2/20 Bracketology: Moving up?
Bizarre.
We moved up in Lunardi's.
We're a 9 seed against 8 VCU in Buffalo with a second round game against 1 Villanova
Jerry Palm has us as a 9 seed against Iowa State in SLC with #1 Gonzaga in the second round.
DRatings has us in as a 10 seed.
We are not listed as a Last Four In or Last Four Byes in any of these.
February 20th, 2017 at 10:56 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 10:56 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 10:58 AM ^
I don't care what we do until we beat OSU and MSU in Football...
Am I doing this right?
February 20th, 2017 at 12:47 PM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:16 AM ^
I think it will take a record better than .500 counting the conference and BTT to make it to the NCAA Tournament. Finding an upset to go 3-1 the next four games for a 10-8 record with one win in the BTT is the route most likely to produce an NCAA bid. Then again, they could just win the BTT and force their way in.
February 20th, 2017 at 12:22 PM ^
I think 9-9 + 1 conf tournament win seals the deal because we already have enough quality wins (unlike last year).
February 20th, 2017 at 1:54 PM ^
One thing is unquestionable - no way we get in if we lose 2 in the BTT.
February 20th, 2017 at 1:58 PM ^
Well, since just yesterday you said it would "take a miracle for Michigan to make the NCAA tournament" and that you would "rather see them make a deep run in the NIT," we all know to ignore your opinion in basketball threads :)
February 20th, 2017 at 12:12 PM ^
I don't know about you guys, but I'd like to beat Purdue and Northwestern, too.
February 20th, 2017 at 10:58 AM ^
Here is a GREAT prop bet... Who puts up more points against Rutgers, our 2016-2017 football team, or our 2016-2017 basketball team? I am going to guess the football team, which is...awesome...
February 20th, 2017 at 11:04 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:29 AM ^
because this is the football team at probably 3:1.
February 20th, 2017 at 10:41 PM ^
I would take the basketball team easily. It is not easy to score 60+ in football. Even against a garbage team.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:03 AM ^
I wonder how much where people place us in the Tournament matters on if they watched the game last night or not? Or how much people value different things? Do they see: A) Michigan got hosed and lost a close OT game on the road? or B) Michigan lost ANOTHER B1G road game?
February 20th, 2017 at 11:07 AM ^
We moved up, IMO, cause we werent expected to beat Wisconsin but we did and we were expected to lose at Minnesota and we did, in OT. I would hazzard a guess they are classifying that as a "quality loss" and a better than expected win.
But what the fuck do I know. I thought, up until last night, when a team throws the ball out of bounds it's a turnover. Now I've learned it's a foul on the other team. And it's a technical foul if you get the chairs ready for an upcoming TO.
Learned something new.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:39 AM ^
after the Wisconsin game though, I think. EDIT: I stand corrected that Lunardi hadn't updated his. Others had, though.
It has more to do with the fact that losing a road game against an RPI top 25 team doesn't hurt you - like you said, it's a "good" loss - and other teams around the 9-10 line lost worse games, like California. Also looks like they finally came to their senses and put MSU behind us. I don't agree with Lunardi having us on the 9 line though. Not sure how Va Tech would be behind us with a similar resume and having beaten us at Crisler. We're probably reasonably a 10-seed right now.
February 20th, 2017 at 12:14 PM ^
What are the chances that the committee when deciding between 2-3 teams looks at the Minnesota game and weights the 41-18 FT's and the fact Michigan averages less fouls than 90% of the NCAA basketball world?
February 20th, 2017 at 12:24 PM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:06 AM ^
While I believe no loss is a 'good' loss. It's not like losing at Minnesota is a bad loss. Minnesota is 39th in Kenpom and 22nd in RPI.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:37 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:07 AM ^
teams near us in the seeding having "bad" loses recently? I wouldn't consider losing to Minny on the road in OT as a bad loss...maybe even like a push.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:11 AM ^
Michigan moved up in Lunardi's bracket because his previous edition had come out Thursday morning, before Michigan beat Wisconsin.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:14 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:15 AM ^
This team has a premier non-con win in SMU that is looking better by the week. Beating a top-15 team by 25 at a neutral site will carry a lot of water for us I expect.
Add in a big win vs Wisco that looks poised to grab at least a share of the Big Ten and a 9 or 10 looks very fair.
Michigan is top 30 in Kenpom for a reason, everyone take a deep breath. It took an all-timer of a screw job to steal a top-25 RPI road win. Shit happens, we are gonna be fine.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:21 AM ^
as someone with tickets in Buffalo, please let the first prediction happen
February 20th, 2017 at 11:25 AM ^
Almost positive that these were completed before the late result of last nights game. Didn't finish until almost 10pm EST. To get these out so early this morning, would have been turned in before that last night. This is why Minnesota moved down and Michigan moved up.
If they updated again tomorrow, almost positive Michigan would be on the low 10 line.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:27 AM ^
"They're so big, so strong that we're not going to win that war," Michigan coach John Beilein said. "So why even try to win it?"
Damnit coach. If there's ever occasions where we wonder why they have a soft attitude or play soft, there ya go. This just hurts my heart reading this stuff.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:42 AM ^
Rebounding or just inside game in general? While I appreciate the awareness here, I do agree that you have to at least have a tough mentality. Smaller guys can get position on larger guys to box out and rebound. You have to try to, and you have to believe you can.
February 20th, 2017 at 11:46 AM ^
But in it's simpliest form, it just speaks to them being weaker than Minnesota and not trying to use physical play to win.
No matter what, if you are the 350th team going up against the #1 team in rebounding, I just hate hearing that from your head man. You need to have a mentality that you will battle them no matter what, not resort to something else.
February 20th, 2017 at 12:22 PM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 12:29 PM ^
http://collegebasketball.ap.org/article/murphy-minnesota-outlast-michig…
Yes, it's about the rebounding.
So, this quote doesn't make me feel any better. I just don't want to hear that from the head guy. Never admit you are going to try something else because you cannot compete in a fundamental part of a basketball game. How about, they are a big and strong team but we will battle them every step of the way on the glass?
February 20th, 2017 at 1:30 PM ^
I'm not sure that's the context without seeing how it landed in the interview. The reporter inserted the quote after listing some rebounding stats but doesn't necessarily mean Beilien was talking about rebounding.
If it's in relation to points in the paint or general inside game, I agree with Beilien. That's not our game, so we shouldn't change our style - offensively. But you obviously need to try to get every defensive rebound possible and you have to be as tough as possible defending the post. You have to block out bigger guys and have the mentality to get position. You may not "win" the rebounding battle but you have to make it as close as possible so your superior shooting wins the game.
February 20th, 2017 at 2:34 PM ^
It was a comment on getting back on defense vs going for offensive rebounds in response to a question on "rebounding being the difference in the game", which was a silly question to anyone that looked at the 4 factors graph.
He was explaining that he valued preventing transition offense of Minn over really fighting on the offensive glass, considering that wouldn't be super successful anyway.
(I listened to the press confrence hoping for some red meat on the officiating. No dice.)
February 20th, 2017 at 3:33 PM ^
I mostly agree with the offensive rebounding strategy. And the advanced metrics tend to validate getting back on defense rather than going all out to crash the offensive boards. On the one hand I think DJ and Mo could be crashing harder but both are usually in foul trouble and both are too important that it might not be worth getting cheap ones there. It seemed like DJ used to crash harder, he got a couple fouls doing it, and Beilein called him off.
Obviously, you have to do everything you can to keep a team like this off the offensive glass. We did it ok last night. Could have been better.
February 20th, 2017 at 4:00 PM ^
Same boat, I've been a bit disappointed with DJ's activity level on offense in general over the last couple weeks.
He feels a bit flat footed along the baseline as opposed to how he played earlier in the year. It feels like he is happy to settle for the same turn-around fadeaways that made him an average player earlier in the season rather than the back cuts and 3's that made him such a beast to start the year.
February 21st, 2017 at 1:35 AM ^
I don't disagree. The thing is, it's getting to the point where we have such a glut of good offensive players that unless Zak gives up some of his possessions (which I would very much like, but which the coaches aren't resigned to yet), there just aren't enough shots to go around.
Mo is too good not to be taking 30 percent of the shots when he's in the game. Despite a couple shaky games, Walton Jr. still needs to get his because he's too good not to, MAAR has been so good in conference play that he needs to get his, so you're not left with that many possessions.
I would like to see Irvin bump down to 15 percent usage and DJ get up to 25 percent, but coaches aren't seeing it that way. They still want DJ playing in a side role with Irvin as a creator/lead dog which hasn't been working that well for him.
February 20th, 2017 at 2:11 PM ^
Thanks, but it's still just a quote without any context from Beilein. the author put it next to some rebounding stats; I assume Beilein wasn't saying "we gave up trying to rebound", which is what the placement of the quote implies.
Again, not defending the rebounding effort. But every time this team loses a game people keep trotting out these coded "white collar" and "soft" descriptions, and it drives me crazy. They aren't a good offensive rebounding team, and when Wagner is out there isn't much defensive rebounding size either. But it's also a highly efficient offensive team and an improving defensive squad; they basically held Minnesota to their season average despite giving up a ton of FTs that limited their ability to be aggressive defensively.
February 20th, 2017 at 8:08 PM ^
this is such nonsense. You would honestly rather be fed a platitude at best or an outright lie at worst?
February 20th, 2017 at 11:36 AM ^
So who is the big man for Rutgers that will have a career night in boards and Points?
February 20th, 2017 at 12:05 PM ^
Massive mountain of a dude. Has zero game, but he's 7 feet, 280.
February 20th, 2017 at 12:30 PM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 2:38 PM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:38 AM ^
Any Najee Harris news?
February 20th, 2017 at 11:39 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^
It will be unfortunate when Michigan makes the play-in game again and JB keeps his job. Program killing scenario.
We need fresh blood on the sideline sooner rather than later. The resources are in place for this basketball program to consistently sit at the top of the Big Ten and make deep Tourny runs.
Never in the history of Michigan basketball has the program had the resources in place, as they do right now, to make a push towards elite. There's only one thing holding them back...The Head Coach.
February 20th, 2017 at 12:21 PM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^
February 20th, 2017 at 11:46 AM ^
and need one of the Cats and Purdue. Win one in the tourney and you might move up a line or two.