Bear Down Wildcats

Machina wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Machina wrote:

catgrad97 wrote: Over Arizona, which did what Duke did not and win its conference and conference tournament. Uh-huh.

Machina and Salty are inventing a new type of board poster that defies troll attributes.

Duke had 0 bad losses to U of A's 3. U of A had three times as many bad losses as Kentucky Duke Virginia Wisconsin Villanova and Gonzaga combined. The only bad loss in that mix was when Frank was hurt.

Duke had the players and wins and no bad losses. Arizona had that but the losses. The tournament and regular season title kept Arizona in the west which should have been a benefit

You don't consider Duke getting whipped by Miami at home a bad loss? Cool story.

RPI wise it was not nearly as bad as ASU UNLV or OSU

I just pulled a muscle rolling my eyes. Getting your ass handed to you at home by a NIT team is worse than a close road loss to a .500 team. I assume you use the RPI because common sense has a different result.

The South Region was an all-time joke. Duke played nobody on Wisky's level all the way there, and of course, got its legendary 8-on-5 help when it did make it there--not to mention at key times against Utah and Gonzaga.

So no, I don't respect Duke sneaking in to grab the title a la UConn when Wisky had to go through both the Cats and Kentucky just to play the Blue Devils. Duke got protected like crazy in this tourney and reaped more rewards than a draft-dodging trust fund Republican politician.

Machina'd

Machina wrote:Arizona with three awful losses did not deserve a 1 seed. And Duke was fairly seeded

Duke was not fairly seeded (they should have been a #2, didn't win either ACC regular season or tourney), nor were they fairly placed with Kentucky, Wisconsin, UA - the three teams still ranked ahead of them by KenPom - and Notre Dame (who beat them twice; these were the next 4 teams ranked in the final USA Today poll) all on the other side of the bracket. Duke's loss at home to Miami is roughly equivalent to UA losing at home to Stanford by 16 (UA actually won that game by 22) - at least all of UA's pre-NCAA losses were a.) on the road and b.) by a combined 9 points.

Duke had a bullshit cakewalk to the Final Four starting in Charlotte. Everyone except you and the most myopic of Duke fans admits this.

cpt wrote:I hate to say it but Duke is legit. Winslow, Okafor and Cook are all peaking. I would say Wisconsin is clearly the second best team but Duke is right there and we are just behind them. Our offense is what holds us back from being higher.

I nailed it, didn't I?

Machina wrote:

catgrad97 wrote:

Machina wrote:Arizona with three awful losses did not deserve a 1 seed. And Duke was fairly seeded

Over Arizona, which did what Duke did not and win its conference and conference tournament. Uh-huh.

Machina and Salty are inventing a new type of board poster that defies troll attributes.

Duke had 0 bad losses to U of A's 3. U of A had three times as many bad losses as Kentucky Duke Virginia Wisconsin Villanova and Gonzaga combined. The only bad loss in that mix was when Frank was hurt.

Duke had the players and wins and no bad losses. Arizona had that but the losses. The tournament and regular season title kept Arizona in the west which should have been a benefit

Not about bad losses. It's about - and should be about - quality wins.

cpt wrote:

Machina wrote:

catgrad97 wrote:

Machina wrote:Arizona with three awful losses did not deserve a 1 seed. And Duke was fairly seeded

Over Arizona, which did what Duke did not and win its conference and conference tournament. Uh-huh.

Machina and Salty are inventing a new type of board poster that defies troll attributes.

Duke had 0 bad losses to U of A's 3. U of A had three times as many bad losses as Kentucky Duke Virginia Wisconsin Villanova and Gonzaga combined. The only bad loss in that mix was when Frank was hurt.

Duke had the players and wins and no bad losses. Arizona had that but the losses. The tournament and regular season title kept Arizona in the west which should have been a benefit

Not about bad losses. It's about - and should be about - quality wins.

Wrong. It's about quality losses.

Signed,
enfuego