'2"-6'4" combo guard on him though.

 

Paul had one of his best games as an Illini. He still makes too many stupid turnovers trying to make a play, but he's got such a quick step. Illinois' offense should be give the ball to Leonard and let him score or distribute, or give the ball to Paul and let him drive and dish. Maniscalco/Richardson/Griffey just need to find open spots. I did like the high/low sets they were running though. I think that could end up being their best option.

 

My only major concern so far is the foul situation. Luckily Illinois is deep, but they still foul way, way, way too much, and in conference play that's going to really hurt them. Bertrand/Henry/Head aren't going to be able to make up a lot of ground if they're losing. Ibby and Egwu have been impressive just from their energy and bball instincts. Now it's just a matter of getting some offensive moves so they aren't so one dimensional.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 08:11 AM)
OSU is legit but thank god they played the way they are capable of so Duke is exposed. I hate that every year they have all this hype and are nothing more than a sweet 16 team

 

f*** Duke. I'm so tired of the ESPN hype machine for them. It must be really tough to recruit when you have loaded schedules and a national cable network pimping you 24/7.

 

Anyone see too that ESPN has a "national college basketball blog" and a "north carolina blog?" What the f*** is that about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 08:52 AM)
f*** Duke. I'm so tired of the ESPN hype machine for them. It must be really tough to recruit when you have loaded schedules and a national cable network pimping you 24/7.

 

Anyone see too that ESPN has a "national college basketball blog" and a "north carolina blog?" What the f*** is that about?

 

cough*theheatindex*cough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 08:11 AM)
OSU is legit but thank god they played the way they are capable of so Duke is exposed. I hate that every year they have all this hype and are nothing more than a sweet 16 team

Was 2010 that long ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 12:35 PM)
Was 2010 that long ago?

 

Well....

 

02/03 - Preseason #6....Sweet 16

03/04 - Preseason #2....Final 4

04/05 - Preseason #11....Sweet 16

05/06 - Preseason #1....Sweet 16

06/07 - Preseason #12....1st round

07/08 - Preseason #11....2nd round (almost 1st - Belmont game)

08/09 - Preseason #5....Sweet 16

09/10 - Preseason #8....Champions

10/11 - Preseason #1....Sweet 16

11/12 - Preseason #6....????

 

That's a little more telling than just picking out 1 season

Edited by ChiSox_Sonix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 11:58 AM)
Well....

 

02/03 - Preseason #6....Sweet 16

03/04 - Preseason #2....Final 4

04/05 - Preseason #11....Sweet 16

05/06 - Preseason #1....Sweet 16

06/07 - Preseason #12....1st round

07/08 - Preseason #11....2nd round (almost 1st - Belmont game)

08/09 - Preseason #5....Sweet 16

09/10 - Preseason #8....Champions

10/11 - Preseason #1....Sweet 16

11/12 - Preseason #6....????

 

That's a little more telling than just picking out 1 season

 

I'd like to see if someone has run some sort of weighted ranking of NCAA success to seeding. I feel like every year Duke is given a 1-2 seed (usually undeserving). Are two wins that tough with such a high seeding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 01:08 PM)
I'd like to see if someone has run some sort of weighted ranking of NCAA success to seeding. I feel like every year Duke is given a 1-2 seed (usually undeserving). Are two wins that tough with such a high seeding?

Ya, this is just untrue. A lot of people understand the flaws that recent Duke teams have had going into the tourny but they've almost always have earned their seeding with what they accomplished in the regular season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 12:19 PM)
Ya, this is just untrue. A lot of people understand the flaws that recent Duke teams have had going into the tourny but they've almost always have earned their seeding with what they accomplished in the regular season.

 

Coach K is a mastermind at scheduling. 90% of the time their non-conference "road" games are on neutral courts (the BigTen/ACC a slight exception). It's normally games at the UC, Madison Square Garden, Dallas, etc etc. Do they get a couple of quality wins a year? Absolutely. But so do 15 other teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see if someone has run some sort of weighted ranking of NCAA success to seeding. I feel like every year Duke is given a 1-2 seed (usually undeserving). Are two wins that tough with such a high seeding?

 

At some point during last year's tournament, I went back 12 years and did an analysis of how ACC and Big Ten teams, and Duke and Michigan State specifically, performed compared to their seeding. I will try to find the exact results, but the ACC and especially Duke underperformed their seeds by quite a bit and the Big Ten and MSU overperformed by quite a bit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 12:08 PM)
I'd like to see if someone has run some sort of weighted ranking of NCAA success to seeding. I feel like every year Duke is given a 1-2 seed (usually undeserving). Are two wins that tough with such a high seeding?

 

The average number of wins for a #1 seed is 3.36 and for a #2 seed it's 2.43, so yes, Sweet 16 is a bit of an underachievement.

 

However, performance against seed expectation by coach:

 

Tom Izzo- 1.013 (4.9 average seed)

John Beilein- .775 (10)

Steve Fisher- .72 (6.7)

Jim Larranaga- .661 (12.8)

Rick Pitino- .584 (3.7)

Mike Davis- .577 (5.5)

Mike Anderson- .569 (8.4)

Billy Donovan- .559 (4.4)

Sean Miller- .486 (7.5)

Mike Krzyzewski- .477 (2.2)

 

Even with a much higher wins expected total than everyone else, he's among the better coaches in PASE. Several of the guys in front of him had one good run as a lower seed that boosts their number considerably. When Duke is a #1 or #2 seed, it's not possible for them to get a +4 that would boost his ratings considerably.

 

Edit- For some reason, Brad Stevens doesn't appear to be on the list. Not enough games to qualify? I'd imagine he's #1 by a decent margin.

Edited by ZoomSlowik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 02:46 PM)
Where'd you get that list from?

 

Some site called bracketscience.com. I googled NCAA Tournament performance against seed expectation and that was the first result.

Edited by ZoomSlowik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...