Is March baskeball different or simply more random?

[FirstDownB]

Do teams play different in March than the rest of the year? Or are the results simply more random due to the 1-and-done format? The very best teams, the ones that have big expectations, the "elites".. Are those guys going as hard, putting the team first, doing all the little things on a Wednesday night game in January as they do in March?

I want to think we are better than teams like Duke and UNC and that will carry over to March. But every year it seems more and more emphasis is put on the tournament and less and less on the regular season. Do teams like Duke or Kentucky care if they don't win a few regular season games as long as they are ready for March? Kentucky made the championship game a couple years ago as an 8 seed. It was almost like "Ok, it's time to wake up and play". And they did because they had the talent to flip the switch and crank it up another level.

The Chicago Bulls, coached by Tom Thibideau, a coach known for demanding 100% effort on every possession of every game (a rarity in the NBA), finished 1st in the Eastern conference in both 2010-11 and 2011-12. But. come playoff time, everyone knew their competition would raise their level of play and the Bulls didn't have another gear to go to.

I guess what I'm saying is, has this NBA "sleepwalk-through-the-season" mindset crept into the NCAA to the point that there are essentially two different seasons for the elites- the regular season and March? We have played better than Duke, but are we really better than them? I'm afraid a team like that is just biding their time and will be ready to play defense in March and start ripping through opponents. Everyone is saying there are no elite teams this year, but perhaps they just haven't gotten out of first gear yet.

Maybe I am overthinking things, but I've been conditioned to keep my expectations and perceptions of reality in check by any means possible!

 

[Do Dah Day]

I think the key to the answer is that "Freshmen aren't freshman anymore in March." Extend that to each player and you get what I mean. Juniors aren't juniors anymore either.

Also, March is always on a non-home (I will NOT say "neutral," floor and crowds are different, adrenaline is different).

Total lack of scouting and knowledge of the other team puts the whole team/coaches in an unfamiliar world.

Bottom line, yes, adrenaline and excitement for the DANCE boosts the passion and adrenaline for some players/teams/coaches. But NO, that does not mean that anyone has been loafing/whatever during the season. The season is still exciting and meaningful ... perhaps not quite so much ... but not noticeable or recognizable at the time.

If there are elite teams this year, Duke and AZ are up there ... but I just don't see them being that much better in March. I think as a TEAM, we are better than Duke. On "paper" they look better ... on the court, Bring 'em on.

I see what you are thinking, but historically, the elites have not done that well in the tourney. Maybe one or two have, but overall, not all of them most years.

 

[boilerzz]

I think if you dig deep into the numbers, the vast majority of coaches and programs are perform in the tournament pretty darn close to how they perform in the regular season. People remember failures of their own program and successes of others.

For example, did you know that Villanova has been a 1 or 2 seed each of the last four years and has only reached the Sweet 16 once in that span? In fact, they've only reached the Sweet Sixteen once in the last decade. Of course, it was their national championship.

Yet, many consider Jay Wright to currently be the best coach in the country.

 

[FirstDownB]

I think if you dig deep into the numbers, the vast majority of coaches and programs are perform in the tournament pretty darn close to how they perform in the regular season. People remember failures of their own program and successes of others.

For example, did you know that Villanova has been a 1 or 2 seed each of the last four years and has only reached the Sweet 16 once in that span? In fact, they've only reached the Sweet Sixteen once in the last decade. Of course, it was their national championship.

Yet, many consider Jay Wright to currently be the best coach in the country.

Villanova is an interesting case. Would you consider them an elite program with elite athletes or more of a program that relies on player development, constant hard work, and team play? I would consider them more of the latter or somewhere in between, similar to Purdue. I know I was impressed with their workman like effort when they came to Mackey last season.

 

[klmLB]

I think if you dig deep into the numbers, the vast majority of coaches and programs are perform in the tournament pretty darn close to how they perform in the regular season. People remember failures of their own program and successes of others.

For example, did you know that Villanova has been a 1 or 2 seed each of the last four years and has only reached the Sweet 16 once in that span? In fact, they've only reached the Sweet Sixteen once in the last decade. Of course, it was their national championship.

Yet, many consider Jay Wright to currently be the best coach in the country.

I think you could argue that Matt Painter is at the same tier of respect as a coach as a pre National Title Jay Wright, which is pretty well respected but not Jay Wright now.

Win a few conf championships, built really solid, respected teams. I would argue that Jay Wright has been able to recruit nationally a higher rated player over time, but Painter is trending upward there.

I think if Painter could get a Final Four run or better, you could put him in that lower tier, now Jay Wright type category. Maybe a deeper run this year will garner more national respect and further increase the caliber of recruit Painter can realistically recruit.

I think that March is just full of surprises. Some teams out perform, some teams choke away.

I think in general, we play pretty well in the tourney but not a huge 'step change' from our regular season output, which isn't a negative because I think we are well coached and out perform out talent level in the regular season. I also think that teams are better scouted in the tourney (for the initial game and not as well for the 2nd game of a weekend). Teams will defend you to make you uncomfortable and do something that isn't your norm (speed you up, break up your sets and make a lesser preferred option beat you). Painter did this in the Michigan by switching all screens. Opponent coaches do the same to us. We typically are more predicable to game plan against, which is one of the reasons I think this year's team because there are so many ways we can beat you.

 

[Wolegib]

I think an additional difference is unlike the regular schedule you can mix in the cream puffs with good teams! You have to play 2 quality teams in either hostile or neutral territory I fully expect a team like Michigan to make the tourney. But they will be a 6-8 seed and possibly a very tough opponent for any team . There is no time left for developing players. The focus is on winning

 

[Inspector100]

I believe Purdue has another level left. I saw a team that had been neutralized last Tuesday night get to the end of the game with small success getting stops. Then raise their defensive level in the last minute to take the game. I think by the end of the year you will see the same from the offense.

 

[FirstDownB]

I believe Purdue has another level left. I saw a team that had been neutralized last Tuesday night get to the end of the game with small success getting stops. Then raise their defensive level in the last minute to take the game. I think by the end of the year you will see the same from the offense.

I'm not sure the seniors by and large haven't peaked, but I see a lot of potential for improvement in the freshmen the next 2 months, and also in how the rest of the guys play off them when they are in the game. It feels like Haarms is a bit underutilized on offense when he is in the game, perhaps they haven't figured out how best to exploit his advantages. Nojel is starting to assert his strengths more and more, and could be quite handy in tandem with Carsen when the opponent decides to extend the defense and dare our guards to take them on the dribble.

 

[Fansince72]

I think , as a successful coach , the goal should be to win it all. League, league tournament, then championship. Win every game you can.
On the other hand, your next goal should be a steady improvement in your team and individual players, hopefully peaking at the end of the season .
There are good coaches and good tourney coaches. I think the secret is to put the pieces together at the beginning of the season ,then nurturing your team into a championship caliber team.

 

[SR711]

Great topic/question.

I don't think there is a singular element that contributes to March tourney success. A lot about it is dependent on things that out of given teams control such as draw, upsets, injuries.

For blue-blood programs like Duke, Kentucky or North Carolina that simply load up on 5 star recruits, this may not be the case as year after year they are going to have a decided talent advantage against most opponents they face in the tourney, but the majority of the field fall into the category that Purdue is in IMO.

Their best shot is going to come with teams that blend a combination of talent and experience.

To this point, it is interesting that one of Keady's deepest tourney runs (Elite 8 in 2000) came with a team that IMO was nothing special during the regular season. That squad just beat a number 3 seed in Oklahoma and the rest of the bracket broke right for them. Few remember that they were in a dogfight in their first round game against an 11 seeded Dayton team that year and they just as easily could have been bounced in the 1st round.

 

[Do Dah Day]

I think , as a successful coach , the goal should be to win it all. League, league tournament, then championship. Win every game you can.
On the other hand, your next goal should be a steady improvement in your team and individual players, hopefully peaking at the end of the season .
There are good coaches and good tourney coaches. I think the secret is to put the pieces together at the beginning of the season ,then nurturing your team into a championship caliber team.

I'm curious ... and I've coached and faced this exact question, would you play someone (the obvious choice for us is Nojel) more in the next few games, with the risk that he "COULD" (please, no haters) diminish our chance to win, but he would gain huge experience in tough situations, which "probably" would benefit us later this year - ie: in the Dance?

 

[Wolegib]

Someone once said that the CUBs and a couple of other teams were built for the long haul and not a short series, and that is why they never won a World series. And then they woke u p and added some pitching and won. Most world series winner are built around have 3 dominate starting pitchers a and 8th inning man and a closer. Having 5 good starters is good for the long haul, but not the short run.

and so it is with the NCAA tourney. It has been said by many for the last decade, the NCAA is won by good guard play, because teams use a zone to neutralize the impact of a big man. And look at the Michigan game. Sure, Haas won it, but it was our guard play that got us back in that game giving us the opportunity to win.

This may not be the greatest Purdue team ever, But the combo of PJ, Edwards, Mathias and Eastern is probably the best collection of guards Purdue has seen play together since Parkinson, Macy, Parker and Sichting.

if the NCAA is known as a guard tourney, we should be more than prepared to win it.

 

[Do Dah Day]

Someone once said that the CUBs and a couple of other teams were built for the long haul and not a short series, and that is why they never won a World series. And then they woke u p and added some pitching and won. Most world series winner are built around have 3 dominate starting pitchers a and 8th inning man and a closer. Having 5 good starters is good for the long haul, but not the short run.

and so it is with the NCAA tourney. It has been said by many for the last decade, the NCAA is won by good guard play, because teams use a zone to neutralize the impact of a big man. And look at the Michigan game. Sure, Haas won it, but it was our guard play that got us back in that game giving us the opportunity to win.

This may not be the greatest Purdue team ever, But the combo of PJ, Edwards, Mathias and Eastern is probably the best collection of guards Purdue has seen play together since Parkinson, Macy, Parker and Sichting.

if the NCAA is known as a guard tourney, we should be more than prepared to win it.

yep - and the "theory" that you can't beat a Senior Point Guard.

 

[Wolegib]

I'm curious ... and I've coached and faced this exact question, would you play someone (the obvious choice for us is Nojel) more in the next few games, with the risk that he "COULD" (please, no haters) diminish our chance to win, but he would gain huge experience in tough situations, which "probably" would benefit us later this year - ie: in the Dance?

My answer would be YES with caveats. I believe he should be given more minutes in games against lesser opponents, where if he fails, rather than winning by 30, we'd win by 10-15. and early in the game. By doing so early in the game, the opposing coach throws out his game plan and now has to figure out how to defend against Eastern. the only question I have is who would sit? I believe the entire board would hate me for suggesting the guy to sit would be PJ.

I question I would ask, are any of the other ultra hyped freshmen doing anything or receiving additional playing time? I've noticed JJJ is playing some minutes and scoring some points.

 

[Wolegib]

PJ is such a clutch player, and can hit his FTs. We need him at the end of games much like a baseball closer. You see PJ in the game with the lead and 1 minute left, it's over!

 

[Do Dah Day]

My answer would be YES with caveats. I believe he should be given more minutes in games against lesser opponents, where if he fails, rather than winning by 30, we'd win by 10-15. and early in the game. By doing so early in the game, the opposing coach throws out his game plan and now has to figure out how to defend against Eastern. the only question I have is who would sit? I believe the entire board would hate me for suggesting the guy to sit would be PJ.

I question I would ask, are any of the other ultra hyped freshmen doing anything or receiving additional playing time? I've noticed JJJ is playing some minutes and scoring some points.

I chose to play the "frosh." Of course, the BTT was not on the line. The pressure to win any single game was near zero, seeding in the tourney was not on the line, so it is totally not relevant.

There is something to be said to have all eight of the rotation as well-prepared as possible. Whether that includes PT in games or not can be debated. Practice time can be more valuable due to the stop-and-teach moments that can be taken.

I doubt there is any question on this team for who would sit. Nojel is a PG ... not debatable, so it is PJ. On the other hand, PJ is a highly polished end-product. So his losing a few minutes here and there should have zero effect on any aspect of the future of the team. TOTALLY true on PJ in the game for the last few minutes!!!

 

[Fansince72]

'm curious ... and I've coached and faced this exact question, would you play someone (the obvious choice for us is Nojel) more in the next few games, with the risk that he "COULD" (please, no haters) diminish our chance to win, but he would gain huge experience in tough situations, which "probably" would benefit us later this year - ie: in the Dance

I would sure be looking for the opportunity in these next few games. The competition will be a lot less stiff coming up.

 

[TheGunner]

Do teams play different in March than the rest of the year? Or are the results simply more random due to the 1-and-done format? The very best teams, the ones that have big expectations, the "elites".. Are those guys going as hard, putting the team first, doing all the little things on a Wednesday night game in January as they do in March?

I want to think we are better than teams like Duke and UNC and that will carry over to March. But every year it seems more and more emphasis is put on the tournament and less and less on the regular season. Do teams like Duke or Kentucky care if they don't win a few regular season games as long as they are ready for March? Kentucky made the championship game a couple years ago as an 8 seed. It was almost like "Ok, it's time to wake up and play". And they did because they had the talent to flip the switch and crank it up another level.

The Chicago Bulls, coached by Tom Thibideau, a coach known for demanding 100% effort on every possession of every game (a rarity in the NBA), finished 1st in the Eastern conference in both 2010-11 and 2011-12. But. come playoff time, everyone knew their competition would raise their level of play and the Bulls didn't have another gear to go to.

I guess what I'm saying is, has this NBA "sleepwalk-through-the-season" mindset crept into the NCAA to the point that there are essentially two different seasons for the elites- the regular season and March? We have played better than Duke, but are we really better than them? I'm afraid a team like that is just biding their time and will be ready to play defense in March and start ripping through opponents. Everyone is saying there are no elite teams this year, but perhaps they just haven't gotten out of first gear yet.

Maybe I am overthinking things, but I've been conditioned to keep my expectations and perceptions of reality in check by any means possible!

Quite frankly, I think this mindset has been there for 20+ years. Not at every program, but certainly some programs struggle to get full effort all the time with certain recruits.

Sean Miller came out earlier this week or last stating he was struggling with his team. Everyone knows the importance is ramped up in March, and the players are now fully aware.

 

[spradecki]

I'm curious ... and I've coached and faced this exact question, would you play someone (the obvious choice for us is Nojel) more in the next few games, with the risk that he "COULD" (please, no haters) diminish our chance to win, but he would gain huge experience in tough situations, which "probably" would benefit us later this year - ie: in the Dance?

wins pretty much determine seeding. got to try to win each game because of seeding

 

[Wolegib]

I'm thinking our use of Haas totally threw Michigan out of their game plan for at least 20 mins to adjust. If you started Eastern think of many other teams gam plans will now be altered as they expected PJ. Pj will still get his minutes, but start the game with a different look

 

[DG10]

Quite frankly, I think this mindset has been there for 20+ years. Not at every program, but certainly some programs struggle to get full effort all the time with certain recruits.

Sean Miller came out earlier this week or last stating he was struggling with his team. Everyone knows the importance is ramped up in March, and the players are now fully aware.

It is trickle down from AAU at the lower levels, but, started as mentioned somewhere in the thread at the NBA level originally...and is no more consistently clear than at that level.

In AAU ball, there is pool play and then tournament play...the best teams barely care about pool play. In HS, most of the elite barely even care about it...but, those that do, the emphasis again is being ready for post-season tournament play. That is absolutely the case at the NBA level. It has taken some time, but, with guys coming in that only cared about tournament play...guys coming back from the NBA to coach or even just be around programs and emphasizing all that matters is tournament play or playoffs...the mindset has indeed set in at all levels...it does not mean that guys don't care or don't put forth an effort outside of the tournament or playoffs, but, there is indeed a different focus and effort and interest at those times at those elite programs that were alluded to.

 

[lbodel]

Do teams play different in March than the rest of the year? Or are the results simply more random due to the 1-and-done format? The very best teams, the ones that have big expectations, the "elites".. Are those guys going as hard, putting the team first, doing all the little things on a Wednesday night game in January as they do in March?

I want to think we are better than teams like Duke and UNC and that will carry over to March. But every year it seems more and more emphasis is put on the tournament and less and less on the regular season. Do teams like Duke or Kentucky care if they don't win a few regular season games as long as they are ready for March? Kentucky made the championship game a couple years ago as an 8 seed. It was almost like "Ok, it's time to wake up and play". And they did because they had the talent to flip the switch and crank it up another level.

The Chicago Bulls, coached by Tom Thibideau, a coach known for demanding 100% effort on every possession of every game (a rarity in the NBA), finished 1st in the Eastern conference in both 2010-11 and 2011-12. But. come playoff time, everyone knew their competition would raise their level of play and the Bulls didn't have another gear to go to.

I guess what I'm saying is, has this NBA "sleepwalk-through-the-season" mindset crept into the NCAA to the point that there are essentially two different seasons for the elites- the regular season and March? We have played better than Duke, but are we really better than them? I'm afraid a team like that is just biding their time and will be ready to play defense in March and start ripping through opponents. Everyone is saying there are no elite teams this year, but perhaps they just haven't gotten out of first gear yet.

Maybe I am overthinking things, but I've been conditioned to keep my expectations and perceptions of reality in check by any means possible!

I think it's easy to overthink, but it boils down to being relatively simple:

1. In a single elimination format, teams gun for other teams. A 12 seed will approach a first round game with more intensity than most 5 seeds. Whereas in December non-conference game - a 12 seed type of team could be coming in with 4 straight losses all on the road when they then play a 5 seed quality team. You just aren't necessarily getting the same effort.

2. The first game you play in each weekend, you have time to prepare for. This partially has to do with #1 as a higher seeded team will game prep probably more intensely than the lower seed. I think this factor does explain Purdue's record in first round games under Painter. People like to complain about the Cincy game or Ark. State game - but overall, Purdue's first round record is very good. I think Painter & Co. have always been good at preparing for games. In the second round, it gets a bit more up in the air as you really only have 1 practice between. Obviously coaches do game prep for all possible opponents, but spending time practicing makes a difference.

3. It's all about unfamiliar match-ups. There are teams that our seniors have played for 4 years now - granted, they don't all have the same coaches, but there's guys they've played against 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7+ games (think conference tournaments). The NCAA selection committee does its very best to avoid "re-matches", which means you play rather unfamiliar opponent. Granted, you can still face somewhat familiar opponents - we had played Vermont the year before, for example.

With playing unfamiliar opponents, you often also play unfamiliar styles. The tournament is heavily about match-ups. There are good match-ups and bad match-ups. A turnover happy team or a team with a weak point guard/ball handling doesn't want to face a West Virginia, for example. But there are very good teams - Duke - that don't play a lick of defense well that could be a very friendly high-level match up for that team.

 

[Boiler Wolf]

I also felt Keady was such a master at getting his players to play hard in the regular season, that they really couldn't play much harder in the tourney. And he had to with the sometimes lesser talent than others, for them to win in the regular season. I don't think a lot of other coaches push their players that hard in the regular season. And the teams with lots of 5 star talent, the coach doesn't have to a lot of times. Then in the tourney, everyone turns it up a notch. Keady's teams didn't have another gear to shift to.

That's what worries me about Duke. They don't play good defense now, but with the athletes on that team, they will play harder in the tourney. Other teams as well.

Someone else said they thought Purdue has another gear they can shift into come tournament time. I don't know if that is necessarily true, but I do think this team is capable of playing better than they have. They've shown it at times, but not for an entire game.

 

[FirstDownB]

That's what worries me about Duke. They don't play good defense now, but with the athletes on that team, they will play harder in the tourney. Other teams as well.

Duke and Kentucky are interesting cases. I'm starting to wonder based on the past couple seasons if their culture has gone to the point where some of their "elite" 1-and-done players don't even care enough about the college team accomplishments to kick it up a notch in the tournament. Or if they are simply preparing for the draft. I think they have the ability to play good defense, but will they bring the all out effort even then? These guys didn't grow up dreaming of being Christian Laettner and hitting the game winning shot for Duke, they grew up dreaming of being Lebron James and just found the easiest way to get there was by going to Duke for one year.

 

[Broncos16]

March basketball is much much different. Its the hardest championship to win in collegiate or professional sports in my opinion. You can have an outstanding regular season but you better have another gear and the urgency better be at 110%. One off night is all it takes, I can only speak from watching Kansas the past two years but we were flawless our first three games in each tournament and fell short in both elite 8 matchups.