Bracketology Updates

Submitted by True Blue 9 on

Just a quick update on where things stand with the Men's bball team. Both CBS and ESPN updated their Bracketology sections this morning. CBS has us as a 10 seed (up from an 11 last week) and playing against Florida in Salt Lake City. 

Joe Lunardi at ESPN has us as his second to last team in, playing against Pitt in the play-in game in Dayton. 

Feel free to add any other updates you see on other sites (Bracket Matrix hasn't updated since Saturday morning). I think we'll make a nice jump if we can beat Indiana on Thursday!

lilpenny1316

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:32 AM ^

I hadn't paid attention the first couple weeks of January, but we seem to have been consistently between an 8-9 seed and a play-in game all the other weeks.  So maybe we're no better (or worse) than other teams that could be slotted ahead of us. 

Lunardi has Sparty as a 7-seed.  I'm sure previous tournament success is a factor in them having that high of a seed, but I think that's an indication of how underwhelming a lot of teams have been this year. 

LS And Play

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:51 AM ^

I don't think this is necessarily a good thing. It's no coincidence that the best teams in college basketball are almost always the youngest ones. John Beilein's best teams at Michigan were his youngest teams. If you have a team full of juniors and seniors it probably means they aren't better than average players, or else they would not still be there. 

JHendo

January 23rd, 2017 at 10:20 PM ^

Jordan Morgan didn't keep improving throughout his career. He seemed like he had potential his freshman year, turned into a crippling liability in the middle years, and then a little bit into his senior season, he all of the sudden started playing respectable basketball.

ColeIsCorky

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:54 PM ^

Not entirely though. The Louisville team that beat us in the Championship game was a senior laden team.

Last season's Villanova team's players with the top 5 minutes...

Josh Hart - JR

Jalen Brunson - 5* FR

Kris Jenkins - SO

Ryan Arcidiacono - SR

Daniel Ochefu - SR

Two other players were sophomores who had significant minutes. It's definitely important to have good young talent that can play immediately, but I think that roster is very comparable as far as experience/playing time goes to this year's Michigan team except for one player - Jalen Brunson.

There are only so many teams that can have a team of freshmen/sophomores and can make it all the way to the Finals. Michigan doesn't need to be that team, but they do need to recruit guys who are immediate impact starters every year like a Mitch McGary. One instant impact 5* guy a year would make a huge difference.

 

Muttley

January 24th, 2017 at 7:58 AM ^

with wins over 23 SMU & 32 Marquette.

There are 36 at-large bids.  The top end of the 32 auto-bids will remove a number of teams from competition for those bids.

(I know the committee doesn't use KenPom, but at this point with so much basketball left to play, I think it's as good a predictor as any.)

http://kenpom.com/

bronxblue

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:58 AM ^

I mean, compared to Arizona and UCLA they aren't in their league.  But I've watched Marquette and Pitt this year a couple of times and neither team is better than UM, and hell, Michigan crunched Marquette the one time they played.  And MSU as a #7 seed seems 100% based on pre-season expectations and Izzo's history, as that team has a bunch of losses to really good teams and exactly 1 top-25 win (against Wichita St.) and a bunch of losses to teams ranked 70+ by KenPom.

lilpenny1316

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:45 PM ^

As good as UCLA is, we hung pretty with them longer than at least I expected.  If someone watched that game and looked at UCLA's ranking, they would think we're a fringe Top-25 team that could make a run if we learned how to play defense.  Too bad the score got out of hand the last 5 minutes to obscure how close the game really was.

Based on our upcoming schedule, if we get into the tournament, we will have earned our way in there and probably not as a "last team in".  We'd likely have wins over some combination of Indiana, MSU, Purdue and Northwestern. 

LS And Play

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

Michigan also last 4 in according to SI. Also something to note: Lunardi moved MSU up a seed line (to a 7-seed) after their two losses this past week. Looks like they'll be in good shape to be the #1 overall seed if they finish 12-20. 

bronxblue

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^

This might be true, but they are also down a couple of seniors due to injury and, I mean, these guys have payed 20 games.  At some point, you are who you are for 2016-2017, and to me they look like a talented, young team coached by a guy who 100% doesn't play well with young guys and demands that they break to his will and buy into his system.  Now, if they all stick around then they'll be terrifying in 2017-2018, but now this feels like a bubble team propped up by losing to a bunch of good teams.

BigBlue02

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:22 PM ^

A bunch of good teams......and Northeastern. I have no clue how anyone can see them as a 7 seed. They lost to Northeastern, who has lost three straight to Hofstra, Delaware, and Towson. I never want to hear another Spartan bitch about Michigan football being ranked high because of their name and/or coach

TrueBlue2003

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

with their youth, they'll should get better and better every game (which the seem to mostly be doing).  These are 18 and 19 year old kids with only a half season of college coaching.  They shouldn't plateau and become "who-they-are" this whole year.  Every game improvement is to be expected.

bronxblue

January 24th, 2017 at 1:03 PM ^

And my guess is that they won't suddenly have the light turn on with, what, a dozen more games left in the regular season?  Like I said, give them an offseason and they'll be terrifying, but most young guys don't get immensely better in-season, especially as they have to deal with the more grinding/time-intensive college season (compared to HS).  Whatever coaching gains these guys make could very well be offset by physical tiredness.

A2MIKE

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^

5dimes has a prop bets on Lunardi's accuracy.  Pays 7 to 1 if he gets all 68 teams correctly and pays 3 to 2 on a over/under at 66.5.  

In most years there are 10-12 teams vying for 6 spots.  Vegas is telling you that Lunardi will most likely get 4 of the 6 spots correct = 66%.  He is a failure propped up by the establishment.  His track record is awful, hence a 12-8 MSU team with 2 top 50 wins on the 7 seed line.

HenneGivenSunday

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:53 AM ^

What kind of record in the B1G do you think they'll need to finish with to make it? I was just looking at the remaining schedule, and I think they'll need to get to 10-8 to be safely in. Thoughts?




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

LS And Play

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:55 AM ^

9-9 because literally every single game the rest of the way minus Rutgers would be a Top 100 RPI win. I'm not vouching for the reliability of the RPI but the committee weighs it heavily. If we finish 6-5 we would have 11ish Top 100 wins, plus any more in the conference tournament. Last year Michigan had just 4 Top 100 wins (although all of those were in the Top 30) and got in. 

Muttley

January 24th, 2017 at 8:05 AM ^

or use it as a first sort, to be followed with more intelligent drill-down analysis?

It's a really stupid metric to be using to decide the final cuts.  I can see it as a metric to use for who gets invited to training camp.

 

Bambi

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:57 AM ^

Those both seem like some pretty accurate projections as of now. Because despite our fanbase's insistence on the fact that this team is shit, odds are this is a torunament team.

Yes this team has some major flaws. Yes there are valid criticisms to be made about the coaches, players, team etc. It's valid to be disappointed with how this season has gone and honestly be skeptical of our team's future. I'm not arguing against any of that. What I am arguing against are the idiots saying this team will be lucky to make the NIT.

This is a very limited team without a doubt. A lot of times we look straight up bad. But guess what? So do most borderline NCAA teams. Last year's team looked like it didn't belong on the same court midseason against Indiana and MSU. Yet we beat Indiana later on, made the tournament, and were minutes away from beating ND and probably going to the Sweet Sixteen.

We're already a borderline NCAA team with so much of the season left to play. We have plenty of time to not only make the torunament, but cement our spot in it. We looked like hot shit to start B1G play and it's very possible that we play like that the rest of the year and miss the tournament. But we also looked like hot shit at points in B1G play last year and in THJ's freshman year, and we made the torunament both of those years and won a game.

This is a college basketball team. One switch can be flipped where a team goes from playing like shit to a top 25 team. We looked like a top 25 team in NY against Marquette and SMU, and these past two games our defense has played like we hoped it would. That's not sufficient evidence of a turnaround, but it could be the start of one. To act like we need a miracle to be an NCAA team where all we really need is this defense to continue the next couple games is asinine. We play good defense, beat MSU and Indiana, and all of a suddent we're sitting pretty.

If you wanna argue that this team shouldn't be a borderline NCAA team at this point and tha's a Beilein criticism, sure that's valid. But we are where we are right now, no use crying over spilt milk. Instead of moaning and complaining about how this team needs to play 7-5 to win a game, realize this season can be turned around in the blink of an eye, and support the damn team. If that turnaround fails to happen then we can have the conversation about this team's future and Beilein's role in it.

Also the amount of hate Zak Irvin gets here is appaling. He definitely has his flaws. He can take some dumb shots, he misses more big shots than anyone else, and turns the ball over a decent amount. You'd be happy if he played the role of the 2nd or 3rd best player on the team and not the 1st which he plays on this team. But he plays that role because he has to and no one else on this roster can come close to it.

Irvin is the only player on this team who can consistently create for other players and himself. He's the only guy who can take the ball on the perimeter when the offense is breaking down and make something out of nothing. So he turns the ball over a lot, but that's because ever since Caris went down his sophomore year late in games or in a shot clock this team has defaulted to give Irvin the ball and see what happens.

He takes "dumb shots" AKA his long two's and his heat checks, but honestly he's incredibly efficient with those long two's. They're dumb shots for most people, but for him they're a good shot. The heat checks are annoying and I have no defense for beyond a lot of players take them and it is what it is.

He misses more big shots than anyone else, but he's the only guy who will take them. Once again, ever since his sophomore year this team has defaulted to Zak make a play when the game's on the line or a big shot is needed. Ideally he probably wouldn't be the guy making those plays since he's not a true #1 player, but he doesn't have that choice. He's accepted the role and he's done as well as he could with hit. He's failed in some big moments, but he's also succeeded and made some big plays for us too.

Irvin has his major limitations and can be frustruating to watch at times. But he's been forced into a tough role, something probably a little too big for him, and where no one else has attempted to embrace it he has, leaving himself open to a shit ton of unwarranted criticism. Most of the time he also has no help from the coaches, his teammates, or anyone else. He's basically the basketball version of Devin Gardner, but unfortunately for him, he'll never get the respect Gardner gets now once Irvin graduates.

Maynard

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:30 PM ^

Pretty sure we can have the conversation about the future of the team and JB's role in it now just as well as we can have it later. But thanks for letting us know what we can and cannot talk about. One thing you failed to mention though is, some of us don't like the style of play and haven't for a long time. You have valid points but so does the person that says it just isn't a team that is enjoyable to watch.

SFBlue

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^

This (along of course with squeaking in last year over St. Mary's and other good teams) shows the rehabilitation of Michigan's name, post-sanctions, is complete. Two, and perhaps four, of Tommy Amaker's teams should have been in the Tournament. 

SFBlue

January 23rd, 2017 at 3:46 PM ^

First, I would say 2003-04 team. They won the NIT, and were the highest KenPom ranked team not in the field. In non-conference, they beat Butler on the road, tournament team NC State at home. They finished 8-8 in the conference, but beat Wisconsin (the best team on their schedule).

Second, I would say 2005-06 (even though you spotted me, very similar to '04). Non-conference wins against Butler, Miami Fla., at Notre Dame. Beat the best team on their schedule (Illinois). They were KenPom 26. Better than many, many teams that made it as at-large picks. In light of the high RPI this was the worst of them all, but I was at Michigan when the '04 team played and I really liked that team. That one hurt the most, as a fan. 

You could maybe make an argument for the 2002-03 team. They finished third in the B1G, and went 17-7 down the stretch after a very bad 0-6 start. A down year for the B1G, maybe, and that team never beat any of the best teams it played. 

2006-07 also finished higher in KenPom than tournament teams like Stanford and Texas Tech. They beat Steph Curry's Davidson, Indiana, fellow bubble teams Sparty and Purdue (split the season series with each). Was a top 30-ish defensive team.  

Ty Butterfield

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:03 PM ^

Staee as a 7 seed?!! Wow. Really hoping to see them miss the tournament. Unfortunately they have a lot of talent and if they start to click they could be dangerous. Their game against Purdue on Tuesday is huge. I feel like if they win that game they could go on run, but a loss may send them into a tail spin. As far as Michigan I have got no faith left. Beat Indiana and maybe I will start to buy in.

BigBlue02

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:26 PM ^

MSU is already in a tailspin. Izzo is publicly questioning his own decision of playing their superstar too MUCH in a loss and they have lost to OSU and Indiana. If they pull out a W against Purdue I will be very surprised

COLBlue

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:13 PM ^

My expecations for this team were dramatically lowered in recent week.  At this point I'm just hoping Michigan wins at least 7 conference games and can make the NIT.  

I'd love to be wrong, and see them still make The Dance.

A2MIKE

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:33 PM ^

Indiana, @ Sparty, Ohio State and Sparty.

Go 1-3 and start making plans for the NIT.

Go 2-2 and tournament hopes are on the ropes, but not dead.

Go 3-1 and probably going to be in the tournament, no play in.

Go 4-0 and the bandwagon will be full.

 

And honestly, I wouldn't be surprised by any of these outcomes.  One thing I will note, is that the bubble is really weak this year and outside of 5-6 teams, there are very few really good teams in college basketball this year.  It will be a wild March with tons of crazy upsets.

ak47

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:01 PM ^

The problem isn't where Michigan sits now, its where they sit and what the rest of their schedule looks like.  Finding more than 3 wins involves an upset, and getting to .500 means winning every game against teams lower than us, even on the road and a couple of upset of teams who look better.  Its an uphill climb.

Perkis-Size Me

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:51 PM ^

Hard to see them making the tournament with the schedule they have left. Still have to play Indiana twice, Wisconsin again, at Purdue, and I don't trust that they'll win any of those games. Maybe we'll split with MSU, but outside of maybe Rutgers, I can't say with any degree of confidence that we'll beat any of the teams left on our schedule. 

They're going to have to score at least 1-2 big upsets and get out of the second round in the BTT. Maybe they could beat Wisconsin at home if their game last week at Kohl was any indication. 

Honestly at this point, if we could beat either MSU or OSU, whatever happens after that is ehh to me. I may be one of the world's biggest cynics, but I just don't have a lot of faith that this team will make the tournament. And even if they do, I find it hard to believe they won't be an early exit.