Running 2010 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament thread

Don't feel sorry for Baylor, aka AAU Waco.

 

Which one was that? The charge call that could have gone either way, or the (correct) technical foul call when the game was out of reach? Yes, such highway larceny.

Since we're on this subject, let us not forget Best! Team! Ever! 2007 Florida, who was handed a 16 seed/Purdue/Butler/Oregon draw to get to the Final Four, and needed a rejection on Corey Brewer to be called a foul just to get by the Bulldogs. That was certified BS. This year's Duke run? Not to that extent.

 

I'm not a Duke hater - but the final four minutes of that Baylor game was a travesty - and yes, that charge, which was a bullshit call, had it gone the other way would have given Baylor a four-point lead going to the foul line to stretch it to 5.

But beyond that, the ridiculous no calls that Duke got particularly Zoubeck over the back and some obvious pulling and grabbing was absurd.

Now, the Blue Devils hit the shots they needed to win so you have to give them credit, but there is no question they benefitted from friendly officiating down the stretch in that game.

 

Classic Zag argument technique: assert something that is highly disputable, very much controverted by evidence, and then assert something along the lines "anyone who disagrees with me is ridiculous and stupid", as if that's supposed to prove something.

I've no interest in getting in an Oop-style all day pissing match with you, but there are just so damn many holes in your prior diatribe, I wouldn't know where to begin picking them apart, and I won't waste time hitting them all. But, you see, this thing where good players go on from college to the NBA, yeah, that happens EVERY YEAR! Good god, you act like last year was the first time that ever happened. The only difference, according to the views of NBA scouts and others I've read, is the group that left last year was overall LESS TALENTED and SHALLOWER than most years, and less talented and shallower than it will be THIS year.

And it's funny the way you only seem to notice the guys that left college basketball last year, but NOT the guys who entered it this year. A good example is your batshit silly suggestion that Syracuse this year is essentially just the same as last year without Johnny Flynn. Umm, did you forget that last year's Syracuse team DID NOT HAVE WESLEY JOHNSON. You know, the guy who was a FIRST TEAM ALL AMERICAN, a top 5 NBA lottery pick, by far and away Syracuse's best player, and a far better overall player than Johnny Flynn will ever be.

Gee, do ya think the addition of a first team all american and top 5 lottery pick might have something to do with why Syracuse was good this year? No, of course not, in Zagland it can only be because "this is the worst field ever and anyone who disagrees with me is ridiculous and stupid, argh, argh, argh...."

And funny how you seem to think the idea of guys getting better with experience only applies to LAST year's upperclassmen, but not this year's. You contend that 09 UNC was more talented than 10 UK, despite the latter having FAR more impressive projected NBA talent, because they were upperclassmen. A fair argument. But funny how you fail to ackowledge that THIS year's upperclassmen might be better for the same reason. You think maybe guys like Singler, Scheyer, Aldrich, Collins etc. might've improved a bit over the years? No, of course not, in Zagland players only benefitted from experience up until the year 2009, and then the phenomenon abruptly stopped.

Bottom line: there's absolutely no convincing non-contorted evidence proving last year's field is far better than this one. To the contrary, NBA scouts seems to think there's actually a bit more talent in college basketball THIS year, and the best teams this year had BETTER records against that talent than they did last year.

And, for what it's worth, I tend to agree that last year's UNC team was the best team in either field. But that is ONE team. But your statement that nobody in this field is as good as the first SEVEN last year is sheer idiocy. If you think teams like Kansas, Duke and Kentucky aren't as good as 2 seeds like Oklahoma last year, then I don't know what to say for you.

 

Again - you are comparing Johnny Flynn (who was one of only three starters they lost) and Wesley Johnson? Really a fucking point guard who dominated games and who by the way was the SIXTH PICK in the draft to a wing player who, I don't recall dominating any games the way Flynn did.

And stop trying to argue about POTENTIAL as opposed to actual accomplishment.

I stand by my statement, which by the way in case you haven't been noticing has been made by NUMEROUS people, analysts, columnists, basketball gurus, who know a lot more about the sport than you all across the country a number of times -- this field is not nearly as good as last year's and is one of the worst in a long time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/sports/ncaabasketball/30coaches.html

That isn't really even arguable.

This is a very down year in college basketball -- it is a point that has been written about throughout the season and especially this weekend.

And it is cute that you keep trying to bring up "this draft will be more stocked than last year's draft", which I understand is the only thing you have to cling to, but it shows your fundamental lack of knowledge of basektball --- the NBA draft since the early 1990s, when the flood of kids coming out early and skipping school became the law of the land, is far more about POTENTIAL than actual ACCOMPLISHMENT.

Yes, John Wall is a better prospect than Ty Lawson -- but guess what, Ty Lawson was a better player last year than John Wall was this year. Ditto DeMarcus Cousins and Tyler Hansbourgh. (SP?)

And like I said, the top six teams in the Big East LAST YEAR - UConn, Syracuse, Pitt, Villanova, Louisville and Georgetown, North Carolina and Michigan State (who, you keep conveintly trying to overlook the fact that this team got to the Final Four and nearly the Final Game WITHOUT its best player and two other guys who were its best players last year) just off the top of my head were all better than any team in this field this year including Kentucky and Kansas.

But I know, I know, some draft expert told you that last year's draft wasn't as deep as this year's draft, so that's what really matters because we all know that Kentucky won the potential national title with guys who, three years from now might be really, really good NBA players..... :

 

So when was the last time a national championship game had five white guys on the court starting--sometime in the 60s?

And I really like Hayward's game. I would not be surprised at all to see him thrive at the next level. Has a knack for getting himself open in position to score and for creating his own shot that should work for him in the NBA as well.

 

Oh my God - and I forgot this gem - you are really trying to compare Duke's upper classmen this year to North Carolina's last year?

That is so stupid it doesn't even merit anything more than a very polite you have no idea what you are talking about and worse than that you don't even know it.

 

What difference does is it make if they are white or black?

 

No, that is not what I said. Not once, ever. That was merely an allusion to the fact that you only seem to think the experience factor counts for last year's players, but not this years. But, by all means, keep distorting.

 

No, again, please try to keep up -- the difference in the experience factor last year as compared to this year was this -- a lot of the experienced players who returned last year were legitimate NBA prospects, which was made last year's field of teams so deep and so good.

The upperclassmen this year, well, the fact that only two seniors are projected to be drafted in the first round, three at the most, speaks volumes to the fact that this was one of those years where, well, the best players were the freshmen and sophomores and a lot of teams were caught in a degree of rebuilding.

There were 34 players taken in last years draft (out of 60) who were juniors and seniors. And there were only four freshman drafted in last year's draft - total.

Shit, if Derrick Favors, Xavier Henry and the four Kentucky guys come out there might be four freshmen off the board in the first 12 picks this year.

Look at this mock draft -- there are 16 first rounders projected to be freshmen and sophomores. 16 of them. Last year there were only nine.

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2010/

But again -- they are all going to be drafted on their potential - which has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

Yes, Derrick Favors and Demarcus Cousins have more NBA potential than Tyler Hansborough or DaJuan Blair - are you going to argue with a straight face that either of those two were anywhere close to the players the latter two were last year?

There are cycles in every sport - up and down -- this is a down cycle in college basketball.

It is not an invention of mine, it is something that has been written about and said for the entire year by just about everybody who observes the sport.

I know everyone wants to celebrate Butler -- and that's wonderful, it is a nice story -- but to continue to deny that at least a part of their run is the fact that this is a down year in college basketball is foolish.

 

Now, if a lot guys projected to leave, stay, well, then next year could be another great season of college basketball.

I don't see it happening because agents are spooking these guys out about the CBA in 2011 so we're likely to see a flood of guys go into the draft, and a lot of guys like Manny Harris and Devin Ebanks, who shouldn't even think about it this year.

I hope that is not the case but from what I'm hearing, it seems like we are headed that way.

 

Not saying it makes any difference. Just an observation that it doesn't seem like there's been this many white dudes on the court at the same time in a while.