Bear Down Wildcats

Jefe wrote:

Irish27 wrote:Seth Davis has the UofA as a #2 seed in the west in his top-16.

On the CBS Saturday morning basketball show he had us as a #1 seed

That was before the Oregon loss. He kept Kansas as a #1 seed even though they lost to Iowa State.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

Irish27 wrote:http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology

I'll be honest, I did not see that coming.

CBS early projections out:

AZ 3 seed in the Midwest, Oregon 2 seed in the West

Kansas #1 in the Midwest, Villanova #1 overall

If Arizona turns it around, they will be the 2 in the West. West brings nightmares but I want zaga.

Merkin wrote:

How is Unc a top 8 team?!?

Gilbertcat wrote:If Arizona turns it around, they will be the 2 in the West. West brings nightmares but I want zaga.

yeah 2 in the west is the ceiling now. we go 6-0 or 5-1 to finish and win the pac 12 and at least play for the tournament title we'll be the west 2. outside of that we risk being a 3 or 4 shipped out somewhere east or midwest.

Pretty much have to beat Oregon in the final if we want the West

eh if we go 6-0 then 2-1 in the tournament but oregon loses another game or two in the regular season then it would be close to call.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

Yes please

CalStateTempe wrote:Yes please

One of the best zone defenses waiting for you in the 2nd round?

3goggles wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Yes please

One of the best zone defenses waiting for you in the 2nd round?

When was the last time a zone defense caused Arizona to lose?

Olsondogg wrote:

3goggles wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Yes please

One of the best zone defenses waiting for you in the 2nd round?

When was the last time a zone defense caused Arizona to lose?

oregon by 27. butler. gonzaga?

If you think that Oregon's zone caused that loss then I don't know what to tell you.

Olsondogg wrote:If you think that Oregon's zone caused that loss then I don't know what to tell you.

Maybe he meant to say "in the zone"

Olsondogg wrote:If you think that Oregon's zone caused that loss then I don't know what to tell you.

only the biggest sunshine pumpers can watch a team score 18 points in a half and not attribute a major share of the eventual loss to the other teams defense and our phobia of it

"Oregon just got lucky and all their shots fell - nothing you could do". where have I heard that before, oh yeah every Wisconsin loss in the EE

do what we do!

Yup, it was their zone that got them to hit 10 treys in the first half.

(should I even bother telling you that Arizona outscored them inside the arc in that game?)

yup it was oregons hot shooting that held us to 18 points in a half and 7+ mins scoreless

stupid argument ignoring half the game, you know, offense, that thing Lute would do that made point guards want to play here?

RiseAndFire wrote:yup it was oregons hot shooting that held us to 18 points in a half and 7+ mins scoreless

stupid argument ignoring half the game, you know, offense, that thing Lute would do that made point guards want to play here?

You are so right. If only we could have matched their 65% shooting from the field we would have won. Outscore! Don't defend! Go Bruins!

Sean Olson wrote:
Maybe he meant to say "in the zone"

like AutoZone?

and Odogg is right -- Arizona lost to Oregon because the Ducks made 16 three pointers and shot 65% from the floor.

no matter how AZ performed against the zone that day, wouldnt of mattered one iota.

RiseAndFire wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:If you think that Oregon's zone caused that loss then I don't know what to tell you.

only the biggest sunshine pumpers can watch a team score 18 points in a half and not attribute a major share of the eventual loss to the other teams defense and our phobia of it

"Oregon just got lucky and all their shots fell - nothing you could do". where have I heard that before, oh yeah every Wisconsin loss in the EE

do what we do!

Why don't you just stop being an Arizona fan? Miller isn't changing, you get your jimmy rustled and blame him for every loss and give him credit for zero wins.

Just go root for Syracuse. It seems like you'd be happier. The rest of us could just soldier on with the burden of Sean Miller, the consensus top 5 young coach in all of CBB.

97cats wrote:

Sean Olson wrote:
Maybe he meant to say "in the zone"

like AutoZone?

and Odogg is right -- Arizona lost to Oregon because the Ducks made 16 three pointers and shot 65% from the floor.

no matter how AZ performed against the zone that day, wouldnt of mattered one iota.

Also, how much do you think this affected the team or coaching staff in terms of "worry"?

I contend, zero.

Olsondogg wrote:
Also, how much do you think this affected the team or coaching staff in terms of "worry"?

I contend, zero.

as we both saw, Coach Miller laughed it off during and after the game, cause sometimes you just have to accept someone else or something different being superior or flat out better in that moment.

it doesnt need theory, explanation or cause for panic and worry -- acceptance and peace can be captured accepting and anomaly rather than manufacturing concern and worry, which is exactly what the game at Oregon was, an anomaly.

so, shake your head, crack a smile, move on, and win the next two in a row.

97cats wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:
Also, how much do you think this affected the team or coaching staff in terms of "worry"?

I contend, zero.

as we both saw, Coach Miller laughed it off during and after the game, cause sometimes you just have to accept someone else or something different being superior or flat out better in that moment.

it doesnt need theory, explanation or cause for panic and worry -- acceptance and peace can be captured accepting and anomaly rather than manufacturing concern and worry, which is exactly what the game at Oregon was, an anomaly.

so, shake your head, crack a smile, move on, and win the next two in a row.

Yup.

In another thread, once again ODogg 2009 version, is arguing against doom and gloom...I know, big surprise.

I don't know why people thought that Trier coming back to a team wouldn't affect the team in both positives (uCla win) and negatives (the "feel" of the offense).

You worried about Trier in the lineup and declining metrics? I'm looking at a top 5 team, on top of the PAC, staring at a top seed in both post season tournaments and wondering why people are worried about KenPom...

i know you feel this way so im rubber stamping and echoing your prior thoughts a bit, but any time you insert a strong figure into the middle of the process there will be both positives and negatives -- as youve clearly mentioned and as we've clearly seen so far from AZ in the last 7 games since Zo has returned.

however, the long term prospects for AZ in March now with Trier far exceed the potential it had without Trier.

97cats wrote:i know you feel this way so im rubber stamping and echoing your prior thoughts a bit, but any time you insert a strong figure into the middle of the process there will be both positives and negatives, as you mentioned and as we've seen so far from AZ in the last 7 games since Zo has returned.

however, the long term prospects for AZ in March now with Trier far exceed the potential it had without Trier.

Negatives as I see them are a feeling that he needs to prove something and "me against the world" mentality rather than team which came to a head a halftime of Stanford.

Not worried about it in the slightest as the reaction from Miller, on camera, was that shit is not going to stand. Post game Furd told me everything was going to be ok, and post Cal confirmed that.

Once Lauri bounces back, and he will, look out.

I really don't want to see Syracuse in the second round either. They play a garbage defense that would give us fits and they have some guys that can really shoot it from three. I think that is a bad match up for us as they have been playing much better lately than they did earlier in the season and I think they will only get better and better. They also beat Virginia last week who also plays pac line defense but is much more familiar with the Syracuse match up zone than we would be.

What I don't get with so many people ignoring or missing the short term impact of Trier returning is most of us remember 1997...we had exactly this happen. And that was with a player who had played with the team in prior years, and not 3 freshmen starting.

The only concern...and there has to be some concern about the way we have played since UCLA...is whether we will figure it out in time. As I mentioned in another thread, there is no way we can be a worse team having added a top level player. It is a matter of how quickly the assimilation gets us back to where we were and then, logically, better than we were before. The NCAA did us no favors holding him until the 3rd week of January. We have a short period of time to shake the tree, get minute losers over their funk and back in tune mentally, and get the team flowing again.

I don't want to see a zone because we have struggled against a zone and they are boring as hell to watch. We do match up better against certain styles, and while I generally am happy to see teams that do not usually zone do so against us (a bad zone is worse than the worst man defense, offensive rebounds are killers, which is why I do not want us playing a part time zone...this isn't Lute's day when you had 3 to 4 years with players and could introduce a zone here and there without hurting the team's development time), I do not want to play a team early that is a zone-only team that has their principles down pat. I don't think that is a crazy notion, that we'd rather not play a gimmick defensive base team.

But I wouldn't fear them, either.

Well there's gotta be a way to make some money on those odds when you don't like any of the top four (really, top 5) teams by odds to win the title.

Nova and Oregon are the best value. Arizona not far behind.

PennZona20 wrote:Nova and Oregon are the best value. Arizona not far behind.

The three that jumped out at me were two you mentioned(nova and oregon, Arizona to a lessor extent) and louisville. They seem like they could get hot for a couple important games and blow some people away.

I'd love to have this Wisconsin team (#11) come out west to be the west #3 with us being the west #2

When does the NCAA come out with their updated top-16 teams?

Irish27 wrote:When does the NCAA come out with their updated top-16 teams?

I don't think they do it again until Selection Sunday.

Irish27 wrote:When does the NCAA come out with their updated top-16 teams?

They don't..Which is why the top 16 was stupid. They do it once like a month before selection Sunday and never again. So their top 16 now is the same as it was when it was released.

ASUHATER! wrote:

Irish27 wrote:When does the NCAA come out with their updated top-16 teams?

They don't..Which is why the top 16 was stupid. They do it once like a month before selection Sunday and never again. So their top 16 now is the same as it was when it was released.

I bet since the response was generally positive after it happened, and the ratings were decent they will do more in future seasons. This was just them testing the water

If you put us as the 2 in the West this is absolutely the matchups we'll end up having http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology" target="_blank

Xavier or Dayton in the second round and then Duke or Wisconsin in the 3rd followed by rematch with Zaga or Butler in the 16

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

azgreg wrote:http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology

Looking good...they just need to continue to win.

North Carolina is funny

UNC as a 1 is a joke.

I like the lower seeds in our region...would love a #4 in Butler, don't think Virginia would get out of the top half as a #5 so they aren't a concern, and our 6 through 10 are pretty non-descript.

But I do NOT like Duke at #3...as much as I usually feel like Duke is usually overrated, I think they are much better than their current seeding this year. They had some real issues with injuries, coaching transitions, and a psychotic tripper, but I think they are closer to a #2 in talent than a #3 seed. It would be fun, and I think we could beat them for sure, but I think until they eventually win and get the higher seed the NCAA always gives them, they are a danger and under-rated in the seeding, though less so now that they finally got out of that #4 spot and into a #3 spot.

Kansas as a 1? Well, the problem I see is I don't think they have the team to beat them in the top half of that bracket. They are good, but so are all #1 seeds. It is silly to overanalyze the 1 seed line when figuring out how good you will do in your bracket unless there are clearly elite 1s and are better than others. Villanova is the only #1 seed that I would fear.

Just want to see history made when Northwestern gets its first bid EVER

azcat49 wrote:Just want to see history made when Northwestern gets its first bid EVER

I hope they have them on camera.

azcat49 wrote:Just want to see history made when Northwestern gets its first bid EVER

They'll be on camera for sure. They should be in right now but it's not guaranteed if they have a collapse in the last couple weeks. RPI is around 35 and SOS around 65 I think. They're listed as a 7-9 seed in most brackets. They're sitting at 20 wins right now...Which means this is already a top 4-5 season in school history even if they finish 0-6 and lose in the first round of the NIT.

If there is one team I would not want to face, it's North Carolina.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology" target="_blank

Of course Gonzaga loses to BYU at home after we hand UCLA the game

Beat UCLA, beat ASU, beat #4 seed Cal in the tournament and get to the title game, and we had a good shot at a 1 seed out west.