March Madness On Demand

March 26, 2009 at 6:27 am · by bteitelbaum · Filed under College Hoops

Those four words are absolutely glorious! Thanks to CBS’ generosity, I was able to watch most of the NCAA tournament’s first two rounds. Yes, MMOD works even in Spain. So now I can write with well-informed confidence. Here are my thoughts on the Big Dance so far:

• Although I have always been deeply involved in bracket challenges, I am starting to feel as if they may somewhat pervert the tourney. I found a bar Sunday night that was showing USC – Michigan St, and four American guys were watching with extreme interest and passion. They were hooting and hollering at the TV, exhorting Michigan St to play better. As the social bird that I am, I asked them if they went to MSU and received a not wholly surprising answer. “No, but our brackets depend on the Spartans winning.” Observing the way these guys approached this game got me thinking. Although it was an intense, back-and-forth, fantastically suspenseful contest, these guys were not taking any of that in. They merely wanted the players wearing green to put the ball in the basket, one way or another. The beauty of the NCAA tournament lies in competitiveness, effort, and excitement far more than it lies in outcomes. It’s really about basketball lovers being able to watch so many games in such a short time span, with most of them being very entertaining. And rooting for your “team” has become all but forgotten (though I did have UCLA going to the Elite 8). Although I have been guilty of a similar type of bracketed fandome in the past, I think this year was a breakthrough for me. While watching Pitt – ETSU, I started rooting against the team I had picked to become the national champion. Screw you bracket, I would love to see a 16 seed finally upset a 1. It unfortunately didn’t happen and my bracket remains alive, but a more important part of me got more revitalized. I love this game.
• Everyone talks about guard play being the key to tournament success, but I would argue that the real important thing is just star play. Blake Griffin dunked; Luke Neville clunked. Terrence Williams balled outrageous; James Harden bawled outrageous. Sherron Collins was awesome; Jeff Teague was awful. It doesn’t matter what position you play. If you’re the star of your team, you better play like one… or you’re going home.
• It’s also nice to have a couple of legitimate stars. Pitt’s DeJuan Blair was a monster in round one, and when he was held in check in round two, Sam Young went off. Kansas’ Cole Aldrich coming up with that trip-dub to support Sherron. That’s why I think Oklahoma, Michigan St, UConn (no Thabeet doesn’t count yet), and Memphis can’t win it all.
• Speaking of guard play, though, that’s the area in which smaller schools can hang. See Cleveland St and Western Kentucky. It’s the inside game that’s almost always their downfall, and it’s just numbers… there are fewer 6′10 people to go around than 6′1 guys.
• Some intriguing style matchups: Missouri and Memphis both really like to get up and down the court. UConn-Purdue should be a knockdown, dragout fight. Pitt might knock down and drag out Xavier. Aside from Hansbrough, UNC-Gonzaga should be all finesse. Aside from Villanova, Duke-Nova should be all finesse. Cuse and Oklahoma have a few of the best athletes college ball has seen.

So who do I got? Louisville, MSU, UConn, Memphis, Pitt, Nova, Zags, Cuse.

Comments (1)

My Picks

March 18, 2009 at 6:07 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under College Hoops

As Rafiki once famously pronounced, “It is time.” A new king is about to be crowned; one team will embark upon an epic journey to find its true self and emerge as the proud leader of the pack. Or proud leader of the pride, if the analogy is to hold. (Shameless corny jokes are my forte.)

And you, sitting in cubicle #3, you are also about to set off on an odyssey. Your bracket, probably hastily penned during the morning’s coffee break, must survive three grueling weeks if you are to take home the $500 and forever incur the ill-will of colleagues. But you are concerned. Jim over in cubicle #10 has won the office pool four year running, and today his swag is phenomenal.

Don’t worry, though, because this year you have a secret weapon. No, you aren’t going to swap brackets when no ones looking. Or get Jim suspended due to PEDs. You are just going to listen to a little bird named Ben. Unfortunately, I can’t give away all my picks – I am in a few national brackets myself – but I will divulge the winners of each first-round matchup and give a tasty tidbit about each game.. Happy bracketing!

MIDWEST

• 1 Louisville over 16 Morehead St: Pitino has at least one game in which he doesn’t need to get excited and risk mussing up his hair.
• 8 Ohio St. over 9 Siena: Evan Turner outduels Kenny Hasbrouk. Don’t get too excited by what Siena did last year. That Commodores team was vastly overrated and overseeded.
• 5 Utah over 12 Arizona: “Arizona might be the most talented double-digit seed in years” – Everyone. Well then why have they just kept losing?
• 4 Wake Forest over 13 Cleveland St: Jeff Teague has been inconsistent of late but I really believe he’ll step up for the tourney. And James Johnson is a matchup nightmare for smaller schools.
• 6 West Virginia over 11 Dayton: The Mountaineers are just too balanced offensively and disciplined defensively.
• 3 Kansas over 14 North Dakota St: I know the Bison are a trendy upset pick and people are expecting Ben Woodside, who scored 60 points against Stephen F. Austin, to pull a Wally Szczerbiak. But I just don’t think the Jayhawks will send him to the charity stripe 35 times.
• 10 USC over 7 Boston College: Ohhhhhh, so that’s why the Trojans were in the preseason top 25 and and DeMar DeRozan was projected as a high lottery pick.
• 2 Michigan St. over 15 Robert Morris: Schools that have someone’s first and last names historically do poorly in the Big Dance.

WEST

• 1 UConn over 16 Chattanooga: If I become more crotchety, can I become the Huskies’ next coach?
• 9 Texas A&M over 8 BYU: Now this is just a hunch. At least I’m honest.
• 5 Purdue over 12 Northern Iowa: The MVC is seriously down this year. This is the first time in a while that it is sending only one team to the tourney. And Purdue is finally starting to come together.
• 4 Washington over 13 Mississippi St: What happened to Georgia last year? It isn’t hard to run through the SEC tournament these days.
• 11 Utah St over 6 Marquette: Dominic James’ injury shows the true importance of leadership and chemistry. Though his numbers were down, the Golden Eagles were up. Since his injury, every game has been a struggle.
• 14 Cornell over 3 Missouri: You need intelligence and poise to beat a press, and the experienced Ivy League representative has plenty of both. Louis Dale is one of the most unheralded but versatile guards in the country.
• 7 California over 10 Maryland: My sister goes to Cal. And bears totally kill turtles whenever they fight.
• 2 Mempis over 15 Cal State Northridge: Calipari has at least one game in which he doesn’t need to get excited and risk mussing up his hair.

EAST

• 1 Pitt over 16 E. Tennessee St: The Buccaneers can at least get a workout by doing pullups on DeJuan Blair’s arms.
• 9 Tennessee over 8 Oklahoma St: Bruce Pearl is not gonna let these guys get bounced in the first round. And the Cowboys can’t match up with Tyler Smith.
• 5 FSU over 12 Wisconsin: The Badgers are the most consistently good boring team in the country. But the Seminoles are way too excited to be a part of March Madness again.
• 13 Portland St. over 4 Xavier: I think I don’t respect the Musketeers enough. I just don’t trust the A-10 or a team that has trouble winning close games.
• 6 UCLA over 11 VCU: Collison/Maynor a showdown for the ages. Maynor wins personally, but the rest of the Bruins lock down on D.
• 3 Villanova over 14 American: Part of me wanted to be patriotic and pick American. And the other part of me follows basketball.
• 7 Texas over 10 Minnesota: Golden Gophers limp into the tournament and Tubby Smith, for all his greatness, needs a refresher concerning coaching under real pressure.
• 2 Duke over 15 Binghamton: Though God and Uncle Sam jumped off the Blue Devils’ bandwagon several years ago, they just can’t lose to Binghamton.

SOUTH

• 1 UNC over 16 Radford: Ty Lawson can afford to rest during this one.
• 8 LSU over 9 Butler: The difference in athleticism is just ridiculous. I don’t know if even the disciplined and smart Bulldogs can overcome it.
• 12 Western Kentucky over 5 Illinois: Nice bounceback season for the Illini, but the Hilltoppers are getting good at this upset thing.
• 4 Gonzaga over 13 Akron: I wonder what would happen if LeBron could play this one game for the Zips?
• 11 Temple over 6 Arizona St: Dionte Christmas and James Harden will both score a bunch, but something is telling me the Owls are gonna eke this one out.
• 3 Syracuse over 14 Stephen F. Austin: Jonny Flynn won’t know what to do with himself when he’s sitting on the bench with 10 minutes to go. And see “Robert Morris.”
• 7 Clemson over 10 Michigan: Clemson has too many good players for the Wolverines, and they are actually going to remember that they are good players.
• 2 Oklahoma over 15 Morgan St: Has any player ever scored ALL of his points in a game on dunks?

There it is. The info you need to succeed. Use it widely. And remember to quote me.

Comments (1)

Shallow on the Surface

March 15, 2009 at 6:58 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under College Hoops

I’m so excited. And I just can’t hide it. I’m about to lose control and I think I like it. Gotta love those Pointer Sisters. And karaoke. Especially karaoke, because that’s where you remember that you love the Pointer Sisters. Ahh, life is good.

I might be developing a trend of beginning my posts with musical references. I’ve actually been thinking recently about the relationship between sports and music. I think it’s quite profound, but I’m still distilling my precise thoughts. So unfortunately profundity will have to wait for a (hopefully soon) forthcoming post. And instead you get the Pointer Sisters.

But seriously, I really am very excited. In fact, today is my 5th favorite day of the year – behind my birthday, the day before my birthday, the day I arrive at camp, and any day that includes breakfast burritos, hammocks, and Alize – for today marks the long-awaited arrival of March Madness.

The brackets are set, bubbles have bursted, and the dance is about to commence. Pundits are analyzing, Dicky V is yelling, and Joe Lunardi is now vacationing. As for me, I’m mentally and physically preparing myself for what will be a demanding few weeks of watching. The NCAA tournament is an event I just won’t miss, ridiculous time difference be damned.

There’s obviously so much to talk about, and ballershorts will do its best to thoroughly cover the Dance. I would like to start, though, by sharing some valuable counter-intuitive insight that I gleaned from the fantastic Big East tournament.

I was lucky enough to catch much of the Madison Square Garden mayhem, specifically the epic Syracuse-UConn 6-OT thriller.  Throughout all of the extra sessions, I kept asking myself (because no one else was insane enough to stay up and watch with me) the same question. Wouldn’t these teams be much better off if they had more depth? If the Orange didn’t have to use a guy who had played 28 minutes and scored 4 points ALL YEAR? (Congrats to Justin Thomas for recording his first rebound of the season.) If the Huskies didn’t have to depend on a guy who hadn’t attempted a shot since DECEMBER? (Donnell Beverly unfortunately did not hoist one up here either.)

Everyone always emphasizes the importance of depth, that it can truly separate contenders from pretenders. At the beginning of the year, talking heads thusly drooled over UNC’s roster. If serious depth is an integral characteristic of championship teams or an accurate indicator of tournament success, then Syracuse and UConn (post-Dyson injury) might be in trouble.  So I decided to do a little research on recent Final Four teams and find out the truth.

I was quite surprised by what I uncovered. I distinctly remember the two teams that met in last year’s finals, Kansas and Memphis, being repeatedly praised for this very quality. However, the numbers tell a different story. In Kansas’ 75-68 overtime victory, the Jayhawks gave only 7 players more than 5 minutes, whereas the Tigers played just 6 men that amount. I doubt you could call that the use of depth.

Granted, Memphis had 10 guys average over 9 minutes a game during the season. But if they’re not going to play when the games really matter, then is it really depth? Or maybe more pressingly, is depth then really important?

Let’s probe further. Over the last five years there have been 15 Final Four games, which means that the best teams in college hoops were given 30 chances to flash their rosters’ range. By and large, those chances were wasted, as the majority of the minutes were taken by seven guys. In fact, only nine times did teams play 8 men more than 10 minutes, and only twice did 9 men see similarly significant action. And merely one championship team – the 2005 UNC Tar Heels – relied on 8 men in both their Final Four victories.

I won’t go so far as to say that depth does not matter in the NCAA tournament, but I will contend that it is necessary. As we have seen, most successful dancers have done without it.

I am never satisfied, though, with discussing pure numbers. I think they are an important, maybe essential, part of the bigger story, but they must be properly used to find that bigger story. So what are the reasons behind and implications of the aforementioned stats? Why do college teams apparently not need depth to win it all?

It will be helpful here to discuss a few differences between professional and college ball. In the NBA it is true that a deep bench is regularly a prerequisite for playoff success. For example, the Celtics did not become a legitimate championship team until they acquired PJ Brown and Sam Cassell. By looking at the role of NBA bench players, it becomes easier to see why college teams rely on them much less.

Firstly, NBA backups generally have two significant qualities that most college subs lack: confidence and experience. They have often been stars before, they are more mature men, and they have had more time to practice their craft at a high level. On the other hand, college benches are usually light on experience and heavy on nerves, especially with players bolting early for the league. During the tense one-and-done moments of March, coaches tend to trust only the most talented or seasoned players. And rarely do college teams have more than seven who fit that description. When the choice is between a tired Jonny Flynn or a fresh Justin Thomas, we all know what Jim Boeheim is going to do.

Furthermore, the college game and season are both shorter than those of the NBA. I know that the pros are supposed to be in better physical shape than their amateur counterparts, but the 8 minutes and 50 games make a serious difference. The NCAA tournament, for all of its hype, excitement, and intensity, doesn’t actually demand more physically than the regular season. Teams play two games a week, something they’ve been doing since November. What ‘Cuse did in the Big East tournament, playing four games in four days, requires much more than the bigger tourney. If they were able to bounce back and beat a very solid West Virginia squad less than 20 hours after the UConn game, then nothing they face in the NCAA tournament should be too draining.

So when we talk about March Madness, let’s please stop talking about depth. It may play a factor, especially if a game goes 6 overtimes, but there are so many more pressing issues that will make or break teams’ dreams. For Syracuse, free throw shooting could be the headache. (They were very lucky that Arinze Onuaku hit those two freebies near the end of the second half against UConn.) The Huskies need either Kemba Walker or Craig Austrie to step up big in place of Dyson. (The two were a combined 6-31 against the Orange.)

Now it’s time for us to wait and see which crucial factors will end up defining this year’s NCAA tournament, and most bench players will be doing the same thing. Because wee know that they won’t see much court time.

Comments

Can Davidson still get an at large bid?

March 9, 2009 at 9:51 am · by Andrew Stein · Filed under College Hoops

No matter what level of basketball fan you might be, March offers an unparalleled level of excitement.  Case and point: here we are before the official madness has begun, and I’m writing about Davidson, a Southern Conference small school team with a brilliant shooter in Stephen Curry.  I will not lie that the only reason I probably care is because they made it to the elite 8 as a 10-seed in last year’s tournament, not to mention the good chance that Curry might be an NBA lottery pick.  Nonetheless, I do care, and I would love to see them in this year’s bracket.

That said, I’ll be realistic.  They will not earn an automatic bid through their conference tournament after losing last night.  If they do get in with a current RPI that ranks 69 in Divison 1 college hoops, they would most likely be the lowest RPI in the field.  Of their losses, two came in-conference, and any loss in the Southern Conference really hurts their chances of a bid.  These losses came at home to the College of Charleston and at home against the Citadel.  Both of these teams now have RPI’s outside of the top 100–nothing to be proud of.  They’re only bright point came on December 26th when they beat West Virginia, an RPI Top 50 win– the only quality win all season.

I’m as big of a Stephen Curry fan as the next guy, but the Wildcats haven’t done anything on the court to deserve a bid, so I predict that they only get in if the committee makes a mistake.  Of course this will not stop all of TV’s talking heads from saying that they should be included.  After all, they’re Davidson, and there is no denying that people like them.

Comments

Wild Wild West

March 7, 2009 at 12:47 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Rants and Raves

West, Jim West, desperado. Rough Rider, no you don’t want nada. Sorry, but I just had to go there. Actually, I’m not apologizing for a Will Smith reference. If I could be anyone in the world besides myself, it would definitely be the Fresh Prince.

The Lakers are doing a pretty good Jim West impression, policing the Western Conference with rather humorous severity. But everything else is getting slightly out of control. With 3 quarters of the NBA season gone by, eight teams are fighting for seven spots. And only 7.5 games separate them. And they all play each other. It’s no March Madness, (and it’s definitely no Bad Boys 2), but it ain’t bad. So here are my thoughts on the progress of the various teams in the race.

• Western Conference, it’s time to face the music. And by that I mean the Jazz. Fully healthy for the first time all season, Utah is on quite a roll. They have won ten straight games, including victories over the Lakers, Celtics, Hornets, Hawks, Rockets, and Nuggets. Deron Williams has been tearing it up and Boozer is rounding into shape. But here’s the real question: Can they win on the road? 8 of those 10 wins have come at home, and everyone knows the EnergySolutions Arena is one of the toughest places to play.
• Denver has won 13 of 15 games when Carmelo shoots at least 50%. However, Anthony is currently shooting by far his worst percentage in four years. Isn’t that a little surprising, considering the addition of Billups? I don’t know if this Nuggets team is built to win more than one playoff series with this type of inconsistency from their best player.
• The Rockets are 17-8 since Shane Battier returned to the lineup healthy, compared to 23-15 otherwise. Battier’s numbers (6.5 ppg, 5 rpg) are no indication whatsoever of his importance to the team. Read this fantastic NY Times article for an in-depth look at Battier’s influence.
• Look at Tyson Chandler. The Hornets’ center was having a very underwhelming season before he was traded to the Thunder, appraised as damaged goods, and shipped back again. Ever since the hullabaloo, he seems determined to prove both teams wrong. He is averaging a double-double and shooting better than 65%. Even more importantly, his team hasn’t lost.
• After a stretch of impressive games, Lamar Odom has disappeared offensively. He has 8 total points in his last 3 games. Although the Lakers are still rolling – they just became the first team to reach 50 wins – this is something to monitor as the playoffs approach. With Andrew Bynum’s health is still a huge question mark, Odom’s assertiveness and effectiveness might very well end up being the difference between a title and another shortfall.
• I wonder how this Phoenix team would play if Steve Nash were a player-coach. I doubt there would be any more defensive strategy, but would there be a different level of overall effort?
• Somehow I haven’t even thought about the Spurs until now, and it still took a review of my previous notes and standings to recognize it. They’re 21 games above .500 and second in the West. Par for the course.
• You couldn’t really say that the Blazers have flown under the radar this season, but their best player definitely has. But we basketball guys recognize his greatness. Read this John Hollinger piece on Brandon Roy to appreciate him a little more. But everyone is still talking about Greg Oden’s knee.
• I can’t figure out the Mavericks or Josh Howard. Mark Cuban realizes it’s panic time but they just don’t have the players. Who knew Jerry Stackhouse was so important.

Bold prediction #1 – Suns won’t make the playoffs.

Bold prediction #2 – Utah gets the second seed.

Bold prediction #3 – Carmelo will find another way to piss off George Karl before the season ends.

Comments

Ancient 8 Intelligence

March 1, 2009 at 4:46 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Rants and Raves

Sorry for being away so long. It hasn’t been easy getting my life in Barcelona together – I’ve battled homelessness, brokeness, tiredness, and more – but finally I am settled in and can turn my focus completely back to basketball. Despite everything, I have managed to read ESPN.com every day and catch some games here and there. So it’s nice to have time to actually write again.

Now that it’s officially March, the hoops world’s attention is turning to the college ranks and the impending NCAA tourney. Teams are jockeying for position, making final pushes for bids, and hoping the selection committee will forget about season-killing stretches of bad play, such as a 7-game losing streak (Notre Dame), and remember season-making marquee victories, such as a 33-point beatdown of Louisville (Notre Dame).

The usual topics of discussion are obviously being discussed. How many teams from the Big East will make it in? How many mid-major conferences will receive multiple bids? When will the Knight family just suck it up and go to anger management?

But nobody (in the sports world) is talking about the Ivy League. Well, that’s not exactly true. Alexander Wolff did just write a fantastic piece for Sports Illustrated concerning the role of bball in President Barack Obama’s life, and the Columbia graduate’s inner circle includes several former Ivy League hoopsters. However, no one is talking about the teams that currently play on the hardwoods of the nation’s finest institutions. They should be.

Amidst all of the tourney build up, people are generally ignoring the fact that the Ivy League could have it’s champion and tourney representative crowned as early as this week. That’s right: the Ancient 8 is the only conference in the nation still without a conference tournament, and thus its regular season champion receives the first of 32 automatic bids. So if Friday sees Cornell beat the middling Penn Quakers and Princeton lose to the dangerous Columbia Lions, then the Big Red can punch its ticket for the Big Dance.

As a member of WKCR’s sports department, I heatedly debated this peculiarity for the last four years. Why does the Ivy League feel the need to be different from everyone else? Wouldn’t a conference tourney add tons of excitement to a rather pedestrian regular season? When I was still a Columbia student, part of me definitely wished things would change. Of course, that was the selfish part that wanted to follow its team through March Madness and knew that a lucky conference tournament run was the only way it would every happen.

But I truly believe that the conference tournament system is terrible and that the Ivy League has it right. First and foremost, it is unfair to the best teams in small conferences. The Ivy League knows that it will only get the one automatic bid and that its school has almost no shot at winning the whole NCAA tournament. Therefore, it becomes an honor and reward to just participate in the magic. And most honors and rewards that I know of (MVPs, Cum Laude Societies, etc.) are based on a full body of work. Every year there is a team from some small school that has played very well all season, completely earning itself the opportunity to participate in the magic, but slips up in the conference tournament and is thus relegated to the NIT. What a consolation! For example, last year Stephen F. Austin went 13-3 in the Southland Conference (26-5 overall) but lost a 3 point heartbreaker to Northwestern State. Ultimately, Texas-Arlington took its losing conference record (7-9) to the Big Dance. You cannot convince me that there is any justice or even thrill in that.

Secondly, the NCAA tournament itself is a sacred institution that thrives on the big upset. Upsets would happen more often if the best team from each small conference went dancing. And the best team can more be more objectively determined by a full season than by a couple of games.

Lastly, conference tournaments were just another financial construction of the sports-media complex. The repeating stories are getting old, but the sports world is getting more and more polluted by money and drugs. I am not going to make the outlandish claim that the conference tournament system is a legitimate threat to the integrity of college basketball. However, I will remind people that although they were ostensibly created to generate more excitement for the approach of the Big Dance, they were largely devised as a way for universities and sports networks to capitalize on the preoccupation with March Madness and make even more money. Ulterior motives just don’t sit right with me.

So Cornell… I know you haven’t locked anything up yet, but enjoy the NCAA tournament! You worked hard for it. The Ivy League has produced some pretty good people and ideas. They got this one right too. I doubt it will be possible to go back, but that doesn’t mean we have to blindly accept it.

Comments