Huh?

what? 

WUT?

I think it's time to bust out the ole' "WHAT IS THIS I DON'T EVEN" images, boys.

Seriously, what are you trying to do here?  It doesn't even make sense from a satire standpoint.

Meth?

I would be very happy with Duke losing to New Mexico.

Let's put it this way, either Kentucky or Syracuse will most likely end with the most impressive season in the country regardless of whether they actually win the NCAA tournament. I for one wish that kind of thing were rewarded.

Hey man, probably not a good idea to be drinking so heavily this early in the day.

Maybe he is trying to poke fun at mgobloggers for using efficiency margins to measure a teams competency?

Will everyone excuse me while I go put some popcorn in the microwave?

I like the concept, but it wasn't executed well. 

Do not speak for me sir!!

I was also bothered by the use of invented KenPom formulas and indicators to detract from our season. KenPom, where MSU is #3, Wisconsin is #7, Duke is #17, and Michigan is #20. Time to recalibrate those formulas, Ken.

I thought it was actually pretty funny.  The concept of game being over before it's played is pretty good, but the OP could have expanded on it more... this probably could have even made into a diary.   I give it an "A" for effort, and I liked the K-Mart remark

I think a better analysis would be to actually take efficiency and kenpom ratings from years past to actually determine how that correlated into NCAA tournament results.  Then debunk or affirm the relative predicting power of kenpom, efficiency, etc. and determine what, if anything, was a good predictor of NCAA tournament success.

I thought it was pretty funny.

Not sure I agree with the somewhat harsh tone of this post, and in some parts even I - who support the OP's basic premise - was all like "WTF?", but I've been feeling this way as well.

Brian's slavish reliance upon the Kenpom numbers feels to me a little lazy and bordering on a cult-like devotion. We get it, they are very valuable statistical figures. However, merely stating "Welp, KenPom says this so this is true" is not the kind of analysis I've come to expect from Brian - who often does a great job of eviscerating the faulty premises of other's statistical analyses. In the latest post he merely states that the 5 seeds are more palatable seemingly because their Kenpom numbers are lower than UNLV/New Mexico. There isn't any thought behind why UNLV/New Mexico are less palatable than Louisville/FSU (the latter of whom has some major wins against major programs), other than "See: Kenpom". Maybe there's more analysis under the surface, but I feel like a lot of basketball previewing/coverage this year from Brian has been "See: Kenpom". 

This is not a flame on Brian, who I think does tremendous work. It is constructive criticism. The only reason I raise it is because I think it is a marked difference from how in depth his other work is/has been.

i just scratched my eyes a lot.

The backgroud or "theme" wasn't very well defined, but it's basically a set of political cartoons in words.  I think it's very current too, even using at least one (i think only the one) quote from Brian's mailbag.

You are correct that Brian has a rather pessimistic view of the team. I believe that the statistic MOV is overrated, and that Beilein has very deliberately game-planned to compensate for Michigan's general lack of length and athleticism. This keeps the MOV low. It also keeps Michigan in games.

My hope is that both Smotz & THJ are peaking, and will be shooting 35 - 40% plus from the three point line. This will open things up so significantly that Michigan would win decisively over most competition.

Goddammit it's

CITE!

Also you seem to be writing this from the perspective of someone who does not get the difference between "Team A and Team B split their season series but Team A scored more and was scored on less over the course of a relatively equal season, therefore I predict Team A would defeat Team B in a hypothetical sixth game between them," and "Team A just beat Team B in their last game, therefore Team A is 'better!'"

That the first thing bothers me more is definitely more my problem than yours. The second is the reason your attempt at lampooning Brian's statement said more about your comprehension of logic than any logical fault with his statement.