I just caught up to this game on DVR. I guess live by the sword die by the sword, but Stephen Curry was terrible that game.

Curry wasn't terrible, he just got tired at the end of the game and missed like 5 straight shots. It's hard to stay energized when you're running constantly on offense through double screens and keeping up on defense vs a fast paced team all while never taking a rest.

Come on. He took a few bad shots down the stretch, but there's no way he was terrible.

When your only skill is scoring and you take 1/2 of your teams shots don't get to the line 5/9 from 2 4/16 from three is terrible.

Im saying that Richards isn't known for his shooting and is mainly used as a point guard running the plays and dishing the ball to people who do the finishing. I know curry can pass, although sometimes he tries to get too fancy.....

I checked the DVR to see if White Lobster was on the court but it didn't copy the last 3 minutes b/c it ran over. Ughh. Does anybody know for sure if White Lobster was in that last play?

iirc he was in the left corner, but he was covered tightly

Actually, I forgot I was DVRing 60 Minutes for the Bill James thing. I just watched the replay and it was these players on the court:

1 - SC
2 - Richards
3 - Rossiter
4 - Sander
5 - Barr (the White Lobster)

Damn, they started w/ 16.8 seconds and when SC crossed the 1/2 court line dribbling the ball up slowly the clock read 9.5 seconds. And, last thing, Richards' shot was behind the little sideline dash that signifies how far upcourt the coach can walk the sideline. Awful Belmont moment I'm still not over.

The White Lobster stood in the left corner 1 foot away from the corner of the court not moving as a complete decoy. I just don't get it. 16.8 seconds.

i thought were going to lose with about 13 minutes left. we got away with one there i think. oh well.

Couple things about the Davidson final possession:

-McKillop messed up taking the final timeout in the backcourt. Inbound it to Richards, have him rush it up, and then draw something up for a sideline inbounds play. Davidson has been great at scoring off of inbounds plays, and with Kansas surely preoccupied with Curry in that situation, there's a decent chance that someone else would have been left open in the scramble to keep the ball out of Curry's hands. It would have taken a few seconds, but Curry spent that time walking the ball upcourt, anyway.

-Like others have said, don't understand why you put the ball in Curry's hands right away. He's decent off the dribble as he showed in the first half, but his real skill -- other than his great range -- is his ability to read the defense and get open.

-Putting the ball in his hands also allows Kansas' defenders to keep Curry in front of them, rather than having him running around behind them. When they're worried about him coming off of screens, they are more likely to let their man drift away. A lot of people have said that there was no way Kansas was letting Curry the ball on that possession, but in doing so, they might've given someone else a great look at a three to win or a two to tie.

-High pick for a three-pointer only works if the defense is at least a little worried about the screener. Up two, Kansas wasn't going to worry about Sander rolling to the basket for a layup.

-To that end, pick and pop with Barr might've worked, because at least Kansas would have had to worry about Barr beating them. Sure, Sander could have thrown in a three-pointer, but Kansas would have been happy to let him take it if letting Curry get a three off was the alternative. I'd still rather have Curry off the ball in that spot, but if you're going to run the high screen, you gotta do it with someone who's a threat to hit the deep ball.

wat?

Good analysis. Also, something going to the basket would have been more likely to free up a shooter or get an easy shot when they help.

when did they ever during the entire tournament

cant wait til next year when these teams have no chance

I know Richards got to the rim a few times in the first half, but I wouldn't have been terribly confident in his ability to do so late. He looked gassed down the stretch, even after he took a lengthy (for him) break midway through the second half.

Also, I watched the replays again and noticed that Sander faded to the wing instead of ducking towards the hoop after Curry came off the screen. Dude's like a 26% three-point shooter and has made seven triples all year. Roll to the the basket, son.

Fair enough criticism, but as someone who has watched a bunch of Celtics games during the Doc Rivers era, you can't possibly say that this is solely a college ball problem.

yes, it was bad, but to liken it to Belmont's play is ridiculous

i'm just glad we can beat a team as hot as Davidson was while playing like absolute ****.

He initially faded, and Curry looked at him and kept the ball. At that point, he moved towards the basket, and if Curry had seen him, it would have been an easy deuce , because no one was around him. I agree that he should have cut in the first place, though.

Yeah, he did cut, but way too late. Curry didn't have time to look for him.

as a longtime KU fan and someone who has seen >75% of KU's games this year, I wouldn't say they played like absolute ****. They ran pretty bad most of the game (good shots not dropping, some questionable calls), but what made the game so close was some rather stupid coaching decisions, notably not letting Jackson and Arthur dominate the post like they could. Davidson is a good team, and were definitely playing like a top 10 team overall come tourney time.

I'd rank the remaining teams UNC, KU, Memphis, UCLA. I'd say the percentages for each team to win are 30% for UNC, 25% for KU, 30% for Memphis, and 15% for UCLA.

15% for ucla? you realize that's 1 in 6.5 times right? if you give me 5:1 on ucla winning the whole thing, I'd wager up to 1k.

Yeah, Curry can't hit a long 3 to save his life...

First of all Curry is returning, so their chances are at least as good as this year. And, while Kansas loses a lot we also bring in a lot. I mean we've lost at least this much before in recent years yet we haven't been worse than a 4 seed since 2000.

I think Memphis is 56ish% to be UCLA and if UCLA wins I think KU/UNC are about 62% to win. That's about ~16.5%, so my numbers aren't that far off.