🏀 KuBuckets Archive

KU - Nova features the two best teams, so if you like Nova to beat KU, you like Nova to win the title, and if you like KU over Nova, you are likely picking the Hawks to win it all.

At this point, the predictions and everything kind of go out the window because there are only a couple of games left and, while each team has its strengths, each remaining team also has some pretty apparent flaws. Loyola probably started the tournament with less than a 1% chance to win the national title. But they have a very real chance now. Even if you think they are the worst of the four teams, you have to give them somewhere between a 5% and 10% chance of cutting the nets in the end (~30% chance of beating Michigan, ~20% chance of beating the Kansas/Villanova winner). That's not bad, to be honest.

But the matchups mean more now than the predictions. It's 80 minutes of basketball. It's one guy getting hot for one night (or one guy going cold). It's a bad bounce, or a questionable foul. Heck, three of the four teams heading to San Antonio wouldn't even be making this trip if one shot had gone differently (or two or three). But hey, that's March Madness.

Langford is a nice piece to add for the shooting reason that @BeddieKU23 points out. Grimes is the only true knock down shooter in next season's group, although both Lawson's, Dotson and Moore could all be roughly average.

The difference is that next year's group will be able to get more easy shots in the paint, so we won't have to stretch the defense as much to create lanes for people. Those lanes will create organically as people drive off the closeout. Plus, we will see a lot more guys that demand double teams. Dedric will command double teams wherever he goes. Grimes will as well. Depending on his progress, KJ could. Dotson will command help when he puts the ball on the floor.

Next year's team will be able to run other teams' off the floor with depth and athleticism, an option we haven't had for a few years because we just didn't have the additional personnel. De Sousa and KJ will see a lot of transition lobs when they beat their guys down the court.

Next year's squad will be about getting easy baskets and being able to lock in defensively in a way we haven't seen from KU since probably 2012.

Our lineup next year is going to be very solid. We have Dotson, Grimes, Lawson, Lawson and Azubuike, De Sousa, or McCormack. That matches up just fine with anybody. If Langford joins, he would push KJ to the bench, but that just makes the team even deeper. KU won't be hurting to match up against anyone.

The thing that made this game great was simply tons of talent on the floor, on the sidelines and the game stayed close throughout. Neither team ever got a big lead. The game never got boring. Neither team ever had clear control of the game. Every time it seemed like one team would take control, the other team made a big play.

Great officiating calls mixed in with really bizarre ones. Coaching and overcoaching (Duke switching into a 1-3-1 for a few possessions).

Lucky plays on both sides. Bad plays followed by great plays. A guy on each team having the game of his life (Duval vs. Newman). An unexpected hero (Silvio).

And ultimately, a villain. Duke would have been better off having Duval take that last shot in regulation, but Coach K went with Allen instead. That may be the single biggest decision. Allen is no better than the fourth best player on that team, yet Duke put the ball in his hands, and he almost converted. ALMOST.

Game play that is good enough to make it watchable, but with enough errors to keep you on the edge of your seat.

@lincase

Against Villanova, Mitch and Silvio will probably be more important than Doke because Villanova will spread the floor with shooters and KU will have to match up against that. This is a huge learning curve, especially for a guy that just as likely should be practicing for the McD's AA game as playing in the Final Four this week. A guy that should be going to prom next month might be the X-Factor in a KU national championship bid. Silvio has stepped up. Mitch has stepped up. Now we need them both to step up at the same time, in quite possibly the biggest game of the year.

In theory, Young with shooters around him spacing the floor should have been a brilliant combination. That never came to fruition. OU guys didn't make open shots, Young threw too many difficult passes, nothing worked the way it should have. I'm not sure what the basketball reasons for that were.

Grimes is the most talented incoming guard KU has had in the Self era. He can do it all. Pure scorer. Has a great knack for distributing. Has the athleticism to defend. Can slide over to point because he has the handle. Has the size to move to the wing if necessary. KU hasn't had a guy like this coming in since probably Paul Pierce. KU is in the middle of a special run right now, but has a chance to have a special season next year, too. But this is Kansas, so that's what happens.

Two things happened to change the ceiling for this team.

1. The emergence of Silvio De Sousa as a legitimate backup big man. His athleticism, energy and talent allows KU to matchup with different big men. In some cases, because Silvio is more mobile, he's actually a better matchup for us than Doke. That's not a knock on Doke, but against a team like Villanova, Silvio and Mitch may play a huge role because Villanova goes 5 out at times.

2. Malik Newman becoming what I thought he would become at the beginning of the season. Dynamic scorer. Slasher. Creator. He makes this offense so much more dangerous. He has, over the last three weeks, looked like the guy he was coming out of high school. Malik Newman at times flat out could not be guarded out on the perimeter. We are back to that point, where it just doesn't look like people can keep Malik from getting where he wants to go.

When KU was Doke and an out of position Mitch inside, that made KU very vulnerable. Adding a third interior guy with a different skill set changes KU's depth.

Having Malik go from being the guy that scored just 7 in the regular season finale debacle at Oklahoma State to averaging nearly 23 per game in the postseason changes the offensive ceiling for a team that was already very good offensively. It allows Devonte to do his thing without having to score as much. It allows Svi more spot up chances. It creates more space for Doke and Co. inside. It frees up Garrett and Vick to be more flexible whether its attacking the glass or cutting.

Its like KU has added two completely different high level players.

The alternate is supposed to help the officials catch that situation. He's an extra pair of eyes. The alternate should confirm the player that was fouled. In this case, he didn't do that, which is one of the responsibilities the alternate has.

@BShark

Much like everything else. Once you go to facebook comments, that opens a whole different can of worms.

@Jayhawk-in-OKC

They got beat. That's now the 10th time in 25 years Calipari has lost to a lower seed. I know your point, but compared to other top coaches, he still grades out quite well by comparison.

I'm sure that both Roy Williams and Tom Izzo, being the great coaches they are, would never lose to a lower seed like that.

If KU cans Beaty, they have to take a risk with the next hire. They have to go unconventional, because trying to beat OU at their game isn't going to work, and trying to emulate Snyder while he's still at KSU with an established program also isn't happening. KU has to go with someone that is going to find a different way to win than what they have tried over the last 20 years.

We aren't going to out-Oklahoma Oklahoma, and we aren't going to out-Snyder Bill Snyder. We need our own way, and whether we continue with Beaty, or go with someone else, we have to establish what exactly the KU way is going to be.

KSU envies KU because they want to believe they have an elite football program, but they really don't have that on the national level.

I remember seeing a friend wearing a "Decade of Dominance" t-shirt for KSU football once. I asked him (honestly, not trying to be a jerk) what decade it was. He said it was 1992 (or maybe 1993) to 2001 (or 2002). I looked at him and asked "What did you guys dominate?"(at that point, I was being facetious). He said something about going to bowls every year during that period.

That's KSU's definition of dominance. Winning more than half their games and going to the postseason. Not even being a national contender every year. Just making the postseason.

So I am happy for them that they are having the ride of their lives. Whether KU makes it to the Final Four or not, I wish KSU well. This is as good as it gets for them.

They will probably never win a title in football because that's not really Snyder's goal. This is, without question, the best shot they have at winning a basketball title, with only Loyola, a couple of football schools and quite possibly a conference opponent between them and the national championship (KSU was 0-7 against Tech, WVU and KU this year, but its awfully tough to beat a team three times, let alone four). It's not likely that KSU will have a better shot than this next year, even if their team is better. Maybe they get a six seed, or even a four or five. What's the chance the road clears like this again next year?

This is the best chance, maybe of a lifetime, for KSU to get a national title. For KU, regardless of what happens in a few hours in Omaha, chances are that KU will be better next year, and will probably have a better shot at winning a title next season. But either way, here we are. RCJH. Go KU.

I didn't see the end of the game, so I can't say what happened exactly, but when I played and coached, even after dramatic victories - buzzer beaters or whatever, you celebrated for a few moments, then went and shook hands with your opponents, then celebrated some more. It's a bit disrespectful to make the team you just beat watch you celebrate and wait to shake your hands.

Since I didn't see it, I can't say if KSU players celebrated too long, or if the Kentucky players walked off the court too quickly. I do see the pictures of UK players shaking the KSU coaching staff's hands, so they didn't just bolt like some of the stories make it sound. I think that's why Calipari clarified, because it makes it sound like they just stormed off the court, when that's not the case. Weber and the KSU coaches probably should have clarified that as well. I think that part of the misunderstanding is on them as much as anybody that they didn't acknowledge that UK shook hands, at least in the articles linked here.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/university-of-kansas/article206402239.html ↗

Talks quite a bit about his work ethic and how he improved his shooting, plus how KU has adapted their playbook to take advantage of his improved shooting stroke.

This season has been strange in that some of the teams that were expected to be stronger just never got rolling.

Between injuries, suspensions, investigations, etc., several of those teams, KU included, either were not whole the entire season, or never got to where they could have been. For example, KU anticipated having Billy Preston. Adding a guy with that talent level to KU doesn't make them a different seed, but the gap between KU and Seton Hall and Penn increases. Yes, injuries are part of the game, but several of those teams lost key guys.

Obviously, the FBI investigation changed everything about this season for Arizona, Louisville and a few others.

UCLA's season was basically toast by the time they returned from China.

Texas A&M was healthy, then wasn't, then sort of was.

Notre Dame never recovered from losing Bonzi Colson.

I've never seen that many top teams beset by so many different issues. Some were able to survive, but when you decrease the margin of error, this is what you get. Full strength Virginia probably beats UMBC 999 out of 1000 times. Not quite full strength UVA beats UMBC probably 49 out of 50 times. But that change in probability is huge for UMBC because they don't have to be completely perfect to win that game.

The best teams always have a certain margin for error. We have seen KU's margin reduced this season because, although they are still better than most teams, it's not by much. That probably changes next year because the depth and talent we have will add some significant cushion to the margins. But for this year, we probably have a 70% chance of beating Clemson. If we had Preston, maybe that chance is 85% or so. Again, just playing around the margins because we are the favorite either way, but that takes us from a 3 inn 10 chance of losing to a 3 in 20 chance. That's doubling Clemson's chances, which I am sure they will take.

Iowa State, Oklahoma, Baylor and TCU should all be considering the transfer route to get some help for next year with a grad transfer. The Big 12 as a whole could get some decent reinforcements via transfer for next season. The Big 12 really needs another nationally strong contender to help validate the conference.

Agreed that mocking the ACC would be a lot easier if the Big 12 had even one other program in the conference that was as consistently strong as Duke or UNC. Or if the Big 12 had a budding program like Virginia (I know they lost to a 16, but check their record over the last 5 years - every non-KU Big 12 squad would trade for that in a heartbeat). Until someone else steps forward on the national stage, it's really hard to mock another conference.

Looks like Penny will have Memphis up and running pretty quickly. There's enough talent from within the city that if he can keep those kids at home, he can have a legit program in just a couple of years.

As for Wake Forest, Manning is in some trouble there. Wake is such a tough job. NC State is a tough job, but Wake is in an even tougher position. It's the only major program in the state without any national titles (everyone else has at least two), and its always recruiting from a disadvantage. I'm not sure how to build a consistent winner there, particularly with UVA also strong. I hope Manning can hold out, but things aren't looking good.

@JayHawkFanToo

You make a good point about players picking their coach, as opposed to the way that I said it. Either way, recruiting is a part of college basketball. I don't think it should be a knock to say that UK has more talent. Calipari is a great recruiter, and recruiting is a big part of the job of any college basketball coach. No one here is discounting our 14 straight Big 12 titles even though KU routinely has more NBA talent (marginal or otherwise) than every other Big 12 team, sometimes more than every other team combined. Self outrecruits the rest of the conference. That makes him a better coach because that is part of the job.

We laugh at Bruce Weber when he whines about not having as much talent. It's not like I think Weber should get extra recognition because he doesn't have as much talent. If you don't have talent as a college coach, go recruit some. If you need more, go get more.

@Jayhawk-in-OKC

You're setting an almost impossible standard if you say a coach didn't have his team ready if they lost to a lower seed. Calipari has lost as the higher seed 9 times in his 24 postseason trips. That looks bad until you start comparing it to other top coaches. Let's take Coach K, Bill Self and Roy Williams, and look at just when they have had #1 seeds.

As a 1 seed (six times), Calipari has won a title, never lost to anyone seeded lower than 2, and has lost to another 1 seed three times. So Calipari has his 1 seeds ready half the time.

Self has also had six number one seeds. He's never lost to another one seed, he has one title, but he's also lost to a 2 twice, a three, a nine and an eleven. Self has his 1 seeds ready 17% of the time.

Roy Williams has had eleven #1 seeds. He's got three titles, but his eight losses were to a pair of 4 seeds, an 8, a 9, three #2's and two #1's. Williams has his 1 seeds ready 45% of the time.

Coach K has had a one seed twelve times. He has four titles as a one seed. He's also lost once to another one seed. The other seven times, he lost to a two seed (three times), a five seed (three times), and a four seed (once). So Coach K has his 1 seeds ready 42% of the time.

So for the 1 seeds of these coaches, Calipari is at 50%, Williams is at 45%, Coach K is 42% and Self is at 17%.

But I will be honest when I say that's an impossible standard. If you're getting to the Elite Eight as a one seed, you're playing pretty darn close to expectation. That makes the ledger look like this instead - Calipari is 100%, Self is 83%, Williams is 72% and Coach K is 67%. That makes more sense to me than saying that four of the best coaches in the game today are all at or under 50% for getting their best teams ready to perform.

As to talent, it's not like any of these four coaches can ever bemoan that they lack for talent. They all basically always have talent. And if they don't, well, if you can't recruit talent to Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky and Kansas, maybe that's not the right job for you. There's no prize for winning with less talent. Part of a college basketball coach's skill is recruiting because you get to pick your own players.

@Kcmatt7

His build says he could, but he isn't a defender. If you look at the Curry/Thompson backcourt, what makes it work is that Thompson is one of the best wing defenders in the NBA, and even if he isn't getting shots, he still plays that end of the floor.

Ideally, Young plays with a 2 that is a top notch wing defender, and a 3 or stretch 4 that is the primary scorer. He needs someone that can guard the other top PGs in the league without it affecting their offense. Booker isn't that guy at this point, although if they draft Young, maybe he becomes that guy.

@Kcmatt7

Young in the wrong situation will be a bust because he will be forced into taking bad shots and throwing careless passes. Young in the right situation could be a star or better, because his floor spacing and vision will be at a premium. You have to pair him with another scorer, and probably a backcourt teammate that can handle the tougher defensive assignments on a nightly basis.

I don't know that Booker is a good match because he may not fit with that group defensively. Young needs to be paired with a bigger guard so that he isn't exploited defensively because of his size/strength.

But what do they want done? Firing the coach means starting over again, which means probably having a roster of 60 something scholarship players, meaning we start over from where Beaty started at three years ago.

If you fire the AD, you probably end up firing the coach after this season, which resets the clock. KU football isn't like some other places because KU cannot just recruit locally to rebuild the talent within the program. At Texas, or Miami, or Alabama, or LSU, or Georgia, or USC (and others) the right coaching hire can attract enough talent to turn around a program in a couple of years because they can recruit locally to replace every position. There just isn't enough talent in a 200 mile radius of Lawrence to turn things around in a couple of years, particularly when you are fighting Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, K-State, Nebraska, etc. for what there is as far as local talent.

Building the program is a years long process. Beaty has completed phase 1, which was just getting scholarship numbers back. Phase 2 is improving the talent base.

@Jayhawk-in-OKC

I've been told that saying always is a sure bet to get you into trouble. You are right. You can't discount the Robert Morris loss as if it didn't happen.

I will grant the Robert Morris loss as a time that a Calipari team did not show up. Here are all of his postseason losses, the seed his team was, and the seed he lost to:

!0_1521571652316_upload-cc323bb1-4f9a-403b-b873-9c78180d3154 ↗

As a one seed in the NCAA tournament (he's been a 1 seed seven times) Calipari has never lost to any team seeded lower than 2. If he gets a 1 seed, he's going to the Elite Eight at a minimum. So he always shows up as a 1 seed.

As a two seed in the NCAA tournament (seeded second five times) Calipari has one second round loss to a 10 seed back in 1994. Other than that, he has a Sweet 16, and three Elite Eights, losing to a 3, a 4 and two different ones. So other than the one disappointment as a two seed in 1994, Calipari gets to the Sweet 16 as a 2 seed.

As a three seed, Calipari was beaten by a 2 seed and a 6 seed.

As a four seed, Calipari went to the Final Four once, and lost in the round of 32 once.

As a seven seed, Calipari never made it past the second round, and lost in the first round once.

As an 8 seed, Calipari went to the national title game.

In his one time as a one seed in the NIT, Calipari lost in the first round. He was knocked out in the first round of the NIT in 1990, and has three appearances in the semifinals, plus an NIT title.

So in 24 postseason trips, Calipari has not been upset just once (the infamous Bobby Mo). He's been upset twice - Bobby Mo in 2013 and Maryland in 1994.

When he has a 1 or 2 seed in the NCAA tournament, you can pretty much bet on him going to the Elite Eight at least. 12 times he's been seeded 1 or 2, and 10 of those resulted in at least Elite Eight appearances or better.

The guy hasn't been upset in the postseason in any of his current player's lifetimes. He got beaten in the NIT by Robert Morris. But if you had to find one coach that would consistently play to his seed, that coach is not Williams, or Boeheim, or Coach K, or Self, or Izzo, or (insert your favorite HOF coach not previously named here). The answer is Calipari.

He does not lose as a one seed in the NCAA tournament to lower seeded teams. If you don't have at least a 2 in front of your name, forget it. If the committee thinks Calipari was one of the best four teams in the country, he's one of the last eight standing, period. No exceptions. There isn't another coach in the country that can say they make it to the Elite Eight if they have a one seed.

I think CBS took a better view, although I would agree with them that this KU team is flawed, but this KU team is still a very good team compared to the nation as a whole. The only teams left that can really punish their weakest spots are Michigan, Kentucky (who we already beat), A&M (ditto) and Duke. I don't think Clemson has the firepower or talent, and Villanova is basically built the exact same way as KU.

The rest of the top teams we either already know (WVU, Tech) or could be exposed as weaker than the nation realizes (did you know Purdue's best non-con wins were Louisville and Arizona), particularly since Haas may be out for the rest of the season.

If we see Duke, it will be the Elite Eight. We wouldn't see Michigan until the title game, if we get that far.

This flawed KU team may have a chance to win a title, because its all but certain that some flawed team will win this title - just a question of which one.

@dylans

People asked the same about Curry. Obviously, Young will have to get into the weight room and train, but you can play in the NBA on the perimeter without being a really big guy, provided you can handle and shoot (Young can do both). The bigger question is where he fits on the NBA totem pole - can he be the best player on a title contender (i.e. Curry), or does he need to be the second or even third best player? That will have more effect on his success than anything. If he needs to be the third best guy, but never gets two other guys with him, he probably won't be that successful at the next level - that's my guess for him, by the way. Young's passing is so good that I could see him being an excellent third guy.

His situation is in some ways similar to Lonzo Ball. Lonzo isn't supposed to be the star. Even his father would admit that if you cornered him and talked about hoops with him for a minute. Lonzo's best skill is his passing, and the ability he has to get other guys their best shots. Now it's just a matter of surrounding him with the right guys to take those shots. Young will be similar to that.

Each team has room to sign two max players under the salary cap. The key is figuring out how to build around them within the cap. Philly has identified their max guys. That's the hard part. Now you just have to be smart in figuring out how to get a third really good guy that you don't have to max, and then build around those three with a team of interchangeable parts.

If Philly is smart, they extend both Simmons and Embiid soon, and as the cap goes up, they will have more space to build out the rest of their roster when they are ready to compete for titles in a couple of years.

@JayHawkFanToo

Agreed that 1 seeds should get a more favorable path, but by virtue of some upsets, KU has one of the tougher remaining paths - only Villanova will have a harder road. But that isn't really anyone's fault, except the top seeds that stumbled along the way, clearing the way for lesser (?) teams to step into that void.

As for Robert Morris beating UK, I don't count that simply because UK had no real interest in that game. I know I am using selective memory on that, but a man wiser than me once told me kids don't go to Kentucky or UNC or Kansas to play in the NIT, just like kids don't go to Alabama, or Miami, or Florida State, or USC to play in the Texas bowl. You go to certain schools to have a chance on the big stage. If you're not on the big stage, it's hard to get or keep everyone's attention, particularly when the guys that were going to jump to the NBA were already focusing on that, and the guys that were staying were already looking to the next year. It's not like Kentucky fans were any more upset about losing in the NIT than they were about being in the NIT in the first place. As a KU fan, I think that we would be in the same place. I'm not even sure I would watch if KU was in the NIT.

@Lulufulu

Duke's length in that zone worries me, because even if they are not perfectly disciplined, they can disrupt shooting and passing angles. And I have no idea how we handle Bagley after Saturday. Delgado destroyed us, and he's not nearly the player that Bagley is. Bagley could drop a 30/30 on us. Could we win that game? Sure. We would have to hit 15+ threes, but we could win that type of game. But Bagley could also have an all time great game against us.

We haven't been able to defend the interior either of the last couple of years. Duke is built to exploit that, should that be their gameplan.

ACC looks bad only because the teams we thought would do well (UNC, UVA) didn't, but the teams we didn't expect (Florida State, Syracuse) did well in their place.

I think most would have guessed the ACC would have 3 or 4 teams in the Sweet 16, but most would have had UNC, UVA and Duke.

If KU had lost over the weekend, but TCU had won, for example, people would be knocking the Big 12, but the truth would be that WVU and Texas Tech played to their seed, KU underperformed, KSU got a good break and TCU overperformed (in this example, anyway). That's where the ACC is. Yeah, UNC and UVA wet the bed, but Florida State and Syracuse stepped up.

@JayHawkFanToo

I always have to give credit to Calipari, because even when he's had really young, really raw rosters, his teams don't just no show like Virginia did, or like Arizona did, or Cincinnati, or Tennessee. Kentucky went out and handled their business over the weekend, and now they are the best team left in that region. The only reason they are in this position is because other teams did not take care of their business, not because of anything they did (other than win).

KU could be a big benefactor of this should Duke misstep against Syracuse. Gonzaga looks like a big beneficiary as well with FSU knocking off Xavier.

But that's more on the teams that lost (Virginia, Michigan State, Cincinnati, Xavier, Arizona, UNC, etc.) than on the higher seeds still remaining, and a credit to schools like UMBC, Marshall, Loyola and others for having a gameplan and the execution to win. Also, I would argue that Syracuse had the toughest two games of everyone remaining - TCU and then Michigan State. Nevada also had a tough road with Texas and then Cincinnati, and don't forget about Loyola with Miami and Tennessee. Syracuse beat a team that lots of people thought had Final Four potential. I don't know that you can say that about KU or even Loyola, though you probably can about Nevada. Texas A&M also had a tough road (Providence and UNC - Seton Hall is better than Providence, but UNC is much tougher than Penn).

It's tough for a 1 seed to have the toughest road right now, because even an underseeded 16 is only a 13 or 14.

Wiggins is the third best player Minnesota has when everyone is healthy. Butler and Towns are both more efficient scorers than he is (largely because they get to the FT line more). Towns' effective FG% is 60%. Butler is 51%. Wiggins is 48%. If you were deciding who should get the most shots out of that group, give the guy with the 60% more opportunities. Minnesota has both Wiggins and Butler shooting about 16 times a game, while Towns takes about 14 shots a game.

This may be why Cleveland moved Wiggins. Would Wiggins have been okay being the third option behind Lebron and Kyrie (clearly superior players)? It is tough to find a guy that is talented enough to carry you on certain nights, but also willing to take a back seat to the other stars on most nights. That's what makes Golden State (and specifically Klay Thompson and Draymond Green) so special. Thompson and Green are both guys capable of having big games, but most nights, they let Durant and Curry do their thing. That's what makes Golden State so tough. If you do happen to limit Durant and Curry, you might still lose because Thompson goes for 30, or because Green drops a triple double.

But you have to have a guy who is willing to accept that lesser role. Maybe Wiggins isn't ready to be that guy.

I've never liked Metcalf's method for re-seeding. He only takes into account how the team has played in the tournament, rather than the entire season. Clemson looked great Saturday. KU looked okay. Teams that have won in blowouts get over-seeded in his re-seeding, while teams that won close games (but have had stronger seasons) tend to get seeded lower.

Clemson playing their best possible game tonight. That bodes well for KU, since Clemson is maxing out their potential tonight.

Malik is probably the most talented pure scorer that KU has on this roster. As I have been saying since early January, when Malik attacks, everything else is so much better. He won't stay quite this hot from three, but if he continues to get into the paint, he won't have to because the points will come from the drive anyway.

You simply can't take away what Malik is doing right now and at the same time take away good looks from three for both Svi and Devonte. You just can't do it. It puts too much stress on the defense because this team can really spread you out. Add in Doke getting 4 or 5 dunks because you have to single cover him on the block and the issue isn't scoring.

Granted, either Duke or Michigan State can handle Doke one on one inside, so that will be a much bigger challenge, but at least for now, things are going well. All things considered, this has to be thought of as a success given this team's personnel limitations, regardless of what happens this week with Auburn/Clemson and Duke/Michigan State/Syracuse. If Syracuse somehow advances, that certainly changes things, but I'm pretty happen with what this season has been.

Both of these teams probably are a little inflated. This game doesn't really seem as formidable as whatever may come after in the Elite Eight. I have no real preference for either Clemson or Auburn. The matchup isn't awful for either one. They are ranked 18 and 19 in Kempom. Clemson's defense is a little better. Auburn's offense is a little better. Clemson plays at a relatively slow pace, so their defensive numbers may not hold up if the tempo goes up. Auburn plays at a relatively fast pace (19th in the country in adjusted tempo), so that probably is a little better for us that getting into a slugfest with Clemson, as we are built more for a track meet than a ground and pound game.

I'd say maybe because of tempo that Auburn is the slightly better matchup even though Auburn is ever so slightly also the better team.

@JayHawkFanToo

I don't think UMBC will beat KSU. KSU is still a superior team to UMBC by quite a bit. But if you're UMBC, you would much rather match up with KSU, who plays at a pace you can live with, and hope Lyles can be the best player on the floor when it matters, as opposed to having to play up and down with Creighton bombing away from 3.

UVA played at an adjusted tempo of 59.4 according to KenPom. That was the slowest pace in all of D1 (and what kept UVA from being able to come back once they got down double figures).

K-State plays faster than that, obviously, but their tempo of 65.6 was fast enough to move them all the way to 305th in the entire country. That's better for UMBC than Creighton, which plays at 70.8, which is 56th in the country.

It's easier for a fast team to slow down than it is for a slow team to speed up. UMBC played at a faster pace than KSU all year, so if they need to slow down to hang with the better KSU squad, they can do that and hope Lyles and their shooters (three guys besides Lyles have hit 60+ threes this year at over a 40% clip) can make enough shots in a lower possession game to give them a chance at the end.

Teams that play slow are always vulnerable to less talented teams because teams need to get fewer stops, and need to figure out fewer ways to score.

If UMBC only has to deal with 65 or so possessions, that's a game they can win. KSU probably can't stay efficient if they have to play at 70 plus possessions, so UMBC will have a chance in this one. It's not a great shot, but if UMBC had a 1% chance to beat UVA, they have at least a 15% chance to beat KSU. According to FiveThirtyEight ↗ UMBC actually has a better chance of beating KSU tomorrow than Seton Hall has of beating KU today.

We've already discussed on this board what could go wrong for KU. UMBC shoots the three well enough that they could trip up KSU, and if Buffalo beats Kentucky, these glass sneakers may fit well past midnight.

Here's an article from last month ↗ talking about how pace of play could affect a favored team, comparing the difference in performance from fast paced higher seeds and slow paced higher seeds to roughly the difference between a 4 and 5 seed.

That's not insignificant. KSU happens to rank below 300 in pace, where we generally see teams underperform. I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

All of the things that needed to happen for a 16 to beat a 1 came together in that game.

1. Lots of good shooting from the 16 seed. 12-24 from the three point line, 26-48 overall.

2. Low turnovers. Just 17 turnovers in the entire ball game. A 16 can't get into an up and down game with a 1 seed. They don't have the talent.

3. Facing a 1 that plays at a slower pace. Virginia was never going to push the pace, so UMBC had the chance to stay in a slower game, and once they started hitting shots, UVA was in trouble.

4. Facing a good college team 1 vs. a 1 with a ton of NBA level players. Virginia doesn't have much in the way of pro prospects. That's important, because once UVA got down, they had to just keep running their regular offense. There was no Malcolm Brogdon on this team to have just take over. UVA had to hope things turned around as a team because they didn't have the individual talent to turn the tide.

That's the lesson from this. UVA, while clearly much better than UMBC, was better as a collection, not on an individual by individual level. As a result, UVA got down and with UMBC playing at a pretty good level, couldn't just make up the gap. And the crazy thing is, depending on how healthy Dean Wade is (and if UMBC is ready to play on Sunday), UMBC could be the first 16 to make it to the Sweet 16 because KSU without Wade can't dominate them, either.

@JayHawkFanToo

Sometimes the previous fit wasn't right. I remember a long time ago there was an NFL coach that had only one winning season in five years, and an overall losing record as a head coach. He got hired by a new team and promptly went 5-11 in his first season, the exact same record he led his team to the season he was fired in his previous job.

That guy was Bill Belichick. He won the Super Bowl the very next year, and hasn't looked back. Some guys just need the right situation and a second chance.

Crennel had one winning season in four years in Cleveland. The Chiefs handed him probably one of the worst rosters they have ever had. Seriously look at this. ↗ He went an almost predictable 2-14. He really shouldn't have taken the job.

Crennel is a great coodinator, but not a great head coach.

Darn it, @BShark stole my thunder.

@bskeet

SHU played a good schedule, and they have some good wins. But they also have a loss to Rutgers that no one can explain, they got swept by Marquette (including a 20 point beatdown) and they split with a weak Georgetown team. They played up or down to the level of their competition quite a bit this season. St. John's played them tough twice (once when St. John's was terrible, once after St. John's briefly impersonated being the best team in the country).

They are an 8 seed because, for nearly every impressive win, they have a head scratching loss. Tech win. Rutgers loss. Louisville win. Blown out by Marquette. Split with Creighton. Split with Georgetown.

We need to play well, obviously because SHU is good enough to win this game, but they are also bad enough to lose it.

If Dixon does get one or two of those guys, that's a huge coup for both him and for the Big 12. TCU's improvement only strengthens the Big 12, much as Baylor going from being a bottom feeder to a solid team helped improve the Big 12 (remember how bad Baylor was for the first 6-7 years the Big 12 existed).

As a conference, you always want teams moving up a rung. You want your worst teams to move from being bottom feeders to competitive, with an outside shot of making the NCAA tournament. That's where Oklahoma, Baylor, Oklahoma State and KSU are right now. That's where you want Iowa State to be next year as well. Obviously, all of those teams won't make the tournament, but you want them to all have the chance. Out of that group, you want one of them to move from barely making the tournament to having a top 7 seed, along with Texas and TCU. Out of that group of three, you want one of them to move into a position where they can get a top 5 seed along with WVU and Texas Tech. And finally, from that group, you want one to move up to the level of KU, where they are a legit threat to get on the one or two line, and have a chance to go to the Final Four. If you have two top 2 seeds, two more top 5 seeds, two more top 7 seeds, and three of the other four teams in the conference on the bubble, whether they make it in or not, that's a really strong league, both in terms of depth, and in terms of top talent.

The Big 12 has the bottom part and the middle part. They just need to take care of the top part.

8 seeds are 8 seeds for one of two reasons - either they have lots of talent, but are very inconsistent, or they aren't very talented, but are very steady.

Seton Hall is the former. They certainly have some talent, but they don't always play up to that level. Because of that, KU should have a good chance of winning this game. Now obviously, a team like SHU can win this game. Unlike Penn, they have the talent to close out a game like this if they get a lead. But, much like Arizona last night, they also may never get going, and KU certainly has the talent to close out SHU if they get a lead.

KU needs to be better than they were yesterday to advance. They don't have to be perfect, but the teams from here on out will be good, so KU needs to be good as well.

@JayHawkFanToo

UConn should have just fired him without cause. Trying to fire him with cause was bound to get pushback because he is going to fight it, which may affect their ability to hire a new coach (who wants to take that job if you're in litigation with the guy that was there before?). Paying the buyout is easier than attacking him as a person.

If they just fire him for not winning games, they are out of it paying the buyout but no other issues. Trying to get out of the buyout will likely cost even more money, even if they ultimately win.

@JayHawkFanToo

Sadly, that hasn't been the case for more than 20 years, even at the D2 level!

Let's take the last 15 years (2003 - 2017) and try to figure out how a double elimination tournament would have shaken out.

First, a list of the #1 seeds and the eventual champion, just to set the stage.

!0_1521122795567_upload-2f4dacac-19cb-4e50-92aa-a8e12828fb4a ↗

To make this a bit easier, let's say that every time a 1 seed won the title eventually, they would still win, so the champions from 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013*, 2015, and 2017 all stay the same.

So let's look at the other years:

2003 - Syracuse

2004 - UConn

2006 - Florida

2011 - UConn

2014 - UConn

2016 - Villanova

In 2003, the best three teams in the country were Arizona, Kentucky and Texas. Arizona had Jason Gardner (All American), plus three future NBA players in Andre Iguodala, Luke Walton and Channing Frye, and another stud in Salim Stoudemire. That team was loaded. KU took them down in the regional final, but I don't know that KU can get them twice because Arizona may well have been the best team in the country. Either that, or Kentucky was. UK had more of a great college team with Chuck Hayes and Keith Bogans leading the way, but they were very good. Texas had TJ Ford (player of the year), plus Brian Boddicker and Royal Ivey (future NBA player). If it's me, I say Arizona wins a double elimination tournament. They were just so talented. If they get another crack at KU (we beat them by just three), I don't know that we get it done.

2004, UConn was a very good team (2 seed). St. Joseph's and Stanford both went through most of the season undefeated, but the best team was almost certainly Duke. JJ Redick, Luol Deng, Daniel Ewing, and Chris Duhon formed an elite collegiate perimeter attack, with Sheldon Williams in the middle. Duke blew a 7 point lead in the national semifinal against UConn and lost by one. Given a second chance, it's likely Duke lifts the trophy.

2006, we know now that the eventual champion Gators were loaded, but we didn't know it at the time. However, the scariest team was probably either UConn or Duke. Duke lost to LSU. UConn lost to George Mason. Duke had the transcendent JJ Redick year (he averaged over 26 points a game) along with Sheldon Williams (almost 19 from him). UConn was lead by Rudy Gay. No way George Mason beats them twice. The title game is probably Duke - UConn in double elimination format. Flip a coin on who wins that one.

2011, the best team was KU, trailed by Ohio State. KU had the Morris twins, Tyshawn Taylor, and TRob. Ohio State was led by Jared Sullinger. There's a reason both of these teams were in the Final Four the very next season. If things are double elimination, KU and Ohio State play for the title in 2011, rather than the national semifinal in 2012, with KU likely winning that game as well.

2014, the best team was Arizona. Aaron Gordon, TJ McConnell, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, etc. They got edged by a very good Wisconsin team in the regional final, but I don't know that anybody could have beaten them again. They were so, so talented. Florida had a nice team that might have snuck in if Arizona stumbled. That Wisconsin squad was also good enough to make noise, but ultimately, Arizona is the likely champ.

2016, the best teams were Kansas and North Carolina. North Carolina very nearly won the title anyway, so we know what they could have done. KU lost the regional final, but had a stacked team with Ellis, Selden, Mason, etc. UNC is probably better, but I don't know if Roy Williams could have gotten focused for a title matchup with KU. Flip a coin on this one.

So the final title breakdown would be as follows:

2003 - Arizona, or maybe Kentucky

2004 - Duke, or possibly UConn or Stanford

2006 - Duke or UConn

2011 - Kansas, maybe Ohio State

2014 - Arizona, maybe Florida or Wisconsin

2016 - North Carolina or Kansas

Duke probably adds two titles to the five they already have (doesn't cost them any titles). Arizona might have two more. KU adds at least one.

However, since I didn't look at any of the years where a 1 seed did win, there's no guarantee that a different top seed doesn't win the title. Illinois was great in 2005. Ohio State and UNC were both tremendous UNC was pretty stacked in 2008, as was Memphis. UConn had a great squad in 2009. Kentucky probably had the best team in both 2010 and 2015. KU might have had a shot in 2013 or 2017.

On the other hand, maybe KU can beat Arizona twice, and they could knock off Syracuse in a second meeting. Maybe Florida does make that run in 2006 (they had the talent). Kentucky has had some talented squads the last several years. Double elimination probably gives Calipari three or four titles instead of just one.

Just adding a few coaches that have already been fired:

1. Mark Fox - Georgia
2. Kevin Ollie - UConn
3. Kevin Stallings - Pitt
4. Jeff Lebo - East Carolina

Ole Miss has replaced Andy Kennedy with Kermit Davis (Middle Tennessee State), so the MTSU job is open. That's it for main conferences so far, though there's no guarantee there won't be action in the ACC, Pac-12, and especially the Big 10 with several teams having disappointing seasons. I think the SEC is done shaking things up, honestly. I wouldn't be surprised if Richard Pitino (Minnesota) was canned for off court issues, and it won't be a complete shock if the Arizona and UCLA jobs open up as well.

David Padgett was the interim at Louisville. They have not yet named him the full time guy, so that job is sort of open.

According to the Coaching Carousel website (http://www.coachesdatabase.com/basketball-coaching-carousel-2018/), ↗ there are currently 26 openings at the D1 level, and that doesn't yet include guys at the end of their contracts that may not return, or any further firings or job changes.

I would imagine the Big 12 will be relatively quiet this year. Prohm would be the only guy that might be in some jeopardy. Everyone else is probably reasonably safe because they either made the tournament, overachieved relative to expectations, or has a strong enough track record to endure one rough year. There are a lot of low to mid major schools with openings right now, so the grad transfer market might heat up soon.

@BeddieKU23

It's a lousy break to be a junior at a school where the coach gets fired/leaves. You either have to pick up and find somewhere else, or stick around and figure out a new regime. Maybe everything works out, but maybe it doesn't and you end up in a lousy situation. With transfer rules the way they are, it's really in most guys best interest to shoot for graduating in three years, that way if they don't have pro aspirations, they at least have some say in where they finish their playing career. Remember, for most, their senior year in college will be the last basketball they will ever play. To have to either sit a year, or pick up an entirely new system isn't exactly a dream scenario.

@BeddieKU23

UConn may lose quite a few guys with the coaching change. Jalen Adams and Christian Vital may also be available (top 2 scorers) if UConn is either put on probation or they don't want to play for the next coach. UConn already lost an incoming recruit (James Akinjo - PG) that was ranked in the top 100. They also have a couple other four star guards that they were targeting that may be available for an enterprising coach.

With the season being over for all but a few schools after this weekend, lots of coaching positions will open up as schools fire and hire, and as players ponder the NBA or using the grad transfer option.

This site does a pretty good job of tracking transfers

https://www.verbalcommits.com/transfers/2018?division=D1 ↗

It updates daily (or even hourly) as news breaks, and even have whether the guy will be eligible immediately or not.

@Crimsonorblue22

Here's the brackets for 1A Division 2 ↗ and 1A Division 1 ↗. Quite a few blowouts in those games.

A really good 1A team, particularly if they have a guy that can play in college, is going to be much better than your average 1A team with a winning record. For most 5A and 6A teams, even if they don't have a guy that can play in college, they have enough solid guys to keep games competitive.

That's one of the reasons Kansas keeps splitting classifications to try and avoid blowouts. There used to be 6 state champs in basketball. Now both 4A and 1A have two divisions. 3A is probably heading that way. 2A may not be far behind.