San Diego, George Mason, & Western Kentucky
um, so yeah. This was going to be a post about lost bubble spots. Teams like VA Tech, Ohio St and Kentucky should be sweating it out now that three leagues that have no business crashing the big dance are likely getting multiple bids. Now, what I'm actually going to do is follow suit and give my best guess as to who will be on the ACC All-Freshman team, especially since the actual version will be released soon.
Kyle Singler, Duke
JJ Hickson, NC State
Terrance Oglesby, Clemson
Jeff Teague, Wake Forest
Jeff Allen, Virginia Tech
That's also my best guess as to the order of votes received, I think a couple of players will be getting the shaft here, both James Johnson and Malcolm Delaney have had noteworthy years but will likely be sad victims of vote splitting among teammates. IF either of them get the nod it would likely be Johnson over Oglesby or Allen.
Wednesday, March 12
First Team All-ACC
Just doing a little spring cleaning around here - I was putting some things away, brushed the dust off a few magazines, and something caught my eye underneath some chips on the coffee table...it was a blog! Our blog! So I cleaned it off and decided to give it a shiny new post before the ACC and NCAA Tournaments get underway. Today I'll give my First Team All-ACC and later I'll give some awards like I did last year (best pure shooter, best blocker, etc.).
Tyler Hansbrough
Sean Singletary
Tyrese Rice
Wayne Ellington
DeMarcus Nelson
These guys all played out of control this year, with Rice and Singletary playing on sub-par teams and as a consequence playing more minutes than the other three, boosting their value. Rice earned some well-deserved national attention when he dropped 34 points on UNC at the beginning of March...in the first half of the game. Hansbrough and Ellington are the key weapons on a balanced UNC squad this year, and DeMarcus Nelson is the best all-around player on a dangerous Duke team. Hansbrough was awarded ACC Player of the Year earlier this week, and if you've not heard yet, he'll have his jersey number (50) retired after he finishes up as a result of being named The Sporting News Player of the Year.
Tyler Hansbrough
Sean Singletary
Tyrese Rice
Wayne Ellington
DeMarcus Nelson
These guys all played out of control this year, with Rice and Singletary playing on sub-par teams and as a consequence playing more minutes than the other three, boosting their value. Rice earned some well-deserved national attention when he dropped 34 points on UNC at the beginning of March...in the first half of the game. Hansbrough and Ellington are the key weapons on a balanced UNC squad this year, and DeMarcus Nelson is the best all-around player on a dangerous Duke team. Hansbrough was awarded ACC Player of the Year earlier this week, and if you've not heard yet, he'll have his jersey number (50) retired after he finishes up as a result of being named The Sporting News Player of the Year.
Monday, February 25
What about Ty?
So, with the impending (we all hope) return of the Heels' starting PG Ty Lawson, many of us are left to wonder: what wonderful offensive progress will said return bring? To dig deeper and answer (or attempt to answer) this question, I compared the tempo-free performance of Carolina's ACC games with and without Lawson. For statistical equivalence I left the Duke game off, since the other 12 games are against opponents that can be considered roughly equal. In addition, UNC has played a couple of teams both with and without Lawson (Clemson and NC State), helping to balance out the statistics.
There are 5 measurements that differ between the Lawson-led Heels and the Quentin Thomas-led Heels, and they fall into 3 categories:
1) Have Nothing to do with who is playing point guard (or if they do I have no idea how):
Defensive Efficiency has gotten much better for the Heels. Not too much stock can be placed in this stat since the teams UNC has faced aren't normalized in any way. Also, it doesn't make much sense other than the fact that the lineup has gotten taller. I don't think anyone would try to tell you that Thomas is a better defender than Lawson, even considering his 3 or 4 extra inches. I'd like to think that the team has collectively picked up its defense since Lawson's offensive impact is missing.
2) Have Something to do with who is playing point guard:
Effective FG% and Free Throw Rate have both seen marked jumps in the time since Lawson left the lineup. This isn't due to either Lawson or Thomas but the fact that the offense now runs more through Tyler Hansbrough, who makes a higher percentage of shots and gets to the free throw line more than pretty much anyone, period.
3) Have Everything to do with who is playing point guard:
These are the important things; the team's change over the past weeks in Turnover Rate, Pace, and Offensive Efficiency are all due to Ty Lawson's bum ankle. Without Lawson in the lineup a less effective ballhandler is always toting the rock (be it Thomas for Lawson or Ginyard for Thomas). Also, there are far fewer possessions that the Raycom cameraman misses by zooming in on someone popping their jersey or pounding their chest, which means we've been playing slower. Also, since the Heels aren't getting those easy layups in transition their overall Offensive Efficiency is down.
So, to overstate the obvious, the Heels miss Ty Lawson, and should benefit from an added 6 to 8 non-empty possessions per game upon his return. Let's just hope they don't forget to feed the machine down low.
All of the specific stats can be found here. (Don't you just love Google Docs?)
There are 5 measurements that differ between the Lawson-led Heels and the Quentin Thomas-led Heels, and they fall into 3 categories:
1) Have Nothing to do with who is playing point guard (or if they do I have no idea how):
Defensive Efficiency has gotten much better for the Heels. Not too much stock can be placed in this stat since the teams UNC has faced aren't normalized in any way. Also, it doesn't make much sense other than the fact that the lineup has gotten taller. I don't think anyone would try to tell you that Thomas is a better defender than Lawson, even considering his 3 or 4 extra inches. I'd like to think that the team has collectively picked up its defense since Lawson's offensive impact is missing.
2) Have Something to do with who is playing point guard:
Effective FG% and Free Throw Rate have both seen marked jumps in the time since Lawson left the lineup. This isn't due to either Lawson or Thomas but the fact that the offense now runs more through Tyler Hansbrough, who makes a higher percentage of shots and gets to the free throw line more than pretty much anyone, period.
3) Have Everything to do with who is playing point guard:
These are the important things; the team's change over the past weeks in Turnover Rate, Pace, and Offensive Efficiency are all due to Ty Lawson's bum ankle. Without Lawson in the lineup a less effective ballhandler is always toting the rock (be it Thomas for Lawson or Ginyard for Thomas). Also, there are far fewer possessions that the Raycom cameraman misses by zooming in on someone popping their jersey or pounding their chest, which means we've been playing slower. Also, since the Heels aren't getting those easy layups in transition their overall Offensive Efficiency is down.
So, to overstate the obvious, the Heels miss Ty Lawson, and should benefit from an added 6 to 8 non-empty possessions per game upon his return. Let's just hope they don't forget to feed the machine down low.
All of the specific stats can be found here. (Don't you just love Google Docs?)
Diamond Heels sweep FAU to begin 2008 season
UNC played Florida Atlantic this weekend in baseball, sweeping the series and starting off the 2008 season 3-0. This from TarHeelBlue:
"Carolina clubbed 11 home runs and added six doubles for a .675 slugging percentage in the series sweep at Florida Atlantic, which marked just the eighth sweep on the road for UNC in the last eight seasons. Left fielder Dustin Ackley and center fielder Seth Williams each hit three home runs, and second baseman Kyle Seager added two."
"National player of the year candidate Dustin Ackley had at least three hits in each game this weekend and finished with a .714 average (10-14), three home runs, seven RBI and five runs scored. He belted a pair of solo shots Friday and added a three-run blast in Sunday's series finale for six home runs in his last seven games dating to last year's College World Series. The Walnut Cove, N.C., native was 4-for-4 Friday for his sixth career four-hit game and followed with back-to-back three-hit games to close the series. Ackley finished with a 1.429 slugging percentage on the weekend." Ackley has a .706 OBP to go along with his 1.429 slugging percentage to begin the season.
"Carolina clubbed 11 home runs and added six doubles for a .675 slugging percentage in the series sweep at Florida Atlantic, which marked just the eighth sweep on the road for UNC in the last eight seasons. Left fielder Dustin Ackley and center fielder Seth Williams each hit three home runs, and second baseman Kyle Seager added two."
"National player of the year candidate Dustin Ackley had at least three hits in each game this weekend and finished with a .714 average (10-14), three home runs, seven RBI and five runs scored. He belted a pair of solo shots Friday and added a three-run blast in Sunday's series finale for six home runs in his last seven games dating to last year's College World Series. The Walnut Cove, N.C., native was 4-for-4 Friday for his sixth career four-hit game and followed with back-to-back three-hit games to close the series. Ackley finished with a 1.429 slugging percentage on the weekend." Ackley has a .706 OBP to go along with his 1.429 slugging percentage to begin the season.
Thursday, February 21
The Duke Dilemma
Just as an FYI (to those of you who read this site regularly but don't follow college basketball) Duke appears to have found a bit of a sour patch en route to replicating its ACC perfection of 1999. Now, many people seem to know why this happens to Duke, however, I'm personally more interested in why it happened to Duke this time and if it has revealed a chink in the Blue Devils' armor. So, to try and find what went wrong (statistically) within the Devils last two games, I decided to compare (using the appropriately named statsheet.com) their first 10 ACC games (10-0, average margin of victory +14 pts) with their last two (0-2, -7 points).
Individually, these games differed greatly from each other. The points per possessions stat tells the story with Wake Forest able to limit the Duke offense (88 ppp versus and average of 116) while Miami's offense dominated the Duke "D" (113 ppp compared to 97). This is echoed in the eFG%, Duke shot 46.8% against Wake (54.5 ACC average) while Miami shot 63.1% against Duke (49.8% opponents average), while Duke held Wake exactly to their defensive average and shot exactly their offensive average against Miami. So, 2 ACC loses that Duke can blame on entirely different ends of the floor.
However, there are 2 statistical abberations that both games have in common. The first is the overall pace. Duke plays a fairly high pace game, 2nd in the ACC only to UNC. Both Miami and Wake average 70 possessions a game or fewer (Duke is at 74.5 in ACC play), so you'd think that neither would want to push the pace against a Duke team at home when the tempo reaches the 80's. In both losses, the games were the fastest Duke has played in the ACC (83 and 85 possessions), tied only by their game against fellow roadrunner UNC. The reason for the high pace was that Duke turned the ball over on 10% more of their possessions than average, in both games. Duke averages a turnover on 16% of possessions, but in these games they were forced to 26.5% and 27%. Their only other ACC game above 18% was when Duke hosted FSU. So, what's the formula for beating the Devils? Apparently "get the freaking ball". This should come to no shock, as Duke is not known for their rebounding, if a team can force them into empty possessions and limit their overall chances, you may very well have Duke on the ropes. However, this is easier said than done when playing a team that starts 4 guards.
To view the Duke vs ACC opponents spreadsheet (with thanks to statsheet.com) click here.
Individually, these games differed greatly from each other. The points per possessions stat tells the story with Wake Forest able to limit the Duke offense (88 ppp versus and average of 116) while Miami's offense dominated the Duke "D" (113 ppp compared to 97). This is echoed in the eFG%, Duke shot 46.8% against Wake (54.5 ACC average) while Miami shot 63.1% against Duke (49.8% opponents average), while Duke held Wake exactly to their defensive average and shot exactly their offensive average against Miami. So, 2 ACC loses that Duke can blame on entirely different ends of the floor.
However, there are 2 statistical abberations that both games have in common. The first is the overall pace. Duke plays a fairly high pace game, 2nd in the ACC only to UNC. Both Miami and Wake average 70 possessions a game or fewer (Duke is at 74.5 in ACC play), so you'd think that neither would want to push the pace against a Duke team at home when the tempo reaches the 80's. In both losses, the games were the fastest Duke has played in the ACC (83 and 85 possessions), tied only by their game against fellow roadrunner UNC. The reason for the high pace was that Duke turned the ball over on 10% more of their possessions than average, in both games. Duke averages a turnover on 16% of possessions, but in these games they were forced to 26.5% and 27%. Their only other ACC game above 18% was when Duke hosted FSU. So, what's the formula for beating the Devils? Apparently "get the freaking ball". This should come to no shock, as Duke is not known for their rebounding, if a team can force them into empty possessions and limit their overall chances, you may very well have Duke on the ropes. However, this is easier said than done when playing a team that starts 4 guards.
To view the Duke vs ACC opponents spreadsheet (with thanks to statsheet.com) click here.
Wednesday, February 6
Bubblicious
Alright everyone, just going to put up a predictive post about the NCAA Tournament field. Using ESPN's bubble watch, I picked out the "Work Left To Do" teams and looked at both their KP rating, consistency, and predicted records via RPI Forecast (which is essentially KP's predictor). So, I took these components and weighted them to give each team a score that represents how they should finish the season.
The yellow highlights the teams that should make the tournament, given that all those in the "Should Be In" category make the cut, and taking 2 at-large bids for mid-majors (South Alabama anyone?), and 1 more for the occasional conference tournament upset I'm not confident that both Drake and Butler will win their conference tournaments. As a side note, VA Tech (just making it as of yesterday) lost last night to NC State, so knock them down a rung and promote the next middling ACC team.
The yellow highlights the teams that should make the tournament, given that all those in the "Should Be In" category make the cut, and taking 2 at-large bids for mid-majors (South Alabama anyone?), and 1 more for the occasional conference tournament upset I'm not confident that both Drake and Butler will win their conference tournaments. As a side note, VA Tech (just making it as of yesterday) lost last night to NC State, so knock them down a rung and promote the next middling ACC team.
Monday, February 4
2/4 Top 25
The picture is finally starting to get clearer for the best teams in the country as there were nine teams that were in all three lists this week but didn't quite make the Top 25.
1. Memphis
2. Duke
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. UCLA
6. Georgetown
7. Tennessee
8. Wisconsin
9. Xavier
10. Stanford
11. Marquette
12. Michigan St.
13. Washington St.
14. Texas
15. Kansas St.
16. Drake
17. Indiana
18. Connecticut
19. Arizona
20. Butler
21. Texas A&M
22. Louisville
23. Pittsburgh
24. Clemson
25. Notre Dame
Just missed the cut: Saint Mary's, Arkansas, Gonzaga, Mississippi, Southern California, Oklahoma, UNLV, Florida, Baylor
1. Memphis
2. Duke
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. UCLA
6. Georgetown
7. Tennessee
8. Wisconsin
9. Xavier
10. Stanford
11. Marquette
12. Michigan St.
13. Washington St.
14. Texas
15. Kansas St.
16. Drake
17. Indiana
18. Connecticut
19. Arizona
20. Butler
21. Texas A&M
22. Louisville
23. Pittsburgh
24. Clemson
25. Notre Dame
Just missed the cut: Saint Mary's, Arkansas, Gonzaga, Mississippi, Southern California, Oklahoma, UNLV, Florida, Baylor
Friday, February 1
Game by Game Ratings
Hello folks, sorry for the long hiatus, but I'm back and soon (well, after this weekend) I'll be all college basketball all of the time. Anyways, First I'd like to go ahead and endorse, err pick the Patriots in the Super Bowl (sorry about that, too much debate watching). They'll get all 10 of my precious points. Now, onto the real reason I'm posting. I've been toiling away at a game by game measurement of the Tar Heels' offensive and defensive performances. I wanted to find a way to represent how well the offense and defense played in each game to see if the team is in as much trouble as people suspect, and also to see how much of the team's struggles have resulted in playing some stiffer competition. The results? Well, check out the nifty graph:
Now, what does that all mean. Ok, lets start with the easiest to understand first, OE-DE. Basically, game by game, our Offensive Efficiency minus our Defensive Efficiency. This roughly translates to score (as you can see, the lone negative value is the Maryland loss) and is a good barometer of how the game went, from domination (SC St, Kent St, Valpo) to close games (Clemson, GT, Maryland). Now, the slightly more complicated part. The red and green (for stop and go), are what I've deemed ratings. I calculated a rating based on two things: Opponent's Adjusted Efficiency (season average) and Actual Game Efficiency (game results). The rating is the difference between that single game, and the team's average on the season, which is then weighted by a adaptation of z-score. So, since Clemson is averaging 115.3 OE on the season, in the game against UNC they had 99.4, this makes that game's rating (after some z-score adjustment) 14.34. The blue line can be used as a guide to see the results of the game, and the red and green lines the respective strengths of UNC's offense and defense. Obviously UNC has won more games relying on offense than defense. As a side note, UNC's forced TO% and OE are now significantly correlated at a 99% CI. Basically, UNC scores more efficiently when forcing more turnovers's, statistically speaking.
Now, what does that all mean. Ok, lets start with the easiest to understand first, OE-DE. Basically, game by game, our Offensive Efficiency minus our Defensive Efficiency. This roughly translates to score (as you can see, the lone negative value is the Maryland loss) and is a good barometer of how the game went, from domination (SC St, Kent St, Valpo) to close games (Clemson, GT, Maryland). Now, the slightly more complicated part. The red and green (for stop and go), are what I've deemed ratings. I calculated a rating based on two things: Opponent's Adjusted Efficiency (season average) and Actual Game Efficiency (game results). The rating is the difference between that single game, and the team's average on the season, which is then weighted by a adaptation of z-score. So, since Clemson is averaging 115.3 OE on the season, in the game against UNC they had 99.4, this makes that game's rating (after some z-score adjustment) 14.34. The blue line can be used as a guide to see the results of the game, and the red and green lines the respective strengths of UNC's offense and defense. Obviously UNC has won more games relying on offense than defense. As a side note, UNC's forced TO% and OE are now significantly correlated at a 99% CI. Basically, UNC scores more efficiently when forcing more turnovers's, statistically speaking.
Wednesday, January 30
Santana to Mets?
It's unclear to me if the Twins decided that they had to get Johan Santana out of the AL, or if the Red Sox and Yankees had gotten fed up with the process and decided to either keep their young talent or replace the frontline members of the trade with other prospects, but the players the Twins are getting from the Mets (Carlos Gomez, Deolis Guerra, Philip Humber and Kevin Mulvey) are just not good enough for a pitcher of Santana's caliber, i.e. the best pitcher in baseball at this point. As Jim Callis, editor of Baseball America, states in this post, "Guerra and Gomez come with high ceilings but also lack a lot of polish and have a long ways to go to reach their potential. The odds that they both will do so are slim." He also projects the two other pitchers as #4 starters on a major league team.
Baseball Prospectus projects Santana as a Met to finish the year with a 2.94 ERA and 239 strikeouts. For reference, Jake Peavy led the majors in strikeouts in 2007 with 240. Scott Kazmir led the AL with 239. Only Peavy would have had a lower ERA in 2007, finishing with a 2.54 mark. This immediately gives credence to a Mets rotation which now includes Santana, Pedro Martinez, John Maine, Orlando Hernandez, and Oliver Perez. The Mets are hoping that Maine, Hernandez, and Perez can all provide the types of performances they gave the Mets last season, but there is cause for concern for all three. Maine will be entering his second full season as a frontline starter, giving opponents a better chance to look at him, and Hernandez and Perez are known more for their inconsistency from year to year than their effectiveness. Nonetheless, combined with the punch that the New York offense provides, the Mets have made themselves the favorites of the NL East with this trade (regardless of what the Braves would have you believe - "Santana deal brings parity to NL East").
Edit: Ryan pointed me to this article by Aaron Gleeman, a writer for Rotoworld. In it he tempers the Twins hating, and provides some hope for Minnesota fans in addition to attempting to rationalize Bill Smith's decision.
Baseball Prospectus projects Santana as a Met to finish the year with a 2.94 ERA and 239 strikeouts. For reference, Jake Peavy led the majors in strikeouts in 2007 with 240. Scott Kazmir led the AL with 239. Only Peavy would have had a lower ERA in 2007, finishing with a 2.54 mark. This immediately gives credence to a Mets rotation which now includes Santana, Pedro Martinez, John Maine, Orlando Hernandez, and Oliver Perez. The Mets are hoping that Maine, Hernandez, and Perez can all provide the types of performances they gave the Mets last season, but there is cause for concern for all three. Maine will be entering his second full season as a frontline starter, giving opponents a better chance to look at him, and Hernandez and Perez are known more for their inconsistency from year to year than their effectiveness. Nonetheless, combined with the punch that the New York offense provides, the Mets have made themselves the favorites of the NL East with this trade (regardless of what the Braves would have you believe - "Santana deal brings parity to NL East").
Edit: Ryan pointed me to this article by Aaron Gleeman, a writer for Rotoworld. In it he tempers the Twins hating, and provides some hope for Minnesota fans in addition to attempting to rationalize Bill Smith's decision.
Monday, January 28
Top 25 - January 28
Here's this week's Top 25, compiled by averaging the rank of the top 46 teams listed by the AP Poll (46 teams received votes this week), Kenpom, and RPI Forecast, then striking any that were not in the top 46 in another's ranking. This week's big loser was Ohio St., who is 21 in Kenpom and 22 in RPI Forecast, but did not receive a vote in this week's AP Poll, being leapfrogged somehow by teams such as Houston, Saint Joseph's, and VCU. The Buckeyes are 14-6, but their worst loss has been to...Butler, who clocks in at #20 in this week's Top 25. Nine teams were in all three lists, but failed to make the Top 25 this week.
1. Memphis
2. Kansas
3. North Carolina
4. Duke
5. UCLA
6. Georgetown
7. Tennessee
8. Xavier
9. Washington St.
10. Wisconsin
11. Michigan St.
12. Indiana
13. Texas
14. Marquette
15. Drake
16. Stanford
17. Arizona
18. West Virginia
19. Kansas St.
20. Butler
21. Pittsburgh
22. Saint Mary's
23. Louisville
24. Connecticut
25. Mississippi
Just missed the cut: Mississippi St., Florida, Oklahoma, Clemson, USC, Texas A&M, Notre Dame, Baylor, Gonzaga
I considered using the BlogPoll this week, but decided against it because it comes out on Wednesdays, and the AP Poll comes out on Mondays. If you have another ranking system you'd like me to use, please comment and I'll try to include it in the future.
1. Memphis
2. Kansas
3. North Carolina
4. Duke
5. UCLA
6. Georgetown
7. Tennessee
8. Xavier
9. Washington St.
10. Wisconsin
11. Michigan St.
12. Indiana
13. Texas
14. Marquette
15. Drake
16. Stanford
17. Arizona
18. West Virginia
19. Kansas St.
20. Butler
21. Pittsburgh
22. Saint Mary's
23. Louisville
24. Connecticut
25. Mississippi
Just missed the cut: Mississippi St., Florida, Oklahoma, Clemson, USC, Texas A&M, Notre Dame, Baylor, Gonzaga
I considered using the BlogPoll this week, but decided against it because it comes out on Wednesdays, and the AP Poll comes out on Mondays. If you have another ranking system you'd like me to use, please comment and I'll try to include it in the future.
Monday, January 21
Top 25 for MLK Day
Okay folks, we're heading into the heart of conference play, and I've compiled a list of the consensus Top 25 teams according to Kenpom, the AP poll, and RPI Forecast, a site that looks at a team's current RPI, looks at the teams it has left to play, and calculates what it thinks will be the rank of everyone's RPIs at the end of the season. Nifty little tool, as it looks beyond wins and losses, but is a little closer to what the average Joe Sports Fan thinks of when he tries to rank teams. Since the AP poll only gave 43 teams votes this week (well, 45 teams, but the bottom three all tied at 43 with one vote), I gave Kenpom and RPI Forecast the chance to give their top 43 teams as well, and then struck any team that was not in all three ballots (if any team wasn't in another's top 43 teams in the country, it isn't deserving of discussion in a Top 25 conversation). 30 teams ended up in all three ballots, and here are the top 25 of those.
1. Kansas
2. Memphis
3. Duke
4. Tennessee
5. North Carolina
6. UCLA
7. Washington St.
8. Georgetown
9. Wisconsin
10. Indiana
11. Michigan St.
12. Xavier
13. West Virginia
14. Marquette
15. Texas
16. Pittsburgh
17. Stanford
18. Drake
19. Texas A&M
20. Clemson
21. Mississippi
22. Kansas St.
23. Butler
24. Saint Mary's
25. Gonzaga
Just missed the cut:
Louisville, Oklahoma, Florida, Southern California, Mississippi St.
1. Kansas
2. Memphis
3. Duke
4. Tennessee
5. North Carolina
6. UCLA
7. Washington St.
8. Georgetown
9. Wisconsin
10. Indiana
11. Michigan St.
12. Xavier
13. West Virginia
14. Marquette
15. Texas
16. Pittsburgh
17. Stanford
18. Drake
19. Texas A&M
20. Clemson
21. Mississippi
22. Kansas St.
23. Butler
24. Saint Mary's
25. Gonzaga
Just missed the cut:
Louisville, Oklahoma, Florida, Southern California, Mississippi St.
Championship Results
Alright folks, I hope we've all learned a lesson from this past weekend. Lucy, do we see what does trash talking gets us? Yep, a whole crap ton of bad kharma.
Ryan: 8 pts 1-1 (10, 5-5)
Cason: 4 pts 1-1 (8, 3-3)
John: 4 pts 1-1 (4, 4-6)
Lucy: -10 pts 0-2 (-6, 5-5)
That's the week's order (and also the order overall as well, it was moving day on the TFSB playoff pick 'em leaderboard), alright everyone, have your thinking caps on for the next two weeks, and be ready to make the big 10 point pick by February 3rd. Everyone is still in the race (ie within 20 points of each other).
Ryan: 8 pts 1-1 (10, 5-5)
Cason: 4 pts 1-1 (8, 3-3)
John: 4 pts 1-1 (4, 4-6)
Lucy: -10 pts 0-2 (-6, 5-5)
That's the week's order (and also the order overall as well, it was moving day on the TFSB playoff pick 'em leaderboard), alright everyone, have your thinking caps on for the next two weeks, and be ready to make the big 10 point pick by February 3rd. Everyone is still in the race (ie within 20 points of each other).
Sunday, January 20
Championship Weeekend
Here are my picks for this weekend's action:
New England (9) over San Diego
Green Bay (1) over New York
Despiration time here at TFSB. This is the last oppurtunity to catch the guests, since I'm pretty sure New England will finish out the 19-0. I'm banking things will fall accoring to seed here, but the surprising Giants are who I fear if anyone, so if they can pull the upset I'll make up a little ground, and if not 10 pts!.
Cason's Picks are as follows:
New England (7) over San Diego
Green Bay (3) over NY
New England (9) over San Diego
Green Bay (1) over New York
Despiration time here at TFSB. This is the last oppurtunity to catch the guests, since I'm pretty sure New England will finish out the 19-0. I'm banking things will fall accoring to seed here, but the surprising Giants are who I fear if anyone, so if they can pull the upset I'll make up a little ground, and if not 10 pts!.
Cason's Picks are as follows:
New England (7) over San Diego
Green Bay (3) over NY
John's Championship Round Picks
New England over San Diego (7)
Green Bay over New York (3)
Upset Special: Billy Volek plays quarterback for at least half of the Chargers' snaps
Green Bay over New York (3)
Upset Special: Billy Volek plays quarterback for at least half of the Chargers' snaps
Thursday, January 17
If Tomorrow were March...
Alright folks, we've finally gotten the college basketball season warmed up and a few games into conference play, so obviously its time to skip ahead and begin thinking about everyone's favorite month of the year, March! So, for the next few weeks, John and I will take a look at what the seeding would look like if we didn't have enough information on the teams to seed them properly, so, if we were trying to seed them in mid-January.
#1's - Kansas, UCLA, Memphis, UNC - This is in order of #1-#4 as well, with UNC getting the benefit of the doubt having not yet lost. Kansas has easily been the best team, UCLA has the most impressive wins against good opponents, and Memphis is yet to let anyone get near beating them.
#2's - Duke, Wash St, Georgetown, Tenessee - Duke is playing very good basketball right now (well, except for a certain someone), Wazzu is also playing extremely well (which just makes UCLA that much more impressive), Georgetown, though they haven't exactly proved much of anything, is still hanging around in the polls, we'll tag them the UNC of this grouping (and wait for the meat of the Big East schedule 1/19 ND, 1/26 @WVU, 2/9 @L'ville), and Tennessee seems to have the pollsters hearts as well, though they meet Vandy tonight so we get to see who's the top dog in the SEC.
#3's - West Virginia, Wisconsin, Indiana, Marquette - (This group appears to be where the stats and the voters diverge, we'll stick with the stats, thanks) West Virginia seems to not be garnering much national attention but I would easily rank them above the second half of the top 25 (though no voters seem to agree), Wisconsin is very good at the style of basketball they play (read: Big Ten style) and they're hard to beat when they execute, Indiana is something of a wild card, as they haven't had many oppurtunities to prove themselves, unfortunately we'll have to wait on February before the heavy lifting within the Big Ten schedule arrives, Marquette is another KenPom pal who will have to prove themselves in the coming days (@L'ville 1/17, @UConn 1/20), we'll have a much better idea of what they're capable of next week.
#4's - Xavier, Texas A&M, Clemson, Pitt - Now, rounding out the theoretical Sweet 16, Xavier, recently punished for their A10 blunder, as is Texas A&M, but their track records keep them in the conversation, Clemson seems to have righted the ship, but hanging with the Devils (@Duke 1/19) will be a big test, stay within 5 and they will seem to be the answer for the "who else is in the ACC" question being bandied about, lastly Pitt is here on good faith, they're holding up well without Fields and Cook, but I don't feel like they can play that way for long.
Who's knocking and what they can do to come in - Michigan St - show that 36 pts was an abberation, Butler - we're going to need to see some 20 point Horizon victories, Louisville - beat Marquette tonight, Stanford - show you're the upper middle class of the Pac 10 (AZ 1/17, ASU 1/19 @Cal 1/26)
#1's - Kansas, UCLA, Memphis, UNC - This is in order of #1-#4 as well, with UNC getting the benefit of the doubt having not yet lost. Kansas has easily been the best team, UCLA has the most impressive wins against good opponents, and Memphis is yet to let anyone get near beating them.
#2's - Duke, Wash St, Georgetown, Tenessee - Duke is playing very good basketball right now (well, except for a certain someone), Wazzu is also playing extremely well (which just makes UCLA that much more impressive), Georgetown, though they haven't exactly proved much of anything, is still hanging around in the polls, we'll tag them the UNC of this grouping (and wait for the meat of the Big East schedule 1/19 ND, 1/26 @WVU, 2/9 @L'ville), and Tennessee seems to have the pollsters hearts as well, though they meet Vandy tonight so we get to see who's the top dog in the SEC.
#3's - West Virginia, Wisconsin, Indiana, Marquette - (This group appears to be where the stats and the voters diverge, we'll stick with the stats, thanks) West Virginia seems to not be garnering much national attention but I would easily rank them above the second half of the top 25 (though no voters seem to agree), Wisconsin is very good at the style of basketball they play (read: Big Ten style) and they're hard to beat when they execute, Indiana is something of a wild card, as they haven't had many oppurtunities to prove themselves, unfortunately we'll have to wait on February before the heavy lifting within the Big Ten schedule arrives, Marquette is another KenPom pal who will have to prove themselves in the coming days (@L'ville 1/17, @UConn 1/20), we'll have a much better idea of what they're capable of next week.
#4's - Xavier, Texas A&M, Clemson, Pitt - Now, rounding out the theoretical Sweet 16, Xavier, recently punished for their A10 blunder, as is Texas A&M, but their track records keep them in the conversation, Clemson seems to have righted the ship, but hanging with the Devils (@Duke 1/19) will be a big test, stay within 5 and they will seem to be the answer for the "who else is in the ACC" question being bandied about, lastly Pitt is here on good faith, they're holding up well without Fields and Cook, but I don't feel like they can play that way for long.
Who's knocking and what they can do to come in - Michigan St - show that 36 pts was an abberation, Butler - we're going to need to see some 20 point Horizon victories, Louisville - beat Marquette tonight, Stanford - show you're the upper middle class of the Pac 10 (AZ 1/17, ASU 1/19 @Cal 1/26)
Wednesday, January 16
Divisional Pick 'em Wrap
Seems like Lucy wrapped this up for us:
Lucy: 4 pts 3-1 (4, 5-3)
Cason: 4 pts 2-2 (4, 2-2)
Ryan: 0 pts 2-2 (2, 4-4)
John: -2 pts 1-3 (0, 3-5)
Not sure how many of you remember, but last year, for the Championship weekend, we decided to allow each picker to allot 10 points to the 2 games (so that the same number of points are awarded this week as were in the first 2 rounds). For an example, last year I gave the Colts over the Pats 6 points and the Bears over the Saints 4. Neither number can be 0, and both integers have to sum to 10. Assign your points wisely.
Oh the games are San Diego @ New England (-14) and New York (N) @ Green Bay (-7). Also, hurry to place your bets on the Super Bowl now, AFC (-12.5) vs. NFC, 12.5 is as low as it will get (mark my words).
Lucy: 4 pts 3-1 (4, 5-3)
Cason: 4 pts 2-2 (4, 2-2)
Ryan: 0 pts 2-2 (2, 4-4)
John: -2 pts 1-3 (0, 3-5)
Not sure how many of you remember, but last year, for the Championship weekend, we decided to allow each picker to allot 10 points to the 2 games (so that the same number of points are awarded this week as were in the first 2 rounds). For an example, last year I gave the Colts over the Pats 6 points and the Bears over the Saints 4. Neither number can be 0, and both integers have to sum to 10. Assign your points wisely.
Oh the games are San Diego @ New England (-14) and New York (N) @ Green Bay (-7). Also, hurry to place your bets on the Super Bowl now, AFC (-12.5) vs. NFC, 12.5 is as low as it will get (mark my words).
Saturday, January 12
Lucy's Divisional Round Picks
New England over Jacksonville (4)
Green Bay over Seattle (3)
Dallas over NY Giants (2)
Indianapolis over San Diego (1)
I noticed that we all have the same teams but thankfully a variety of ranking them as far as the points we assigned each. I could have put Dallas or Greenbay anywhere in the middle I guess when I'm just looking at the rank.
Green Bay over Seattle (3)
Dallas over NY Giants (2)
Indianapolis over San Diego (1)
I noticed that we all have the same teams but thankfully a variety of ranking them as far as the points we assigned each. I could have put Dallas or Greenbay anywhere in the middle I guess when I'm just looking at the rank.
John's Divisional Round Picks
Little late getting these in; long night last night.
4. Colts over Bolts
3. Pats over Jags
2. 'Boys over 'Men
1. 'Hawks over Pack (go hot pants!)
4. Colts over Bolts
3. Pats over Jags
2. 'Boys over 'Men
1. 'Hawks over Pack (go hot pants!)
Friday, January 11
Divisional Weekend
Sorry for the brevity here folks:
4Indianapolis - The Bolts are in trouble w/o Gates, they barely beat the injury-ravaged Colts playing in SD against bizzaro Peyton (6 picks)
3Green Bay - Just a step ahead of Seattle, and if Seattle's not at home, it ain't happening (something like 2-6 i think)
2New England - There is a shot, though an outside one, too bad Jax isn't playing Indy, b/c it'd likely make for a better game
1Dallas - Almost went with the upset, but I think the home/rested teams will carry the day
Here are Cason's picks for this week:
4 - New England over Jacksonville
3 - Green Bay over "We want the ball and we're gonna score!"
2 - Indianapolis over San Diego
1 - Dallas over NY
Cason: "I was originally going to pick New York here, but so many people have started calling this upset a sure thing that it makes me wonder. I'll be happy if Eli wins here but I'm leery of the Giants all of a sudden getting too much love. I think Dallas wins in a close one, with or without T.O."
4Indianapolis - The Bolts are in trouble w/o Gates, they barely beat the injury-ravaged Colts playing in SD against bizzaro Peyton (6 picks)
3Green Bay - Just a step ahead of Seattle, and if Seattle's not at home, it ain't happening (something like 2-6 i think)
2New England - There is a shot, though an outside one, too bad Jax isn't playing Indy, b/c it'd likely make for a better game
1Dallas - Almost went with the upset, but I think the home/rested teams will carry the day
Here are Cason's picks for this week:
4 - New England over Jacksonville
3 - Green Bay over "We want the ball and we're gonna score!"
2 - Indianapolis over San Diego
1 - Dallas over NY
Cason: "I was originally going to pick New York here, but so many people have started calling this upset a sure thing that it makes me wonder. I'll be happy if Eli wins here but I'm leery of the Giants all of a sudden getting too much love. I think Dallas wins in a close one, with or without T.O."
Monday, January 7
Wild Card Wrap Up
We all had so-so weekends, I also like to re-extend the invite to Cason, thanks to our wonderful points system he can jump in now and (with some good picking) keep up, especially after our mediocre weekend.
Ryan: 2 pts, (2-2)
John: 2 pts, (2-2)
Lucy: 0 pts. (2-2)
So, Lucy looked a little too over-reliant the seeding and I should have gone with my gut, oh well, maybe next week. Speaking of: Jax@NE, SD@Ind, NYG@Dal, Sea@GB. And look later for John and my thought on the squeaker over Clemson.
Ryan: 2 pts, (2-2)
John: 2 pts, (2-2)
Lucy: 0 pts. (2-2)
So, Lucy looked a little too over-reliant the seeding and I should have gone with my gut, oh well, maybe next week. Speaking of: Jax@NE, SD@Ind, NYG@Dal, Sea@GB. And look later for John and my thought on the squeaker over Clemson.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)