March Madness Thread

[dew1679666265]

For all the crap I've given the SEC, they have an incredible chance of having 0 Elite 8 teams. And should probably have 0 Sweet 16 teams.

 

Tennessee shouldn't be in the Sweet 16 why? It wasn't exactly a miraculous upset we pulled over Butler. It was exactly as expected, they play a very disciplined style that usually gives Tennessee problems. The Vols played well and barely beat a very good mid-major.

 

I would even argue Vandy is a better team than they showed against Siena, but I won't press the point. They lost and that's the way it is. But there's no good reason why Tennessee shouldn't be in the Sweet 16.

[snoodmonger]

You know, for all the crap I've given the Big Ten, they do have a realistic chance at two EE teams.

 

Honestly, I think Wisconsin or MSU will be in the Final Four at the rate things are going. They're two of the best-coached teams in the nation and have enough talent and firepower to match up with teams like Kansas, Memphis, Davidson, and Texas. You have to admit, they've been impressive.

 

 

No, neither is a stretch. I did find this interesting, though. For as much crap Self gets for his coaching abilities (and as much praise Ryan gets) you wouldn't expect the following numbers.

 

Looking at Bill Self, Bo Ryan and Jay Wright in the NCAAs (career):

 

Self (Overall - 18-9)

vs. seeds 1-4: 3-5

vs. seeds 5-9: 6-2

vs. seeds 10-16: 8-2

vs. higher seeded teams: 3-3

vs. lower seeded teams: 15-6

In S16: 4-1

In E8: 0-4

 

Ryan: (overall 10-6)

vs. seeds 1-4: 0-4

vs. seeds 5-9: 1-2

vs. seeds 10-16:

vs. higher seeded teams: 0-5

vs lower seeded teams: 10-1

In S16: 1-2

In E8: 0-1

 

Wright: (overall 7-5, 7-3 at 'Nova, 0-2 at Hofstra)

vs. seeds 1-4: 2-4 (2-2 V)

vs. seeds 5-9: 2-1

vs. seeds 10-16: 3-0

vs. higher seeded teams: 2-4

vs. lower seeded teams: 5-1

In S16: 1-1

in E8: 0-1

[SouthSideRyan]

For all the crap I've given the SEC, they have an incredible chance of having 0 Elite 8 teams. And should probably have 0 Sweet 16 teams.

 

Tennessee shouldn't be in the Sweet 16 why? It wasn't exactly a miraculous upset we pulled over Butler. It was exactly as expected, they play a very disciplined style that usually gives Tennessee problems. The Vols played well and barely beat a very good mid-major.

 

I would even argue Vandy is a better team than they showed against Siena, but I won't press the point. They lost and that's the way it is. But there's no good reason why Tennessee shouldn't be in the Sweet 16.

 

Butler missed more layups in that game than they've missed all year. They also shot poorly from the FT line.

 

And of course Vandy is better than they showed. They were blown out by Siena.

[dew1679666265]

For all the crap I've given the SEC, they have an incredible chance of having 0 Elite 8 teams. And should probably have 0 Sweet 16 teams.

 

Tennessee shouldn't be in the Sweet 16 why? It wasn't exactly a miraculous upset we pulled over Butler. It was exactly as expected, they play a very disciplined style that usually gives Tennessee problems. The Vols played well and barely beat a very good mid-major.

 

I would even argue Vandy is a better team than they showed against Siena, but I won't press the point. They lost and that's the way it is. But there's no good reason why Tennessee shouldn't be in the Sweet 16.

 

Butler missed more layups in that game than they've missed all year. They also shot poorly from the FT line.

 

And of course Vandy is better than they showed. They were blown out by Siena.

 

And Tennessee didn't miss a single shot they should have made, eh?

 

Neither team played at its best, that's pretty clear. Tennessee played pretty well, but got into more foul trouble than normal and turned the ball over a bit more than normal.

Butler missed a bunch of layups and turned the ball over more than normal.

 

By all rights Tennessee is the better team and played better Sunday afternoon, why should they not be in the Sweet 16?

[SouthSideRyan]

I didn't mention turnovers cause those rely heavily on the opponent's defense. Obviously Butler is going to turn it over more against a defense the caliber and style of Tennessee. I didn't mention Buter's poor shooting because again, function of the defense.

 

Fouls, again, function of the team you play against, and the refs calling the game. Tennessee committed 24 fouls in the game, and averaged 20.6 on the season. Butler committed 25 in the game, 17.2 on the season. Not a complaint, as I said there's a ton of noise in a stat like that to say anything.

 

Uncontested layups and free throws are independent acts, and Butler choked the game away on those.

 

Edited: Found stats

[dew1679666265]

I didn't mention turnovers cause those rely heavily on the opponent's defense. Obviously Butler is going to turn it over more against a defense the caliber and style of Tennessee. I didn't mention Buter's poor shooting because again, function of the defense.

 

Fouls, again, function of the team you play against, and the refs calling the game. I can't find good data on total fouls per team, but I do know Tennessee was averaging more than Butler, as SI has a top 50 with Tennessee checking in at 20.6 per game. Butler is not in the top 50.

 

Uncontested layups and free throws are independent acts, and Butler choked the game away on those.

 

So independent of anything else, if Butler had hit more open layups they would have won the game. Problem is, you can play the what-if game like that all day long. By that reasoning Vandy should be in the Sweet 16 because they are likely more talented than any team they would have played to this point - how they actually played in the game against Siena is irrelevant.

 

Tennessee is a more talented, better team that played better Sunday afternoon. Because of that they should be in the Sweet 16. Are there regrets for Butler? Sure, but there are for both teams. Tennessee played better Sunday and has been better throughout the year. They deserve to be where they are.

[SouthSideRyan]

For the 3 other people that care about Pomeroy:

 

At-larges that would be out going by strict Pomeroy:

 

BYU

Villanova

Oklahoma

St. Mary's

St. Joe's

Vandy

Kentucky

South Alabama

 

And taking their spots:

 

Nebraska

Ohio St.

New Mexico

VA Tech

Florida

Arizona St.

Syracuse

Illinois(last spot in!!)

 

Pomeroy rating of remaining teams

 

1. Kansas

2. UCLA

3. Wisconsin

4. Memphis

5. UNC

6. Washington St.

7. Louisville

10. Texas

11. Stanford

13. Michigan St.

14. Tennessee

18. Xavier

19. West Virginia

29. Davidson

46. Villanova

61. Western Kentucky

[SouthSideRyan]

But I'm not playing the what if game over every event. I'm playing it over events that Butler should've had complete control over. Put it this way, if Butler missed one of those many wide open layups, or free throws with 1 second left in the game everyone would be saying they blew it.

 

Don't get me wrong, Tennessee won the game, that's it. Everything that happens in a game matters, regardless of whether Butler shot themselves in the foot or it was Tennessee's defense doing it. My only point is that 9 times out of 10, Butler hits another free throw, or hits one of those layups and wins. I didn't see those independent chokes from Tennessee other than the travel near the end of regulation.

[dew1679666265]

But I'm not playing the what if game over every event. I'm playing it over events that Butler should've had complete control over. Put it this way, if Butler missed one of those many wide open layups, or free throws with 1 second left in the game everyone would be saying they blew it.

 

When you miss a layup has some level of significance. If Butler missed one layup the entire game and it came early in the first half, there is still plenty of time to make up for that mistake. It's up to Butler to make up for it and, partly because Tennessee played better, they couldn't.

 

Had that one missed layup come in the final second of the game, there is no way Butler can overcome it. Therefore, the importance of it increases.

 

And you can't just discount all factors. Isolating one group of mistakes a team made doesn't work because there are so many more factors involved in a game. Should Butler have made more layups and free throws early, Tennessee's strategy likely would have been different in the last few minutes (considering they'd be losing instead of winning).

 

In a rematch maybe Butler wins. Not because they're a better team, but because they match up so well against Tennessee. But the simple fact of the matter is, Tennessee was more accomplished over the course of the season and outplayed Butler Sunday. Thus, the Vols deserve the Sweet 16 berth.

[SouthSideRyan]

Oh, no doubt Tennessee is the better team. That's what's so frustrating, when a team has a chance to beat the better team and loses it because of fundamental mistakes.

 

Point taken on the timing of the gaffes, though that was one of the most frustrating parts of hte layups was that they were missing them down the stretch. They did hit their free throws then though. As I mentioned I agree with the general principle that there's a lot of noise involved in a basketball game, which is why I don't trust the advanced basketball stats nearly as much as I do baseball. They're fun to look at, and I do think they do a better job than looking at the conventional stats, but basketball has too much outside involvement to break it down(even though I love Pomeroy) so easily with stats.

[dew1679666265]

Oh, no doubt Tennessee is the better team. That's what's so frustrating, when a team has a chance to beat the better team and loses it because of fundamental mistakes.

 

Point taken on the timing of the gaffes, though that was one of the most frustrating parts of hte layups was that they were missing them down the stretch. They did hit their free throws then though. As I mentioned I agree with the general principle that there's a lot of noise involved in a basketball game, which is why I don't trust the advanced basketball stats nearly as much as I do baseball. They're fun to look at, and I do think they do a better job than looking at the conventional stats, but basketball has too much outside involvement to break it down(even though I love Pomeroy) so easily with stats.

 

Ok, looks like that's the best I'll get out of you. :D

 

Pomeroy interests me no doubt, but I'm confused by some of his metrics. From what I can tell he leaves out such things as difficulty of opponents and such when rating teams. Maybe I'm just not quite understanding the metrics (I'm no math whiz) but it seems like he ought to be taken along with things like RPI and Strength of Schedule.

[snoodmonger]

Oh, no doubt Tennessee is the better team. That's what's so frustrating, when a team has a chance to beat the better team and loses it because of fundamental mistakes.

 

Point taken on the timing of the gaffes, though that was one of the most frustrating parts of hte layups was that they were missing them down the stretch. They did hit their free throws then though. As I mentioned I agree with the general principle that there's a lot of noise involved in a basketball game, which is why I don't trust the advanced basketball stats nearly as much as I do baseball. They're fun to look at, and I do think they do a better job than looking at the conventional stats, but basketball has too much outside involvement to break it down(even though I love Pomeroy) so easily with stats.

 

Ok, looks like that's the best I'll get out of you. :D

 

Pomeroy interests me no doubt, but I'm confused by some of his metrics. From what I can tell he leaves out such things as difficulty of opponents and such when rating teams. Maybe I'm just not quite understanding the metrics (I'm no math whiz) but it seems like he ought to be taken along with things like RPI and Strength of Schedule.

 

 

I think it does. At least, by my caveman understanding of math it does.

 

http://www.kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/ratings_explanation/

 

I would describe the philosophy of the system as this: it looks at who a team has beaten and how they have beaten them. Same thing on the losses, also. Yes, it values a 20 point win more than a 5 point win. It likes a team that loses a lot of close games against strong opposition more than one that wins a lot of close games against weak opposition.

Edited March 25, 2008 by snoodmonger

[Productive Outs]

http://media.scout.com/media/image/53/532752.jpg

 

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-03/37063269.jpg

 

how many times is UCLA going to get bailed out?

[dew1679666265]

Oh, no doubt Tennessee is the better team. That's what's so frustrating, when a team has a chance to beat the better team and loses it because of fundamental mistakes.

 

Point taken on the timing of the gaffes, though that was one of the most frustrating parts of hte layups was that they were missing them down the stretch. They did hit their free throws then though. As I mentioned I agree with the general principle that there's a lot of noise involved in a basketball game, which is why I don't trust the advanced basketball stats nearly as much as I do baseball. They're fun to look at, and I do think they do a better job than looking at the conventional stats, but basketball has too much outside involvement to break it down(even though I love Pomeroy) so easily with stats.

 

Ok, looks like that's the best I'll get out of you. :D

 

Pomeroy interests me no doubt, but I'm confused by some of his metrics. From what I can tell he leaves out such things as difficulty of opponents and such when rating teams. Maybe I'm just not quite understanding the metrics (I'm no math whiz) but it seems like he ought to be taken along with things like RPI and Strength of Schedule.

 

 

I think it does. At least, by my caveman understanding of math it does.

 

http://www.kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/ratings_explanation/

 

I would describe the philosophy of the system as this: it looks at who a team has beaten and how they have beaten them. Same thing on the losses, also. Yes, it values a 20 point win more than a 5 point win. It likes a team that loses a lot of close games against strong opposition more than one that wins a lot of close games against weak opposition.

 

Interesting, thanks.

 

I still don't think I'd use him exclusively, but Pomeroy definitely seems like a rating to keep in mind when analyzing teams.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

[Exile on Waveland]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

 

Bo Ryan at No. 9? That's just, well, completely asinine. This is all ambiguous I know, but Rick Barnes (especially, there are others I take exception too as well) ahead of Ryan is unbelievable. There aren't eight coaches in the nation better than Ryan, much less of the teams left.

[SouthSideRyan]

Bo Ryan is overrated in some circles cause he has a lot of white players on his team and people assume white players = not as good. Don't get me wrong, white people do suck at basketball, and Bo Ryan is a great coach, but I think both sides get taken to too far of an extreme some time.

 

That said I love Bo Ryan.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

Bo Ryan is overrated in some circles cause he has a lot of white players on his team and people assume white players = not as good. Don't get me wrong, white people do suck at basketball, and Bo Ryan is a great coach, but I think both sides get taken to too far of an extreme some time.

 

That said I love Bo Ryan.

 

this is all truth.

[rawaction]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

 

Maybe they ranked them by most recognizable names. Williams, Calipari, and Huggins are mediocre coaches. The first 2 just get great talent. Huggins is a great motivator.

 

My top 5 would be Howland, Ryan, Miller, Bennett, Izzo.

[CuseCubFan69]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

 

Maybe they ranked them by most recognizable names. Williams, Calipari, and Huggins are mediocre coaches. The first 2 just get great talent. Huggins is a great motivator.

 

My top 5 would be Howland, Ryan, Miller, Bennett, Izzo.

 

Is that the Sean Miller that used to play at Pitt?

[Exile on Waveland]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

 

Maybe they ranked them by most recognizable names. Williams, Calipari, and Huggins are mediocre coaches. The first 2 just get great talent. Huggins is a great motivator.

 

My top 5 would be Howland, Ryan, Miller, Bennett, Izzo.

 

Is that the Sean Miller that used to play at Pitt?

 

Yes.

[CuseCubFan69]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

 

Maybe they ranked them by most recognizable names. Williams, Calipari, and Huggins are mediocre coaches. The first 2 just get great talent. Huggins is a great motivator.

 

My top 5 would be Howland, Ryan, Miller, Bennett, Izzo.

 

Is that the Sean Miller that used to play at Pitt?

 

Yes.

 

Thanks. Do any of you remember when he was on Johnny Carson as a 3 or 4 year old and showed off his dribbling skills?

[Exile on Waveland]

Bo Ryan is overrated in some circles cause he has a lot of white players on his team and people assume white players = not as good. Don't get me wrong, white people do suck at basketball, and Bo Ryan is a great coach, but I think both sides get taken to too far of an extreme some time.

 

That said I love Bo Ryan.

 

I agree with this. I've actually argued both sides of this argument. Wisconsin has much, much more talent than people realize or are willing to admit. This current version has two five-star, five four-star, and four three-star players. That's quite a bit of talent. Bo Ryan is not winning with five scrubby white guys he found at the YMCA. However, his teams are always among the most fundamentally sound, disciplined teams in the nation. He's not winning with a ton of NBA talent, but he has talent. He's worlds better than some of those coaches ahead of him though.

[Exile on Waveland]

Absolute garbage gets spewed on the internet everyday!!

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7952192/Seeding-the-Sweet-16-coaches

 

On a lighter note, a bunch of my buddies are staying at my place and we are all going to the sweet 16 here in lovely detroit.

 

Maybe they ranked them by most recognizable names. Williams, Calipari, and Huggins are mediocre coaches. The first 2 just get great talent. Huggins is a great motivator.

 

My top 5 would be Howland, Ryan, Miller, Bennett, Izzo.

 

Is that the Sean Miller that used to play at Pitt?

 

Yes.

 

Thanks. Do any of you remember when he was on Johnny Carson as a 3 or 4 year old and showed off his dribbling skills?

 

No, but I believe I may have seen clips. When he was three or four I wasn't even a sparkle in my father's eye.

[Derwood]

i'm not sure I understand the argument that Bo Ryan is less of a coach because he does well with a bunch of unathletic white guys.....wouldn't that make him a BETTER coach than someone who has five 5-star future NBA'ers?