NCAA Tournament Playalong Thread

[King Glorious]

I am going to change my stance from the beginning of the season and suggest that UNC actually has a chance to win the title. Jay Wright said it was their defense that killed them. Imagine that. So did Jeff Capel. They don't lock you up for 40 minutes a night but they have such great athletes all over the floor that they can tighten the screws for several minutes at a time and make life miserable for you. You can play them even for 32 minutes but there will be two four minute stretches where they will go on a 12-2 or 18-4 run and that's the game. Michigan St. got out and ran with UConn and had success. Izzo has to know that they can't beat UNC that way and will try to slow the game down but the problem will be just like the one Illinois had a couple of years ago. It's the natural instinct of the players to run and with a team dominated by perimeter players like Michigan St. is, they are going to be lulled into a track meet for a few minutes here and there and that's where they will lose the game. I think UNC wins by about 15.

[Crown@club]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I am going to change my stance from the beginning of the season and suggest that UNC actually has a chance to win the title. Jay Wright said it was their defense that killed them. Imagine that. So did Jeff Capel. They don't lock you up for 40 minutes a night but they have such great athletes all over the floor that they can tighten the screws for several minutes at a time and make life miserable for you. You can play them even for 32 minutes but there will be two four minute stretches where they will go on a 12-2 or 18-4 run and that's the game. Michigan St. got out and ran with UConn and had success. Izzo has to know that they can't beat UNC that way and will try to slow the game down but the problem will be just like the one Illinois had a couple of years ago. It's the natural instinct of the players to run and with a team dominated by perimeter players like Michigan St. is, they are going to be lulled into a track meet for a few minutes here and there and that's where they will lose the game. I think UNC wins by about 15.

Ask Louisville how that worked.

[SniperSB23]

Was just looking at Michigan State guys from the Izzo era and he's had exactly three players that went on to average 10 PPG any season in the NBA. Mo Peterson was there all four (actually five) years but Richardson was only there two (and averaged 5 PPG in his first) and Zach Randolph was only there for one season. Has any coach had such a level of success in the past 15 years with less NBA talent? Anyone even close?

[gales0678]

scott - give me a winner tonight

i say carolina wins and covers

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by gales0678

scott - give me a winner tonight

i say carolina wins and covers

That is the most likely scenario in my mind, they are just too good and Michigan State can't score with them when Lawson is healthy. If I do make a play it will be to parlay Michigan State on the moneyline with the under. There is no way in hell that Michigan State can win in a high scoring game. Even with that I'd still need at least +1000 on the parlay to make the bet (which I suspect I can probably get).

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Was just looking at Michigan State guys from the Izzo era and he's had exactly three players that went on to average 10 PPG any season in the NBA. Mo Peterson was there all four (actually five) years but Richardson was only there two (and averaged 5 PPG in his first) and Zach Randolph was only there for one season. Has any coach had such a level of success in the past 15 years with less NBA talent? Anyone even close?

Coach K has had an extraordinary number of NBA failures.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Coach K has had an extraordinary number of NBA failures.

I was just about to type that same thing. I know part of the reason though. He doesn't recruit NBA players. He recruits good high school players that he thinks will form a good college team but not necessarily the top high school players that are great pro prospects. Kobe Bryant and LeBron James being the big exceptions but I remember when Baron Davis was available and Coach didn't want him because he didn't think he was a good fit. Some coaches, Calipari and Bobby Cremins, for instance, will look specifically to get a superstar player and work around him and let that player take them as far as he can for as long as he can before moving on. I look at the all-Americans that Duke has coming in next year and I don't think either of them are close to being pro prospects.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Coach K has had an extraordinary number of NBA failures.

Only counting players that didn't enter the NBA until 1995 since that is when Izzo started you have all of the following that have averaged 10+ PPG in a season in the NBA:

Shane Battier
Carlos Boozer
Elton Brand
Chris Duhon
Mike Dunleavy
Grant Hill
Corey Maggette
Luol Deng

That's a lot more NBA talent than what Izzo has had to work with and that doesn't even include Jay Williams who averaged 9.5 as a rookie before the accident ruined his career.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

Ask Louisville how that worked.

Louisville is NOT UNC. They don't have the overall talent that the Heels do.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Louisville is NOT UNC. They don't have the overall talent that the Heels do.

agree king - louisville can't shoot

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Only counting players that didn't enter the NBA until 1995 since that is when Izzo started you have all of the following that have averaged 10+ PPG in a season in the NBA:

Shane Battier
Carlos Boozer
Elton Brand
Chris Duhon
Mike Dunleavy
Grant Hill
Corey Maggette
Luol Deng

That's a lot more NBA talent than what Izzo has had to work with and that doesn't even include Jay Williams who averaged 9.5 as a rookie before the accident ruined his career.

No doubt that Duke has had more NBA level players but I think the point was that based on their expectations in the NBA compared to how much success the program has had, they haven't reached it. A few players here and there but not the great success people have expected. Personally, I believe that the expectations have been too high and the Duke players have done pretty well for themselves in the NBA.

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Only counting players that didn't enter the NBA until 1995 since that is when Izzo started you have all of the following that have averaged 10+ PPG in a season in the NBA:

Shane Battier
Carlos Boozer
Elton Brand
Chris Duhon
Mike Dunleavy
Grant Hill
Corey Maggette
Luol Deng

That's a lot more NBA talent than what Izzo has had to work with and that doesn't even include Jay Williams who averaged 9.5 as a rookie before the accident ruined his career.

Now give the failures.
Start with the superstar Laettner. The Spurs drafted Johnny Dawkins and Gene Banks. They were big disappointments. The list is long... I dont want to go through them all. Many highly reguarded going into the draft. The guys you put up are hardly superstars.

I will give you that Hill and Brand could be remembered as very good players but because they are so injury prone. They are hardly superstars.
Maggette would be the anti-Duke type.
Putting Dunleavy up there... sort of embarassing.
Deng... has just not played long enough to make any statement.

Boozer has been a nice the nice surprise imo.
Sorry thats a very short list for a team that is tops in college
basketball. Which I must give K credit for. He does a good
job with the kids he gets.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Now give the failures.
Start with the superstar Laettner. The Spurs drafted Johnny Dawkins and Gene Banks. They were big disappointments. The list is long... I dont want to go through them all. Many highly reguarded going into the draft. The guys you put up are hardly superstars.

I will give you that Hill and Brand could be remembered as very good players but because they are so injury prone. They are hardly superstars.
Maggette would be the anti-Duke type.
Putting Dunleavy up there... sort of embarassing.
Deng... has just not played long enough to make any statement.

Boozer has been a nice the nice surprise imo.
Sorry thats a very short list for a team that is tops in college
basketball. Which I must give K credit for. He does a good
job with the kids he gets.

Laettner's first five seasons in the NBA:
18.2 and 8.7 boards
16.8 and 8.6
16.3 and 7.6
16.4 and 7.3
18.1 and 8.8

I'd HARDLY call putting up those kinds of numbers in the NBA as a failure. He even made the All-Star game once.

Dawkins barely played as a rookie but after that, in seasons 2-4:
15.8 and 7.4 assists
14.2 and 7.0
14.3 and 7.4
He was at 15.8 and 7.0 before getting hurt after four games in the next year.

Again, you don't put up those kinds of numbers at the NBA level if you are a failure.

Dunleavy has averaged double figures every season in the league after his rookie year, including 19.1 a game last year. You think scoring 19 a game in the NBA is embarrassing?

Hill is not a superstar? You are letting his years since the injuries cloud your judgement. Starting with averaging 20 a night as a rookie and being named co-rookie of the year, look at what he did after that:
20 points, 10 board, 7 assists (10 triple doubles)
21, 9, and 7 (13)
21, 8, and 7 (4)
21, 7, and 6 (1)
26, 7, and 5

He was an all-star every season. He made second team all-league in his second season and first team in his third. He was second team the next three years. He was second in the league in defensive rebounds one year (top 10 overall), top 10 in the league in assists the next year, then third in scoring a few seasons after that. There wasn't a thing Grant couldn't do on the court. He also had 29 triple-doubles in that period.

Brand has only averaged 20-10 four times and his career averages are 20 and 10. Compare him to a guy like Tim Duncan:

Duncan 21.4, 11.7, 3.2 asts, 2.4 blks, .507 fgp
Brand 20.0, 10.1, 2.6 asts, 2.1 blks, .503 fgp

One is a first ballot hall of famer and the other isn't even a star? Please.

Michigan St. +7.5

330/300

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Now give the failures.
Start with the superstar Laettner. The Spurs drafted Johnny Dawkins and Gene Banks. They were big disappointments. The list is long... I dont want to go through them all. Many highly reguarded going into the draft. The guys you put up are hardly superstars.

I will give you that Hill and Brand could be remembered as very good players but because they are so injury prone. They are hardly superstars.
Maggette would be the anti-Duke type.
Putting Dunleavy up there... sort of embarassing.
Deng... has just not played long enough to make any statement.

Boozer has been a nice the nice surprise imo.
Sorry thats a very short list for a team that is tops in college
basketball. Which I must give K credit for. He does a good
job with the kids he gets.

How could you even put those guys up there as failures when compared to Mateen Cleaves and Shawn Respert? Either way, that isn't the point. Duke has had far more successful NBA players than Michigan State in the past 15 years yet Michigan State has been almost as successful. Can you really think of anyone else that had three solid pros or less that has been anywhere remotely close to as successful as Michigan State in that time? I think the job Izzo does there is extremely underrated.

[otisotisotis]

Can I get an over/under on Hansbrough flops tonight?

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

That is the most likely scenario in my mind, they are just too good and Michigan State can't score with them when Lawson is healthy. If I do make a play it will be to parlay Michigan State on the moneyline with the under. There is no way in hell that Michigan State can win in a high scoring game. Even with that I'd still need at least +1000 on the parlay to make the bet (which I suspect I can probably get).

Not even close and I'm pretty shocked. Only +645 for Michigan State and the Under. I'm going the opposite and throwing the money on Carolina to cover and the over, that +260 seems much better value to me. Seems like the bettors are trying to outsmart themselves tonight.

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

How could you even put those guys up there as failures when compared to Mateen Cleaves and Shawn Respert? Either way, that isn't the point. Duke has had far more successful NBA players than Michigan State in the past 15 years yet Michigan State has been almost as successful. Can you really think of anyone else that had three solid pros or less that has been anywhere remotely close to as successful as Michigan State in that time? I think the job Izzo does there is extremely underrated.

Oh hell I agree. BTW Matteen Cleaves was exactly who I was thinking of.

But Duke has been bad compared to what they have done
in the NCAA. Look at the past 20 years and look at Duke's record.
Look at UNC, and look a their players in the pros.

Actually Magic would make up for all Michst. failures,
but he was with Judd Heathcombovercoat.




My point is Duke has NC type NCAA numbers, but pros...
no way. Something amiss.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Laettner's first five seasons in the NBA:
18.2 and 8.7 boards
16.8 and 8.6
16.3 and 7.6
16.4 and 7.3
18.1 and 8.8

I'd HARDLY call putting up those kinds of numbers in the NBA as a failure. He even made the All-Star game once.

Dawkins barely played as a rookie but after that, in seasons 2-4:
15.8 and 7.4 assists
14.2 and 7.0
14.3 and 7.4
He was at 15.8 and 7.0 before getting hurt after four games in the next year.

Again, you don't put up those kinds of numbers at the NBA level if you are a failure.

Dunleavy has averaged double figures every season in the league after his rookie year, including 19.1 a game last year. You think scoring 19 a game in the NBA is embarrassing?

Hill is not a superstar? You are letting his years since the injuries cloud your judgement. Starting with averaging 20 a night as a rookie and being named co-rookie of the year, look at what he did after that:
20 points, 10 board, 7 assists (10 triple doubles)
21, 9, and 7 (13)
21, 8, and 7 (4)
21, 7, and 6 (1)
26, 7, and 5

He was an all-star every season. He made second team all-league in his second season and first team in his third. He was second team the next three years. He was second in the league in defensive rebounds one year (top 10 overall), top 10 in the league in assists the next year, then third in scoring a few seasons after that. There wasn't a thing Grant couldn't do on the court. He also had 29 triple-doubles in that period.

Brand has only averaged 20-10 four times and his career averages are 20 and 10. Compare him to a guy like Tim Duncan:

Duncan 21.4, 11.7, 3.2 asts, 2.4 blks, .507 fgp
Brand 20.0, 10.1, 2.6 asts, 2.1 blks, .503 fgp

One is a first ballot hall of famer and the other isn't even a star? Please.

ahhh you with the numbers.
I watched Dawkins played.
He did not come close to expectations.
He was a decent player, but we expected wins with
him... those were in the days of hyped up numbers (had to play man to man)
and the Spurs a run and gun team.

Hill is not a superstar. He could not possibly be.
He has been injured. I am not sure what a superstar is.
He definitley had the talent. But he was out soo much.
I cannot put him there, not his fault.

Laettner the same as Dawkins. Decent numbers,
but hardly as expected. Laettner would have been #1 in draft,
Shaq and Mourning went ahead of him. He was thought to be a franchise
player. If you have to put those guys
up against NC guys, its a laugher.

Dunleavy is not a failure, defintely not compared to expectations.
But he aint that good.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pgardn

My point is Duke has NC type NCAA numbers, but pros...
no way. Something amiss.

I don't think there is any doubt. Duke is a college basketball program. North Carolina is an NBA factory. I'm pretty sure Rashad McCants went to North Carolina for three years without ever intentionally throwing a pass once.