Bracketology: Bubble Watch and a mailbag full of questions

Making the field of 68 is a big deal, so we dive in with another look at the Bubble of Bracketology and our first Busting Brackets mailbag!

Welcome to our first Busting Brackets mailbag and another edition of Bubble Watch!

In our mailbag, I took to Twitter looking for questions regarding Bracketology, the bubble, or just the general college basketball world. Below, I answer the questions I received prior to getting into the Bubble Watch for this week.

If you still have questions about any of these topics, we’ll be back soon for another edition. Well, without further ado, let’s get started.

As both Villanova and Kansas fell to likely tournament teams on the road, I think that this question comes down to Tennessee and Louisville. All in all, I think that the difference comes in “most impressive.” Louisville putting a bubble team’s home crowd to sleep in a 55-point rout is no doubt impressive. As for Tennessee’s win, I think the better word is surprising. No doubt Tennessee has played a tough schedule (nine games against the RPI top-50), but this was their first time capitalizing on one of those opportunities.

Not to take away from great wins by both Marquette and West Virginia, but I think I give the nod for most impressive to Louisville.

As mentioned in a follow-up tweet by Matt, “actually good” is qualified by “making the tournament and winning a game.”

Although the Big Ten is not as strong as it has been in past years, it is still a major conference and will likely receive a number of bids. After Purdue, Wisconsin, and Maryland, the race for the fourth spot in the Big Ten is very much up in the air.

Minnesota is 3-4 against the RPI top-50, with two of those losses coming to Michigan State. With the resume that they currently have, I think it is fair to say that making the tournament is most than likely for the Golden Gophers. As for winning a game, that is a different story.

In my latest Bracketology update from Monday, Minnesota received a seven seed, matched up against the 10 seed VCU. For a reference point on how Minnesota has played against teams around the 7-11 seed range, let’s see their track record so far this season.

— 85-71 win over Arkansas at home

— 70-66 win over Northwestern on the road

— 75-74 loss to Michigan State at home

— 65-47 loss to Michigan State on the road

This 2-2 record is not a great indicator, but four of the team’s five losses have come against the top-50. Plus, both of their losses came to the same in-conference opponent, which they will not be matched up with in the Big Dance. Although not a definitive answer to the question, I would say the current mood of a Minnesota fan should be cautiously optimistic. 

As for the second part of the question, I think there is still room to be excited about next season for Minnesota. All three leading scorers will return from a likely tournament team this year and could stay in competition for a tournament bid next season as well.

At 6’9,” Swanigan will play the four in the NBA with a variety of skills. Although from the shorter three-point line, Swanigan upped his three-point percentage from his freshman year (29.2%) to his sophomore year (50.0%) by 20.8 percentage points. With the NBA game changing towards a more stretch-four style of play, Swanigan could fit in quickly to an NBA organization as a rookie. Next to Ethan Happ of Wisconsin, “Biggie” is one of the best bigs in the Big Ten Conference and has a reasonable future ahead of him.

Even though he is an outstanding college player, it seems as though he could end up being a second-round pick in the NBA Draft. Nonetheless, we have seen second-rounders have immense success in the past, so it is not out of the question.

As for a comparison, this is where things get tricky. Due to his athletic advantage in college, Swanigan is able to snag a ton of rebounds, but these numbers are due to decrease at the next level, as is his three-point percentage with the deeper line. There are not many players who combine Swanigan’s ability to rebound and shoot the deep ball in the NBA.

This comparison might not account for Biggie’s improvement on defense, but possibly a high-scoring big like Enes Kanter would make sense. And although Swanigan has better range, his play is somewhat similar to somebody like Greg Monroe as an inside scorer who can rebound.

That concludes our mailbag for this week, so let’s get into the Bubble Watch. Once again, here is a brief look at how the system works.

Categories for the Bubble Watch:

Lead-Pipe Lock: These are teams that are guarantees to make the tournament and there is such a small likelihood that they miss the tournament that they are categorized as “locks.” This is the first week that this section is active.

Some Perspiration: These are teams that should make the tournament. They are likely already in the Bracketology prior to this Bubble Watch and are usually in with room to spare.

Better double up on the deodorant: These teams are very much on the fence. They could be in the tournament at the time, but there is very little room between them being in and them being out. Most of these teams are out of the tournament looking for wins to play their way in.

Also, if there is a team not mentioned in this edition of the Bubble Watch that should be, don’t worry. There is plenty of time left for teams to work their way up onto the bubble and potentially into the tournament.

For any questions or comments on this Bubble Watch, tweet your thoughts at @BustingBrackets or @hardwiredsports (that’s me!).