Straight stats…because I know you guys like that.
After seeing yet another opposing guard put up 30-plus on the Heels I decided to delve into the numbers to see what the difference between last season and this season was in terms of opposing guards’ offensive production in ACC play. The table below shows the points per game by opposing guards and team three point percentage. Note that the ppg average is derived from taking all the points scored by any player listed as a G or G-F in the box score.
| Teams vs UNC | 2008 | 2009 |
| Games Played | 16 | 13 |
| Team PPG | 75.9 | 76.7 |
| Guards PPG | 41.75 | 47.0 |
| Guard % of Total | 55% | 61% |
| Gms 3 Guards in Dbl Figures | 6 | 5 |
| Team 3P% | 33% | 37.8% |
| Gms 3P% 35% or higher | 7 | 9 |
| Average 3PM | 7.6 | 8 |
| Average 3PA | 23.1 | 22 |
| 3PM High | 13 | 13 |
| Gms Guards Total 40+ | 9 | 9 |
| Gms Guards Total 50+ | 5 | 4 |
| Gms Guards Total High | 64 | 78 |
| Gms Guards Total Low | 19 | 25 |
| Individual Guard 20+ | 9 | 11 |
| Individual Guard 30+ | 2 | 5 |
| Individual Guard High | 46 | 35(twice) |
| Individual Guard Low* | 10 | 11 |
*Leading scorer among guards
The two stats that instantly jump out are the guards PPG against UNC and the overall three point percentage. To absoultely no one’s surprise opposing teams are shooting the three better against the Heels and opposing perimeter players are scoring more per game. And to the credit of ACC coaches they have been very good about going to this particular well. While UNC’s points allowed average went up only slightly(76.7 vs 75.9) the percentage of those points coming off the guards increased from 55% to 61%. It is also clear that UNC was less apt to give up “the big game” by one player. In 2008 only twice did an opposing guard go for 30-plus on the Heels. Clemson’s Cliff Hammonds did it in the 2OT game at Chapel Hill and Tyrese Rice went for 46 in the game at Boston College. This season it has happened five times. In 2008 UNC had six games in which they allowed three perimeter players to score in double figures. This season that is five with three games left. In those five games UNC is 3-2. In games where a single player goes for 30-plus, UNC is 3-2. In terms of opposing three point shooting, nine times this season teams have shot 35% or better. In six of those games it was over 40% and twice teams have gone over 50%. In 2008 35% or better shooting happened seven times, four of those over 40% and zero games over 50%. The best anyone shot against the Heels in 2008 was the Tyrese Rice goes nuts game at BC where the Eagles shot 47% from three. Most of that was Rice. This season UNC allowed NCSU and UVa to shoot 50% or better.
The question everyone wants answer to is: Why? Some possibilities.
1. Marcus Ginyard
This is probably 75% of it and it will be very hard to convince me otherwise. And spare me the whole UNC is still talented enough to compensate, blah blah blah. Ginyard is a lock down defender. He is 6-5 and knows how to play defense against the type of players who have scorched UNC. The truth is Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington and Danny Green cannot defend on the ball the way Ginyard could. Granted he is not Jackie Manuel but he was clearly head and shoulders above everyone else in a Tar Heel uniform when it comes to guarding someone. Also understand that I am not laying the whole ball of wax on Ginyard. Obviously he cannot guard everyone and these stats indicate that team defense as a whole has fallen off but I think that is fruit of the posionous tree. Looking at these numbers you see that opposing teams are shooting the ball 5% better from three and scoring six more ppg with their guards than last season. We have clear cases of teams getting more production from their guards and UNC has fallen victim to the “hot shooter” five times, more if you count guys like BC’s Reggie Jackson or MD’s Cliff Tucker. Those kind of performances were rarer a year ago. The difference between this season and last is Marcus Ginyard is not playing in 2009. You do the math.
2. Guard play in the ACC is drastically improved.
I think this is part of it. On one hand there are some great guards in the ACC and many of them having real breakthrough seasons. That being said some of the players who went for 30-plus played the Heels last season and were nowhere near the same neighborhood. What that means is yes these players are going to do more damage than last season but should not have been able to make the jump from scoring 18 to 34 like Wake’s Jeff Teague did. Take maturing guards in concert with #1 and you might have something.
3. Opposing coaches got wise
Give some credit to the guys on the other bench who have figured out UNC does not defend the perimeter well. If you scout UNC you are a fool to use any offense that does not weight towards taking outside shots. Heck even Leonard Hamilton figured out it should be the Toney Douglas Show when the Heels played FSU and could have won the game had he also had a clue about guarding Ty Lawson with three seconds left. Opposing coaches also know that UNC does not have a lockdown defender on the perimeter. Roy has said as much and it is clear they relish the opportunity to exploit this every chance they get.
4. Extended three point line
Worth mentioning. We all assumed the extended line would hurt three point shooting. That is not the case but it does mean defenders have to travel a foot further to contest a shot. Given the style of defense UNC plays that is man-to-man and a lot of scrambling, one extra foot is going to create a few more open shots. This is probably not a huge part of it but it is worth considering as another factor.
5. The defensive scheme itself
I do not like criticizing the coaching staff because I am convinced they know more than I do. However I am wondering if the defensive scheme is the problem if you do not have a player like Marcus Ginyard. Since the Heels lack a lockdown defender they are asking players who are not that to keep the opposing team’s top scorer in check. It is painfully obvious they are unable to do so and you end up with 2-3 different players trying to check the same guy because no one can handle him. Heck the FSU game saw Tyler Hansbrough make the best defensive plays on Toney Douglas only because they switched on the screen. UNC did the same thing versus Duke and it worked well there also. I wonder if it is time to take a step back and try to view the defensive scheme more along the lines of team defense rather than depending on winning the individual matchups. If you have a Marcus Ginyard you can get away with less skilled defensive players guarding less skilled offensive players. When you cannot even lock down the other team’s top scorer it opens up all kinds of holes in your defense when you are constantly scrambling to help.
I fully understand that I am not in practice with the team nor do I know the players as well as Roy and his staff does. But I do know this. The proof is in the pudding and numbers do not lie. Whatever UNC is doing on defense strikes me as being more than being tough, smart or focused. It seems to me that the players cannot execute the scheme they are in effectively enough to make crucial stops. At this point what does Roy and the team have to lose by trying some different sets? Try switching on the screens. Throw some zone out there or box and one just to see how it flies. Given the problems the Heels have on defensive I am not sure how much worse a poorly executed zone is going to look versus the holes we are seeing with the Heels in a man-to-man. My point is there is obviously something wrong and to Roy’s credit he realized when they went to Duke last season and made the adjustments. Based on the evidence I think some kind of adjustment to the defense is in order.
![[Bloglines]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
THF, you might like this and it goes along the lines of the importance of perimeter defense. We just took our live stats shot data and graphed the FG% by shot distance for games where we received the data and came up with some interesting things. You can find the article here…
http://www.scacchoops.com/tt_NewsBreaker_External.asp?NB=1730
Its my opinion UNC would benefit significantly by applying more pressure on the ball. The problem the Heels have is that they are lacking a legit shot blocker when Ed Davis is not in the game. Yet another reason Davis should be getting more minutes than Thompson in my opinion.
very nice analysis, THF. thanks for that.
i have a sneaking suspicion that william would put less than 75% weight on ginyard and much more on your pt #5.
pt #4 is something that i hadn’t thought about. but yes, the extended line is absolutely counter to what we are trying to do.
i seem to remember ginyard was hurting by the end of the season last year. was there a game or two that he missed or played signifincantly fewer minutes? i wonder how the defensive stats look for those games…
heeled,
Marcus had a bad case of turf toe from the first Duke game to the rest of the season. He probably would have missed the a couple of games in February, but the Heels needed him to play with Ty out.
Great work, THF. You must have some serious flex time during the day to be able to compose these lengthy, stat-filled posts. The only point in your analysis that involves not only the problem but the solution, is #5. That may be what it takes if we continue in this direction. That, or to just outscore everyone, which is a riskier approach to depend on.
“In games where a single player goes for 30-plus, UNC is 3-2.”
I wonder what the average win % is for a team that gives up 30 to an opposing player? UNC should be 4-1 in those 5 games. Despite Vasquez’s game, UNC should have won the UM game.
“My point is there is obviously something wrong and to Roy’s credit he realized when they went to Duke last season and made the adjustments. ”
I wonder if there is any chance that Roy has something in mind, but he’s holding off to implement it until March, figuring UNC is good enough to win the ACC title as is? This way he gives tourney teams, who are already less familiar with UNC, even less to work with? Don’t forget, he did make the switching the screen adjustment until the Duke game and, including that game, for the next 8, UNC played at a very high level, especially the first 4 games of the NCAAT.
My understanding of our man to man system is that we apply ball pressure on the ball, and then the guys playing off the ball overplay their man and try to cut off the passing lanes.
When the player guarding the ball is beat and his man is heading toward the basket, the other defenders are trained to help on the ball to avoid giving up a layup.
In the three losses this year, we have been burned by the opposing team’s point guard. The on-ball defender continually gets beat creating all sorts of openings in the defense. The past few years, Marcus has been the designated stopper in these situations.
As much as I like Danny and Wayne, the simply don’t have quick enough feet to apply on-ball pressure against top-flight ACC point guards. Ty has good feet, but is too short.
THF has suggested another scheme. At think point, I don’t think a zone is the solution because have looked awful in zone (don’t know what we are doing).
What I think we should do is play a sagging man to man, which basically means guarding the lane. It drove me crazy that we did not do this against Wake and let Teague beat our guys off the dribble over and over (I think other teams have made Teague shoot since then). General Grievous did basically the same thing. It might not be in Roy’s personality, and we may get burned by players hitting from the perimeter, but it’s probably the only solution.
I wonder how much of Roy’s resistance to change defensive schemes comes from the fact that these guys are used to the sets they’ve been running for 3+ years, and switching now might mean they play even worse due to lack of experience in a new scheme. I think you can throw a wrinkle in every now and again, but that’s about it.
It’s sort of like Gminski saying that the Heels might want to slow things down the other night. That’s all fine and dandy, but when you’ve been hardwired to run at every opportunity it hard to change horses midstream. Getting away from what you do and (normally) do well is usually fraught with problems.
^ Like THF says, “However I am wondering if the defensive scheme is the problem if you do not have a player like Marcus Ginyard.”
In other words, the whole system breaks down when the other team’s ball-handler can break down the on-ball defender. Without Marcus, we can keep doing the same old thing, but change may be in order regardless of what we have been doing for three years. If it’s not broke, don’t fix it, but if it is broke, fix it.
I would not be surprised in our next game against a stud point guard if there was a different defense. But that won’t happen until the ACC tourney at the earliest.
Is this really a stuation where we have to say that this is not working and we have to make a major change? Or is it just the understanding that it’s an obvious limitation and we have to do as best we can, with the system we’ve chosen and given our personnel make up? Also, what is the definition of not working? Now the stats show we’ve given up way more on the perimeter and driving the lanes than last year, and we seem to know why, but what is the overall negative result of it. We’ve lost 3 games by 13 total points and could have easily won two of those. (I know, we could have lost a couple of close ones too) Going forward, it seems to be the thought that this is a fragile, glass house we’re living in or that it simply won’t be good enough down the road against really good teams. Fundamental change or doing what we do better?
Look, I am not an insurance salesman, I’m not a doctor, I’m not a burger flipper, but I am the basketball coach at UNC. I see these guys in practice everyday. Don’t you think if I thought a different scheme would work on defense, I’d have tried it. We stink at junk defenses. I just don’t how to teach them, really, I care more about this on the tip of my f#$%g finger than all of you.
Signed,
Well, you get my drift.
It’s my opinion that Roy believes these guys can really defend if they do what they’re supposed to do. He knows the nature of our offensive scheme will give the other guys more possessions. BTW, I wrote the “Roy diatribe” off the top of my head……have we heard it that many times?
Carry on.
Coach,
You forgot to mention that you have a national championship, are in the Hall of Fame, and will make over $12 million dollars for the university this year. Jim Calhoun would be proud of you.
Keep up the good fight!
“Also, what is the definition of not working?”
The other team’s PG going for a triple-double and UNC losing.
wb3 — You nailed it, and succinctly.
What works to win 24 games against mostly inferior competition can scarcely be counted on to get us where we want to go.
The defensive scheme has to be changed in order for us to have a realistic shot at the national championship. We will be facing more daunting challenges than Greivas Vasquez, and he was bad enough.
Although THF did us a service by posting some revealing statistics, we all knew before then what we had seen. Time after time Vasquez simply did not have a defender within 12 feet of him. Although this sort of no-D D was particularly on display, and particularly lethal, in the Maryland game, we’ve seen it before this season, also with unwanted effects. In the five games where the other team’s best guard had 30 or more points, we lost three — in other words, most of them.
Roy’s being a top-flight coach does not change this fact, nor does the fact that we are not at the practices and are not in the HOF. The three losses are there, two of them against markedly inferior teams. Our season went on quite successfully nonetheless, but that is cold comfort as we approach the part of the season — starting in a little over three weeks — where a single loss is fatal.
“In the five games where the other team’s best guard had 30 or more points, we lost three — in other words, most of them.”
Not true. UNC lost to Wake (Teague) and Maryland (Vasquez). They beat ND (McAlarney) handily, FSU (Douglas) and Miami (McClinton), both of which are on the road. In fact, UNC has won 5 of their last 7 games when giving up 30+ to a guard. And to be honest, they should have won the Maryland game.
I also think we are putting FAR to much focus on one guy getting 30+. A great example is BC. Last year, Rice gets 46, but no one else scores in double figures. UNC wins. This year, Rice scores 25, but Sanders and Jackson combine for 39. UNC loses.
Versus Miami, McClinton scores 35, Asbury gets 12, no one else is above 6. UNC wins.
Versus FSU, Douglas gets 32 and Echufu gets 12, no one else is above 8. UNC wins.
Against ND, in a high scoring affair, no one, besides KM, had more than 13.
Against Wake, yes Teague went off, but they also got 20 from McFarland.
And versus Maryland, yes Vasquez got 35, but UNC had the game well in hand until Hayes and Tucker got hot.
My point is, if one guy is UNC need to focus on the other guys that much more.
CM,
That is why I included the “three guards in double figures” stat.
Yeah, I see that now. Looking back at UNC’s last 6 losses, the only time the winning team had less than 3 double figure scores was the Wake game in which McFarland had 20.
Maryland (2008): Gist – 22, 3 others with 10+
Duke (2008): Paulus – 18, 5 others with 10+
Kansas (2008): Rush – 25, 3 others with 10+
BC (2009): Rice – 25, 2 others with 15+
Maryland: Vasquez – 35, 2 others with 15+
UNC’s problem is not that they are a “bad” defensive team; in fact, with an adjusted defensive ranking of 21, one could argue that they are a pretty good defensive team. UNC’s problem lies in the fact that they are an inconsistent defensive team, and occasionally those lapses lead to a catastrophic breakdown, and usually a loss.
It sounds to me like Coach Williams and the Heels are in a lose-lose situation with some of you , unless they fundamentally change their defensive strategy. If they win the national championship, without changing much , it will be in spite of an ill-advised defensive approach. If they lose on the way there, it will be a situation of: I knew they’d never win this way. Tough spot.
BTW, North Carolina has, at best right now, a 29% chance of winning the national championship (that is actually pretty good), which means that whomever says they won’t, and for whatever reason they give, has a 71% chance of being right.
Great article. One thing I can’t tell, is whether you have adjusted for tempo differences and schedule strength differences between last year’s play and this year’s. I also think that more teams are playing three guard sets this year and it might be necessary to consider opponent guard minutes.
I would note that my recollection from Adam Lucas’s book about Williams is that Coach Williams’ position on switching on screens is about as hallowed a position as he holds. It was about the only way that Kansas and UNC differed when they played those two times in the early 90′s. The teams said it was a bit eerie playing each other since they mirrored each other in so many ways.
I got the feeling from the book that fighting through screens embodies Williams’ more blue collar upbringing, compared to Dean Smith’s background as a child of schoolteachers. I think the almost exclusive use of man to man is similar for Williams and may explain why he seems to perhaps, have a softer spot for players like Frasor and Hansbrough, who play with a blue collar ethic.
The problem with all of the possible explanations, except for the Ginyard one, is that it seems that not that much has changed since last year. Maybe Manuel and Ginyard were that valuable. Defense is much harder to evaluate than offense, which is one reason why analysts argue so much about Bill Russell, with some seeing him as the greatest center of all time, based on his defense, and others placing Shaq, Wilt and Kareem and perhaps others over him, based upon their far superior offense.
Is Ginyard that much better defensively than Frasor? And if he is, then the loss is two-fold, because Ginyard has been a better offensive player than Frasor over the four year period, and certainly hands down better than Frasor this year.
Once again, though, I see that Ellington, Green and Hansbrough have all been dropping in their offensive ratings recently. The drops aren’t huge, but they are there. Davis and Thompson are steady, with Frasor blipping up after Duke. Lawson continues as first in the nation.
I like the idea of switching on screens, but I don’t think that Roy wants to let the cat out of the bag too often. I agree with CM in that Roy probably has something up his sleeve. That is not blind hope, for he has proved us all wrong countless times.
I have been thinking more and more about Florida ’07, and how they went through that rough patch in February. I think they lost three of four, and went in to the conference tournament with five losses. While they may have played better defense, they definately had their lapses. However, it’s going to boil down to good fortune. The Heels defense is not that far off from last year and they have witnessed some freakish shooting performances this year.
Unfortunately, those 30 plus scoring nights have already gotten old and now we have too much time to contimplate the what ifs. I hate to say this, but I’ve already gone through the scenerio of how I will handle things should the Heels not win any postseason tournaments, ACC or NCAA. The defeats would be crushing, right up there with ’94, ’95, ’98, ’07, and last year. What will truly suck is that Tyler and Co. deserve a better ending. Fate typically steps in and intervenes on behalf of the champion-to-be this time of year. Fate is fickle, and often confusing, like the 2005 ACCT loss. However, a couple of weeks later, Melvin Scott gets his redemption and we are in the Elite Eight. So, was fate playing a significant role in the Maryland game? If you watch the 2005 championship dvd, you’ll hear the players reflect on moments during the year that helped propel them to bigger things in the NCAAT.
We should not ignore the fact that all of our losses have been by a combined 13 points. We knew the ACC was going to be tough, when has it not been? A month and a half from now, we could all be talking about how, in retrospect (after what I believe will be a solid ACC performance in the NCAAT), this was one of the deepest conference rosters in recent ACC history. More and more pundits now look to the ACC has being the toughest conference this year. If we go six or seven deep on Selection Sunday, then a 13-3 or even 12-4 mark is pretty damn good.
Go Heels!
I seem to be in the minority, somewhat I think due to post-projection, but I believe that the 1995 team really outdid itself just to make it to the Final Four. I never saw that 1995 team as being the best team in the country, similar to 1991, which was disappointing to me only because we blew a chance to win without being the best team in the country.
The 1995 team went 12-4 or 14-5 after the ACC tourney, after finishing in a four way tie for first in the ACC and going through overtime games against co-regular season titlists Maryland and Wake in the ACC tourney.
I know that teams are losing more this year, but I really don’t think that 12-4 is a particularly distinguished conference record for a national titlist aspirant. NC State did go 8-6, or 11-6 after the tournament in 1983, but they did have injuries for a significant portion of that year. Otherwise, the worst I can find is Duke from 1991 at 11-3, or 13-4, depending on your perspective. For UNC, in 1981, we went 10-4 or 13-4 and were a mediocre 29-8 but that was a down year for college basketball. In 1972, we were 9-3 or 11-3 after the tournament, before losing to FSU in the semi-finals in a game reminiscent of last year’s Kansas debacle.
I believe that in “straigh up” man situations, UNC does pretty well defensively. The problems lie in dribble penetration followed by a kick out pass, or not switching on screens. Maryland hit quite a few three balls on those backside screens. Those shooters were wide open. I also don’t believe this team is suited well enough to go into a primary zone based scheme; this team’s strength on offense is obviously transition hoops and running the other team to death. That’s harder to do when you’re in a zone on the other end of the floor.
Personally, I’m more worried about Hansbrough, Green, and Ellington cooling off a little bit on offense. If Tyler had better vision and could make some passes whie he has three guys on him, it would ease those multiple defenders on him all the time. If Ellington was more consistent, that could also ease some pressure off Hansbrough as well. I think Danny Green is in a little bit of a funk that he will come out of pretty soon.
Pitt just got beat tonight. Not that I thought they were national title material anyway, but late February/early March is always an “x-factor” time in this game. Some teams get hot, some cool down, and some fall flat on their face.
North Carolina will be okay. If they lay an egg against Georgia Tech on Saturday, then I’ll hit the panic button. Virginia Tech is a typical “trap” game, as the Hokies ALWAYS play UNC tough. A loss there wouldn’t be particularly devestating, either.
I think UNC very well may have a two game lead again after this weekend, which is basically a three game lead including tiebreakers.
I think you are right about the offense, Andy. Also, Maryland wanted that game so bad they could taste it. We played hard; they played in a way that they refused to lose. On a neutral court, UNC probably wins by the average of the two results and that is assuming Maryland brings its “A” game.
It looks like FSU is going down to 8-5. Duke and Clemson each have two tough games this weekend and could each conceivably drop two games while UNC plays GIT at home.
Well, maybe I spoke too soon. FSU cuts it to 2 points with four minutes to play at BC.
C.Michael — I stand corrected. Thank you for setting that straight. I believe my principal point survives, however. The emblem of our three losses this year is the successful outside shooting of one or two of the other team’s guards. When you know what lies behind your losses, it would be odd not to try do something about it.
Wanting to win really badly, as Vasquez did, does not actually produce wins. If it did, Frasor would be hitting 40% of his shots and Hansbrough would have had 30 points.
The reason Vasquez did us in was PARTLY that he had a world of desire, sure. But the greater part is that on so many of his shots, there was no one within 12 feet of him. When an opposing player is killing you (and Maryland, led by Vasquez, made up a 16 point deficit in the second half to get it to overtime), the coach can’t responsibly sit there, comforted in the knowledge that his system has, on the whole, produced great success (as Williams’ system certainly has). Games aren’t played “on the whole.” You have to stop the bleeding when the wound appears.
I think you put your finger on it when you said, “…one could argue that [Carolina is] a pretty good defensive team. UNC’s problem lies in the fact that they are an inconsistent defensive team, and occasionally those lapses lead to a catastrophic breakdown, and usually a loss.” The problem is that the NCAA Tournament does not forgive inconsistency. So if and when the next version of Vasquez shows up in a Tournament game, we have to have more of a plan to put a stop to it than we had last Saturday.
Some have said that Roy has a “secret plan” that he’s mostly keeping under wraps. But that view of things doesn’t square with the furious Roy I saw after the Maryland game. Nor am I aware of any evidence to support it from our other 26 games.
The bottom line is simple: You can’t leave a red-hot three point shooter 12 feet open time after time. The defensive scheme has to be flexible and innovative enough to have an answer for that, because if it doesn’t, then, as you said, there will be a catastrophic breakdown probably resulting in a loss.
Wow…Jay Williams on ESPN2 talking about how Jim Boeheim is one of the best coaches ever and how great it is he has won 20 games for 31 seasons. Well, that kind of thing is easier when you play nobody from November to January. Saying he is “one of the best coaches ever” puts him close to Dean Smith. He ain’t anywhere close to Dean Smith.
This may sound trite, but winning 20 isn’t what it used to be. Including the first game of the conference tourney, most teams play 32 games in the regular season.
agreed rath…
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1417975.html
well, lets hope this UNC team makes a playoff transformation like the 2006 St Louis Cardinals.
“Pittsburgh is the best team in the country because it is committed to defense, physical man-to-man defense.” – Dave Odom
Are they now??
Adjusted Defense Rankings:
UNC: 90.0, 21st in the country.
Pitt: 92.1 35th in the country.
Is it too much to as ask for reporters(or ex coaches) to do just a little bit of research? BTW, this doesn’t include last night’s game in which Pitt’s Adjusted Defense rating was a pathetic 115.
Dave Odom’s article was hardly enlightening.
I hope UNC is already quite a bit better in its domain this year than that Cardinals team was, although St. Louis had had a bunch of injuries that season which made them seem worse than they were relative to the Tigers.
Results in the MLB baseball post-season are based much more on random occurences than in the NBA or the NFL. I believe the Cardinals won that series in five games, which I, as a National League guy, certainly applauded. But no one would have batted an eyelash if the same two teams had met in inter-league play and the Cardinals had taken four games out of five from the Tigers.
Or, some might remember my boyhood idols, the Cincinnati Reds. Back in 1973, they were defending National League champs and won 99 games in the regular season. They faced the Mets, who had won a paltry 82. But, in a five game series with their great pitching, the Mets edged the Reds 3 games to 2 and then fell just short against the defending champion A’s, losing in seven games in Willie Mays swan song. Baseball plays a ridiculously long 162 game regular season and then sabotages the result with a five game series.
Similar upsets, although more rare, can happen in the NBA, however, especiallly when they utilize the ludicrous best of five series format. One year in the early ’80s Houston took out the Lakers and then made it to the finals after posting a 40-42 record, ending up losing to Boston. Golden State actually swept the Bullets back in the 70′s, in spite of the Bullets having a much better regular season record.
“2006 St Louis Cardinals”
I hate that team.
(Full-disclosure, I’m a born an bred Mets-fan.)
and I hate the Mets, as I’m a Cards & Orioles (see 1969) fan lol.
“Baseball plays a ridiculously long 162 game regular season and then sabotages the result with a five game series.”
Actually, the LCS and World Series are 7 game series. Interestingly enough, playing a 7 game series after a 162 game (4.3%) is pretty much the equivalent of playing a one-and-done tournament after a 32 game season (3.1%).
good point CM–and mine was that much like the NBA & MLB, I think you’ll see the real Heels defense show up for the stretch.
“and I hate the Mets, as I’m a Cards & Orioles (see 1969) fan lol.”
We’ll always have the Tar Heels!
(Actually, so long as you didn’t say the Yankees, we’re cool. There is hate, and then there is HATE!)
you know that’s an interesting angle: many of my ABC friends (and I use that term loosely) had a mental picture of UNC fans that lumped the Yanks and Cowboys together with the Heels. I hate the Boyz probably as much as you hate the Yankees.
Dallas is easily my least favorite NFL team. I’m a Bills/Giants guy.
True, but nobody is defending the NCAA tourney’s accuracy. Ol’ Dean said it best when he said, “we sacrifice accuracy for excitement.”
Here is what the NCAA tourney does a great job of: It is very, very difficult for an outright mediocre team to win four games in the tourney, let alone six in a row. Thus, you never have a completely undeserving team win the tourney. You do have a UNC make the Final Four in 2000 or George Mason in 2006 or UVa in 1984, but none of these seriously challenged for the title.
If I had to pick the worst team to win the NCAA tourney in the last 30 years since the tourney was expanded, I would probably say Indiana in 1981 or NC State in 1983, Villanova in 1985 or Kansas in 1988.
Among runners-up, the worst would probably be Georgia Tech in 2004; UNC in 1981, UCLA in 1980, and Duke in 1978.
Neither Indiana, State, Villanova nor Kansas was as unworthy relatively as the football Giants last year or the football Cardinals this year or the baseball Cardinal a couple of years back. To win six games in the tourney, you might not have to be the best, but you do have to be pretty darn good.
If you look at some of the famous years, where the “best” team is said not to have won, it generally is much less clear-cut and often is based upon people looking back and comparing future pro’s on the teams. Such results seemed much more common in the 1980′s, so maybe the shot clock and three pointer are actually assisting the better teams.
Obviously, there was State and Houston in 1984. Houston went to three Final Fours in the early 80′s and is one of the best cores never to win it all.
Georgetown in 1984 had the same record as UNC and had been playing ferocious defense and trending much better at the end than UNC. I frankly get tired of hearing UNC people complain about not winning in 1984.
Georgetown would go to the Finals again the following year, where we would have, along with the Houston-NC State upset, the foremost example of the best team not winning, against Villanova, followed a couple of years later by Kansas’s upset of Oklahoma.
UNC in 1993 had already played Michigan’s Fab Five once on a neutral court and lost by one point on a tip-in at the buzzer.
Duke in 1991 was in the middle of a three year run of championship games and would repeat the next year.
Kentucky in 1998 had the same number of losses as UNC and won its second title in three years.
UConn in 1999 was a great team, even though Duke was probably a little better. This is probably the best recent example of the best team not winning. Strangely enough, virtually no one ever talks about Duke’s Freddie Brown-type ending in this game.
Also kind of surprising is that no one seems to feel that UNC’s win in 2005 was an upset, even though Illinois was ranked number one virtually the entire year and entered the game with only one loss.
So, what are my choices for the best teams of all time not to win it all since tournament expansion? 1. Georgetown 1985; 2. Duke 1998 3. UNLV 1992. Worst champions? 1. Indiana 1981; 2. Kansas 1987 3. Villanova 1985.
Totally unrelated update:
The 73 year old basketball player for Roane State Community College (Tenn.) that I commented on the other day, has been declared academically ineligible and his team has to forfeit a game. (Apparently he waited a bit too long to tell his coach he was flunking Spanish) It seems that the troubling indicators surrounding this player were ignored. He was kicked off his first team, over 50 years ago, for putting shaving cream in his coaches’ sneakers… a charge he denies to this day.
That sucks because he was a canidate for NPOY and possibly could have been drafted in the 1st round. 73yrs old is the new Lebron James.
Absolutely, BrooksJ. You always love to see those under-the-radar players finally get the recognition they deserve.
LarryS — I don’t think he’s an under-the-radar player. I think he’s a before-radar player.
Wow. We really needed a mid-week game!
Now that’s funny, rath. William, you are correct, sir, we need a game soon. So far, in the last two days, we’ve discussed:
Women
Golf
Flowers
The weather
Baseball
1950′s locker room pranks
And the list is growing. THF is doing his level best, as usual, to keep things pertinent.
From SI.com:
“Luke Winn: Which ACC defender is the best at harassing shooters?
Terrance Ogglesby: Danny Green [from North Carolina] is good. He’s one of the best, because he’s long and athletic that he can give you room and still be able to recover and contest the shot.”
agreed–would love to see him at the point in a 3/2 zone (trial of course)
There was a moment in the first half of the Maryland game when UNC had the two Tylers, and Ed on the court and they looked to me like they were playing a 2-3. Did anyone else catch that, and more importantly, does anyone else recall how effective they were?
Some people say Danny is a great defender; others say he is terrible. It drives me crazy. As John Lennon once said, “All I need is some proof–just give me some proof.”
I think Green does some nice things on defense. I also think he fouls too much and gets beat as well. It is a mixed bag but he does have his share of signature defensive plays such as the block on McClinton in Miami as well as others.
“Some people say Danny is a great defender; others say he is terrible. It drives me crazy. As John Lennon once said, ‘All I need is some proof–just give me some proof.’”
I think he is great at some parts and terrible at other parts…
which UNC player hasn’t been “beat” this year?