Posted by gillispie1 on 3/18/2014 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 3/18/2014 3:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/17/2014 2:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by thinair on 3/17/2014 1:59:00 PM (view original):
Louisville and Michigan St might be two of the best #4 seeds ever? I honestly have not watched one florida game all year. I always tend to underestimate them. Why don't you think Florida will win it all?

i agree with the FL comment. they are an exceptionally coached team who works very hard. to me, this allows them to make up for the fact that they aren't the best team, and if one of the dozen or so more talented teams plays a really good game vs them, i'm not sure florida can do anything about it. i think they are like some duke teams of old - they are excellent in terms of consistently performing at the top of their range, which makes them a very good and very consistent team. but in the NT you get a lot of teams' top performances, so i think these exceptionally disciplined hard working teams actually have a disadvantage in the NT, compared to their regular season. 

i agree with michigan st and louisville too... both have a great shot at winning the whole thing

I'd sure love to hear this list of a dozen or so more talented teams than Florida. 

The Duke example is a pretty bad one also.

is it? it is really meant as a complement - for a team in the regular season to outperform their level of talent, with hard work and dedication, leading to consistent performance... thats not a bad thing. i just think that advantage is lessened in the post season, as compared to the regular season. to me, the biggest complement is to the coach - billy d did a fantastic job this year, getting the most out of his guys game in and game out (or as close as you realistically get to that unachieveable goal). as much as i hate duke, i can't deny coach k is an excellent coach, and i think of him similarly (well, except for the hating him and all the flopping part)... great at getting the most of of his guys, building work ethic and determination, more than just relying on talent. they are both great game coaches too, something i wish i could say about our coach (coach cal). so if you disagree, im curious what specifically do you disagree about - in these instances, are these two coaches not getting the most out of their guys? are they not getting a level of dedication and consistent effort other coaches fail to exact from their players? or are you disagreeing this advantage is more significant in the regular season than the post season? i mean, you can say, "they have the talent, too", but im not really disagreeing, i just don't think its quite of the 1st class nature - just a little lower, with the slack picked up in the areas mentioned (which to me, frankly, is more respectable - winning on talent is still great because you are winning, but if i had my choice, i'd rather win in any other category)

i know most of my posts citing duke are of the negative variety, but this wasn't one. i always thought of coach k as a guy who generally took the smarter players over the more talented players, the guys who worked hard and earned everything they got. he's had plenty of talented guys... obviously... but i always thought his priorities were a little more geared to the smart hard working guys, than other high end coaches. but if i'm wrong, let me know, i'm more than happy to cross off one of the very few reasons i have some respect for that man :)

I realize that this is only one way of looking at it, but you DO realize who has had the most McDonald's All-Americans since 2000, right?  Yep, that would be the team you hate so much.  Coach K has plenty of talent to work with, yet to hear you tell it, he's got a bunch of so-so players that he elevates into these hard working, consistent , determined kids.  If anything, he's underperformed compared to the talent he's had, but to insinuate that they just have average to slightly above average talent every season and K pushes them to their maximums in flat-out wrong.  To say that he's not working with talent of a first class nature is almost an embarassing indictment of your lack of real basketball knowledge.  Take your UK blinders off and you'll see that both Duke and Florida have just as much talent as any team in the country.  Again, if anything, he isn't pushing them high enough given the players he's had.

By the way, do you know how many teams have more McDonald's AA's on their roster than Florida?  I'll give you a hint, you can count them on one hand, so it's not like Billy Donovan's team is devoid of talent either.

Not to be an ***, but just because someone has mastered a mathematically-based internet basketball simulation does not automatically mean they have even the first clue about how the real world of basketball operates.  I've hesitated at commenting in the past when you posted about Duke and other real world teams, but your tunnel vision towards UK and hate of anything Duke-related has led you to post some absolutely ridiculous statements.  Unfortunately, your success in this game has clouded the eyes of some of the younger users and given your statements an amount of undue credibility, but for those of us who know something about the game, those same statements usually lead to nothing but eye-rolls.  Harsh, but reality.  Have a nice day.

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/17/2014 8:09:00 PM (view original):
i always thought it was an interesting question, what format should be in place for bracket pools to reward picking upsets? just 1 point per team who advances, i don't think it really is enough, i feel like there should be some additional incentive, ideally based on the % chance of progressing by seed or something. that probably gets too complex, anyone familiar with a simple system that gets you most of the way there?

Not sure if someone has already posted something similar, but the biggest pool I'm in does a 1-3-5-7-9 points per round, but with seed differential bonus for each win.

Albany trying to make history. 

Posted by thinair on 3/20/2014 5:01:00 PM (view original):
Albany trying to make history. 

Go Great Danes!

I think it's a good argument...(both Gillepsie and dyc). I've had this similar discussion multiple times with people. 

I think Duke/Coach K often times have these statements made due to the fact that Duke basketball is more of a system than some. Duke, more so than other top 10 programs has players on their roster that were not sought after as highly - yet they fit the duke system. This is more of a general opinion - dear god i'm definitely not saying this is fact. Players like Lee Melchionni come to mind. Compared to, let's call it the "Calipari system", Duke in the past has had fewer "one and ones". I honestly just think coach K believes this is the best way to win - not that he's on a higher moral ground. Coach K would sell his grandmother for another national championship.

With that said, and I'll go ahead and be the one to say it, I think a lot of it comes down to race. Face it, when a team full of white athletes wins it's because they are intelligent and/or tough where as teams that are not - are considered athletic. I see commentators and writers preach this in copious amounts. It's really saddening. 

^^ Not my view, general observation

Jon Scheyer might have not been able to jump out of the gym but he was a phenomenal basketball player in high school and college. Yet, I think a lot of people look at Scheyer like he was some sort of project. Did he improve at Duke, sure, but he wasn't ever a scrub. The plumlee brothers are all athletic as all hell but were they seen that way, not sure? 

I honestly think there are social stigmas out there that somehow convince people that guys like Scheyer, and Redick and Dunleavy...etc. are of inferior talent level. It blows my mind. I don't disagree completely with you gillepsie, when I think about that 2010 team thoughts similar to your come into play (self contradiction?) but overall I think there's something I can't quite put my finger on that leads to this misconceptionthat Duke doesn't get as much talent as some. 

Just some thoughts. 

I haven't seen worse shooting FT in my life than yesterday. That NC State/St. Louis was horrible. You're telling me that in the biggest tournament of the year you can't shoot FT.  Pathetic!

I have a perfect bracket after day one. Does anyone else?

Posted by bk41129 on 3/21/2014 12:12:00 PM (view original):
I have a perfect bracket after day one. Does anyone else?

Dude, props. I missed the NC.ST game, otherwise I'd be with you. 

Posted by thinair on 3/21/2014 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bk41129 on 3/21/2014 12:12:00 PM (view original):
I have a perfect bracket after day one. Does anyone else?

Dude, props. I missed the NC.ST game, otherwise I'd be with you. 

same

emy, i respect your opinion but think you are a little off the mark on this one. i don't make that many comments about real basketball, and i frequently acknowledge i am far from a basketball expert. seems to me, plenty of people call me on my off-the-mark comments on real basketball, i think i might get undue credit with some of my crazy HD theories.. but i certainly don't feel like that is the case with respect to real basketball. those two are totally different and in my eyes, most people get that.

i think you have some duke blinders of your own - i never suggested duke has "average or slightly above average talent" - that is of your own fabrication. i just don't think their level of talent is up to the ridiculous excellence displayed in their regular season success. when i think through the 20 years or so i've watched college ball, is there anyone who challenges duke in regular season success? nobody comes to mind. i might be off on this one - but on the flip side, sure doesn't seem like many nba stars went through duke, either. this is not a calipari-era opinion of mine, i've felt this way for at least a decade. i also think burger boy counts are not particularly relevant, rather when i watch these teams play, "the eye test" as the commentators seem to love to say, i just feel like duke is the most successful team in the regular season (and maybe they aren't, but to me they are) not so much because of excellent talent - but rather because of excellent execution. how you get average talent out of that is beyond me... thats not the claim i'm making. besides, i don't see how my hatred of duke can be a blinder here, im saying they execute well, thats not something i would naturally say about a team i hate, is it? its not so much i disagree with your conclusions... just your approach and exaggeration in general.

besides, you should know me well enough to know i prize coaching and team planning over raw talent in HD to a semi-ridiculous extent - don't you think i feel the same way in real life? saying a team wins more on execution and strategy, not talent, thats clearly something i prize - so where does the duke hating (or even more confusingly, kentucky loving) blinders come in?

man with this first round going so close to my bracket so far, i almost have to root for duke to beat mercer here (have them in the elite 8). almost... ;) 

Maybe this has been mentioned but Duke is playing in North Carolina.  Has there EVER been a Duke team that didn't get to play in-state in the NT?

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/21/2014 1:36:00 PM (view original):
man with this first round going so close to my bracket so far, i almost have to root for duke to beat mercer here (have them in the elite 8). almost... ;) 

This game is really difficult to watch. 

Posted by alblack56 on 3/21/2014 1:46:00 PM (view original):
Maybe this has been mentioned but Duke is playing in North Carolina.  Has there EVER been a Duke team that didn't get to play in-state in the NT?

on the flip side, duke is actually in a really hard bracket this time. it always ****** me off how easy their path is when they pull 1 seeds. i guess if i didn't legitimately believe duke was intentionally given advantages, i probably wouldn't hate them so much. although with my first memory of college basketball (not the first game i watched, but the first i remember) being the 1992 duke kentucky elite 8 game... with the stomp and all... there is really no hope for duke, on the me-not-hating them front. even if they were the classy gentlemen the NCAA paints them to be, instead of the flopping tools they are.

Posted by thinair on 3/21/2014 2:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/21/2014 1:36:00 PM (view original):
man with this first round going so close to my bracket so far, i almost have to root for duke to beat mercer here (have them in the elite 8). almost... ;) 

This game is really difficult to watch. 

that would be so crazy, if they lost as a 2 seed again. was that just last year, or the year before? i remember posting about it and emy getting really mad. thats probably why he is so aggressive to me in this thread. probably why i continue to post negatively about duke as well ;)

edit: duh, 3 seed... i guess i am thinking 2 because i had them in the elite 8. oh well. go mercer!