Bracket Lames: Inconsistent Tar Heels completely untrustworthy
Split personalities are capricious by nature.
Take iconic Batman character ‘Two-Face.’
Prior to undergoing a life-altering facial disfigurement from acid tossed by Sal Maroni (Comics version), a transformative, the mercurial man was Harvey Dent, respected, upstanding District Attorney of Gotham. Post-scarring, however, his mental disassociation and fate-driven obsessions consumed him, forever replacing the good-natured Dent with a black-hearted villain whose coin flips became the ultimate decider.
North Carolina is college basketball’s version.
Temperamental in their play, the Tar Heels are virtually impossible to predict. Heads, they’re an extremely talented, well-equipped bunch that defend aggressively, dominate the offensive glass and excel in transition. Tails, they’re an enigmatic group plagued by surrendered jumpers, deficient three-point shooting and inexplicable mental lapses.
Your guess is as good as mine what team shows up in Raleigh.
[Yahoo Tourney Pick’em: Fill out your bracket for a shot at $50K]
Picked by several pundits preseason to cut down the nets in Houston, Carolina didn’t exactly live up to the hype. Over the course of the season, its wild rollercoaster ride was filled with unexpected twists and turns. The Heels reached the summit against Maryland, Miami and Pitt and sunk versus Northern Iowa, Duke, Louisville and, nearly, to conference-winless Boston College.
Though the ACC regular and postseason champs enter the NCAA tournament as a prodigious No. 1 seed, the tea leaves say disappointment is inevitable.
Why is North Carolina doomed to fail? Here are four reasons:
Wretched outside shooting. A blindfolded, one-legged Ryan Mallett attempting to hit a moving target from 20 yards out. That’s about how accurate Marcus Paige and Joel Berry are. Combined the duo has netted a mediocre 34.3 percent from three. When on, they provide much-needed offensive balance, which helps free up the interior for glass guys Brice Johnson, Isaiah Hicks and Kennedy Meeks. However, when off, the Heels become very one-dimensional, allowing foes to employ zone and overload the lane. How they perform in the Dance is imperative to Carolina’s longevity.
Pacing. Breakneck is the tempo UNC prefers. Its fleet feet and off-the-charts athleticism are why it prospers in transition. But when competitors ease up and keep action confined in the half-court, the Heels, in general, get rattled. This is why it underwhelmed against the likes of Northern Iowa, Texas, Louisville and Virginia, teams that ranked above No. 270 nationally in adjusted tempo.
Missed adjustments. Earlier this season in a game against arch-rival Duke, Johnson, who had 27 points and 14 boards with 10-plus minutes remaining, inexplicably disappeared down the stretch. Though unstoppable for nearly the entire game up to that point, either Roy Williams didn’t call out or draw up designed plays for the big man (Likely) or UNC guards suffered a sudden amnesia (Unlikely). Whatever the reason, forgetting to feed Johnson was dumbfounding. Will Roy push the right buttons in high leverage situations? I have my reservations.
Opponent trey bombs. Due to its length and elasticity, Carolina is an exceptional defensive team inside the arc. However, outside, it struggles with bouts of laziness. It doesn’t rotate efficiently, evade screens or extend particularly well along the perimeter. As a result, it checks in at a deplorable No. 251 in three-point percentage defense (36.3 percent allowed). In the Heels’ six losses it yielded an average of 7.5 made treys per game. Keeping their mitts up is an absolute must to prevent an early exit.
To be fair, UNC exhibited considerable toughness and a killer instinct at Cameron Indoor Mar. 2. It humiliated its nemesis on the glass, warded off calamity late and fought until to the end. If it can replicate that effort, it will defy its staunchest critics, including yours truly. But since the Heels were unable to consistently exude those qualities throughout the year banking on a Final Four appearance is a tremendous leap of faith, especially with Xavier, Kentucky and West Virginia potentially in their path.
Not even ‘Two-Face’ would take that chance.
Here are four additional busters (No. 5 seeds or higher) that could bloody your bracket:
Maryland Terrapins (25-8, No. 5 seed, South region)
Putting your trust in Maryland, similar to its former ACC compadre above, is a tightrope walk across the Grand Canyon. One wind gust, or in the Terps case, one underwhelming shooting night, and your bracket goes SPALT! Unpredictability has reigned supreme in College Park this season. The Terps, widely pegged to be a national title contender preseason, wound a rocky road to the NCAA tournament. Its erratic execution, specifically Melo Trimble’s, should give anyone pause. From Feb. 6th on, the point guard couldn’t shoot a golf ball through a hula hoop. During that stretch he hit only 30.3 percent of his field goals and was hampered by turnovers. Equally concerning, the Terps, despite the skills and talent of Diamond Stone and Robert Carter, often played soft on the glass ranking above No. 150 in offensive and defensive rebounding percentages. Toss in Jake Layman’s misuse as a swing forward along with Maryland’s vulnerability to turnovers and it could get poached by Cinderella, possibly South Dakota St.. Keep in mind, it limps into the tournament after losing five of its past eight contests.
Arizona Wildcats (25-8, No. 6 seed, South region)
If you’ve ever been to a nightclub and rubbed up against a random stranger under colored lights only to find out later they’re rather hideous in a brighter setting, you fully understand this year’s Wildcats. Strip away the name and look past the lopsided overall record, and Arizona is a JAT (Just Another Team). Sure, Sean Miller has a cupboard stuffed with talent. Ryan Anderson is a multi-faceted post-player with nimble moves and a scoring knack around the rim. ‘Drago’ doppelgänger, Kaleb Tarczewski, is an athletic center who is highly active on both ends. And Allonzo Trier and Gabe York are fantastic outside gunners who collectively net just shy of 40 percent from downtown. Throw in the fact ‘Zona, as a whole, ranks favorably in multiple categories (e.g. OR%, DR%, free-throw rate, offensive efficiency, etc.) and you might wonder why on earth its on the list. The ‘Cats, however, possess qualities consistent with tourney flops. For starters, they commit too many silly mistakes on the offensive end. On the year, aggressors turned them over nearly 18 percent of the time. They’ve also squandered game-clinching opportunities late, evidenced in close losses to USC, Cal and Colorado. Worst of all, their record is terribly deceiving. Arizona logged ONE, that’s right, ONE win against the KenPom top-25 (Cal). That’s it. Let someone else be the sucker. Bet on it getting tossed by either Vandy or Wichita St.
Duke Blue Devils (23-10, No. 4 seed, West region)
Even casual fans are familiar with Duke’s various accolades and the unforgettable players who donned the Blue and White – five national titles, 28 Sweet Sixteens, 36 All-Americans including Grant Hill, Christian Laettner, Elton Brand, Shane Battier, J.J. Reddick, Jason Williams and Jhalil Okafor … the achievements and names go on and on. However, the odds of the defending national champs escaping their region are extremely long. Brandon Ingram, a rangy, well-equipped forward who has point guard handles and all-around scoring ability, and Grayson Allen, notorious tripper and slasher who averaged over 21 points per game, are the pistons that pump Duke’s engine. The dynamic duo, along with rainmaker Matt Jones (41.6 3PT%), are why the Devils rank No. 5 nationally in offensive efficiency. Scoring isn’t an issue, however, defense and depth most certainly are. Seas part when Duke attempts to body up. Statistically, its D is nearly identical to the 2014 team’s, the squad that got bounced by Mercer in Round 1 of the NCAA tournament. Whether employing man or zone, it’s simply too forgiving. Coach K’s extremely thin frontcourt also raises a red flag. Chase Jeter is the only plus-sized option outside starter Marshall Plumlee on roster. And he’s largely inept. String it all together and the Devils are sure to drag your bracket to hell. Avoid at all costs.
Villanova Wildcats (29-5, No. 2 seed, South region)
‘Nova is reminiscent of an Adam Sandler movie. ‘Happy Gillmore,’ ‘Billy Madison’ and ‘The Wedding Singer’ conjure fond memories, but every time you get lured in by one of the actor’s latest offerings, an overwhelming sense of time-wasted follows. Similar to Sandler, the Wildcats are a high-profile team that constantly let their believers down. Three straight years they failed to survive the first weekend. And they were a No. 2/No. 1 seed in 2014/2015. This year’s brand is very talented, but can Jay Wright shake the 500-pound gorilla off his back? One of four teams nationally that ranks inside the top-15 in offensive and defensive efficiency, ‘Nova boasts balance. They punish opponents at the free-throw line (77.3 FT%), commit few turnovers, and, thanks in large party to Daniel Ochefu, defend the paint staunchly. Though just over a third of their points come from treys, the Wildcats aren’t the most proficient long-range club. Their 34.4 three-point percentage ranks No. 184 in the category. They depend on volume, but against stingy man defenses that stretch out along the perimeter, that reliance can prove problematic, especially when considering their limited frontcourt depth. Also below average in rebounding, Villanova can be shoved around by physical teams equipped with height, muscle and defense, evidenced in its 11-point loss at Virginia in non-conference play. With another premature dismissal entirely possible, the gorilla will only get heavier.
Other potential busts: Xaiver, Indiana, Utah.
Fun facts/trends about the Big Dance:
• Since 2006, 63 percent of teams seeded No. 11-15 that advanced beyond Round 1 ranked inside the top-75 in offensive efficiency. Defense may win championships, but offense springs Cinderella.
• Excluding 2009, at least one No. 2 seed has been eliminated by Round 2 every year since 1997. Last year, Virginia and Kansas fell victim.
• Sixteen 8/9 seeds have upended a No. 1 since 1985. North Carolina St. bounced top seed Villanova last year.
• No. 5 seeds have lost 35.4 percent of their first-round matchups since ’85.
• No. 3 and No. 6 seeds beware. Seven No. 11 seeds have reached the Sweet Sixteen since 2010.
Follow Bracket Brad on Twitter @YahooNoise
