2008-2009 College Basketball Thread......

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Dola: just found Arizona St @ UCLA on CBS, which makes for a pretty nice consolation prize. Very deep pool of quality games today.

Yeah, I noticed all these good games were going on at once. And my local programming gets Wake-Clemson, too.

Of course, I am also watching the UCLA-ASU game.

[Radii]

I only saw the final 3 minutes of regulation + OT, but UCLA has looked absolutely terrible.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Radii

I only saw the final 3 minutes of regulation + OT, but UCLA has looked absolutely terrible.

Yes, they did, and you can put that at the feet of the coach who, IIRC, is supposed to be above criticism because he took the team to three Final Fours in a row. It was probably the worst 13 minutes in UCLA basketball history, or damn near it.

And the whole reason for it is because said coach, for all his amazing ability in coaching defense and teams and preparing and recruiting, just can't coach an offense to save his life. Anyone who thinks the 30-second-dribble-and-pass-along-the-perimeter-and-then-rush-an-awful-hurried-shot-against-the-clock offense is some thing that just popped up today, then that person hasn't been watching UCLA basketball. Howland has needed someone who actually knows offense to run that part of the team since the day he got into coaching, and he's too stubborn and arrogant to recognize it, which, IMO, is a major fault for any coach to have.

I don't think ASU fans would even say they had a great game. They just had a good game, and UCLA out-undered them.

[MrBug708]

That was....


awful? I would have rather seen us lose Lavin style then how we lost in that game. By far the worse loss in Howland's UCLA tenure.

[Radii]

UNC looks terrible for 15 1/2 minutes vs Miami and trails 32-23. They get it together in the final 4 1/2, closing out the 1st half with a 13-0 run to lead 36-32. UNC is committing way too many unforced turnovers. Jack McClinton looks like an NBA scorer for Miami, creating his own shot at will and making everything. Hansbrough has 20 points in the first half.

[Radii]

Wayne Ellington is on fire. He was scoreless in the first half. He's 7 for 8 from 3 point range in the 2nd half and has scored 23 points in 13 minutes.

edit: he's been a bit off all season, his season high was 17 coming into tonight and he hadn't really distinguished himself as a scoring threat this season yet. Maybe this will get him going.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

The Paul Hewitt era continues right on track, losing at home in OT to NC State.

One thing I've noticed about GT is they play a very sloppy game and their defensive pressure seems to force the other team into doing the same. Maybe it's just that Maryland and NC State aren't that good, but they games were full of turnovers, bad shots, and missed free throws.

Also, they're talent level is a bit low. Lawal is a good player, Miller and Shumpert look like solid guards, but the rest seems to be a mixed bag, although I did like the play of Sheehan today and when I saw them a couple of months ago.

If they can take care of the ball and pound into the post more, they could be a solid squad down the stretch with their interior defense.

[MJ4H]

Haven't updated much on Arkansas lately. They've crashed badly after beating Texas and Oklahoma. Lost 3 straight, mostly, I'd say, due to the disappearing act of the perimeter shooting game. Mostly Welsh and Clarke. Three consecutive absolutely horrid perimeter shooting games.

12-4 and 0-3 in conference play.

[mckerney]

Blarg. Ugly game for Minnesota to drop one to Northwestern on the road.

[Logan]

Va Tech up 4 on Wake, in Winston Salem, with just under a minute left.

[wade moore]

I hate Seth Greenburg.

[MylesKnight]

Northwestern (Northwestern?) wins in East Lansing over #7 Michigan State 70-63.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Logan

Va Tech up 4 on Wake, in Winston Salem, with just under a minute left.

Wake was only down 4 with 1:30 to go, what #1 team at home starts fouling that early? No matter how bad the other team is from the line. But worse than that is that they have no poise at all on offense. Their last 3 or 4 offensive possessions have been just ridiculously bad.

[Logan]

Despite the potential upset, I'm only half-watching...and that confused the hell out of me.

[Radii]

Grats to Va Tech but I am baffled at Wake Forest's play down the stretch.


on to UNC/Clemson, my favorite streak in all of sports, as Clemson hasn't won in Chapel Hill in 53 years. As Clemson has improved in recent years I get more and more nervous for this game.

[MylesKnight]

Radii, Navy finally beat Notre Dame a couple of seasons back on the gridiron. Look out for CU.

[Radii]

High energy first half in Chapel Hill, a lot of fun to watch for both sides I would assume. Both teams have been a little sloppy at times. UNC ends the half on a nice run, Clemson killer Wayne Ellington has 16 at the half, and UNC leads 45-40. Should be an outstanding second half if its played at the same intensity.

[Radii]

Clemson can't hit a damn thing to start the second half, 10-2 run and its 55-42 UNC with about 17:30 to go.

[Radii]

And now Clemson has never won in Chapel Hill in 54 tries. UNC dominates the second half, winning 94-70. After being mostly non-existant this season, Wayne Ellington has now had two great games in a row, scoring 25 with (I think) 7 assists tonight.

[Karlifornia]

Clemson should have a copyright on fading in big games.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Dont look now but Clemson is #11 and you come to Littlejohn Saturday...

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

Yeah, but you're Clemson for chrissake. You do this every year before you slide during ACC play. And no matter what, I'm counting on you taking your first loss by the 21st at the latest anyway....

Well, it was their second loss this year rather than their first.

"First you hate 'em. Then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, you get so you depend on them."

(Said with a little gest, in a "What I wouldn't give to be spat on" kind of way as a member of a fanbase that in some respects should be institutionalized with their behavior. )

[CU Tiger]

not surprising.....knew they they had better talent.

[Butter]

Crazy doings in DC last night...

Dayton vs. George Washington tied 60-60 with :22 left. GW at the line for free throws. They miss the first, but hit the second. Dayton tries to inbounds the pass, but in the middle of the play, a technical foul is called. Turns out, GW was subbing a player in for the free throw shooter, and he entered the game during the first free throw. So, they had 6 players on the floor during the 2nd free throw, which went unnoticed. But after the FT make, the shooter did not leave the floor, so they had 6 defenders out there during the in-bounds, and were caught... when the whistle blew, one player tried to hide in press row, the other quickly tried to blend in with the bench... but it was too late.

UD gets 2 FT's, and the ball... and are fouled on the technical in-bounds play to take a 63-61 lead and win by that score. Dayton had been bit by some bad luck vs. GW over the years, it was nice to finally win one by luck instead.

Dayton goes to 17-2, 3-1 in the A10 and keep their bubble status alive with 3 home games to come, where they rarely lose.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

when the whistle blew, one player tried to hide in press row, the other quickly tried to blend in with the bench... but it was too late.

Hah, I hope that looked as entertaining/amusing when it happened as it does in my head the way you're describing it.

[terpkristin]

Well that was embarrassing. I've been saying for a few years that Gary doesn't seem to be the right fit for Maryland, and never was it more obvious than today.

/tk

[MJ4H]

Just saw the score. Ouch.

Arkansas struggling at home to overcome Auburn's ridiculously over-expectation shooting (started 8/10 from 3). Seems to be a pattern here. Auburn leads by 7 at the break.

[dawgfan]

Big win for the UW at home today, continuing UCLA's struggles under Howland to win in Seattle - that's 5 straight now the Huskies have won over the Bruins in Hec Ed.

Washington now sits alone atop the Pac-10 at 6-1 in conference and 15-4 overall. I expect the Huskies to break in to the top-25 this coming week.

[Radii]

Big win for Virginia Tech on the road vs Miami, 88-83 in overtime. The Hokies have had a hell of a week.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by terpkristin

Well that was embarrassing. I've been saying for a few years that Gary doesn't seem to be the right fit for Maryland, and never was it more obvious than today.

/tk

So, 7 years is the shelf life for a national title. Good to know for when I can rightly start prepping the "Tressel must go" banners for Ohio State football home games.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Mizzou went on a nice tear while I was on vacation. Now 17-3 and 4-1 in conference with a RPI of 31. Looking good for a NCAA bid, which would be wonderful given our 4 year drought.

[terpkristin]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

So, 7 years is the shelf life for a national title. Good to know for when I can rightly start prepping the "Tressel must go" banners for Ohio State football home games.

It's not like that. I've long thought Gary hurts himself as a coach. He does well (generally) coaching the underachievers and the ones who nobody else wanted. When they are more talented or have potential to be "stars" he doesn't seem to know what to do with them, to make them better and bring out the best. Therefore, we go through cycles..when we're good, we recruit better, which means we get the people that Gary doesn't seem to coach well, therefore we underperform, so we get the "lower" caliber players, who Gary responds well with, so we do better...rinse, repeat.

To be consistently competitive in the ACC, that doesn't work. It's something I've noticed over the last 10 years or so, and I have been saying for a few years now that either Gary needs to change his coaching style or we need a new coach.

/tk

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Mizzou went on a nice tear while I was on vacation. Now 17-3 and 4-1 in conference with a RPI of 31. Looking good for a NCAA bid, which would be wonderful given our 4 year drought.

I'm very happy right now.. and honestly.. pleasantly surprised.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by terpkristin

It's not like that. I've long thought Gary hurts himself as a coach. He does well (generally) coaching the underachievers and the ones who nobody else wanted. When they are more talented or have potential to be "stars" he doesn't seem to know what to do with them, to make them better and bring out the best. Therefore, we go through cycles..when we're good, we recruit better, which means we get the people that Gary doesn't seem to coach well, therefore we underperform, so we get the "lower" caliber players, who Gary responds well with, so we do better...rinse, repeat.

/tk

Mike Anderson's recruiting at Mizzou has changed my thinking regarding this topic. Your description of Coach Williams reminds me a lot of the Quin Snyder years at Mizzou. We had some huge recruiting classes during his stay at MU where we'd have top 10 recruiting classes year in and year out. The problem was that most of the players would repeatedly fizzle out and not perform anywhere near their expectations.

In contrast, Mike Anderson has targeted atheletic players with great work ethic and good academic numbers. While many of them are not the elite 4 and 5 star players, they seem to be extremely coachable and adapt well to his style of coaching.

I don't think the ranking aspect of your point is as important as the players he was coaching. There are certain kids who fit well with a coach. Where a coach gets into trouble is when he/she goes out and gets the highest ranked players rather than the players who fit best to his coaching style. It may make the fan base happy on signing day, but it can be detrimental to the program's progress overall.

[terpkristin]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I don't think the ranking aspect of your point is as important as the players he was coaching. There are certain kids who fit well with a coach. Where a coach gets into trouble is when he/she goes out and gets the highest ranked players rather than the players who fit best to his coaching style. It may make the fan base happy on signing day, but it can be detrimental to the program's progress overall.

I agree with this, but this pretty much agrees with what I was trying to say. Maybe I should've expanded "Gary needs to change himself as a coach" to also specifically include his recruiting, but as of now, he hasn't, he's done the same thing a few times that I've been paying attention. We do well, the top players want to come to MD, he signs them, we do poorly, he gets players that are less..."desirable" by the top schools, we do better, he gets top players...

Drives me nuts.

/tk

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by terpkristin

I agree with this, but this pretty much agrees with what I was trying to say. Maybe I should've expanded "Gary needs to change himself as a coach" to also specifically include his recruiting, but as of now, he hasn't, he's done the same thing a few times that I've been paying attention. We do well, the top players want to come to MD, he signs them, we do poorly, he gets players that are less..."desirable" by the top schools, we do better, he gets top players...

Drives me nuts.

/tk

Mizzou is on the opposite end of the recruiting right now. Mizzou recruited kids like Suggs (Washington), Brandenburg (Virginia), and Releford (Kansas) in the 2008 recruiting class who were all 4 or 5 star players. Coach Anderson ended up signing players like Marcus Denmon, Kim English, Lawrence Bowers, and Keith Ramsey. They were all three star players who are now getting significant minutes for our team while the previously listed recruits that we didn't sign are sitting on the bench and rarely playing for the other schools. The moans about our lackluster recruiting class have quickly vanished into the delight over a great start to the season.

I can easily see a similar problem at Illinois in the next two years when Weber takes in those highly ranked classes. I'm not sure that Weber is at his best with those kinds of players.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Anyone have a clue why Notre Dame and Georgetown are still ranked? Both have 6 losses including 3 straight losses. Neither has any business still being ranked.

[Butter]

Let me guess... Missouri's not ranked.

[sooner333]

I think if it were up to a lot of people the entire ACC and Big East would be ranked and maybe Oklahoma, UCLA, and a few others.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Anyone have a clue why Notre Dame and Georgetown are still ranked? Both have 6 losses including 3 straight losses. Neither has any business still being ranked.

Because the Big East is the best conference in the country. It doesn't count against them when they lose in conference.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by sooner333

I think if it were up to a lot of people the entire ACC and Big East would be ranked and maybe Oklahoma, UCLA, and a few others.

Hey, leave the ACC out of this! We've got 4 very good teams at the top and they're all ranked highly. The rest of the crap in the middle can sort itself out and hopefully a couple of them can earn their way into the tournament in March. The Big East is the conference that thinks its a mortal lock to get 9 tournament teams and that is probably deserves 10 or 11. :P


Notre Dame's last 3 losses are all to top 10 teams. I would have still included them in the top 25. Georgetown I would not.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Radii

Notre Dame's last 3 losses are all to top 10 teams. I would have still included them in the top 25.

Interesting. Losing to three ranked teams in a row earns a ranking?

[Groundhog]

Losing to three top 10 teams means you're not a top 10 team. You then have to look at the rest of the team's games.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Let me guess... Missouri's not ranked.

Mizzou doesn't belong in the rankings currently IMO. If MU wins both of the games this week (@KSU, Baylor), they probably have earned a ranking at this point. Certainly, people are starting to taking note......

http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/in...ps?eref=fromSI

THE SLEEPER TEAM


I'm obsessed with efficiency stats, but it's for good reason -- the teams in the Final Four always tend to be the same teams who sit atop the efficiency charts at season's end. For the past few weeks I've been tracking one club that keeps climbing the statistical ranks on kenpom.com, but remains on the outside of the AP's Top 25. This team is the biggest sleeper left in all of college hoops, garnering zero hype despite its solid credentials.

Of the first eight teams in the Pythagorean Rankings on kenpom.com (I'm not going to link to it yet, because that would spoil the surprise), five are in the AP's top 10 (Duke, UConn, Pittsburgh, North Carolina and Louisville), one is 14th (Arizona State) and one is 20th (Gonzaga). The other team -- we'll refer to them henceforth as a proper noun, The Sleeper Team -- isn't ranked by the voters, but is seventh in the nation in adjusted offensive efficiency, and 25th in adjusted defensive efficiency, which means it has the profile of an actual Final Four contender, even if it hasn't behaved entirely like one in the win-loss column.

The Sleeper Team's offense is more efficient than 19 of the AP top 25 teams' offenses, including Arizona State, UConn, Georgetown and Marquette.

The Sleeper Team's defense is stingier than eight of the AP top 25 teams' defenses, including Syracuse, Michigan State, Clemson and Butler.

According to Basketball Prospectus, The Sleeper Team has the fourth-best in-league efficiency margin of any major-conference school in the country. The only teams with better margins are top-ranked Duke (+0.32 points per possession), Kansas (+0.25) and strangely, LSU (+0.24).

So who is The Sleeper Team? Your first hint is that it's a band of thieves, one that steals the ball from opponents on 15.1 percent of defensive possessions, second in the nation only to VMI.

Your second hint is that The Sleeper Team's best player is a transfer from Vanderbilt.

Your third hint is that The Sleeper Team's breakout rookie is a guard whose last name is very similar to that of one of Washington's starters in the backcourt.

Your fourth hint, if you don't have it already, is that The Sleeper Team plays in the Big 12. Still need the answer?

...

...

It's Missouri.

This would be the same Missouri team that's 17-3 but suffered an embarrassing loss at Nebraska on Jan. 10, ensuring that the Tigers would be ignored on the national scene until they beat someone of consequence, like, say, Baylor on Saturday, or Texas in 10 days, or Kansas on Feb. 9. The Vandy transfer is one DeMarre Carroll, a "junkyard dog who's averaging 16.3 points and 7.1 boards. The rookie is one Marcus Denmon (sounds like Justin Dentmon, of UW), who's averaging 7.8 points and was clutch down the stretch in Saturday's 97-86 win over Texas Tech. Mizzou hasn't made the NCAA tournament since 2003, but the Tigers should get there this season as a mid-level seed -- and be a strong candidate to pull off a few upsets.

[Karlifornia]

Can I guess the sleeper team? I'm gonna say it's Kansas!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Losing to three top 10 teams means you're not a top 10 team. You then have to look at the rest of the team's games.

Exactly. That only furthers my argument. Notre Dame is currently 71(!) in the RPI. Their NCAA credentials are as follows......

Record: 11-6
Record vs. Top 100: 2-5
Record vs. 100+: 9-1

One of their two top 100 wins is quickly diminishing in significance given their recent slide: Georgetown. They also already have a 'bad' loss against St. Johns. In addition, one of their wins is not counted for RPI and NCAA bid consideration. There's absolutely nothing about that resume in its current state that even suggests anything more than a bubble team, though even that is questionable given the RPI of 71.

[hoopsguy]

Don't forget that the rest of the schedule for ND is not all that easy. Likely losses, or at least pick-em games:
@Pitt
@UCLA
Louisville
@WVU
@Providence
@UConn
Villanova(?)

Each of these games is currently projected as a loss on kenpom.com. If that holds, the Irish will be 16-14, 7-11 in conference and requiring a big-time run in the conference tournament to make the field.

As it stands right now, I think there are a lot of teams with better resumes than ND. They are on the brink of losing five in a row, including a pair of home games where they had previously won 45 straight. The team is a mess besides Harangody right now ... they can't hit 40% as a team and that is with LH shooting over 50% in the two home losses.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Interesting. Losing to three ranked teams in a row earns a ranking?

Losing to three ranked teams in a row earns you a slower drop than you would otherwise suffer had you lost to garbage. We're talking about the difference between being 25th and being in the "others receiving votes" category here, its a pretty marginal difference.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Radii

Losing to three ranked teams in a row earns you a slower drop than you would otherwise suffer had you lost to garbage. We're talking about the difference between being 25th and being in the "others receiving votes" category here, its a pretty marginal difference.

Dola, note that I'm talking about the subjective polls. I didn't realize we all of a sudden expect poll voters to rank teams based on Pomeroy rankings or the RPI. :P Notre Dame was ranked 13th and lost two road games vs other top 25 teams. They fell to 19th. Then they lost a home game to the #4 team in the nation. They fell to 23rd. Seems pretty standard to me?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Radii

Notre Dame was ranked 13th and lost two road games vs other top 25 teams. They fell to 19th. Then they lost a home game to the #4 team in the nation. They fell to 23rd. Seems pretty standard to me?

Standard by polling precedent, perhaps. If we're making a list of top 25 teams right now, they don't even come close given their current body of work. Obviously, they lost another game last night and have now lost 4 in a row. They're now 2 games under .500 in conference and 2-6 vs. quality opponents. Their NCAA hopes have hit a major buzzsaw at this point.

Good win by OU last night at OSU. Really tough place to steal a win, especially in a rivalry game.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Their NCAA hopes have hit a major buzzsaw at this point.

That's definitely true. All the pundits who assume the Big East is a lock to get 9+ teams into the tournament are probably assuming that all these ranked teams are simply going to beat up on each other and probably win the rest of their games vs the bad teams in the Big East. Notre Dame's game vs Pitt is quickly approaching "must win" territory.

I do wonder though, since everyone's estimation of the Big East is so very high, I would not be surprised to see any team that makes it to .500 in conference play getting in.