While I do think BVP would’ve been super valuable to have in this 1st round game, calling us ‘broken’ isn’t any actual analysis. It’s just a generalization based off a limited narrative.
Real glad that Titus made the move over to Barstool, sounds like some hard hitting research is going on over there lol.
I used to run an office pool (back in the days before it was all online) where you got points based on how many people in the pool picked the opposite team. So when there was a trendy upset pick, you actually got more (potential) points for picking the “favorite” (which wasn’t really the favorite since no one was picking them).
I figure the Furman math guys who built the model (and probably did great work, though with very small sample) all shake their heads when they read how their results are presented in the articles. Like… “Hold on, you can’t… That’s not…” And then they remember this is paying for their kids’ braces and they move on with their lives.
Vecenie made pretty much the same statement on his podcast and he’s pretty knowledgeable. Though he spends most of his time on nba and draft prospects. He prob watched our early OOC games vs Baylor/Illinois with BVP cooking and then Duke and then jumped to conclusions
Big thing to keep in mind with how uninformed all these reporters and podcasters are on UVA/Furman is they are most likely similarly uninformed on the other matchups
I think the only people who don’t think BVP’s absence hurts us at all are the ones who post on this board.
No question it hurts us. But is it fatal? Maybe in later rounds. Definitely makes our job harder, especially in matchups like Furman. But I don’t think it “breaks” us.
I know people will point to UMBC to highlight our difficulties against small, mobile, hot-shooting teams. But remember that our guards that game were Ty and Kyle. Great players, not particularly great or quick defenders (which was why Kihei’s addition the next year was so critical). And our big guys were Jack and Isaiah, who were terrific defenders but not offensive threats and not rim protectors.
We showed we can play against this style versus Baylor. And yes, we shot well that game. But also, Baylor is a lot better than Furman.
Yeah, also a distinction between healthy and hobbled BVP.
No doubt his lack of availability hurts our ceiling. But I think our floor was lower playing him the way we were while he was injured.
Net / net - I think our floor is higher now that injured BVP won’t get 25 minutes. Our ceiling is lower now that a healthy BVP isn’t an option (and might not have been anyway if his back stayed the way it was).
I call shenanigans on a formula calling for a Furman upset that has input from Furman math professors.
Game 1 vs Duke vs Game 2 would be a good comparison, but I’m not sure how it affects other matchups.
Most people forgot that UVa was +20 in Vander Plas’ 30 minutes in Game 1, and -13 in his 15 minutes off. In that particular matchup he was valuable offensively (even without hitting a three) and played excellent defense.
Without him on Saturday, it was just a different game. We were worse, Duke was maybe slightly better.
I should’ve read further down before replying. But that was one of the first things I noticed when I read the article last night.
The ESPN upset model doesn’t have our game in the top 10 of possible upsets.
These “models” remind me of the scam where you send an email to a thousand people promising a sure-fire, lock-of-the-week pick. This pick is so good that you’re giving it away for free, just to prove how smart you are. Here’s the con: Half the emails pick Team A, half pick Team B.
When that game is over, you send another email to the 500 people who were given the winning team, and say, “See how smart I am? Do you trust me yet?” And then you pick another game. Same deal: Half the emails say Team A, half say Team B.
After four games, you’ve got 75 people who will write you a check for any amount to get all your picks because you’ve “proven” you choose nothing but winners.
I listened to the new iteration of One Shining Podcast on the Ringer. Tate Frazier had Kyle Mann on for his Selection Show edition. They both picked Furman, though Mann more confidently. Kyle Mann loves Bothwell and Slawson, particularly Slawson: “Furman is a team than can absolutely beat Virginia.”
He asked Tate if he was picking the upset: “Well, I’m leaning toward that but look the Wahoos fans have been so great to me and I want Tony Bennett to make a run for the ACC’s sake, but I do think Vander Plas going down is a little bit of an identity crisis for this Virginia team, trying to figure out who they are without Vander Plas. I thought he was a nice glue guy for that group. So, I think there’s more questions than answers with Virginia so in my mind it makes a lot of sense. And we know when Virginia has injuries in the tournament, like they did with DeAndre Hunter, we saw what happened when they played UMBC. So I don’t know. There’s a little bit of a recipe and a formula that has unfortunately played out with this group so that’s on my radar.”
All that to say…sure Tate watched the ACCT quarters where we beat his beloved Tar Heels. Early bad, but pretty solid to good for the most part. I also have to assume he watched the Clemson disassembling.
I don’t think we have an identity crisis at all. We are now a leave-it-all-on-the-floor defensive team, trying to snatch rebounds, who needs to see some shots fall. Our identity is that we took a look in the mirror and found ourselves staring back. And I think for this group of guys, locking in on D, crashing the boards, and fighting is their identity.
Will that equal a long NCAAT run? Time will tell. But I don’t doubt we know who we are and what we need to do.
The identity crisis was before the BVP injury. The BVP/Gardner lineup was really bad
FACTS
Only people who don’t actually watch UVA would insist we’re “broken” over losing a guy who’s on the season 30% from 3; 50% from the line, and a poor defender. It’s just silly to even say.
BVP was a willing passer and, when healthy, allows us run a different offense. But anyone who watched the month of February knows it won’t workin. There is no identity crisis at all, we’re going back to plain old, boring, UVA mover blocker and grind the game to a screeching halt style of play, something Tony has done for years. If we lose, it will not have anything to do with BVP being out, it will have to do with Furman hitting a bunch of 3s or our guys not hitting theirs.
Seth couldn’t control himself last night with the upsets. I appreciate that he’s willing to take some risks with his picks on TV unlike most other guys, but I think he went a little overboard.
I think we gotta get to the FT line and get Armaan and Isaac 8-10 quality looks from 3.
Here are the 8 games against madness teams:
86-79 over a #3 seed. (9/14 on threes)
70-61 over a #9 seed (5/17 on threes)
61-69 loss to a #1 seed (6/22 on threes)
64-66 loss to a #5 seed (6/23 on threes)
65-68 loss to a #11 seed (9/21 on threes)
63-50 win over a #11 seed (2/8 on threes)
69-62 OT win over a #5 seed (4/14 on threes)
49-59 loss to a #5 seed (4/17 on threes)
I’m reading that this is a dream matchup for Gardner, which obviously means he’ll turn his ankle 3 minutes into the game.
Same - i put in for tickets
