2018-2019 B1G Basketball Thread

[ELA]

Three games.
The Purdue game, they were down 2 with 5.9 sec left and shooting their second [of two] free throws. They unintentionally missed the FT, had the rebound tipped ALL the way into the backcourt, had a very heady play by a freshman guard to [instead of chucking up a desperation three] heave a pass back into the front-court, where an off-balance rushed turnaround jumper released with about 0.3 on the clock managed to rattle in to force OT.
Some Purdue fans were a little salty as well, because from the moment the rebound was touched to the start of the game clock was about 0.5 sec, so had the reaction time of the clock operator been slightly better, UVA doesn't even get the tying shot off. I'm not salty personally about that, those are the breaks. But they were certainly helped a bit by chance there.
Virginia was just the team of destiny in this one. Maybe it's karma repaying them for forever being the answer to the trivia question of the only 1 to be upset by a 16 last year.

I meant their previous two games being Purdue and Auburn.  Last night they hit a 3 to tie it with like 12 seconds left, but it was just a big shot, not a miracle.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I meant their previous two games being Purdue and Auburn.  Last night they hit a 3 to tie it with like 12 seconds left, but it was just a big shot, not a miracle.

Ahh, understood. Although you could potentially classify the "off the fingertips of a TTU player" changed call being at least a LITTLE bit of a miracle...

[CWSooner]

TT lost the game because of a mental defensive mistake at the end.... they didn't protect the 3 despite their coach yelling "no three's and no +1".   TT, known for their smart defense, lost the game on their biggest strength.   I feel bad for them...  Virginia has the resources to be back.   TT.....  not impossible, but less likely.

Yep.  They gave up the open 3.  They would have been better to have fouled the guy and made him make 3 FTs.

[medinabuckeye1]

Eh, they were still solid offensively, they just disappeared at times.  Obviously better offense is always better, but I think there's always some overreaction, both positive and negative to a single elimination tournament going forward.  I don't think it's a coincidence that some of Izzo's most overrated teams (based on preseason ranking) were ones coming off long tourney runs, that may have been a tad fluky based on seed (specifically the '03 Elite 8, '05 Final 4, '10 Final 4, and '15 Final 4 leading to being overrated going into the following season).  I still think this year's Michigan team is slightly better than last year, and at worse, on par.  This year's team just drew a really good 3 seed Texas Tech, on a night their shots weren't falling.  Texas Tech plays great defense, but Michigan was also missing open looks, and Texas Tech made 2-3 lucky ones.  Last year's team didn't play a team seeded higher than #6 until the championship, and they needed a miracle shot to win that.  So yeah, NC appearance > Sweet 16, but a lot of the circumstances surrounding that is beyond the team's control.  I think next year's team should be Beilein's best since 2014, and I don't necessarily think one game in a single elimination tournament changes anything.

I wanted to come back to this now that the tournament is over because I agree with what @ELA said here and I think it deserves more recognition.  
Due to the nature of the tournament I think we tend to oversimplify and remember only how far a team got in the tournament but the reality is that this does not tell the whole story.  A few examples:  I completely agree with ELA that this year's Michigan team was better than last year's Michigan team.  That said, 20 years from now the 2018 version will be more loved by Michigan fans because they got to the NCG whereas the 2019 version "only" got to the Sweet Sixteen.  
Two similar examples involving Ohio State:
In 2010/2011 the Buckeyes "only" made it to the Sweet Sixteen, losing 62-60 to Kentucky.  Then in 2011/2012 the Buckeyes made it all the way to the Final Four before losing to Kansas 64-62.  Nobody will ever convince me that the 2011/2012 Buckeyes were better than the 2010/2011 Buckeyes.  The difference was that the 2011/2012 Buckeyes were simply luckier.  They were a #2 seed and got a #6 (Cincy) instead of a #3 in the Sweet Sixteen then got an injury-hobbled #1 seed in the Elite-8.  The 2010/2011 Buckeyes had the misfortune of catching an underseeded (IMHO) #4 seed Kentucky in the Sweet Sixteen and having an off night.  That ended it.  
The other example involving Ohio State is back in the 1990's.  I don't remember the years exactly but I think it was 1998 when Ohio State had a rather surprising Final-Four run.  They were not actually all that good and nowhere close to one of the top four teams in the Country but they got hot, caught a few breaks, and made it to the Final Four.  Then the next year with nearly that entire team back they got cold and had an early exit from the tournament.  Similarly, I will never be convinced that the Final Four team was better than the following year's early exit team but those things happen in a single elimination tournament.  

[Kris60]

Yeah, of the “Press Virginia” WVU teams that made the tournament from 15-18 I think the 2016 version was probably the best and they were the only one not to reach the Sweet 16.  They were upset by Stephen F. Austin in the first round so they are remembered differently

[betarhoalphadelta]

To be honest, I think the 2017-18 Boilers were better than the 2018-19 team, despite not winning a share of the B1G regular season, not winning the BTT, and not getting past the S16. While the 2018-19 won a share of the B1G regular season and made it to the Elite Eight and was a fluke play away from the Final Four.

2017-18 was just a complete team, with experience and high BBIQ at every position. Oh, and Haas was damn near unguardable on the block, while being surrounded by 4 players who shot 40%+ from 3PT. It was total pick-your-poison. Double Haas? Shooters will kill you. Single-cover Haas? Yeah, good luck with that. The only team that I saw truly defend Haas one-on-one was MSU, and they had Schilling [IIRC] basically playing football with him trying to drive him out to the elbow instead of on letting him establish on the block. Haas was second only to Carsen in USG%, was shooting 62% from the floor, 75% from the stripe (>5 attempts/game), and anchored the offense. 

Only team in Purdue history to win 30 games. I think had Haas not gone down in the tourney with an injury, it changes the story.

2018-19 was interesting. It was far more athletic top-to-bottom. Even when Carsen was in a slump, other guys stepped up and Purdue kept winning. But the team revolved around Carsen. Heck, the team was great at offensive rebounding because 4 players could be setting up to get ORB when they knew Carsen was going to be jacking up so many shots. The team worked as a team because you had one superstar and guys around him who could flourish with him taking so much defensive attention, but it was not always balanced basketball. 

The 2018-19 was exciting as hell to watch. The 2017-18 team was more like Alabama football. They were going to just do their boring thing of working everything through the post and dare you to stop them, slowly strangling you as your bigs get tired from dealing with trying to defend Haas while 4 other guys just start raining down threes over your heads. 

[mcwterps1]

LOL 

Cute


https://twitter.com/TerpsWatch/status/1115461665645051904?s=09

[medinabuckeye1]

From 1985 (expansion to 64 teams) through 2019 (35 tournaments) here are the winners in each round:

Seed	R64	R32	S16	E8	F4	NF
1	139	120	97	58	35	22
2	132	89	64	28	12	5
3	119	74	36	17	11	4
4	111	66	21	13	3	1
5	90	47	9	7	3	0
6	88	42	14	3	2	1
7	85	27	10	3	1	1
8	68	13	8	5	3	1
9	72	7	4	1	0	0
10	55	23	8	1	0	0
11	52	22	8	4	0	0
12	50	21	1	0	0	0
13	29	6	0	0	0	0
14	21	2	0	0	0	0
15	8	1	0	0	0	0
16	1	0	0	0	0	0

Here it is as a percentage chance (based on historical results) for a team of a given seed to win at a given round:

Seed	R64	R32	S16	E8	F4	NF
1	99.29%	85.71%	69.29%	41.43%	25.00%	15.71%
2	94.29%	63.57%	45.71%	20.00%	8.57%	3.57%
3	85.00%	52.86%	25.71%	12.14%	7.86%	2.86%
4	79.29%	47.14%	15.00%	9.29%	2.14%	0.71%
5	64.29%	33.57%	6.43%	5.00%	2.14%	0.00%
6	62.86%	30.00%	10.00%	2.14%	1.43%	0.71%
7	60.71%	19.29%	7.14%	2.14%	0.71%	0.71%
8	48.57%	9.29%	5.71%	3.57%	2.14%	0.71%
9	51.43%	5.00%	2.86%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%
10	39.29%	16.43%	5.71%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%
11	37.14%	15.71%	5.71%	2.86%	0.00%	0.00%
12	35.71%	15.00%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
13	20.71%	4.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
14	15.00%	1.43%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
15	5.71%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
16	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%