48 NCAA Autopsies
The top teams in the NCAA tournament are rewarded for their good play throughout the season by receiving seeds so that they avoid playing the other top teams until the second weekend of the tournament. If a top team loses, they probably blew it somehow. Teams seeded 5 and lower are almost never going to overwhelm the opposition with unbeatable play.
The lower-seeded teams don’t have this luxury. Sometimes they run into buzzsaws like
What I am trying to say is that losing in the first two rounds of the NCAAs can usually be attributed to a shortcoming in some area. Losing is traceable to mistakes, errors, deficiencies. If a team loses in the first two rounds, they almost certainly would have lost in one of the next four.
I have examined the 48 carcasses left littered across the country from the last four days of play. Here are the reasons they won’t be playing next week:
Oral Roberts lost because they missed 15 of their first 16 two-point shots.
Baylor lost because they gave up 90 points to low-scoring Purdue.
Cornell lost for a lot of reasons, including being outscored 44-16 in the paint.
USC lost because they were overpowered inside by
BYU lost because defensive-minded Texas A&M shot 54% from the field, including 8-16 on threes.
George Mason lost because their 9 players not named Will Thomas combined to shoot 9 for 43 from the field.
Cal State Fullerton lost because their bench combined for 0 pts, 2 rebounds, 0 assists, 8 fouls, and 3 turnovers in 53 minutes and 9 shots.
American lost because they had 21 turnovers.
Gonzaga lost because they had 18 turnovers, Austin Daye shot 3-13, and Davidson’s Stephen Curry went 8-10 on threes.
Saint Mary’s lost because they went 12-23 on free throws and
Drake lost because Missouri Valley Conference Player of the Year Adam Emmenecker shot 0-10 from the field.
South Alabama lost because they couldn’t defend
UMBC lost because they went 7 minutes in the first half without a point.
Austin Peay lost because…"When we play somebody of this caliber, as I told the guys, I sometimes lay awake at night worrying about how we're going to score against people that are that size," Austin Peay coach Dave Loos said.
UConn lost because starting point guard A.J. Price tore his ACL in the first half, and because they couldn’t find a way to stop
Mount
Vanderbilt lost because they allowed
Boise State lost because they had 18 turnovers, managed just 4-17 on three pointers despite shooting them at a 40% rate for the season, because they made just 5 of 12 foul shots, and because Louisville made 12 of 24 three pointers.
Clemson lost because their players not named Demontez Stitt went a combined 5 for 29 from downtown.
UT-Arlington lost because they were outrebounded 39-29.
Duke lost because they missed 15 straight 3-pointers in the second half.
Purdue lost because they were outshot 54% to 38%.
Notre Dame lost because they shot 24.5% from the field.
UNLV lost because they were outshot 58% to 26% (mostly because
Pitt lost because they went 2-17 beyond the arc; guards Ronald Ramon, Keith Benjamin, and Gilbert Brown combined for 8 pts, 3-17 shooting, 8 rebounds and 2 assists in 85 minutes.
Texas A&M lost because they had only two threes (on ten shots), made just three free throws (on seven shots), and had just two steals.
Every team has deficiencies. Every team gets bad games from top performers. The teams I like to win two more games next weekend and advance to the Final Four are the teams that have the ability to overcome off-games from key players. Namely:
UCLA. If UCLA had wound up in the mortuary, their autopsy would have read like this: UCLA lost because second leading scorer Josh Shipp scored 0 points in 37 minutes, and third leading scorer Russell Westbrook scored 5 points on 2-9 shooting in 39 minutes. But UCLA didn’t lose despite these horrific offensive efforts from their wings. They got excellent games from superstars Kevin Love and Darren Collison, and they play the best defense in the land.
Playing great defense is the most important attribute after the first round of the tournament. It keeps teams having difficulties in the game, both by preventing scoring from the opposition and by creating easy offensive opportunities. Most of the cadavers listed above were unable to get those easy buckets when times got tough, and that’s why they won’t be returning next week.
5 Comments:
Excellent.
I'm not disagreeing with the fact that these teams probably wouldn't get through next weekend, but your logic as to WHY I find faulty. Why, for example, is it an Arizona "deficiency" that "West Virginia went 11-19 on 3-pointers"? Isn't that just the opposite? It wasn't AZ's definciency, it was WV's ability to step up, to take that win from them.
I think there's a difference between teams that lost their games (like Duke :() and teams that snatched victory away from the other team (like Davidson).
Sometimes both teams have really good games, sometimes they both have crappy ones, and I think you're certainly oversimplifying it to say that these teams lost because of one bad statistic. If it were that easy to analyze people wouldn't watch sports as much as they do.
When a team shoots over 50% on 3s, the defense probably wasn't very good. There are exceptions. But UCLA almost never will let a team hit 50% of its 3s.
You should be a sports writer. Use the poker retirement phase to work on it.
First of all you left out one huge key to UCLA's success all season...paying off the refs
Secondly, I hate to rehash this terrible defeat but as a (sadly) avid supporter of Arizona hoops there defense all season has been horrendous, except for a three game stretch where they defeated Wash and Wash St. at home and USC on the road. This can be expected when the rotation consists of 6 guys, 5 of whom averaged about 39 minutes all year long. For God's sake Fendi Onobun who had one great game this season left for the locker room with 4 mins left and no one on the bench even NOTICED! West Virginia shot lights out, but it's easy when there is nobody within three feet of the shooter. With this rationale in mind, let me say this, Chase Budinger may be the worst defender in the history of basketball, not because he doesn't have the quickness or size, he just doesn't seem to care about anything but hitting jump shots (or if there are two seven footers guarding the basket then driving the lane.) AFter all this bashing you may ask, "why are you a UA fan?" Believe me I ask myself the same question every day.
On a much more positive note I agree with anon about working on sports writing during the hiatus.
Post a Comment
<< Home