Big Ten Conference NCAA Tournament Outlook
Since you’ve been devoid of any bracket analysis over the last couple days, I’m here to provide some. You can count on me when the rambling television heads get too annoying or when another one picks all four No. 1 seeds to make the Final Four. I’m here for some civility, objectivity and ego-less breakdowns of the Big Ten’s six first round matchups.
South Region
No. 1-seed Ohio State Buckeyes (30-3) vs. No. 16-seed Central Connecticut State Blue Devils (22-11)
Both played:
Michigan – CCSU lost in Ann Arbor 60-40, OSU beat the Wolverines three times, each time by double digits.
Record vs. tournament teams:
OSU: 10-3 (Wins against Purdue (3 times), Michigan State (2), Wisconsin (2), Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee)
CCSU: 0-1
Studs:
OSU: C Greg Oden (15.5 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 3.5 blk/gm), G Mike Conley, Jr. (10.5 ppg, 6.3 apg)
CCSU: G Javier Mojica (16.7 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 42% 3-point), G Tristan Blackwood (17.3 ppg, 118 three-pointers), F Obie Nwadike (14.8 ppg, 10.9 rpg)
Breakdown: Yeah, so maybe a 16-seed has never beaten a 1-seed, and maybe Ohio State has won its last seventeen games, and maybe Greg Oden… well, you get the idea. There has to be one thing CCSU can bank on, though, right?
Right?
Well, they’re certain to score a few points. Greg Oden can’t block everything, and he certainly won’t be able to stop Tristan Blackwood from launching a few 3-pointers. The junior guard canned 118 bombs this season, tied for third in the nation. He made 10 from downtown in one game earlier this season, but CCSU probably will need 20 to pull out a victory.
Ohio State comes at you in waves, flying wings down the court and launching deep balls from all directions. Mike Conley, Jr. is incredibly polished for a freshman point guard and has taken it upon himself to look for his own offense more in the second half of the season. And then there’s Oden. Although he looked more passive than ever in the Big Ten title game against Wisconsin, Oden will most likely bring some fire to the tournament. He will be a handful for CCSU forward Obie Nwadike, who, at 6-4 will be tremendously undersized. He’ll be hard-pressed to reach his 11-rebound average.
Key Matchup: Greg Oden vs. everybody. Oden’s Big Ten tournament-record 19 rebounds in the semifinals should scare any opponent. I don’t see the Blue Devils being able to slow down Oden at all. If they can, they might be able to keep it relatively close.
Prediction: They can’t, and won’t, shut down Oden, and will instead be shut down by him. A nice tune-up for the Buckeyes, 80-63.
Midwest Region
No. 2-seed Wisconsin Badgers (29-5) vs. No. 15-seed Texas A&M-Corpus Christi Islanders (26-6)
Both played:
Purdue – The Islanders lost by 18, the Badgers won by 5.
Record vs. tournament teams:
Wisconsin: 9-4 (Michigan State (2), Illinois (2), Winthrop, @Marquette, Pittsburgh, Ohio State, Purdue)
Texas A&M-CC: 0-2
Studs:
Wisconsin: F Alando Tucker (20.2 ppg, 5.3 rpg), G Kammron Taylor (12.6 ppg, 40% 3-point)
Texas A&M-CC: C Chris Daniels (15 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 59% FG), G Josh Washington (13 ppg, 47% 3-point)
Breakdown: Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce to you, this year’s “we’re just happy to be here” team: Texas A&M-Corpus Christi. Of course, they’d never utter such nonsense, but the Islanders are the only first-time tournament team in this year’s field. In fact, this is their first year in a conference, as they spent the last five years as an independent. A nice achievement, for sure, but that’s all it will be. The Islanders have a nice big man in 7-0 Chris Daniels, and, while not Greg Oden, he should be able to score inside against the Badgers. His ability to create second shots against a terrific rebounding team will be crucial if the Islanders want to stay close.
Wisconsin is a nice team, and I’ve been touting them all year, but they rarely blow people out. Yes, they beat Southern by 53 and have several double-digit conference wins, but they don’t attack you out of the gate like Ohio State does. They wear you down. They have possibly the toughest core of players of any team in the country and are tremendously disciplined on both ends of the floor. Alando Tucker is tough to guard and can score from multiple starting points and in various ways. If the Islanders are to have any chance of winning, they must slow down Tucker and make guys like Michael Flowers and Marcus Landry make outside shots.
Key Matchup: Corpus Christi’s outside shooters vs. Wisconsin’s perimeter defense. The Islanders can shoot the deep ball, making 40% as a team, and will need a bunch to stay in the game. Wisconsin’s Michael Flowers is as good as any perimeter defender in the Big Ten and will give guard Josh Washington, among others, trouble.
Prediction: Like I said, Wisconsin doesn’t blow people out, and I don’t think they’ll crush Texas A&M-Corpus Christi as badly as other 2-seeds would. With that said, the Badgers will still win easily, 74-60.
No. 8-seed Arizona Wildcats (20-10) vs. No. 9-seed Purdue Boilermakers (21-11)
Both played:
Virginia – Purdue won by 2 at home, Arizona fell short by 3 at Virginia.
Illinois – Both won, Purdue by 17, Arizona by 12.
Record vs. tournament teams:
Arizona: 8-9 (Stanford (2), New Mexico State, UNLV, Illinois, @Louisville, Memphis, Oregon)
Purdue: 5-7 (Virginia, Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Illinois, Michigan State, Indiana)
Studs:
Arizona: F Marcus Williams (16.8 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 50% FG), F Chase Budinger (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 49% FG), G Mustafa Shakur (12 ppg, 6.9 apg, 4 rpg)
Purdue: F Carl Landry (18.9 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 60% FG), G David Teague (14.3 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 43% 3-point)
Breakdown: An interesting matchup, as most 8-9 games are. Some had Arizona pegged as a Final Four team at the beginning of the season, and why not? The Cats have as much talent as any team in the country, but as has been the case in recent memory, haven’t been able to find the chemistry to match. They’ve fizzled out in the tournament before, and that scenario is possible again against a Purdue team that has a perfect style to frustrate Arizona.
If Arizona is to win, point guard Mustafa Shakur must take care of the ball. He’s averaged 3.5 turnovers per game this season and Purdue will be happy to take it from him. Shakur has been able to get his teammates involved, ranking third in the country in assists. The scoring can come from anywhere on the Arizona roster, and Shakur is the guy who needs to make it happen. But he’s a meltdown waiting to happen.
Purdue has two of the grittiest seniors in the Big Ten in forward Carl Landry and guard David Teague, and the Boilermakers won’t allow themselves to be blown out. They can slow the tempo of the game, working possession-by-possession and frustrating opponents. For the Wildcats, who thrive in an up-tempo game, this is dangerous. Will they be able to counter the Boilermakers’ stinginess and persistence on both ends? If they keep their heads clear and allow their talent to surface, they should come out on top.
Key Matchup: Carl Landry vs. Marcus Williams. Landry is dominant inside, as evidenced by his 60 percent field goal shooting. He also gets to the free throw line more than eight times a game. Williams has the athleticism to create some difficulty for Landry, but will he be able to deny him the ball? If Landry gets it in the paint, game over. On the other end, will Landry be able to stay with the much quicker Williams? Who will better exploit the mismatch?
Prediction: Although I’m hesitant to pick the most inconsistent team in the field, I think talent wins out. Arizona squeaks it out 69-66.
West Region
No. 7-seed Indiana Hoosiers (20-10) vs. No. 10-seed Gonzaga Bulldogs (23-10)
Both played:
Butler – Both lost, Indiana by 5, the Zags by 8.
Duke – Again, no wins, with Indiana falling by 3 in Durham and Gonzaga losing by 7 in New York.
Record vs. tournament teams:
Indiana: 5-8 (Illinois, Southern Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue, Wisconsin)
Gonzaga: 3-6 (North Carolina, Texas, Stanford)
Studs:
Indiana: F D.J. White (13.7 ppg, 7 rpg, 52% FG), G Roderick Wilmont (12.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 70 three-pointers)
Gonzaga: G Derek Raivio (18.2 ppg, 41% 3-point, 96% FT), G Jeremy Pargo (12.2 ppg, 4.6 apg, 4.4 rpg)
Breakdown: This is a battle of enigmatic squads. Indiana had a mid-season streak when they looked as good as any team in the country, but struggled down the stretch. The fall culminated in a Big Ten Tournament loss to Illinois in overtime. Gonzaga has some tremendous wins on the season, but lost to Loyola Marymount last month. And now, without stud big man Josh Heytvelt, they are scrambling to find inside contributions. Sean Mallon and Abdullahi Kuso are candidates, and the Zags will need both to contend with pesky D.J. White. Derek Raivio is a pillar, and while he may look like he’s 12, he makes clutch shots. He’s the reason Gonzaga is in the tournament. Oh, and don’t foul him.
Indiana has had big performances from just about everyone in their rotation. Roderick Wilmont has provided a spark lately, and is a prototypical Kelvin Sampson player. He’s tough, rebounds as well as anyone his size, and makes gutsy plays. He and White will provide a major challenge for Gonzaga.
Key Matchup: Indiana’s guards vs. Gonzaga’s guards. Derek Raivio and Jeremy Pargo are solid players, but have they seen a set of guards as tough as Indiana’s? The Hoosiers boast a stable of capable guards, all of whom can score. A.J. Ratliff joins Wilmont as the next guy in line, but don’t sleep on Armon Bassett, Earl Calloway or Joey Shaw. If Raivio and Pargo can score with this crew, they’ve got a shot.
Prediction: Gonzaga won’t recover from a brutal start against a much tougher team. Indiana hangs on to win 77-71.
No. 5-seed Virginia Tech Hokies (21-11) vs. No. 12-seed Illinois Fighting Illini (23-11)
Both played:
Iowa – The Hokies won 69-65, while the Illini split, winning by 4 at home and losing by 7 on the road.
Maryland – Virginia Tech handled the Terrapins 67-64, Illinois lost 72-66.
Record vs. tournament teams:
Virginia Tech: 8-4 (Duke (2), Old Dominion, @Duke, Maryland, @Georgia Tech, Virginia, Boston College)
Illinois: 6-9 (Indiana (2), Florida A&M, Miami (OH), Belmont, Michigan State)
Studs:
Virginia Tech: G Zabian Dowdell (18.3 ppg, 6 rpg, 3.3 apg), F Deron Washington (11.8 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 50% FG), G Jamon Gordon (11.3 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 4.6 apg)
Illinois: F Warren Carter (13.7 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 49% FG), C Shawn Pruitt (11.6 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 55% FG)
Breakdown: You know at least one No. 12 seed will pull the rug out from under a 5. If you’re riding Illinois as your choice, you’re doing so because of their defense. If you’re apprehensive about taking the Illini, it’s probably because of Virginia Tech’s defense.
This game should be a battle. Both teams hold their opponents to poor shooting and each squad forces over fifteen turnovers a contest. The Hokies’ backcourt duo of Zabian Dowdell and Jamon Gordon present a particularly daunting challenge. Gordon was the ACC’s defensive player of the year and Dowdell was first team all-defense. If Illini guards Chester Frazier and Rich McBride can beat the on-the-ball pressure and pound the ball inside, Illinois has a shot.
Virginia Tech takes care of the ball, shoots it well and presents athleticism mismatches for Illinois. Deron Washington has the ability to make big plays on the interior, but he’ll need to show newfound consistency to scare Illinois. The Hokies want to push this game into the 70s. If they can, Illinois won’t be able to keep up.
Key Matchup: Shawn Pruitt, Warren Carter and the rest of the Illini bigs vs. Virginia Tech’s frontcourt. Illinois out-rebounds their opponents by more than five boards a game, while Virginia Tech collected fewer on the season than their foes. If Illinois can exploit this advantage, and ambush the Hokies on the offensive glass, that gives Virginia Tech fewer possessions and leads to a lower-scoring game.
Prediction: Illinois keeps Virginia Tech in neutral for a while, but the Hokies adjust in the second half and break free. Hokies win 69-61.
East Region
No. 8-seed Marquette Golden Eagles (24-9) vs. No. 9-seed Michigan State Spartans (22-11)
Both played:
Oakland – Both cruised, each winning by 18 at home.
Record vs. tournament teams:
Marquette: 6-5 (Pittsburgh (2), Texas Tech, Duke, @Louisville, Villanova)
Michigan State: 6-9 (Texas, BYU, Belmont, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana)
Studs:
Marquette: G Dominic James (14.8 ppg, 5 apg, 1.9 spg), G Jerel McNeal (14.7 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 2.6 spg), G Wes Matthews (12.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg)
Michigan State: G Drew Neitzel (18.1 ppg, 4.3 apg, 42% 3FG), C Goran Suton (9.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 51% FG)
Breakdown: By now you know the storyline: Tom Izzo tutored Tom Crean while he was an assistant at MSU before Crean landed the Marquette gig. The two remain close friends and agreed to never schedule games against each other. Oh that sneaky selection committee.
Michigan State, lacking a scoring punch, has fallen back on its sturdy defense and tenacious rebounding to grind out wins. They hold their opponents to 57 points a game, and they need to. That’s not good news for the cold-shooting Golden Eagles, who, despite their lightning-rod talents, struggle to put the ball through the net. They shoot poorly overall, are worse from downtown, and can be downright atrocious from the charity stripe.
Despite their shortcomings, Marquette, specifically PG Dominic James, keep their trigger fingers ready. James hit only 26 percent of his deep balls on the year, yet still jacked it up a team-high 174 times. And you can bet MSU will have a hand in his face. Conversely, the Golden Eagles thrive on their pressure perimeter defense, which should be emboldened by the return of Big East defensive player of the year Jerel McNeal. Marquette averages nearly nine thefts a game, and MSU has been happy to oblige opponents, coughing it up fifteen times a game.
Finally, Michigan State’s deliberate, physical style may present a problem for the foul-happy Eagles. McNeal fouled out six times this season, and fellow guard Wes Matthews didn’t finish four games.
Key Matchup: Dominic James vs. Drew Neitzel and MSU’s help defense. James will get by Neitzel, that’s just a fact. The Spartans, well-schooled defensively, will have to help in the lane and force James to kick it out or take tough shots. James has been more willing to get teammates involved lately, and his penetration creates easy shots for Marquette. The Spartans need to pack the middle and force Marquette to make some jump shots.
Prediction: MSU holds opponents under 40 percent shooting, and this game will be no different. The shots don’t fall for Marquette. Michigan State wins 74-68.
