College basketball and 2017 draft - One more poll after last game

Post #1161 » by **ATTL** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:10 am

Duke vs UNC on now on ESPN

MrMiyagi · Post #1162 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:23 am

ATTL wrote:Duke vs UNC on now on ESPN

I'm rooting for a UNC loss. I find it ridiculous that UNC gets to be ranked above Arizona when they have 6 losses. Are losses to Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke (14), Virginia (21), Indiana and Kentucky (8) really better than losses to Gonzaga (4), UCLA (3), Oregon (5), and Butler (18)? And they've been in the discussion as a #1 seed in the NCAA Tourney. That's some bull **** if you ask me.

MrMiyagi · Post #1163 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:25 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
ATTL wrote:Duke vs UNC on now on ESPN

I'm rooting for a UNC loss. I find it ridiculous that UNC gets to be ranked above Arizona when they have 6 losses. Are losses to Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke (14), Virginia (21), Indiana and Kentucky (8) really better than losses to Gonzaga (4), UCLA (3), Oregon (5), and Butler (18)? And they've been in the discussion as a #1 seed in the NCAA Tourney. That's some bull **** if you ask me.

I mean, we lost to 1 team who considered worse than us but is considered a top 25, and North Carolina lost to 6 teams considered worse than them, three of which aren't ranked in the top 25. **** them.

Post #1164 » by **ATTL** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:01 am

Tatum with a huge first half

MrMiyagi · Post #1165 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:32 am

Does UNC have a win better than Arizona at UCLA?

Can someone with a Twitter account tweet at Joe Lunardi and Jay Williams and Jay Bilas and these other ACC cronies about how is Arizona ranked worse for the tourney than UNC bringing up that Arizona has the best win (at UCLA) and better loses (3 to top 5 teams, 1 to a top 25) and less of them (4 vs. 6) than UNC? #ClawsOverFeet

kennydorglas · Post #1166 » by **kennydorglas** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:38 am

MrMiyagi wrote:Does UNC have a win better than Arizona at UCLA?

Can someone with a Twitter account tweet at Joe Lunardi and Jay Williams and Jay Bilas and these other ACC cronies about how is Arizona ranked worse for the tourney than UNC bringing up that Arizona has the best win (at UCLA) and better loses (3 to top 5 teams, 1 to a top 25) and less of them (4 vs. 6) than UNC? #ClawsOverFeet

They were the underdogs only for two games and lost both
We had 7 underdogs games and won 4... and there's another one tonight against UCLA

Post #1167 » by **bwgood77** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:19 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
ATTL wrote:Duke vs UNC on now on ESPN

I'm rooting for a UNC loss. I find it ridiculous that UNC gets to be ranked above Arizona when they have 6 losses. Are losses to Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke (14), Virginia (21), Indiana and Kentucky (8) really better than losses to Gonzaga (4), UCLA (3), Oregon (5), and Butler (18)? And they've been in the discussion as a #1 seed in the NCAA Tourney. That's some bull **** if you ask me.

We deserve to be higher, but the thing is, it's like the NCAA football BCS stuff where they will try and take the top team of each conference or region and put them atop. So with Gonzaga getting a one, only one PAC 12 team will get a 1. If Gonzaga wasn't as high as they are, two PAC 12 teams would likely get 1 seeds.

If we can win our tourney, we should get a 1 seed. They won't give 1 seeds to three teams in the west. #1 seeds of regions are supposed to be from those regions. Usually in weird years they have to put a team outside of a region as a 1 seed, but they usually won't put two teams as #1 seeds outside of those regions I don't think.

If we don't get a 1 seed, I hope we end up as the 2 or 3 seed in the Gonzaga region.

darealjuice · Post #1168 » by **darealjuice** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:28 am

Tatum's been really impressive through the ACC tournament, not shooting overly well from 3 but he's played some solid games. He's starting to work his way toward the Ball/Jackson/Smith tier for me. Let's see if he can have put another good one together against the winner of ND and FSU.

kennydorglas · Post #1169 » by **kennydorglas** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:31 am

UNC just lost another one.

MrMiyagi · Post #1170 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:37 am

bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
ATTL wrote:Duke vs UNC on now on ESPN

I'm rooting for a UNC loss. I find it ridiculous that UNC gets to be ranked above Arizona when they have 6 losses. Are losses to Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke (14), Virginia (21), Indiana and Kentucky (8) really better than losses to Gonzaga (4), UCLA (3), Oregon (5), and Butler (18)? And they've been in the discussion as a #1 seed in the NCAA Tourney. That's some bull **** if you ask me.

We deserve to be higher, but the thing is, it's like the NCAA football BCS stuff where they will try and take the top team of each conference or region and put them atop. So with Gonzaga getting a one, only one PAC 12 team will get a 1. If Gonzaga wasn't as high as they are, two PAC 12 teams would likely get 1 seeds.

If we can win our tourney, we should get a 1 seed. They won't give 1 seeds to three teams in the west. #1 seeds of regions are supposed to be from those regions. Usually in weird years they have to put a team outside of a region as a 1 seed, but they usually won't put two teams as #1 seeds outside of those regions I don't think.

If we don't get a 1 seed, I hope we end up as the 2 or 3 seed in the Gonzaga region.

I don't see why Gonzaga isn't the team that's bumped if we're going to emphasize region. I mean, the PAC-12 has 3 top 6 teams, two of which are likely to play in the PAC-12 Championship game. How does whoever comes out on top not deserve to be the the #1 seed in the West?

I mean, UCLA is currently getting shafted by being listed as a 3 seed in the South. If they're going to be in the South anyway, and are considered a better team than UNC, shouldn't they be the 1 seed in that bracket?

Post #1171 » by **ATTL** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:38 am

Did you hear that bull on ESPN? Saying top 4 are set and no one in the PAC 12 gets a top seed no matter what.

MrMiyagi · Post #1172 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:41 am

ATTL wrote:Did you hear that bull on ESPN? Saying top 4 are set and no one in the PAC 12 gets a top seed no matter what.

I can't believe Jay Bilas tried to say Duke should be a 2 seed.

Post #1173 » by **bwgood77** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:52 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:I'm rooting for a UNC loss. I find it ridiculous that UNC gets to be ranked above Arizona when they have 6 losses. Are losses to Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke (14), Virginia (21), Indiana and Kentucky (8) really better than losses to Gonzaga (4), UCLA (3), Oregon (5), and Butler (18)? And they've been in the discussion as a #1 seed in the NCAA Tourney. That's some bull **** if you ask me.

We deserve to be higher, but the thing is, it's like the NCAA football BCS stuff where they will try and take the top team of each conference or region and put them atop. So with Gonzaga getting a one, only one PAC 12 team will get a 1. If Gonzaga wasn't as high as they are, two PAC 12 teams would likely get 1 seeds.

If we can win our tourney, we should get a 1 seed. They won't give 1 seeds to three teams in the west. #1 seeds of regions are supposed to be from those regions. Usually in weird years they have to put a team outside of a region as a 1 seed, but they usually won't put two teams as #1 seeds outside of those regions I don't think.

If we don't get a 1 seed, I hope we end up as the 2 or 3 seed in the Gonzaga region.

I don't see why Gonzaga isn't the team that's bumped if we're going to emphasize region. I mean, the PAC-12 has 3 top 6 teams, two of which are likely to play in the PAC-12 Championship game. How does whoever comes out on top not deserve to be the the #1 seed in the West?

I mean, UCLA is currently getting shafted by being listed as a 3 seed in the South. If they're going to be in the South anyway, and are considered a better team than UNC, shouldn't they be the 1 seed in that bracket?

I agree. I think Gonzaga should get bumped. Personally I don't totally care if we are 1, 2 or 3 as much as being in the west. Because no matter what, if you are a 1, you have to face the 2 or 3, and if you are a 2 OR 3 you have to face each other eventually.

The worst thing is, winning the tourney might only get us a 2 seed instead of a 3 but at least we'd be in the west, have some confidence, and Gonzaga would be the 1 seed we'd have to face in the elite 8. UCLA and Oregon would probably be 3s in other regions.

Gonzaga over us is probably easy. They beat us. They have the worst loss and not as many good wins, but they did beat us. The only real advantage to me getting a 1 over a 2 is the first game which, for 1 seeds is usually a cakewalk because 16 seeds are usually much worse than 15 seeds, and then avoiding the 3 seed in the sweet 16.

MrMiyagi · Post #1174 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 3:45 am

bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
We deserve to be higher, but the thing is, it's like the NCAA football BCS stuff where they will try and take the top team of each conference or region and put them atop. So with Gonzaga getting a one, only one PAC 12 team will get a 1. If Gonzaga wasn't as high as they are, two PAC 12 teams would likely get 1 seeds.

If we can win our tourney, we should get a 1 seed. They won't give 1 seeds to three teams in the west. #1 seeds of regions are supposed to be from those regions. Usually in weird years they have to put a team outside of a region as a 1 seed, but they usually won't put two teams as #1 seeds outside of those regions I don't think.

If we don't get a 1 seed, I hope we end up as the 2 or 3 seed in the Gonzaga region.

I don't see why Gonzaga isn't the team that's bumped if we're going to emphasize region. I mean, the PAC-12 has 3 top 6 teams, two of which are likely to play in the PAC-12 Championship game. How does whoever comes out on top not deserve to be the the #1 seed in the West?

I mean, UCLA is currently getting shafted by being listed as a 3 seed in the South. If they're going to be in the South anyway, and are considered a better team than UNC, shouldn't they be the 1 seed in that bracket?

I agree. I think Gonzaga should get bumped. Personally I don't totally care if we are 1, 2 or 3 as much as being in the west. Because no matter what, if you are a 1, you have to face the 2 or 3, and if you are a 2 OR 3 you have to face each other eventually.

The worst thing is, winning the tourney might only get us a 2 seed instead of a 3 but at least we'd be in the west, have some confidence, and Gonzaga would be the 1 seed we'd have to face in the elite 8. UCLA and Oregon would probably be 3s in other regions.

Gonzaga over us is probably easy. They beat us. They have the worst loss and not as many good wins, but they did beat us. The only real advantage to me getting a 1 over a 2 is the first game which, for 1 seeds is usually a cakewalk because 16 seeds are usually much worse than 15 seeds, and then avoiding the 3 seed in the sweet 16.

I'd personally take the easier path over the location.

And it's just seems asinine to respect the top 25 ranking for 3 out of the top 4 teams being 1 seeds only to **** the bed for the PAC-12 that has 3 deserving teams for an undeserving ACC team. You really going to say that playing in the WCC like Gonzaga does is harder than playing in the PAC-12 or the ACC? If you're going to bump a top 4 team, go with the one in the weakest conference.

Zelaznyrules · Post #1175 » by **Zelaznyrules** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:00 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
ATTL wrote:Did you hear that bull on ESPN? Saying top 4 are set and no one in the PAC 12 gets a top seed no matter what.

I can't believe Jay Bilas tried to say Duke should be a 2 seed.

He also tried to say that accidental elbow tonight was no different than the evil cheap shot by Grayson several days ago. Lose the "L", he's Jay Bias AFAIC.

MrMiyagi · Post #1176 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:11 am

Zelaznyrules wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
ATTL wrote:Did you hear that bull on ESPN? Saying top 4 are set and no one in the PAC 12 gets a top seed no matter what.

I can't believe Jay Bilas tried to say Duke should be a 2 seed.

He also tried to say that accidental elbow tonight was no different than the evil cheap shot by Grayson several days ago. Lose the "L", he's Jay Bias AFAIC.

I just hope there are some crusty old dudes on the selection committee that look at the wins and losses instead of some of the ridiculous "analytics" they use. BPI favors teams who blow out weak competition, SOS/SOR/RPI have no clear variables. I say **** these charlatans! There is only one voice of reason, he of the bright colors:

DirtyDez · Post #1177 » by **DirtyDez** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:22 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
DirtyDez wrote:
Would take him right now since Rawle plays no D whatsoever.

Are we watching the same Rawle Alkins?

He didn't put an oz of effort on D for most of the season. Now it's Kobi who has been benched.

Already dreading the point in the game where UCLA goes zone.

Post #1178 » by **bwgood77** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:32 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:I don't see why Gonzaga isn't the team that's bumped if we're going to emphasize region. I mean, the PAC-12 has 3 top 6 teams, two of which are likely to play in the PAC-12 Championship game. How does whoever comes out on top not deserve to be the the #1 seed in the West?

I mean, UCLA is currently getting shafted by being listed as a 3 seed in the South. If they're going to be in the South anyway, and are considered a better team than UNC, shouldn't they be the 1 seed in that bracket?

I agree. I think Gonzaga should get bumped. Personally I don't totally care if we are 1, 2 or 3 as much as being in the west. Because no matter what, if you are a 1, you have to face the 2 or 3, and if you are a 2 OR 3 you have to face each other eventually.

The worst thing is, winning the tourney might only get us a 2 seed instead of a 3 but at least we'd be in the west, have some confidence, and Gonzaga would be the 1 seed we'd have to face in the elite 8. UCLA and Oregon would probably be 3s in other regions.

Gonzaga over us is probably easy. They beat us. They have the worst loss and not as many good wins, but they did beat us. The only real advantage to me getting a 1 over a 2 is the first game which, for 1 seeds is usually a cakewalk because 16 seeds are usually much worse than 15 seeds, and then avoiding the 3 seed in the sweet 16.

I'd personally take the easier path over the location.

And it's just seems asinine to respect the top 25 ranking for 3 out of the top 4 teams being 1 seeds only to **** the bed for the PAC-12 that has 3 deserving teams for an undeserving ACC team. You really going to say that playing in the WCC like Gonzaga does is harder than playing in the PAC-12 or the ACC? If you're going to bump a top 4 team, go with the one in the weakest conference.

Yeah, people complain about the ACC all the time. If you go by what the committee typically uses, RPI and/or BPI, you will see that AZ and Oregon are tied at 7th in the rpi. http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi

And for the BPI they are 23rd http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bpi

MrMiyagi · Post #1179 » by **MrMiyagi** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:39 am

DirtyDez wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
DirtyDez wrote:
Would take him right now since Rawle plays no D whatsoever.

Are we watching the same Rawle Alkins?

He didn't put an oz of effort on D for most of the season. Now it's Kobi who has been benched.

Already dreading the point in the game where UCLA goes zone.

I have no clue why you feel that way about Rawle. He always seems to be giving effort on defense.

Post #1180 » by **Duke4life831** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 5:30 am

I will say the bias against the PAC-12 is very weird this year. I usually watch a good amount of PAC-12 games since I'm from California and most years I tend to agree not giving PAC-12 teams as much respect because a lot of the time it's usually a 1-2 team comference. Last year began to change that and this year the entire conference is being drastically over looked. You're telling me that AZ or UCLA win the PAC-12 tournament they aren't a 1 seed? UCLA was a 3 seed heading into today's game? I think PAC-12 has at least 1 1 seed and probably two 2 seeds.

If we have the 1st or 2nd pick, and take Ball, how will you feel