I think the key to predicting these games, like any other first round games, is evaluating the quality of coaching and team leadership. In 2004, Manhattan knocked off Florida in the first round on the back of senior guard Luis Flores, who scored 26 points en route to a 15-point victory. Flores, the nation's third leading scorer that year, attacked the Gators mercilessly from everywhere and created opportunities for his teammates. However, the Jaspers' amazing performance may also be partly attributed to great coaching. Manhattan coach Bobby Gonzalez told his players not to think about the game like an "upset," and to ignore the team name on the other jerseys. He reminded them how close they came to winning against Syracuse (the eventual champion) in the previous year, and that given another chance, they would win. You can take into account other factors, such as Florida's lackluster play in the second half of the season, and the Jaspers out-rebounding the Gators 36-26...but ultimately, Manhattan had a gifted and passionate leader on the court (Flores), and a coach who inspired his players.
(On interesting sidenote, Bobby Gonzalez was fired from Seton Hall in 2010 after a first round game in the NIT, in which one of his players punched an opposing player in the groin and the coach received his 7th technical foul of the season...so maybe, in that case, he inspired his players to play too aggressively. Luis Flores, by the way, is playing for a Ukrainian team, BC Donetsk, after an unsuccessful stint in the NBA.)
So, given our recent history lesson, do Richmond, Utah State, Memphis, and UAB or Clemson have the tools to pull off wins over the #5 seeds? Out of these 5 teams, Richmond, Utah State, and Clemson all suffered first-round losses last year in March Madness, so their players have been on the big stage before. UAB and Richmond both have senior players who score 17+ points per game, in guard Jamarr Sanders and forward Justin Harper, respectively. Richmond's Harper is a special player who can score and rebound in the paint and shoot threes (46% from beyond the arc, and 54% FG overall). Utah State and Memphis feature more balanced attacks, with scoring distributed more evenly among the players. More offensive options should be a good thing, right? Yes, in theory...but time and time again, we see stars like Stephen Curry of Davidson lighting up the scoreboards and carrying their teams to victory. I'll go ahead and make the argument that in tournament play, you'd rather have one great player than a bunch of good players...because great coaching should be able to squeeze more out of an adequate supporting cast, whereas a marquis player is essential and harder to come by. In terms of coaching, Utah State has the edge. In 11 seasons, Aggies coach Stew Morrill has led his team to at least 23 wins every season but one (21 in 2008), and Utah State has been in the NIT or NCAA tournament every year he's been on the sidelines.
Whoa...I'm overwhelmed by all the information I've been digging up. Look, just take Richmond as your upset pick. It's what all the pundits and sportswriters say, and I happen to agree with them. Now that I've overanalyzed these first round matchups, I've left little time to study who actually will win the NCAA championship. Oh well, there are only really three teams to choose from - the Dukies, the Buckeyes, and the Jayhawks. Right?
No comments:
Post a Comment