Dave Sez

Equal Opportunity Final Four?

StateFans Nation uncovered a very interesting statistic that I had not noticed. Over the past five seasons, only one team has had more than one Final Four appearance, Kansas in 2002 and 2003 (with Roy Williams, who also took UNC last year). That means 19 different teams have reached college hoops' Mount Olympus in the last five years. No repeats from Duke, UNC, Connecticut, Kentucky, Michigan State, UCLA, Indiana or Arizona.

Pretty damn interesting, I think. I also think it's an anomaly. Look for UNC, Duke and UConn to make some more appearances in the coming years.

I should point out that the well-intentioned fellows at SFN use that statistic as yet another cudgel with which to bash Herb Sendek.

Conference Performance In The NCAA Tournament

With the mass exodus of talent to the NBA last year, most people expected that the ACC would be down this year and that's pretty much how things turned out. Carolina was better than expected, but that was offset by Duke being not as good as expected. Most people, me included, thought the Blue Devils would be far and away the best team in the country, but they struggled all season with developing their bench and getting consistent production from anyone other than J.J. Redick and Shelden Williams. Boston College was also supposed to be a top-ten team, but rarely played like it. They coasted at times and were more like a 15-20-type team.

The NCAA Tournament isn't necessarily the best way to rate a conference's yearly performance - a true measure would take tournament performance combined with a few computer power ratings and head-to-head comparisons against other top leagues - but it's probably the most significant. Five years from now, few people will remember much about this season other than that Duke failed to reach a Final Four and the ACC was shut out of the Elite Eight. Likewise, many will forget that the SEC had a relatively down year, because that league has stepped up so nicely in the postseason.

I put together a table that shows how each of the six power conferences (sorry, Conference USA, you no longer count) have performed so far in the postseason. In each column, I've bolded the top figure so that you see for example that the Big East led in bids while the SEC has the best winning percentage.

As you see, the ACC falls in the middle of the pack in most measures. It didn't flop nearly as badly as the Big Ten or Big Twelve, but didn't perform as well as the Big East, Pac Ten or SEC. What's particularly interesting is that Big Ten was believed by many to be the top league this year while the Pac Ten and SEC were almost universally thought to be having bad years.

For my next table, I've added another column for what I call Impact. Impact is simply the number of bids multiplied by the conference winning percentage. This takes into account both how well a league did (win %) and how many teams they sent to the dance. This way, teams that get bids but lose in the first round (half of the 64-team field) can still have a positive impact on a league's rating. In effect, this gives a league credit for it's pre-tournament success and also keeps leagues that send only one or two teams from appearing to be the top conference if one of their teams makes a deep run (like the CAA this year).

Curiously, the Impact rating says that the Big East has had more impact on the tournament than the SEC (to this point). This may seem counter-intuitive, since the SEC has two Final Four teams while the Big East has none, but remember that the Big East had four Sweet Sixteen teams while the SEC was already down to two at that point.

Hey Ladies!

While the ACC men predictably fell well short of the Final Four this year, the women did nearly the exact opposite. Three of the four entrants in the women's Final Four are ACC teams. Very impressive indeed!

UNC will play Maryland and Duke will face LSU on Sunday. Obviously that means we could see something that has never happened before, Duke-UNC in the NCAA Tournament. In the finals, no less. Yeah, the women don't generate nearly the same intense interest that the men do, but that would still be a hugely important game for both sides. Talk about a trump card to settle any Duke vs. UNC arguments!

The Geaux Team

If you're like me, when you were watching the basketball games last week, you noticed LSU coach John Brady's wife. They showed her several times in the audience and I'm sure I wasn't the only one surprised to see that this man (look over there -->) has such a cute wife.

It was only later that I found out her maiden name, Misty Champagne.

Yes, Misty Champagne. Hmmm, where do you think he made her acquaintance? Think maybe he was at a coaches' convention with Mike Price?

Assuming that's her actual given name, who the hell names their child Misty Champagne? Remember what Chris Rock said about raising girls? Your number one priority is to keep them off the pole. When you go with Misty Champagne as a name, you've pretty much limited her career options. Ever meet a lawyer named Misty? How many members of Phi Beta Kappa are named Misty?

Oh, and you won't be surprised that she makes her living with her body (more or less). She's a personal trainer and occasional model.

Can you imagine telling your mom about her for the first time? "Hey mom, I met this great girl. I think she's the one!"

"Oh really, dear? That's wonderful. What's her name?"

"Misty!"

"Oh"

"Misty Champagne!"

... dead silence ...

Geaux Tigers!

Move Over Chaminade

Move over Chaminade, college basketball has a new Cinderella. And she's cuter.

Sure, Chaminade had a great run as the plucky winner of the Greatest Upset Of All Time, but George Mason is the new best story. Sure, you could argue that the difference between Virginia and Chaminade was greater than Connecticut and GMU. I mean, Chaminade was NAIA school that no one had ever heard of and UVA was undefeated, #1 in the country and was led by Ralph Sampson, one of the greatest college players ever. While no one outside of northern Virginia has ever heard of George Mason, it is a D1 school who had just won three NCAA tournament games, including triumphs over powers Michigan State and North Carolina.

But consider the circumstances. That Chaminade game was played in an non-air-conditioned shoe box in front of a tiny crowd. Not only did nobody see the game, but no one even knew it was being played. Virginia was on their way back from a trip around the world - they had traveled to Japan to play a couple of games, including one against Akeem Olajuwon and the rest of his Phi Slamma Jamma brethren. Several of the Virginia players got sick on the trip. In fact, Sampson didn't even play against Houston, but Virginia won anyway. When the Cavaliers arrived in Hawaii, they were tired, sick and jet lagged. They still should have beaten the Silverswords, of course, but you can understand how and why they didn't have their hearts (or legs) in it.

Last Sunday's game was a NCAA Tournament Regional Final. Huge stakes. A packed stadium. A national TV audience of millions. UConn may not be ranked #1 in the AP poll, but they were the prohibitive favorites to win the tournament. Not only that, but in recent years the Huskies had become the closest thing to a sure thing that there is. Once they got close the end, they always closed the deal. Facing a team that until ten days previous had never won an NCAA Tournament game? With no fewer than six legit NBA prospects in their lineup versus a bunch of guys who will have to get passports to collect money to play basketball? It should have been a blowout.

Then consider the way the game went. UConn opened a decent early lead - exactly what you'd expect a superior team to do. The Patriots were game and held tough until the Huskies got serious at the end of the half and opened up a 12 point lead. I thought that was it. Mason was a great story, but they were done. But they weren't. They fought harder in the second half and in front of millions of disbelieving eyes, opened what seemed to be a late, insurmountable lead. But they blew it. Cinderella tripped on her way down the stairs. When Denham Brown's shot hit the rim fourteen times and fell through while the horn was still echoing, I was sure that was it. The better team had all the momentum and surely they were alert by now, right? Nope. Cinderella got back up, and beat the pumpkin back into a stagecoach.

George Mason - the greatest Cinderella of all time. Don't talk to me about Chaminade ever again.

Please.

-------------------------------------------

While Jim Larranaga is everybody's newest bestest friend, I've actually known him for over 20 years. Well, sorta. Way back in the early 80s, 1981 maybe, I attended the University of Virginia basketball camp. I wasn't much of a basketball player, but the chance to meet and rub elbows with Ralph Sampson, Jeff Lamp and others was too great.

Head coach Terry Holland ran the camp, but just like in real life, the assistant coaches actually did a lot of the work of running drills. Of course, I had no idea who the assistants were, but everyone in camp quickly learned who Jim Larranaga was. He was loud, brash, cocky and mean. He had that unmistakable New York accent and it seemed like he was always yelling at someone. Everyone quickly came to hate him. Maybe that was his role. Holland was the southern gentleman and Larranaga was his attack dog, always ready to do the yelling that Holland tried to avoid.

But even then, as everyone cowered from him, it was clear that Larranaga had a lot of charisma. I don't remember any of the other assistants, and I probably didn't even learn their names then. He had a lot of presence (and a lot more hair than he does now).

I remember one session late in the week when the whole camp was together, maybe sitting in the bleachers at University Hall. Coach Larranaga had everyone's attention and for once he wasn't yelling at us to get in better defensive position or to box out. He was just telling a story. A story about a high school player who couldn't quite dunk, but kept trying and trying. It was a hokey story, but it worked. Like I said, Larranaga had charisma. That one story almost redeemed him in my eleven-year-old eyes. Maybe he wasn't such a bad guy after all. But I stayed away from him just to be sure.

What Could Have Been

This is always fun. SI tries to roll back the clock and imagine what the college basketball landscape would look like if studs didn't leave early for the NBA. For you youngsters, about 20 years ago - the golden age for college basketball, IMHO - this is pretty much what the top teams looked like.

A couple of notes:
Duke - After reading the blurb, I had to get myself a Mountain Dew just so I could spray it all over my monitor at the idea that Shavlik Randolph would have started this year had he not gone to the NBA. He barely played last year! Add Luol Deng and Shaun Livingston and you have a hell of a squad and one that Randolph would barely affect.

Ohio State with LeBron James? Sick. In fairness, even 20 years ago, stars of his ilk didn't play four years. Isiah Thomas, Michael Jordan and James Worthy all left early and so would have Bron Bron.

UConn's front line of Villanueva, Bynum, Boone, Armstrong and Adrien would have been amazing.

Memphis would have been so good even John Calipari couldn't have screwed them up. Like LeBron though, no way would Amare Stoudemire have played four years of college ball in just about any era.

Check out UNC's lineup - the guys from last year plus J.R. Smith and Dwight Howard. Tyler Hansbrough would have barely played. That might have been the best team ever.

Louisville has been hurt the most by defections. They struggled all year and have lost five guys to the League.

Like The Phoenix

Like MacArthur, but unlike Calhoun, I have returned. Or more accurately, Dave Sez has returned. Sadly, I've been here for a week already trying to get it back. In the end, I had to concede defeat. I stopped fouling a couple of days ago and admitted that I just wasn't going to be able to achieve a full victory. Instead (to continue mixing the hell out of my metaphors), I negotiated a surrender. I'd let the crashed drive take my entire history of comments to the garbage dump, but I'd get to keep all of my articles. It wasn't what I'd hoped for, but it was really all I could do. I really, really hate losing those comments, but short of forking over thousands of bucks for some serious hard drive restoration (anyone want to volunteer their services?), I had no choice. The database was corrupted.

So, consider this a rebirth. Didn't like what someone said about Ronald Curry or Shavlik Randolph (two of my most persistently commented-on pieces)? Write something better. Did you lose something particularly profound that you typed a while back? See if Google's cache can dig it up for you and repost it (please!).

The one good thing that came out of all of this is that it nudged me to finally fork out a little cash for a better box to host this on. You wouldn't believe the clunker that I used to host Dave Sez on. This box isn't exactly the state-of-the-art, but it's many times more capable than what I had. You should notice that things are much more responsive.

Tomorrow night I set up the nightly backup. I promise. Heck, if I get a jolt of energy, I might just try to get it going tonight.

Crunch Time

Sorry for my relative silence so far this week. It's not like me in such a fun and important time of the college hoops season, but I've been swamped with work. You see, an old college friend decided to put together a ski trip for a group of us, and wouldn't you know it, he picked this week. At the time, I didn't realize that his days coincided with the best four-day stretch on the sports calendar, but so it is. Unfortunately, if the threat of missing a bunch of games isn't enough, I had to squeeze a whole bunch of work into my two days this week.

But now that's done. Now I have to try to convince my brain that it's not really spring, that it hasn't really been 80+ degrees for days now and that tomorrow I will be in the snowy mountains. It doesn't seem real.

But enough about that. On to the tournament, and the ACC teams in particular.

Duke
Is it just me, or did Duke get a particularly brutal bracket? Ostensibly, they got a #1 seed, but they (likely) play the team with the best record in the country in the second round and to get all the way to Indy, they'll have to make it through the Big Ten, Big Twelve and Big East champions! Has one bracket ever had the league champions from four of the six power leagues before? And don't forget that Cal was the runner-up in the Pac Ten.

As for Duke themselves, I like the way that they shook off their late-season malaise and got progressively better in each ACC Tournament game. J.J. Redick got back (nearly) to his season-long form and more importantly, the two key freshmen Greg Paulus and Josh McRoberts both played very well. If Duke is going to make a deep run, they are going to need strong play from Paulus in particular. He needs to tone down the antics several notches though. He was positively Melchionnic last week. Wojciechowski-ish, if you will.

On the flip side, does anyone know where Sean Dockery went? Send out an APB, the senior is missing. And he might have taken DeMarcus Nelson with him. Unfortunately for the Blue Devils, they only play seven guys, so they need all of them to contribute in some way. Not everyone has to score 15 points, but you can't have guys disappearing, not on this team. It's a good team, but not that good.

For that reason, I don't think the Dukies are going to make it to the Final Four this year. This team just doesn't have any more upside. I'm not so sure they can get better, but all it takes is one bad game from Redick or Shelden Williams and they are much, much worse. Also, they have been playing tight for weeks now. It's like they feel like they are Duke and they should win championships, especially with the great J.J. Redick on their side. Then, when teams don't roll over, the Devils appear frazzled. They aren't the first Duke squad to play tight late in the season, and like those other Duke teams, this one's gonna falter.

North Carolina
It's hard not to like this Tar Heel squad. Well, hard if you aren't a Duke fan, that is. The Heels are deep and talented, but yet still find minutes for guys like Wes Miller and Byron Sanders. They are young, yet the best player is one of the most focused and poised players in the nation.

Not only do I like this team, but I like the way they are playing. They are the opposite of Duke. They appear to be having fun on the court, but not in loosy-goosey, play-time kind of way, but in a we're-going-to-kick-your-ass-and-smile-while-we-do-it kind of way. That's a great tournament attitude.

Unfortunately for the Heels, I'm just not convinced they are a Final Four team. They could be of course, they are good enough, but I really think this tournament is UConn's to lose. The Huskies can match Carolina's talent, and then some, and have much more big game experience. But then, UConn has played some sloppy and dispassionate ball at times this year. If Connecticut gets upset early on, the Heels could dance their way to Indianapolis.

Boston College
Before the ACC Tournament, I didn't like this BC team at all. Sure, they were a good team with good players, but their attitude was obnoxious and their playing style was not only boring, but it lent itself to close games. Play too many close games and you get upset.

But then something happened. They started running out after missed (and made) baskets and turnovers and picked up some easy buckets. The Eagles got a few freebies against both Maryland and UNC. Get four or five of those a game and the whole complexion changes. But that wasn't all, they also picked up the pace in their half-court sets a bit, still utilizing their excellent interior passing, but finding good looks throughout the shot clock, not just at the end. It made all the difference. Not only were they a more aesthetically pleasing team, but they took better advantage of their talent and became much more dangerous.

A week ago, I was sure that the Eagles were primed for a first or second-round upset, but not now. They could win four tourney games, easy. Well, easy if Villanova weren't on their side of the bracket. I really like that Wildcat team, but I would not be shocked if BC put together a run to Indy.

But then, I wouldn't be shocked by an early loss either.

NC State
Man. What to say. I can't recall a more disappointing late-season slump in recent memory (Maryland is exempt from this category, as they invented it.) It's not just that they have lost four in a row, including two to the last-place team in the league, but they looked like crap doing it. Very erratic effort, no production from Engin Atsur, Ilian Evtimov and Cedric Simmons and they look unhappy.

What makes things tougher is that this slump also signifies a serious dent in Herb Sendek's standing in the State family. Over ten years, he very, VERY slowly built up a decent foundation of support in the Wolfpack community. He never won over all of the fans (far from it), but everyone had to acknowledge that things had been pretty good in recent years. No, they still aren't a comparable program to UNC or Duke, which is what State fans expect, but at least they have become a consistent upper-tier ACC team. But if this team continues its flame-out, I think fans will turn on Sendek with an heretofore unseen fury. It will be like he betrayed them. Those who jumped on his bandwagon while shrugging their shoulders over the past two or three years, will leap off, pitchforks and torches in hand. You can just see it coming. Caulton Tudor all but called for Sendek to be fired today.

So, what's going to happen? Sometimes in sports when you think for sure a team will lose in the tourney because they ended the season on a skid, they go and win two or three games. Could that happen here? Sure, it could. But I don't think it will. I hate to pick any ACC team to lose in the first round, but I think State will have problems with Cal's Leon Powe and they will be one and done. They will not survive and advance.

And it might be Herb Sendek's last game on the bench for NC State.

----------------

Well, that's about it for me for the rest of the week. Enjoy the games!

Oh, and don't miss the NIT! The ACC may have only gotten four teams in the NCAA (and that's all that was deserved), but six got NIT bids. I wonder if that's a record? In fact, Virginia tips off in less than an hour ... at Stanford! Can you believe that? The NIT put out their brackets at 9:30 on Sunday night and had Virginia scheduled to play at Stanford exactly 48 hours later. Dean Smith is on the NIT's selection panel. Think he's still mad that Terry Holland named his dog Dean because it whined a lot as a puppy?

Win Your Office Pool

If you've poked around my site much, you probably figured out that I like me some stats. I love some good, geeky analysis of numbers. If I didn't have an actual job and family to take away from my critical Dave Sez time, this site would be wall-to-wall numbers. Fortunately for me (and you), there are guys like Ken Pomeroy (and many others) who have less life than I do (presumably) and who put out some great statistical analyses and power ratings.

One of those number geeks who I linked to in my ACC Expanded Standings is Mike Greenfield, who (with Thomas Federico) publishes his numbers at TeamRankings.com. Mike has built a very cool analytical tool that you can use (if you fork over a little change) to help you build your NCAA Pool brackets. He takes his power ratings along with a ton of other factors like Distance Traveled, Last 10 Games, Average Margin Of Victory, etc. to help you decide who should win just about any matchup in the tourney. Not sure who would win your predicted Regional Final matchup between Duke and Texas? Run the numbers. You can take their preset weights or you can tweak them because you think (for example) that Duke plays equally well anywhere, but Texas doesn't travel well.

Another cool feature is a rundown of past games with similar matchups. It looks like their database goes back at least ten years, which is pretty cool. It's like a history lesson mixed in with your crunching.

So, check it out. See if you can't use actual data to beat that secretary in Accountz Reeceevable who beats you every year using her "places I've been or would like to visit" methodology.

Full disclosure - Thomas Federico emailed me about this tool and they have an affiliate program that I signed up for. So, yes I could potentially earn a little money from this promotion, but I'd have linked to it anyway. And seriously, I don't think we're talking much money here. I just don't want to be accused of being a soulless shill like, say, Billy "Mr. Cash" Packer or Dick "You Want Me To Pitch Your Product? That's Awesome, Baby!" Vitale. (p.s. Corporate America, I'm kidding. Call me, we'll do lunch.)

Redick Breaks Career Three-Pointers Mark (Again)

Was Curtis Staples in the house Friday morning? No one seemed to notice, but J.J. Redick once again broke the NCAA record for career three pointers when he hit five against Miami. This time, it wasn't Staples who J.J. passed though, it was St. Peters' Keydren Clark who quietly passed J.J. last week. Their career stats here: Redick, Clark.

After today's game against BC, Redick will probably be about eight threes ahead of Clark with just the NCAA Tournament to go. St. Peters might make the NIT, so Keydren still has a chance, albeit slight, to end his career at #1. Of course, he could end his career at #1 and still lose it a day or two later.

ACC Tournament - Day Two

After impressively missing on three of my four predictions yesterday, I'm sure you all can't wait to see what I can get wrong today. In my defense, I nearly had the courage to pick Wake Forest to upset Florida State. Unfortunately, I have no more heart than the Seminoles and went with the chalk.

The one game I got right was Maryland smacking Georgia Tech around. Considering the circumstances, that might have been the Terrapins' most impressive game of the year.

03/10/06 Miami @ Duke Greensboro, N.C. - 12:00 p.m.
Duke has obviously been wobbly of late, but I'm guessing they found their legs at some point during their five days off since losing the Carolina. Miami made a strong comeback against Clemson, but I'd be shocked if they kept this game within single digits. I think Duke will come out with the defensive intensity they've been missing.

03/10/06 Wake Forest @ NC State Greensboro, N.C. - 2:30 p.m.
So Wake Forest won two of their first 15 ACC games, but has now won two in a row (and three of five)? Meanwhile, NC State has lost three in row. And of course, Wake beat State rather soundly just last weekend.

Hmmm. I honestly don't know what to think about this game. Sometimes you want to go against the trends in a game like this - the assumption is that teams will revert to the mean, but I'm not sure this time. Wake may have finally found whatever it is that they are missing and State is banged up. I would not be surprised to see another upset here, but I'll give Sendek's boys the benefit because he has a very good ACC Tournament record.

03/10/06 Virginia @ North Carolina Greensboro, N.C. - 7:00 p.m.
Not gonna happen. It shouldn't be another 45-point blowout, but Virginia simply doesn't have the offensive firepower to beat back these Tar Heels. I'd be happy if they can keep it under 15.

03/10/06 Maryland @ Boston College Greensboro, N.C. - 9:30 p.m.
I really think Maryland needs to win this game. As things stand right now, they might be in, but they have to play again. They are either going to help or hurt their standing and they can't afford any damage. I really like they way they played last night and they have won three straight. Maybe, like the Deacons, the Terps have finally figured out what they are doing wrong. Considering that that crowd might find themselves pulling for the old guard in this late game, I think Maryland can and will do it. Or maybe I'm just hoping for a fifth NCAA Tournament team.

An Email On The ACC Tournament

One of my Dave Sez readers sent in a lengthy and thoughtful email on the new structure of the ACC Tournament. His points center around how the new larger tournament makes it harder for all of the teams, including those at the top, to win. With more teams comes more likelihood for unexpected results, which is both good and bad. We like our tournaments to include some upsets, but we also like having a few established power programs. Will those powers be less dominant with more teams in the mix? And how will it affect mid-level programs and mid-level coaches that their chance of winning an occasional tournament has now dropped by about 33%?

I won't chime in any more and let his words stand. Feel free to discuss in the comments.

We've heard a lot about how important it is to finish in the top four and avoid the dreaded "four game tournament" scenario, and rightly so. But broadening the field has another effect, one far less recognized: increasing the field increases the likelihood that some top seeds will be upset before the semifinals and finals. Everyone seems to be looking forward to Duke-UNC III, yet top seeds one through four will now face in some cases far stiffer, more motivated competition than they would have under the eight- nine-team format. Duke, for example, will face in its first game a team with a winning record, either Clemson or Miami, both of whom finished a game only a win away from a .500 finish in the league this year. Two years ago, Duke would have played the winner of the "play-in" game, Georgia Tech or Wake Forest, the dregs of the season. (Thirty years ago, in a seven team league, Duke would have received a bye to the semis!).

Perhaps the downside of playing better teams in the quarters will be countered by playing teams on one day’s rest. But it could mean instead that, in the quarters, the unexpected is more likely to occur than the expected. It may mean more memorable games in the early rounds, with early round "upsets," and correspondingly less competitive games in the semis and finals and even lower seeds face the top seeds who get through. It means fewer heavyweight slugfests in the finals: a Duke-UNC rematch is perhaps more likely than any other pairing in the final this year, but it is less likely than it would have been a few years ago. It means a streak of championships like Duke's recent run will become more difficult to accomplish. In other words, the ACC Tournament will feel the same effects - to a somewhat lesser degree - that the NCAA tournament experienced when it more than doubled its field size three decades ago.

Some might prefer a more wide-open tournament; indeed, interest in the NCAAs has certainly sky-rocketed since the field was expanded. But in the more regional ACC, I question whether too many semis and finals pitting high seeds vs. low seeds will be good for the league or its teams. Basically, the tourney needs competitive marquee games (i.e. UNC or Duke in the final more often than not, playing another high seed) to sustain national interest in the tournament and its reputation as the best of its kind. I have this nightmare of a BC vs. FSU final, played in a half empty Greensboro Coliseum. What an abominable shame that would be.

Proportionately, winning will be harder for everybody, of course. The Marylands, Georgia Techs, and NC States, who usually broke through every fifteen or twenty years will now find it even tougher to do so, (Virginia: from every fifty years to every... I don't want to think about it.) Not good news for coaches of the mid-level powers who need to win a tournament every once in a while to save their jobs or build their programs. How might the fans of these schools view legacies of coaches like Driesell, Cremins, Valvano and Holland if they'd never won the ACC Tournament?

All this might not matter so much if the league didn't crown the tourney winner as "conference champion." The only way I see mitigating these effects would be to reshuffle the seeds after the first round. Have the top seed play the lowest remaining seed in the tournament in the quarters. I can't imagine that will happen.

It seems to me the new super conference ACC is diminishing its most distinctive event. I predict we will look back on the seventies and eighties as the golden age of the ACC Tournament.

p.s. I should add that Caulton Tudor asks some of those same questions today, but for different reasons.

ACC Tournament - First Round

How weird is it that there are four games on Thursday? It just doesn't seem right. It was mildly odd way back when Florida State joined the league and they had to add the one bastard child Thursday night game. Being the lone game made it stick out like a sore thumb, kind of like putting the bad teams in stockades in the town square. But then, that game became the Les Robinson Thursday Night Invitational Play-In Game, and that made it a bit more fun (unless you were a State fan).

But now, there's a whole day of games, but without any of the best teams. It's funky.

Funky, but fun. Instead of digging up a jillion links for to read through, I'm going to be lazy and point you towards The Duke Basketball Report's page of links. They always do a good job of finding a lot of sources.

And for my brief, but amazingly insightful and accurate predictions of today's games.

03/09/06 Clemson @ Miami - 12:00 PM
Clemson has been hot, and don't forget what I wrote about their unmentioned, but still possible, chance at an NCAA bid. Yeah, it's a long shot, but it's there. I think the Tiggers will take out the stumbling Hurricanes.

03/09/06 Wake Forest @ Florida State - 2:30 PM
Wake has been playing somewhat better of late, but so has Florida State. The Seminoles need to win this game to sew up their NCAA bid, while Wake really has little to play for, except and outside shot at and NIT bid. Generally, when one team has more to play for and that team is the better team anyway, it's an easy pick. But I have a nagging feeling that this game could be an upset.

Screw it, I'm ignoring my gut and going with my head on this one. Florida State.

03/09/06 Virginia Tech @ Virginia - 7:00 PM
I wish I could say that I think Virginia was going to take this game, but I can't. The teams are fairly evenly matched - Tech has a better team, but Virginia's had a better year. The Cavs won both regular season matchups, but both games were very close. It's hard to beat a team three times in a season, particularly when the two teams are fairly evenly matched.

I think the Hokies will pull out a close win here (although I hope I'm wrong).

03/09/06 Georgia Tech @ Maryland - 9:30 PM
Maryland's back is to the wall and they have the blindfold on, but the firing squad hasn't shot yet. This game could be that "fire!" command, or it could mean that the blindfold comes off. The Terrapins are the better team and they should win this one. I think they will.

Final Regular Season Prouty Ratings

As I promised yesterday, I calculated the final regular season Prouty ratings for all ACC players. As I expected, the Prouties accurately picked four of the five first-team All-ACC performers. The one exception is Sean Singletary, who comes in 15th in Prouty, but the ratings don't take into account leadership, toughness or offensive burden, other than in the catch-all category of Win Effect (see this explanation of the ratings).

One player I pointed out yesterday as being undervalued by the league's voters was Jared Dudley. Just as I suspected, the Prouties backed me up. Dudley comes in fifth place overall in the league, which makes sense, as his numbers are fairly close to his teammate Craig Smith's.

One aspect of the Prouty ratings that I've said before that I like is also one that I have some problems with. We all know that statistics don't tell the whole story in basketball, so the Prouty ratings include a team's overall success in the formula. The theory is that things like setting good picks, fighting through screens, remembering plays and hustling after loose balls don't always show up in a box score, but they are critical aspects of winning. So, the ratings factor in a team's winning percentage. I think that's great, but I think that the Prouty ratings give this factor too much weight. Win Effect is equal to Points Per Minute, Possessions Per Minute and Offensive Efficiency. While I agree that some stats are missing in there, I don't think the missing stats add up to 25% of the total. Conventional numbers aren't that bad.

To fix this problem, I recalculated the ratings giving Win Effect only 10% of the total. I put these in a column called "Dave" for "Dave Ratings" just because something like "Adjusted Prouty" sounded too boring (and made the column too wide). This change doesn't have a huge overall impact, but it does help guys like Singletary who shine on a team that's not doing well. It also helps to offset the pull that great teams have on average players. For example, Sean Dockery is a good player who's important to Duke's success, but is he really the 12th best player in the league? Far from it. The Dave ratings put him at 35, which is more reasonable (especially when you remember that there are 12 teams in the league now).

Below is a list of the top 50 players in the league, sorted by their Dave Rating. You can see the full stats here.

Rank	Player		Team	Prouty	Dave

1	JJ Redick		Duke	0.589	0.540

2	Shelden Williams	Duke	0.569	0.535

3	Tyler Hansbrough	UNC	0.514	0.500

4	Craig Smith	BC	0.515	0.478

5	Jared Dudley	BC	0.513	0.469

6	Al Thornton	FSU	0.474	0.468

7	Reyshawn Terry	UNC	0.462	0.462

8	Chris McCray	MD	0.422	0.453

9	Cedric Simmons	NCS	0.457	0.449

10	Eric Williams	WF	0.437	0.442

11	David Noel	UNC	0.476	0.442

12	Sean Singletary	UVA	0.434	0.436

13	Alexander Johnson	FSU	0.430	0.433

14	Danny Green	UNC	0.409	0.429

15	Robert Hite	UM	0.427	0.428

16	Nik Caner-Medley	MD	0.441	0.427

17	Engin Atsur	NCS	0.452	0.421

18	Akin Akingbala	CU	0.415	0.414

19	Tyrese Rice	BC	0.414	0.413

20	Ilian Evtimov	NCS	0.431	0.413

21	Josh McRoberts	Duke	0.429	0.412

22	Justin Gray	WF	0.413	0.411

23	Guillermo Diaz	UM	0.418	0.410

24	JR Reynolds	UVA	0.408	0.404

25	Cameron Bennerman	NCS	0.425	0.404

26	Jamon Gordon	VT	0.407	0.404

27	Louis Hinnant	BC	0.439	0.402

28	Trent Strickland	WF	0.402	0.402

29	Ra'Sean Dickey	GT	0.381	0.401

30	Ekene Ibekwe	MD	0.393	0.400

31	Shawan Robinson	CU	0.398	0.397

32	Anthony Morrow	GT	0.385	0.396

33	Sean Marshall	BC	0.421	0.393

34	Zabian Dowdell	VT	0.398	0.391

35	Sean Dockery	Duke	0.440	0.391

36	James Mays	CU	0.348	0.390

37	Vernon Hamilton	CU	0.399	0.388

38	Isaiah Swann	FSU	0.386	0.387

39	Gavin Grant	NCS	0.389	0.387

40	Coleman Collins	VT	0.379	0.386

41	Jeremis Smith	GT	0.369	0.385

42	Andrew Brackman	NCS	0.381	0.384

43	Mike Jones	MD	0.375	0.379

44	Tony Bethel	NCS	0.405	0.378

45	Wes Miller	UNC	0.387	0.377

46	DJ Strawberry	MD	0.393	0.377

47	Andrew Wilson	FSU	0.367	0.374

48	Anthony King	UM	0.371	0.372

49	James Gist	MD	0.366	0.371

50	Bobby Frasor	UNC	0.395	0.367

A few thing that stood out to me:

• Losing Chris McCray really hurt Maryland more than most might have guessed. Actually, that's fairly obvious now, but seeing that McCray still rates as the eighth best player in the league, it makes a lot of sense.


• Justin Gray, as I pointed out yesterday, was way overrated by the voters. I think they gave him credit for his career, or more likely, just looked at his scoring average.


• Danny Green isn't just a nice role player for Carolina - he's very efficiently productive!


• Tyrese Rice should probably be starting for Boston College.


• Cameron Bennerman is overrated, at least relative to his NC State teammates. I suspected this already, and the numbers back it up. Ilian Evtimov and Engin Atsur, his more versatile teammates, count more towards State's success (or lack thereof).


• Reyshawn Terry, at least from a production standpoint, is a better player than David Noel. I know he's not the leader that Noel is, but Terry had a hell of a emergence in the second half of the season, and his numbers reflect that.


• Florida State's Andrew Wilson is not only older than half of the NBA All-Stars, but he's the most efficient scorer in the league (among players who play at least 15 minutes per game. Miami's flashy freshman Denis Clemente is dead last.


• It's no shocker that J.J. Redick leads the league in points per minute (by a huge margin), but I was surprised to see that Sean Singletary is number two. When you factor in Virginia's relatively slow tempo, that's just more evidence to support his first-team honors. Although, to be fair, Justin Gray comes in third, so either I'm too hard on Gray or that stat means less than I think.


• When he wears his mask, Laurynas Mikalauskas is the scariest-looking player in decades. He looks like he wants to eat your children.

All-ACC Teams Announced

As you've probably seen by now, the ACC released it's 2006 All-ACC Basketball teams today. The list is pretty solid and looks pretty close to what I expected.

I hope they don't mind, but I'm going to steal the table from the ACC website:

The first team is fairly non-controversial. Any idiot with a pair of eyes could see that J.J. Redick, Shelden Williams and Tyler Hansbrough needed to be on the first team. Craig Smith was a pretty obvious choice as well, although he didn't have the kind of season that many people expected. The one player that could be debated is Sean Singletary. As a Virginia fan, it's great to see the first Cav on there in fourteen years (Bryant Stith in 1992 was the last Virginia player on the first team), but I'm not convinced that I would have voted him on. His measurable numbers don't quite hold up compared to guys like Jared Dudley or Al Thornton. Also, while Singletary is clearly the best point guard in the league, he does turn the ball over a lot and takes a lot of bad shots. Of course, he's often forced to try difficult plays because there simply aren't many other options on that offense. Also, it's often hard to accurately measure a point guard's impact on the team. Assists don't tell the whole story, particularly with a guy like Singletary whose toughness set a tone for Virginia all year. It was like he personally refused to be a basement-dwelling team. He never played like a player on a bad team and he never seemed surprised by his success. I think I'm talking myself into 100% agreement with his inclusion!

It's always interesting to look closely at the votes to see how guys were regarded relative to each other. The one player who it appears was most undervalued was Jared Dudley. For a good part of the season, he, not Craig Smith was the best player on that BC team and his numbers reflect that. They are very similar to Smith's and it is Dudley who is the heart and soul of that squad. Maybe he lost points for that hair. And he should have.

On the flip side, I think a lot of voters forgot to actually watch Wake Forest play this year (although that can be understood). There's no other explanation for having Justin Gray so high. I love the guy, but he had an awful year. Yeah, he scored 18 ppg, but he shot under 38% from the floor! And he had basically a 1:1 assists-to-turnovers ratio. When I get my updated Prouty numbers out later this week, you'll see that his efficiency ratings don't justify his making even the third team, and that doesn't even take into account his lack of leadership on a team sorely needing direction.

I wish they still published the whole list of players who got votes. It's always fun to see who some guys vote for. I wonder how many votes Jason Cain picked up?

Pomeroy on Duke-UNC

Ken Pomeroy has a nice writeup on the Duke-UNC game. As always, he makes some good observations and he caps this one off with a purty little graph.

ACC Expanded Standings - 3/6/2006

This is really the last time that these standings will have much meaning. Obviously the regular season results are now set. The ACC tournament could have a critical impact on a few teams, but we'll know just what that impact will be by next Monday. I doubt I'll get a chance to rerun the numbers during the tournament.

Suffice it to say that there are two (three? See below) ACC teams who need to put forth a strong ACC Tournament showing to get into the NCAAs. Four teams are absolute locks and are just playing for seeding, and in Duke and NC State's cases, trying to find their games.

Florida State and Maryland both won two games last week to put themselves back into serious NCAA contention. Most seem to think that the Seminoles' win over Duke got them in. I mostly believe them, but I think they had to win that Miami game as well. As it stands now, their RPI is still a meager 56, but the other computer rankings are more impressed. More important for FSU, they now have 19 wins and one signature triumph. If any of you saw the Virginia-Maryland game yesterday, they interviewed UVA AD Craig Littlepage during the game. He is the chairman of the NCAA selection committee this year, so his comments on Florida State were significant. From what Littlepage said, the NCAA is definitely giving Florida State some credit for their near-win over Duke earlier in the year. The committee seems to be rounding that one up in FSU's favor, giving them more like 19.5 wins. Sounds like a sure thing to me. But they better beat Wake on Thursday to be sure.

Maryland's wins were much less interesting, but they are sitting at 18-11 on the season now and have a relatively healthy RPI of 47. If you remember back to this article, Maryland's RPI alone puts that at a historical chance of between 30-50%. A win over Georgia Tech on Thursday would push them even higher. Beating BC on Friday isn't out of the question either - the Terps did win their one meeting this season. If they win those two and then lose to UNC on Saturday, the Terps would be 20-12 with an RPI of between 40-45. If they were left out with 20 wins, it would be a precedent.

But you know what, that's not really the whole story of ACC bubble teams. People will call me crazy, but take a look at Clemson. Like Maryland, they are 18-11. Their RPI sucks (70), but with two wins, you can be sure that that would climb. Of course, their second win would have to be over Duke, so it's pretty unlikely, but at the same time, it would be mighty valuable (and would add up to a five-game winning streak). It's a pretty unlikely happening, but it's not impossible, especially with the way that Duke has been playing.

But back to reality. Let me sum up Maryland and Florida State's resumes:
FSU
Pros

• 19 wins


• Controversial loss to Duke (half a win)


• Actual win over Duke


• Four wins in last five games


• Strong non-RPI computer ratings (see below)

• Poor RPI of 56


• Weak non-conference schedule (one game against a top-100 school and they lost)


• Only one win over tournament team

Maryland
Pros

• 18 wins


• Quality wins over Arkansas and Boston College


• Decent non-conference schedule (Gonzaga, Arkansas, GW, Temple)


• Decent RPI of 47

• 5-7 since losing Chris McCray (the committee does take personnel changes into account)


• 2-8 against likely NCAA teams

Standings? You want the expanded standings? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE UP-TO-DATE EXPANDED STANDINGS!!

Team	prev/cur	Pomeroy	Sagarin	Greenfield	RPI	Avg.	Postseason Prediction	Trend
Duke (27-3, 14-2)	prev	1	1	1	1	1	Will probably need to make the ACC finals to ensure a 1 seed.
	cur	1	1	3	1	1.5
UNC (21-6, 12-4)	prev	12	9	14	13	12	Looking like a 2 seed now.  A 3 at the worst.
	cur	7	8	9	8	7
BC (24-6, 11-5)	prev	25	19	18	35	24.25	A 5 or 6 seed.  Good candidate for an upset loss.
	cur	23	21	19	32	23.75
NC State (21-8, 10-6)	prev	17	16	17	34	21	Hard to tell.  Anywhere from a 4 to an 9 seed.
	cur	22	18	23	40	25.75
FSU (19-8, 9-7)	prev	35	39	39	65	44.5	A dangerous 9 - 11 seed.
	cur	27	24	27	56	33.5
Maryland (18-11, 8-8)	prev	54	43	47	51	48.75	NCAA! Anywhere from an 9 to 12 seed.
	cur	57	39	46	47	47.25
Clemson (18-11, 7-9)	prev	65	56	64	72	64.25	NIT
	cur	56	56	57	70	59.75
Miami (15-14, 7-9)	prev	57	73	55	71	64	NIT
	cur	60	74	58	81	68.25
Virginia (14-13, 7-9)	prev	74	60	59	67	65	NIT, but just barely.
	cur	82	73	63	77	73.75
VA Tech (14-15, 4-12)	prev	67	80	77	116	85	Spring football!
	cur	70	84	87	131	93
GA Tech (11-16, 4-12)	prev	94	90	106	137	106.75	What number does Thaddeus Young want to wear?
	cur	94	96	107	150	111.75
Wake Forest (15-15, 3-13)	prev	106	97	100	113	104	Shopping for defensive plans on eBay.
	cur	93	85	88	107	93.25

The Week That Was - 2/27 - 3/5/2006

02/28/06 Boston College 80, Wake Forest 65 - Chestnut Hill, Mass.
Clinical. Predictable.

03/01/06 Clemson 86, Virginia Tech 81 - Blacksburg, Va.
Don't look now, but the Tigers seem to be finishing quite strongly. Road ACC wins are always something to be proud of, particularly for a team that had a pretty recent five game skid.

03/01/06 Florida State 79, Duke 74 - Tallahassee, Fla.
How about those Seminoles? Everyone has been pointing to this game as a possible upset. Usually when that happens, it ends up being a blowout for the favorite. Not this time. What struck me about this game was how FSU came out absolutely fired up and almost cocky and Duke seemed to let them set the tempo. It was like Duke was in a fight and instead of coming out swinging, they just braced themselves to take the punches. Not what I'm used to seeing.

03/01/06 Maryland 65, Miami 61 - College Park, Md.
Break out the paddles, I think there's some life in this one yet! Clear!

03/01/06 North Carolina 99, Virginia 54 - Chapel Hill, N.C.
I pretty much covered this one already. Ugly. It was over about 10 minutes in. Virginia just didn't have the toughness that they've shown all year and without that they are a bad team. On the flip side, Carolina is morphing into a juggernaut.

03/04/06 Boston College 59, Virginia Tech 57 - Chestnut Hill, Mass.
Not a very impressive effort from the Eagles on Senior Day. Not at all. Something tells me this team is gonna get bounced in the second round of the NCAA's. Or maybe the first.

03/04/06 Clemson 95, Georgia Tech 82 - Clemson, SC
Did I mention that the Tiggers had it going on? Nice win by Oliver Purnell's boys. Don't look now, but at 18-11, if they can get by Miami on Thursday, Clemson might just have an NCAA play-in game against Duke on Friday. Remember what Al Featherston taught us about 20-win teams?

03/04/06 Wake Forest 76, NC State 63 - Winston-Salem, N.C.
Speaking of non-impressive performances. State is now on a three-game losing streak at what would generally be considered "the wrong time." Remember just a few weeks ago when this was a mentally strong, versatile team? What happened? They looked positively lethargic against Wake Forest. Yeah, Cam Bennerman missed the game, but he's a good player, not a superstar.

03/04/06 North Carolina 83, Duke 76 - Durham, N.C.
Impressive performance by Roy's squad. Extremely impressive. He continues to use his deep bench, seemingly without fear of how the "lesser" players will perform in the cauldron. On the flip side, Coach K appears to have no faith in his bench and so his team is looking tired at the end of the year. That's now four consecutive sub-par games for the Blue Devils. I agree with Dick Vitale (forgive me) - this team needs to just take a couple of days off, clear their heads and recharge their batteries. I hope to have a longer piece on my thoughts on Duke later today or tonight.

03/05/06 Florida State 67, Miami 64 - Coral Gables, Fla.
Who is this team? First FSU actually gets the upset win that many predicted and then they take care of business against Miami. I'm not so sure that I'm not more impressed by the latter win. Getting the wins they should get hasn't exactly been the Seminoles M.O. in recent years. Or ever, actually. I have to think that they are 95% in the tourney at this point. Just don't crap the laundry hamper against Wake Forest on Thursday!

03/05/06 Maryland 71, Virginia 70 - Charlottesville, Va.
Tough loss for Virginia. They fought back from 18 down, with Sean Singletary on the bench with foul trouble, no less, and were up two with the ball with under two minutes left. Poor execution cost them the game. What is it with ACC teams and failing to get any sort of decent shot at the end of games/halves? I swear that in about half of the cases this year, teams either failed to get a shot off or were forced to jack a deep, contested shot off the dribble. Don't teams practice this situation anymore?

For Maryland, this week went exactly as it needed to. I wrote them off as completely off the bubble last week, but I guess I was too hasty. Now they have 18 wins and a sub-50 RPI. They are back in the conversation. I'll discuss their case a bit more later today with my expanded standings.

To Hate Like This

That article I linked to a few minutes ago was part of a series of excerpts that Inside Carolina is running about the soon-to-be-released book To Hate Like This Is To Be Happy Forever, by Will Blythe. Evidently, Blythe has a number of short pieces that he couldn't fit into the book and so he's sharing with IC.

They are fantastic.

The first of his articles is one on Melvin Scott and other former college players trying to hone their games for some unknown future. It's a great read.

Article III (the Chronicle one was II) is about UNC walk-on Philip McLamb.

Article IV is about going to a UNC-Duke game in Cameron (the most amazing athletic spectacle I've ever been to, by the way) and an encounter with Speedo Man.

I expect there will be one more piece today. I certainly hope so!

Digging Up Dirt: K and the Chronicle

Inside Carolina has an interesting article looking back Coach Krzyzewski's infamous tirade against the Duke Chronicle editors. Of course, you have to consider the source here - the author is an unabashed Carolina fan and this was printed in IC. That said, much of the content of the article is direct quotes from the Chronicle editor at that time, Rodney Peele.

Definition: Disingenuous

dis·in·gen·u·ous (dĭs'ĭn-jĕn'yū-əs)
adj.

1. Not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating: “an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, who … exemplified … the most disagreeable traits of his time” (David Cannadine).


2. Pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated; faux-naif.


3. Mike Krzyzewski: "I never look at talking to the referee as "working the ref." I think that's one of the worst phrases that could ever be made. I don't think that's what happens. What you're trying to do is find out why something has been done or explain your situation. It's not a matter of "working," it's a matter of explanation." source
   
4. Usage Problem. Unaware or uninformed; naive.

That About Settles It

I got an email last night from a reader that said exactly what I was thinking - the ACC Coach of the Year award was settled last night. No question.

The three men in the running were Coach K, Roy Williams and Dave Leitao, all for slightly different reasons. Krzyzewski was considered because while his team was picked first, no one expected them to win all of their games. Well, after last night's loss, they haven't won all of their games. And it's not just a one game thing - that's now three games in a row where they haven't played very well. It appears to me that K has allowed Duke to become the J.J. Redick show and Redick has become a slave to his scoring average. Earlier in the year, when his shots weren't falling, he got other players involved and started taking the ball to the hole. Last night, he just kept shooting. Sure, he scored 30, but it took him 28 shots to get there. That's not a good game.

Dave Leitao was in the running because he had taken the team with the worst talent in the league and got them on the verge of .500 in the ACC. The loss last night doesn't end that possibility, but it was the second bad loss in a row for Virginia. And you simply can't win any team awards after you lose to a conference rival by 45 points. If that's not a rule, it should be.

So, the award is Roy Williams', and after the run Carolina has been on the past couple of weeks, it should be unanimous. Like with Duke, this is not just a one game thing, but when you beat a mid-level conference team (mid-level by their record, at least) by 45 points, you aren't just a good team or even a very good team - you're a juggernaut. Duke hasn't whomped an ACC team by that much, not even close. The emphatic win over Virginia officially stamps this UNC squad as a Final Four contender. They won't be a favorite to get that far, and they shouldn't be, but they certainly have shown that they are good enough to win four NCAA Tourney games.

That same emailer pointed out that he can't remember any Dean Smith coaching jobs any better than this year. I can't argue with him, although I admit to not having the in-depth Carolina memory to challenge it. In some ways, this team reminds me of UNC's 1993 squad, a deep team full of very good players, but no real superstars. I always thought that 1993 squad was a special bit of alchemy and this year Roy is matching his mentor.

Roy Williams - your 2006 ACC Coach of the Year

p.s. I did a Google image search for "Huckleberry Hound" to find that pic and the number one result was from my site. I had forgotten that I used that pic before. I found that kind of funny.

Coach Kommercial

Remember back in the fall when the N&O had one of their art guys (Gray Blackwell) do those Flash satires of Chuck Amato and John Bunting? They were great and I was wondering if they would ever do some for basketball. Well, the wait is over. Blackwell has now spoofed Mike Krzyzewski and it's damn funny. Check it out.