Sweet 16 Breakdown: Midwest and South

Pitt and Xavier played more defense than I thought, and Missouri outgunned Memphis, but I was right on elsewhere: Duke lost to Villanova in large part because Gerald Henderson and Jon Scheyer combined to go 4-for-32 from the field, and Connecticut was too strong for Purdue. Let's look at tonight's games:

MIDWEST
#1 Louisville vs. #12 Arizona. As a commenter to yesterday's post mentioned, I'm something of a sucker for Arizona when it comes to the tournament. Given that I'm not all that high on Louisville -- I watch them and I just can't figure out how they are good as they are -- the temptation is there to pull the trigger on a Wildcat upset.

I don't think it's going to happen, though. The 'ville is a bad matchup for the 'cats. As well as Nic Wise has played this year -- I distinctly remember asking aloud at some point this year, "When did Nic Wise get good at basketball?" -- he's still prone to getting a little out of control, deadly against a team that uses full-court pressure the way the Cardinals do. Arizona doesn't have another really solid ballhandler in the backcourt, and they might do well to have Chase Budinger help bring it up.

While it's not all that rare that you see players on opposing teams who will end up in the NBA, it is a little more rare when those players go head to head. Watching Budinger go against Terrence Williams should be a lot of fun, and Williams will want to avoid getting into a scoring contest with Budinger, which given his unselfish nature, shouldn't be hard to do. Potential lottery picks Jordan Hill and Earl Clark will battle it out down low, too. Give the advantage on the inside to Louisville -- Hill also has to deal with Samardo Samuels.

It could happen, but it would take a near-perfect game from the Wildcats.

#2 Michigan State vs. #3 Kansas. A couple of big-name programs who quietly had very strong years, and yet neither of these teams really strikes you as a scary one. (I'm pretty unimpressed with the whole South region.) The point guard matchup should be a good one, with Big Ten Player of the Year Kalin Lucas going up against Sherron Collins. Lucas is a blaze with the ball, while Collins, though plenty quick, is a bit more powerful.

I honestly don't have much to say here -- let's just pick the Spartans and move on.

SOUTH
#1 North Carolina v. #4 Gonzaga. The Tar Heels are beatable, but I think it's going to take a team that is a little bit better defensive than the Bulldogs to do it. Carolina's point guard, Ty Lawson, is going to play despite a toe injury, and though he was hampered somewhat in the first two games, he's still plenty quick enough with the ball to wreak all kinds of havoc on the opposition.

Inside, I think Tyler Hansbrough is probably too tough and physical for Josh Heytvelt, who seems less and less interested in mixing it up underneath as his career goes on. Similarly, as much as I like Austin Daye, I'm not sure he's big and strong enough to be effective for a full game against Carolina's depth.

#2 Oklahoma vs. #3 Syracuse. The game of the night, if you ask me, and it's actually the early game in this region. Syracuse was one of the hottest teams coming into this tournament, and Oklahoma one of the coldest.

The Orange seem to be a popular pick, and I can see why. The two teams have such contrasting strengths that it's as easy to envision Jonny Flynn sojourning into the lane time and again, zipping passes to Eric Devendorf and Andy Rautins for open threes as it is to picture Blake Griffin finding holes in the Syracuse 2-3 zone and going for one of the 20-point, 20-rebound games that seem to be his signature.

I think Syracuse can win this one, but Oklahoma is the favorite. The Orange defense has not been as good this season as we've come to expect from them, and it's not because they don't get out on three-point shooters. There are too many holes in the middle of that zone, and you can't give Blake Griffin the ball there. He's got the combination of size, strength, and ballhandling ability that he can do a ton of damage from the high post. Griffin does like to spin dribble a little too much, a move that can be dangerous in traffic, and so Syracuse forwards Rick Jackson, Paul Harris, and Kristof Ongenaet should be prepared to step in and take the charge. Getting Griffin in foul trouble would be huge.

Earlier in the season, I might have said that Arinze Onuaku was a decent matchup for Griffin, but knee injuries have really slowed him late in the season. He's just not the same player, and I don't think he can effectively play Griffin on either end. His reduced mobility, too, will be a problem on the glass. Rebounding out of the 2-3 is always tough, and that's exacerbated when you're up against an athletic, mobile guy like Blake Griffin. And Blake's older brother, Taylor, is no slouch either.

I'd like the 'cuse a bit more if Paul Harris were playing better, but he hasn't been himself for several games, dating back to the Big East tournament. Flynn is every bit the point guard that Lawson and Lucas are, and Rautins and Devendorf are marksmen. I'm just not sure Syracuse has enough to overcome the Sooners' obvious interior advantage.

Bizarre Ending in the Desert

I'm a day late posting this one, but I didn't get a chance to watch UAB's wild 72-71 win at Arizona in the quarters of the Preseason NIT until tonight.

In case you didn't see it, the clip is here. You can't really see the score, though, so I'll do my best to explain it:

UAB up 71-68 and the ball, like 45 seconds left. Arizona interim coach Russ Pennell orders the foul, which is something I don't think coaches do enough in these situations: Lengthen the game, make the other team hit free throws, don't give them a chance to run 30 seconds off the clock and ice it with a bucket. The gamble pays off, as UAB misses the front end of the one-and-one, and Arizona rebounds.

On the ensuing Wildcat trip, Arizona freshman Garland Judkins is fouled. He makes the first. 71-69, UAB, with about 35 seconds left. He misses the second, but UAB's Robert Vaden can't corral the rebound. The ball squirts to another Arizona freshman, Kyle Fogg, who lays it off the board and in. 71-71.

UAB inbounds, and Fogg -- apparently unaware that his bucket tied it up -- reaches out and grabs the Blazer ballhandler. As the crowd, the bench, and Pennell go nuts, Fogg still hasn't realized his mistake. Only when sophomore Jamelle Horne comes over and tells him does Fogg realize his error. He's distraught.

But he's also lucky, because UAB missed the front end of yet another one-and-one. Arizona calls timeout. The play was for Nic Wise, who missed a jumper (he shot a tick or two early, by the way, and he had taken a very ill-advised shot a possession or two earlier. The play should have been for Chase Budinger). At any rate, UAB rebounds, and Paul Delaney III begins dribbling upcourt, heaving a three-quarter court shot...

while Horne lunges at him with both hands from behind, grabbing his jersey!

The ref has no choice. Delaney's heave misses, but the whistle blows with eight-tenths of a second left. Intentional foul. Delaney hits one of two, UAB survives an adventurous inbounds pass, escapes the McKale Center with a victory, and punches its ticket to Madison Square Garden and a date with Oklahoma in the semis.

***
Hard to know exactly what happened here. It's possible that both Fogg and Horne mistakenly thought they were behind, though this is hard to reconcile in Horne's case, since he was immediately aware of Fogg's mistake and there was a timeout in between the first foul and the second.

ESPN analyst Len Elmore posited a different theory, which is that down three points with 45 seconds left, Pennell put the intentional foul defense "on," and either never called it "off" (unlikely, given his reaction to Fogg's foul and the fact that there was a timeout between the two fouls) or Fogg and Horne never realized it was "off."

At first, Elmore's explanation didn't make much sense. Why would any player think it was correct to foul when the score was tied? But as I thought about it more, it reminded me of a point I'm always making and a conversation I had about it with a mid-major Division I assistant coach I know.

I think coaches end up wasting timeouts in close games to tell their players something the kids should know already. For example, let's say Arizona had the ball with 40 seconds left down three. The Wildcats kids should know what the coach wants them to do there, whether it's run a specific play for a three or get a quick two and then foul. Instead, the coach ends up burning a timeout to remind them of the strategy, which incidentally gives the opposing coach the opportunity to communicate strategy to his players, get his personnel right (subbing in his best defenders or free throw shooters, for example), and maybe draw up a play or two for when they get the ball back.

My point is that the players should be smart enough to know what to do in these common lage-game spots. It's apparent, however, that a great many players don't. Whether it's because they lack "Basketball IQ" or they simply lose their heads in the moment, they have a tendency to do the wrong things in these spots. So my position has always been that coaches need to spend more time "coaching" these specific situations in practice.

I brought this up to my friend, the assistant coach, and he told me that they do coach situations; the kids just temporarily forget in the heat of the moment.

So, did Fogg and Horne suffer the same bizarre mental breakdown on back-to-back possessions, somehow forgetting the score? Or were they simply following orders; that is, had they simply not heard that the intentional foul play was off? I suspect we'll never know, as it's not in the team's interest to continue to discuss this in the media. It seems implausible that Horne, especially, would have realized the intentional foul was "off" when Fogg tied the score, and then not realized it seconds later.

But anything's possible, and Elmore and my friend certainly know more about the brains of college basketball players than I do. If Elmore's theory is correct, it goes a long way to proving my friend right.