Biorhythms for Carolina @Virginia: Post-Game Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter donbosco
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 673
  • Views: 10K
  • UNC Sports 
Bigs23 said:
You mean if only UNC had won 2 of those 3, right?
Click to expand...
Yes. We should have won 3, but the wolves would have been pretty silent if we were 18-2 and top 10 in the country.

But dropping all three (plus the terrible second half against Wake) got the internet hordes back into overdrive.
 
Calheel said:
Yes. We should have won 3, but the wolves would have been pretty silent if we were 18-2 and top 10 in the country.

But dropping all three (plus the terrible second half against Wake) got the internet hordes back into overdrive.
Click to expand...
The odds of winning all 3 of those road games was under 50% so saying they should have won all 3 is not accurate.
 
Bigs23 said:
Or at least beat them.
Click to expand...
Because Tech is so low in the rankings, NET and such, it needs to be a beat down. A solid double digit W blowing the doors off the spread. Anything less and the wolves will stick another paw through door and into the kitchen.
 
stankeylegjones said:
Click to expand...

No. That totally ignores defense. It ignores strength of schedule as it relates to rebounding and turnovers. It also ignores rebounding percentages.

It shows Carolina will have a better chance in March than Alabama, Vanderbilt, and Kansas.

It shows that Tulsa, Santa Clara, Utah St, and George Washington will have a better chance in March than Carolina. High Point is in the top right quadrant.

💩💩💩
 
Last edited:
Centerpiece said:
Because Tech is so low in the rankings, NET and such, it needs to be a beat down. A solid double digit W blowing the doors off the spread. Anything less and the wolves will stick another paw through door and into the kitchen.
Click to expand...
kenpom has Carolina by 9. barttorvik has Carolina by 8.2. A blowout would be great, but a solid double digit win should suffice to improve Carolina's NET.
 
BillOfRights said:
No. That totally ignores defense. It ignores strength of schedule as it relates to rebounding and turnovers. It also ignores rebounding percentages.

It shows Carolina will have a better chance in March than Alabama, Vanderbilt, and Kansas.

It shows that Tulsa, Santa Clara, Utah St, and George Washington will have a better chance in March than Carolina. High Point is in the top right quadrant.

💩💩💩
Click to expand...
How are UNC's rebounding percentages/rebounding?
 
NYCBlueBlood said:
"you think icky's weighting system gives too much weight to the regular season? how so?"

I don't think the regular season should have a 70% to 80% weighting toward deciding whether it was a good/bad season. IMO at most it's maybe 50%. It's a subjective thing. You clearly disagree. That's ok.

But for me there are key moments that make or break a season. Driving a dagger into the undead heart of K for the final game on his own home court with his heralded 4 lottery pick team... then taking them down again in the Final Four for his final game ever... all by a rookie UNC coach... after his farewell tour where he demanded homage at every away game he played... for me those two things alone make it a GREAT season. I can close my eyes right now and still see the look on his face when he knew he'd lost... bang, bang mfer...

I can forgive a lot in a regular season if things pick up in the second half of ACC play and it leads to a deep run. But god/bad/great is a subjective thing.
Click to expand...
i appreciate your thoughts. i agree with you about the way that the end of that season felt. it was amazing. the most fun that any of us have probably ever had in a non-title season. but a lot of that, as you said, is due to the "vanquishing the rat factor" which we will never have the opportunity to do again. it was a one-off.

and i thought that this thread had trended into more of a dispassionate review/debate on the pure results and outcomes of HD's 5 seasons at the helm thus far and we shouldn't just ignore the really poor performance on court in a discussion of that nature even though later performances that season made us feel amazing because they featured a couple of once in a lifetime wins.

i still think that your general position glosses over the fact that most of the teams that end up being good later in the season and making nice post-season runs are also pretty good earlier in the season. 2000 and 2022 are clear outliers/rarities.
 
4thgenheel said:
i still think that your general position glosses over the fact that most of the teams that end up being good later in the season and making nice post-season runs are also pretty good earlier in the season. 2000 and 2022 are clear outliers/rarities.
Click to expand...

There's a strong correlation to being good in the regular season and good in the post season

But struggling in the regular season, getting better, making the post season, and winning a bunch of games is accomplishing the same goal no?

Weird fan perspective imo to dwell on January losses when a team is winning in March
 
Heelsandeers said:
Weird fan perspective imo to dwell on January losses when a team is winning in March
Click to expand...
I think the idea is that NCAA victories are not very predictive, as they are kind of random. For instance, in 22 we had an unusually easy path to the Final Four, given that we played a 15 seed in the Elite Eight.

Regular season results tend to be more predictive year to year (i.e. more stable).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top