Sunday, December 16, 2007

W-13 BP65

1. NORTH CAROLINA (ACC)
1. KANSAS (BIG 12)
1. MEMPHIS (CONFERENCE USA)
1. UCLA (PAC 10)

2. Duke
2. MICHIGAN STATE (BIG 10)
2. GEORGETOWN (BIG EAST)
2. TENNESSEE (SEC)

3. Texas
3. Marquette
3. Texas A&M
3. Pittsburgh

4. Indiana
4. Washington State
4. Louisville
4. USC

5. Ohio State
5. Arizona
5. Villanova
5. GONZAGA (WCC)

6. Oregon
6. UConn
6. Florida
6. BYU (MWC)

7. Wisconsin
7. SOUTHERN ILLINOIS (MVC)
7. Syracuse
7. XAVIER (ATLANTIC 10)

8. Illinois
8. BUTLER (HORIZON)
8. Clemson
8. Kansas State

9. Vanderbilt
9. California
9. Creighton
9. Missouri

10. West Virginia
10. Arkansas
10. Stanford
10. Virginia

11. GEORGE MASON (COLONIAL)
11. Washington
11. Kentucky
11. DAVIDSON (SOUTHERN)

12. Alabama
12. Miami (Fl)
12. Georgia
12. NEW MEXICO STATE (WAC)

13. Mississippi
13. MIAMI (OH) (MAC)
13. WINTHROP (BIG SOUTH)
13. WESTERN KENTUCKY (SUN BELT)

14. HOLY CROSS (PATRIOT)
14. MARIST (MAAC)
14. ORAL ROBERTS (SUMMIT)
14. MONTANA (BIG SKY)

15. SAM HOUSTON STATE (SOUTHLAND)
15. BELMONT (ATLANTIC SUN)
15. YALE (IVY)
15. VERMONT (AMERICA EAST)

16. AUSTIN PEAY (OVC)
16. MORGAN STATE (MEAC)
16. PACIFIC (BIG WEST)
16. LIU (NORTHEAST)
16. MISSISSIPPI VALLEY STATE (SWAC)


Other teams considered, but that just missed the cut:
Boston College, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Dayton, Duquesne, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Notre Dame, Providence, Minnesota, Purdue, Nebraska, Texas Tech, VCU, Bradley, Drake, San Diego State, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Saint Mary's

Other teams with a decent shot, but that need to improve their resume:
Maryland, NC State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest, St. Louis, Depaul, Seton Hall, Penn State, Baylor, Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Drexel, James Madison, UAB, Missouri State, Northern Iowa, UNLV, Arizona State, Auburn, Nevada

Other teams I'm keeping an eye on, but that need to drastically improve their resume:
Fordham, George Washington, Temple, Rutgers, St. John's, Iowa, Michigan, Oklahoma, Old Dominion, UTEP, Wright State, Valparaiso, Akron, Central Michigan, Kent State, Ohio, Illinois State, Indiana State, Wichita State, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, Utah, Oregon State, LSU, South Alabama, Fresno State
Posted by at

9 comments:

Evilmonkeycma said...

Since you and I apparently have different seeding philosophies, I'm not going to comment on things that I disagree with but are very plausible (such as Georgetown a 2 seed without having won against anyone good). There are a couple of points that I find puzzling.

First: USC and Louisville at 4-seeds with each having 3 losses (including one bad one) and no outstanding wins? It doesn't seem like something the committee will reward.

Second: Davidson and Southern Illinois. Two mid-major teams that were stellar last year. Both had high expectations going into the year, and had a decent schedule. All they have proved is that they cannot hang with the top major-conference programs (both teams losing their marquee matchups), and in fact cannot hang with some not so great teams (both possess two "bad" losses).

I also find the inclusion of Kentucky puzzling, given their losses to UAB and Gardner-Webb, along with 0 redeeming wins.

Anyways... those are the things that I couldn't reconcile with my view of the basketball world. Feel free to defend your views, and tell me what you believe is wrong with my seed list.

December 17, 2007 1:57 AM
Jeff said...

Remember, this is about where the teams will end up - not where they are now. So, I predict Georgetown to win the Big East - and if they do that then the worst seed they're getting is a #2. Right now they're ranked 5th in the AP, anyway, so I don't think I'm really going out on a limb giving them a #2 seed.

I'm not quite sure what your complaint is on SIU or Davidson... are they too high or too low?

As for Kentucky, they've been atrocious so far. I'm just giving Billy Gillespie the benefit of the doubt here, as he does have decent talent if they can learn to play like a team and pass the ball. Learning to run without the ball would be good, too.


And as for USC and Louisville: Remember, Louisville has played this entire season with between 2 and 3 of their best players on the bench. If everybody gets healthy (and players stop getting suspended), this is arguably the best team in the Big East. Since they won't have everybody healthy for the entire Big East season, I think they'll lose enough games to finish behind Georgetown, Marquette and Pitt. But they will be a very good team. And possibly a sleeper team in the Tournament.

And USC has three outstanding youngsters that are just learning to play together (Hackett, Mayo & Jefferson). Teams heavy on the freshmen and sophomores always improve more throughout the season than senior-heavy squads.

December 17, 2007 9:02 AM
Anonymous said...

evil monkey has a strange definition of "hang". Davidson came down to one shot in the last minute with UNC. If that isn't hanging with the Tar Heels, then "hang" has a definition identical to "defeat".

December 17, 2007 9:23 AM
Evilmonkeycma said...

To the anonymous commenter below: my choice of the word "hang" might have been a little unfortunate (read: I should not have used "hang" to refer to Davidson). However, it does seem like Davidson probably looked at both UNC and Duke as the marquee games of the year, and probably had performances that could be ranked among "best" performance. It seems to me that a more typical performance would be the 12 point loss to UCLA, the 7 point loss to Charlotte, and the 6 point loss to Western Michigan.

Jeff - I accept your logic for USC, Louisville, Georgetown, and Kentucky (althought I don't think Kentucky will show up later in the season)

My complaint with both Davidson and Southern Illinois is that they are too high. Both teams have tried and failed against good teams, and then gotten upset against not-so-good teams. Other teams in their conferences have proven more than able (Georgia Southern in the SoCon, Drake or Creighton in the MVC)

December 17, 2007 10:09 AM
Jeff said...

Okay, well now I get your point. But if we look at Davidson's resume, it's not really as bad as it seems. Yes, they're 4-5. But they have only had one "bad" loss. Nobody is going to criticize them for losing to UNC or UCLA. Meanwhile, they look likely to dominate their conference. Assuming they win the conference tournament, that would put them 23-6 overall. Possibly 24-5 if they can beat NC State and then go undefeated in conference. And they'd probably have an RPI of around 40. I think that's good enough for a 10 or 11 seed.

As for SIU, their out of conference resume is obviously going to be weak. But I still think they're winning the Missouri Valley. And that conference is so good that the winner is going to get a 6 or a 7 seed at worst.


When you're in a big conference you don't need big out of conference wins. You can get big in conference wins.

December 17, 2007 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...

Lose Kentucky, they're going nowhere, maybe the NIT.

Louisville is too high as is Ohio State. But they have a chance to turn it around, though Louisville will have a tough time in the Big East.

I agree with you that USC will improve its stock throughout the season and get a top 4 seed.

We'll see how Texas does against Michigan State in Detroit this weekend before I comment about their seeding.

December 17, 2007 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...

Alabama? Really? Have you seen them play this year? If so, then your projections have zero credibility. Same goes for Georgia.

December 19, 2007 10:48 PM
Jeff said...

Yes, I have seen Alabama play a couple of times.... have you? They've simply been finding their way without Ronald Steele. It was natural to expect a slow start (with the bad loss and a narrow win over Wofford), but they have looked a lot better lately.

Richard Hendrix might be the player of the year in the SEC, and this team is deeper over than last year's team.


Sure, if the season ended now, Bama wouldn't get in. But the season doesn't end now, and I think they will get in.

December 20, 2007 9:35 AM
Anonymous said...

Yes, I've watched Alabama, and they're really not very good. Plus, Gottfried is the new version of Dale Brown (gets less with more).

And that Georgia prediction looks better and better everyday.

December 21, 2007 9:21 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)