~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~

[TyphonInc]

Are we going to do a CFB51 bracket challenge?

[medinabuckeye1]

It seems to me that Ohio State's draw is incredibly unfavorable geographically. The other #5 seeds got (potential #4 seed second round match-ups):

• #5 Kentucky has Arizona in Boise 
• #5 WVU has Wichita State in San Diego 
• #5 Clemson has Auburn in San Diego

All the #5 seeds are far from home and I expected that but the other three all seem reasonably neutral. Then for some reason tOSU got Gonzaga just a few hours from their campus and, BY FAR, the closest first/second round site to Gonzaga.
If the Buckeyes manage to get to the Regional it is in LA but at least there the likely opponents would also be FAR from home (Xavier, UNC, Michigan).
Normally I would like the potential second round rematch because the Buckeyes lost earlier this season but after PSU part II and PSU part III I'm not so sure.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Are we going to do a CFB51 bracket challenge?

@jhetfield99 does one every year... I'm sure he can hook you up with the info.

[MichiFan87]

Bummed that Michigan didn't get the Detroit region, especially compared to Sparty, but they definitely got some favorable matchups. Montana is underseeded, but they have no good non-con wins (but came close against Washington), and there are only a few halfway-decent teams in the Big Sky. I watched the replay of their championship game against Eastern Washington, and I definitely think Michigan matches up well with them..... Houston and San Diego State are dangerous but most of their best wins are at home. Michigan probably matches up better with Houston, which is a smaller team that relies more on forcing turnovers..... North Carolina would be tough, of course, but when they played in the regular season, Brooks was the starting PG and neither Livers nor Brooks were getting much playing time, nor had Teske emerged as a quality backup center. If they get past them, I think Xavier and Gonzaga are both very beatable. Michigan would almost certainly have the home court advantage in LA for those games with so many Michigan grads and fans in California.

We'll see....

[ELA]

Bummed that Michigan didn't get the Detroit region, especially compared to Sparty, but they definitely got some favorable matchups. Montana is underseeded, but they have no good non-con wins (but came close against Washington), and there are only a few halfway-decent teams in the Big Sky. I watched the replay of their championship game against Eastern Washington, and I definitely think Michigan matches up well with them..... Houston and San Diego State are dangerous but most of their best wins are at home. Michigan probably matches up better with Houston, which is a smaller team that relies more on forcing turnovers..... North Carolina would be tough, of course, but when they played in the regular season, Brooks was the starting PG and neither Livers nor Brooks were getting much playing time, nor had Teske emerged as a quality backup center. If they get past them, I think Xavier and Gonzaga are both very beatable. Michigan would almost certainly have the home court advantage in LA for those games with so many Michigan grads and fans in California.

We'll see....

I think UM and MSU are in the same boat, that I'm not picking them to get past the Sweet 16, but I do think whoever wins those games (MSU-Duke or UM-UNC) will reach the Final 4, if not more.  Those are just really bad matchups for each of them, at such an early stage.

[medinabuckeye1]

Bummed that Michigan didn't get the Detroit region, especially compared to Sparty, 

A couple pages ago you said "This should clinch a 4 seed and a trip to Detroit if the tournament committee doesn't screw them over. Even if the 4/5 seed teams in other power 5 leagues do well in their conference tournaments that should still be the case (eg. Tennessee, Clemson & West Virginia)."
ELA and I quickly pointed out that Michigan had almost no chance at playing their first/second round games in Detroit.  I realize that the Wolverines when 2-0 against the Spartans but I don't think you can rely that strongly on H2H, the Spartans were a better team on the whole.  
I hope the B1G at least gets multiple teams to the S16 again!

[Anonymous Coward]

Michigan may not have received Detroit but they got a better draw at 1-2-4 in their regional. I think Michigan is probably the better team right now, but the whole season is declared up front to add in - seemingly equally - week by week, so I don't fault the committee or think they got it wrong, though given RPI, the locations of the 2-0, and each team's list of top wins (all are values the committee appears to care about -- a conversation separate from whether RPI is flawed), I doubt their choice was easy. 
Michigan until February was an 8/9 seed. Michigan from the beginning of the February win streak until now is a 1 seed. It's a super weird year like that...except also something Beilein has shown. They have been building to peak form for awhile. Now we have to see how long they can maintain.

[MichiFan87]

A couple pages ago you said "This should clinch a 4 seed and a trip to Detroit if the tournament committee doesn't screw them over. Even if the 4/5 seed teams in other power 5 leagues do well in their conference tournaments that should still be the case (eg. Tennessee, Clemson & West Virginia)."
ELA and I quickly pointed out that Michigan had almost no chance at playing their first/second round games in Detroit.  I realize that the Wolverines when 2-0 against the Spartans but I don't think you can rely that strongly on H2H, the Spartans were a better team on the whole.  
I hope the B1G at least gets multiple teams to the S16 again!

My precedent for that thought was that they were a 4 seed in 2013 when they played in the Pistons arena (along with MSU in their own regional). It's just an unfortunate reality that there are a disproportionate number of good teams in the Midwest and Northeast compared to the West, but the NCAA still could've done a better job of sending more top 4 seeds to places where their fans would be more likely to travel (not that Wichita or Boise are good locations for anyone except Gonzaga, since Wichita can't stay home).
Arizona probably should be in San Diego (not like it matters whether Wichita State or Auburn are there instead of Boise), Duke would probably rather be in Nashville while Xavier and Cincinnati would prefer Pittsburgh. It is how it is, though. Some other schools certainly have more reason to be upset with where they were seeded.

[ELA]

So picks?

3 categories:
1.) First round upset picks (11 seeds or low, none of this 10 over a 7 garbage)
2.) How far do you have the Big Ten teams going
3.) Your Final 4 with National Title game

Upsets: Loyola over Miami; South Dakota State over Ohio State; NM State over Clemson; ASU/Cuse winner over TCU

Big Ten: OSU out 1st round; MSU and UM to Sweet 16; Purdue to Final 4

Final Four: Cincinnati, North Carolina, Purdue and Duke; Duke over Cincinnati for the title

I have about my normal number of 1st round upsets; then a lot of 2nd round chalk, but only one #1 seed (Kansas) surviving the Sweet 16

[medinabuckeye1]

My precedent for that thought was that they were a 4 seed in 2013 when they played in the Pistons arena (along with MSU in their own regional). It's just an unfortunate reality that there are a disproportionate number of good teams in the Midwest and Northeast compared to the West, but the NCAA still could've done a better job of sending more top 4 seeds to places where their fans would be more likely to travel (not that Wichita or Boise are good locations for anyone except Gonzaga, since Wichita can't stay home).
Arizona probably should be in San Diego (not like it matters whether Wichita State or Auburn are there instead of Boise), Duke would probably rather be in Nashville while Xavier and Cincinnati would prefer Pittsburgh. It is how it is, though. Some other schools certainly have more reason to be upset with where they were seeded.

As per usual, they simply have too many Western first/second round sites.  

[ELA]

As per usual, they simply have too many Western first/second round sites.  

Yup, that's the problem.  Particularly when the Pac 12, WCC and Mountain West are so far down.  If not for that San Diego State upset in the MWC tournament, the Dayton games would be solely to determine if anything more than just the conference champ from each of those leagues got in.
Granted Wooden built an empire on the fact that the west coast was not good, at a time when the selections really were regionally based.
I saw a map of the 2017 field.  You could draw a line through the southern tip of Texas, and only 8 of the 68 schools were located west of that.  Just the states of Michigan, Indiana and Ohio produced 10 tourney teams.  You include Chicago up into Wisconsin you expand that to 13.  So if the West gets 2 sites, the Chicago-Indiana-Michigan-Ohio area alone should have 3+

[medinabuckeye1]

Yup, that's the problem.  Particularly when the Pac 12, WCC and Mountain West are so far down.  If not for that San Diego State upset in he MWC tournament, the Dayton games would be solely to determine if anything more than just the conference champ from each of those leagues got in.
Granted Wooden built an empire on the fact that the west coast was not good, at a time when the selections really were regionally based.
I saw a map of the 2017 field.  You could draw a line through the southern tip of Texas, and only 8 of the 68 schools were located west of that.  Just the states of Michigan, Indiana and Ohio produced 10 tourney teams.  You include Chicago up into Wisconsin you expand that to 13.  So if the West gets 2 sites, the Chicago-Indiana-Michigan-Ohio area alone should have 3+

If you have a link to that map, I'd be interested in seeing it.  Nevermind, here is that map for the 2018 field.  Some notes:

• Pittsburgh is the most NorthEastern site.  All of the following 11 teams are NorthEast of Pittsburgh:  Buffalo, St. Bonaventure, Syracuse, Bucknell, Iona, Villanova, Penn, Seton Hall, LIU-Brooklyn, Rhode Island, and Providence.  
• If you draw a N-S line roughly through Dallas and Wichita half of the sites are on or West of that line.  Only the following 18 teams are near or West of that line:  SDST, Creighton, KSU, KU, WichitaSt, OU, TCU, Tx, TxTech, NMST, Zona, ASU, SDSU, CalSt-Fullerton, UCLA, Nevada, Gonzaga, Montana.  
• If you use the Mississippi River to divide the Country into East and West, the above 18 teams plus SFA, aTm, TxSo, Houston, and Mizzou are west of the Mississippi for a total of 23 out of 68 teams.  That is about a third so only two or three of the first/second round sites *SHOULD* be West of the Mississippi.  Instead four of them (San Diego, Boise, Dallas, Wichita) are West of the Mississippi and another (Nashville) isn't very far east of it.  
• Without counting it up, if you draw a line from Chicago to Charleston it is abundantly obvious that well over half of the NCAA teams are from the NE side of that line and yet only three of the first/second round sites (Detroit, Pittsburgh, Charlotte) are NE of that line.  Five of the eight are SW of that line.   

FWIW:  I get eight teams from Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio this year:

• MSU
• M
• PU
• Butler
• Wright St
• Cincinnati
• Xavier
• tOSU

[847badgerfan]

I'm bullish on Michigan this year. I think they have the right makeup (toughness, desire, coaching, experience) to go pretty far in this thing.

As I was doing picks yesterday, I was still wondering how the F#$k UNC got a 2 seed and why Syracuse is in at all.

[PSUinNC]

I'm bullish on Michigan this year. I think they have the right makeup (toughness, desire, coaching, experience) to go pretty far in this thing.

As I was doing picks yesterday, I was still wondering how the F#$k UNC got a 2 seed and why Syracuse is in at all.

I have M and MSU in the Final Four.