(Still) way too early bracketology: Michigan a 7 seed

Submitted by BlueLikeJazz on February 1st, 2016 at 5:09 PM

Just released today, the latest bracketology has Michigan at a 7 seed. These are still fairly meaningless, but it is nice to see the team firmly off the bubble and creeping towards an attractive seed.

Depending on how the last 9 games + BTT go my guess is that anything from a 4 to a 10 or 11 is possible. I'm hoping for a 6. Barring a complete meltdown they aren't missing the tournament.


Other teams of note:

Xavier - 2

Iowa - 1

MSU - 3

Maryland - 3

Purdue - 4

Indiana - 6

Wisconsin is in the "next four out" category and OSU is nowhere to be found.



February 1st, 2016 at 6:45 PM ^

I'm not sure I get the justification but I get why you would really want to avoid a 1 seed this year more so than others.

The field is weak. There's really only a few teams that we'd have an extra low probability of beating. Most years, a 6-8 is a real underdog compared to 1-3. This year, the only way we'll really be a lopsided underdog is if we have to play a 1. So, in the past, we'd need a near miracle at any seed 5-8 with a strong field. This year, the parity 2-7 makes it extra enticing.

I'm not sure how true that is, but I think that's the idea.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad


February 1st, 2016 at 8:03 PM ^

there are no elite teams.  The top 4 are the weakest in many, many seasons per kenpom and by the eye test, and by the quantity of future starting pros test.  No one is that scary this year.  So that means we likely WOULD NOT be a really lopsided underdog against a #1 seed this year.  It is the one year where an 8/9 isn't so bad.  Of course, you always prefer a better seed, but this year there isn't a big difference between 6-8 because there won't be much of a difference between 1s though 3 or 4.


February 1st, 2016 at 8:19 PM ^

the least scary they've been in more than a decade. Their tallest starter is 6'8, we'd actually be able to match up with them inside!  I'm not sure they have a definite NBA player in the starting lineup. Maybe Selden. Maybe Ellis. I'd be perfectly happy seeing them in the second round.

Oklahoma is a nice team, but I think we match up with them pretty well too.  Hield is awesome but they're very dependent on him, so you can work with that.

UNC is the most scary in terms of talent (and maybe Kentucky but they won't be a one seed) but not much scares me about Roy Williams teams anymore.  Seems like he's coasted for the last five years and continually underachieves.

Cali Wolverine

February 1st, 2016 at 6:23 PM ^

...although they lost, as a Michigan fan, I would not want to play Washington.

PAC 12 is going to be very strong this year in the tourney...they don't have an elite power...but there are a lot of deep, athletic teams. I have bashed the PAC since the post 2008/2009 NBA exodus of talent (James Harden, Russell Wesrbrook, Kevin Love, Lopez twins, OJ Mayo, Jrue Holiday, Taj Gibson, DeMar Derozan), but the talent is really starting to reload.


February 1st, 2016 at 8:58 PM ^

Huskies? The team that is ranked 76th (!!) in Kenpom, 47th in RPI and lost to Oakland and UC Santa Barbara...at home? They're a better bet to not make the tourney than win a game. Plus, they'd be a great matchup for Michigan if we did see them in, perhaps, a 6/11 matchup.  They play super fast, depend on blocking shots, kind of a typical chaos Romar team.  Beilein teams usually eat those teams alive because we dictate a slow tempo, don't turn it over, take good outside shots away from the shot blockers, and without fast breaks, those teams can't adjust in the half court.  Bring it.


February 2nd, 2016 at 12:55 AM ^

but not that good at basketball.  Men's basketball.  The sport in which they lost to Oakland and UC Santa Barbara at home, and the 76th ranked team in kenpom. And I've also watched them out here in PAC12 country and they depend on steals, tempo, blocked shots, and all the things we are good at not allowing. They're not very disciplined which plays right into our game.  Not saying they COULDN'T beat us, but it'd be a fine matchup for us and there are about 40 teams in the tourney that you should be more afraid of. Teams that will actually make the tourney.

It's also really funny how you watched them play one time, in a loss no less, and you seem weirdly concerned of this random mediocre team when all the rest of the discussion is about actually good teams that will definitely, you know, make the tournament.


February 1st, 2016 at 5:33 PM ^

Maybe, maybe not. Imagine if the best player we were missing was a Mitch McGary type substance and we were waiting for his return. Now that's the type of player this team needs to make a run. LeVert will help spell Duncan and Irvin and keep dakich off the court for those grueling 2-3 minutes. But who knows how we'll adjust to his need for the ball to flow through him.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad


February 1st, 2016 at 7:52 PM ^

the ball to flow through him. Michigan needed him in that role. With Irvin's emergence it will interesting to see what changes. Caris seems to need to dominate the ball more than Irvin though, maybe it will depend on matchups. The ability to run the offense from three different spots is pretty damn intriguing.


February 1st, 2016 at 5:31 PM ^

As an aside, it's a little silly to me that this Indiana team is ranked over us. They have no great wins and only one less loss than us. They've beaten up on the little sisters of the poor in the big ten.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Darker Blue

February 1st, 2016 at 5:35 PM ^

I wouldn't be surprised if Michigan ended up as high as a 2 seed. 

This team is really starting to come together. It should be a fun finish to the hoops season.


February 1st, 2016 at 5:37 PM ^

This is about where I expect to be seeded in March. Even with 4 more losses that I project to happen and finish 12-6 in the Big Ten. I'm not quite as optimistic as others as far as playing the higher seeds. I think if we get match up against any of the #3 seeds, we'll be in for a decent run. The top ten, as it stands right now, is pretty strong.

Mr. Yost

February 1st, 2016 at 6:13 PM ^

Right on target, IMO...called it back in June/July when it was truly a WAAAY too early list.

I'm just hoping we stay in this range like many have said. We're a 2nd round team that NOOOObody wants to play. We could get blown out by 20+ or we could get hot, torch any team in the country and find ourselves in the Sweet 16. I honestly feel the 2nd scenario is more likely.

I don't like this teams chances in a long grind of a tournament, but in an upset situation - which is basically a one-off game. I could see this team having a Michigan/Florida Elite 8 type game. Not as much of a blowout, but in terms of the level that WE'RE playing...I could see Robinson and Irvin just going OFF in a game like that.


February 1st, 2016 at 6:46 PM ^

I'd say a 5 is the ceiling right now, which is fine with me. Unless they get super hot, the poor defense will still hurt them against the other teams in,the conference fighting for top 4 seeding.


February 1st, 2016 at 7:10 PM ^

Taking a step back, the team has accomplished much without Caris Levert. 

Having said that, Michigan is a bubble team unless Levert comes back and elevates the team for the stretch where it plays Indiana, Michigan State, Purdue, at Ohio, at Maryland. 


February 1st, 2016 at 7:59 PM ^

I am concerned about how soft the schedule has been the last month or so. I look ahead and see only two games that should definitely be wins (@ Minn, NW). I agree that anything at or above .500 down the stretch clears the bubble--just not sure it is the  most likely outcome here.