The Pac-12 won’t have as many national title contenders as say the Big Ten or ACC, but with 8 teams likely to be competitive for an NCAA bid, the Pac-12 will be plenty relevant next year.                                                                                                                                                              

For a description of the lineup-based model that generated these results, click here. For a description of column headings, click here.

Arizona: I love what NBC’s Rob Dauster wrote here. For Arizona to reach its full potential, elite recruit Aaron Gordon has to play the power forward position. Arizona doesn’t need a repeat of what we saw with Baylor’s Perry Jones who floated too much on the perimeter and fell from the 8th ranked prospect out of high school to the 28th pick in the NBA draft.

Arizona’s ideal forward rotation would be a three man split between Kaleb Tarczewski, Brandon Ashley and Gordon. To reach its full potential, the team doesn’t want to have to rely on Matt Korchek or Zach Peters for major minutes next year.

That doesn’t mean Gordon cannot display his perimeter skills. He can draw opposing bigs out by shooting threes and then blow by them to the hoop. That doesn’t mean Gordon might not start at the small forward position. A starting lineup of transfer PG TJ McConnell, returning star Nick Johnson, Gordon, Ashley, and Tarczweski is certainly a possibility. But the team would be better off getting Rondae Hollis-Jefferson on the court at the SF position as much as possible, and if that means playing Gordon at the PF position, so be it.

UCLA: UCLA recently added forward Wannah Bail to provide more depth in the front court. Prior to Bail joining the team, the model had no choice but to assume all the post minutes were going to go to The Wear twins and Tony Parker who are all talented high potential athletes. But if Alford plays Bail some minutes, because Bail wasn’t rated as highly out of high school, the model thinks Bail is only going to be a drag on the offense. Thus UCLA slipped a few spots in the Top 25 since my last projection.

This is one of the things I plan to tweak in the model going forward. I think players should generally only have positive option value. If Bail isn’t very good, Alford doesn’t have to play him. There really is no downside risk to having another post option.

On the other hand, there probably is something to be said about having a tight lineup. Part of why Missouri’s offense was so crisp two years ago is that they literally only had seven guys to play. If Alford sticks to playing his seven highly rated athletes (Kyle Anderson, Jordan Adams, Norman Powell, freshman Zach LaVine, Parker, and the Wear twins), that seven man rotation may be able to develop incredible chemistry with one another. But the fear of foul trouble, exhaustion, and the desire to prepare players for the future will probably lead Alford to give some minutes to the less highly rated freshmen in his incoming class.

Colorado: I was a little surprised that Colorado didn’t fall out of more people’s Top 25 rankings with the loss of Andre Roberson. Part of that may be Roberson’s offensive regression last year. Roberson’s shooting percentage was down across the board, and he had a career worst turnover rate. But Roberson wasn’t just valuable because of his offense; Roberson was a truly elite defensive player. Roberson had a ridiculous 27 percent defensive rebounding rate and was the only Colorado player with a defensive rebounding rate above 15 percent last year. He was also an incredible shot-blocker and ball-thief. And he posted great numbers in defensive boards, blocks, and steals throughout his career. My model is predicting that Colorado will take a step back on defense this year without Roberson in the lineup.

Offensively, I expect a big jump. Xavier Johnson, Spencer Dinwiddie, and Josh Scott are young and talented players who are only going to get better. And while Askia Booker really struggled with his three point shooting last year, he is still an asset. Top 100 recruit TreShaun Fletcher will be too. That starting lineup has a lot of people excited.

But there are questions about offensive depth. Last year Colorado’s bench was dreadful. Despite being low volume shooters, Jeremy Adams, Shane Harris-Tunks, Xavier Talton, and Eli Stalzer were not Pac-12 caliber players. Two of those players have transferred. The result is that Colorado is probably going to end up giving a bunch of bench minutes to freshmen again this year.  Expect Colorado to have a lot of games where they win the first five minutes, but then fall behind once some of the reserves take the court.

Now that doesn’t mean Colorado won’t be good. Tad Boyle has been remarkably good at developing offensive players and playing the best basketball at the end of the season. That should continue and Colorado’s offense should take a big step up from last year. But in the final evaluation, my model places them 27th nationally, not in the Top 25.

Final note: The Buffaloes have a chance to be truly elite in 2014 because none of their key players are seniors.

Stanford: No team vexes me more than Stanford. The Cardinal show up as 28th in my model nationally, which seems way too high to me. Stanford struggled mightily down the stretch last year, and even if they return 88 percent of their offensive possessions from last year, I wasn’t in love with last year’s lineup. Johnny Dawkins has been at Stanford for five years and while his teams have generally been competitive, they have never been to the NCAA tournament yet. In fact, they’ve never finished better than 6th in the conference. To project them at 28th suggests this team is close to a tournament lock.

But I’m not the only one to see some value in this team. Jason King slotted the Cardinal in his initial Top 25. And I do understand where the numbers are coming from. Stanford actually had solid margin of victory numbers last year, finishing 50th in the country. They simply lost a ton of close games. In fact, they were 323rd in terms of luck according to kenpom.com.

And next year’s team should be very experienced. They will likely put together a solid 10-player rotation without a single freshman. They won’t have the growing pains of other teams and that will help them tremendously early in the season. They may be able to pull off a few non-conference upsets based on experience alone. And yet, I still can’t get that excited about this team.

Washington: When UCLA was looking for a new coach, Lorenzo Romar’s name came up a few times as a possibility. I get the feeling Washington fans weren’t terribly worried about losing him. It isn’t that they don’t respect what Romar has done with the team. But with just three NCAA appearances in the last seven years, and three more key seniors starters departing, it feels like the program isn’t trending in the right direction.

But the model is way more optimistic. First, the team returns its best player (by far) in CJ Wilcox.

Second, the team adds Nigel Williams-Goss at PG. Williams-Goss might be the best recruit anyone picks up this year. He is an incredibly intelligent and hard-working player, the kind of player that improves the character of a basketball team. And while he is good enough to lead his team from Day 1, he isn’t a super-athlete. He doesn’t have NBA teams salivating over him for next year. To get an instant impact player who might stick around for several years is the ideal situation.

Third, the team adds San Francisco transfer Perris Blackwell, a forward who dominated in the WCC. While the WCC isn’t quite at the Pac-12 level, Blackwell has played against NCAA tournament caliber teams like Gonzaga, St. Mary’s, and BYU on a regular a basis. The team also adds JUCO small forward Mike Anderson.

Fourth, Shawn Kemp Jr. will be healthy from the start of the year and that should help his development.

Finally, while many of the backups on last year’s team weren’t stars, they were still solid. Players like Andrew Andrews should be ready for an expanded role.

Overall, Washington can go a solid eight players deep without needing to depend on any unranked freshmen recruits. Saying this team returns just 55 percent of its minutes is deceiving. The combination of experience and talent at the top should put Washington back in the tournament.

California: If you want to be pessimistic, let me hand you some ammunition.

-California was lucky to make the NCAA tournament last year. They had the 56th best margin-of-victory numbers nationally which normally wouldn’t make the cut.

-The team’s best offensive player, Allen Crabbe, declared for the draft.

-Last year was Montgomery’s worst offensive team in his five years at California. And Tyrone Wallace was Montgomery’s personal kryptonite. Montgomery stuck by the shooting guard and Top 100 recruit even though he couldn’t make a perimeter shot to save his life (22 of 98 on the year). And Wallace is expected to return and play a similarly large role in the offense this year.

-The team gave tons of rotation time to Brandon Smith even though over four years he proved his idea of offense was dribbling into traffic and losing the ball. If he was good enough to play major minutes after four years of struggles, that suggests the players sitting on the bench aren’t ready.

-That means the team is probably going to rely a lot on a group of three-star freshmen. There will be some growing pains with that endeavor.

Still, let’s not get overly pessimistic. With four quality starters (Justin Cobbs, David Kravish, Richard Solomon, and instant impact recruit Jabari Bird), and a coach who has dominated the Pac-12 for most of his career, there is plenty to work with. California may not be a lock for the tournament, but they’ll be in the hunt.

Click here for a discussion of Arizona St., Oregon, and the rest of the league.

Last fall on Basketball Prospectus I introduced the first ever lineup-based predictions model. Even -though I intend to make improvements to the model over the summer, since I already have the programming code written, today I wanted to rerun the first version of the model and see what it tells us about the 2013-2014 season.

The biggest problem is guessing which players will declare for the draft. I haven’t seen an official announcement for Nerlens Noel or Shabazz Muhammad, but I think it is clear they are both leaving. I also assume that anyone who can make this year’s lottery would be foolish not to leave. Thus I assume Ben McLemore, Marcus Smart, Victor Oladipo, Otto Porter, and Trey Burke are gone. Michael Carter-Williams never struck me as an obvious lottery choice this year, but the consensus seems to be that the scouts like his size and NCAA tournament play, so I project him as leaving.  Similarly a slew of big guys seem likely to go pro from Gorgui Dieng, to Cody Zeller, to Alex Len, to Kelly Olynyk.

Notably, I’m not going to assume Doug McDermott and Russ Smith come back. I understand there isn’t much more they can accomplish in college, but based on the draft projections I have seen, neither player is guaranteed to be a first round pick right now.  I think that if you are not certain to get a guaranteed contract in the NBA, the risk of leaving is pretty high. Thus I’m going to assume these players return, even though that may be a dubious conclusion.

 Key:

Pred Off, Pred Def, Pred Pythag: The predicted points scored and allowed per 100 possessions, and predicted winning percentage against an average D1 team on a neutral floor.

Returning Minutes, Possessions: The loss of high possession players can be a larger detriment to the offense, thus I list percentage of returning possessions in addition to returning minutes.

T100: Number of players who were Top 100 recruits out of high school. People focus on Top 100 freshmen, but Top 100 players are also more likely to become breakout stars later in their career.

Last Pythag: Last year’s Pythagorean winning percentage according to Kenpom.com. This is essentially a measure of each team’s margin-of-victory in 2012-13.

Kentucky: The Wildcats have the most talent by far, and the most NBA potential, by far. The only question is time. Can John Calipari teach such a wide array of talent to play together in one year? In three of his four years, John Calipari has managed to get the Wildcats to play elite defense. The model hedges its bets and says the defense might not come together that quickly. (The fact that defense-lacking Kyle Witjer is still going to play meaningful minutes is also a concern.) But with all those Top 20 recruits, and all those highly ranked returning sophomores, it is very hard to predict anything other than a special offensive team.

Michigan St.: I’m assuming Gary Harris is coming back based on Tom Izzo’s comments. When a Top 10 Big Ten squad returns basically all its key players, it is hard not to have high expectations. Kenny Kaminski will be healthy. Denzel Valentine and Matt Costello both remain high potential guys who should see a sophomore leap in efficiency. And Harris, Keith Appling, Branden Dawson, and Adreian Payne are as good a returning set of four starters as you will find. Michigan St. might not be the most talented team in the country, but they have fewer lineup questions than just about anyone.

North Carolina: The Tar Heels will be back. The two biggest lineup issues this year were point-guard and one of the forward slots.  We already saw glimpses of point guard Marcus Paige’s improved play late in the year and he should be a star in year two. I can’t tell you exactly who will develop as a post compliment to James McAdoo, but someone will. Whether it will be freshman Isaiah Hicks or Kennedy Meeks, or (after a summer of working out in the gym) Brice Johnson or Joel James, the Tar Heels have four former elite high school post players to choose from. At least one of them will be ready. Overall, North Carolina has more Top 100 talent than anyone else.

Louisville: With players like Montrezl Harrell playing well in limited time this year, Louisville has a chance to go to the Final Four again. But this high ranking depends on Russ Smith’s return. Without Smith, the team will be putting a heavy burden on incoming freshman point guard Terry Rozier. Rozier isn’t in this year’s ESPN’s Top 100 because he needed a year of prep school, but he was a consensus Top 100 recruit last year. RSCI had him 75th.

Florida: Don’t be scared away because the Gators return only 54% of their offense from last year. The Gators add two instant impact recruitsin Kasey Hill and Chris Walker, along with two transfers who were former Top 100 players, Damontre Harris and Dorian Finney-Smith. If the point-guard Hill lives up to his hype, Florida might be even better than last year. They will certainly be deeper.

Michigan: The further development of Mitch McGary, Glen Robinson, and the addition of another stellar recruiting class should help overcome the loss of Trey Burke. But if additional players declare for the draft, Michigan’s expectations could slip.

Arizona: My gut tells me Arizona may be a little too low here. Arizona loses a lot of production, but they have the right pieces coming in. Point guard TJ McConnell was phenomenal at Duquesne and unlike Mark Lyons, McConnell is more of a natural PG. Aaron Gordon and Rondae Hollis-Jefferson should be instant-impact recruits. And the returning sophomores on the front line should be better in year two. The model is mostly concerned whether Sean Miller can bring together an elite defensive team. Last year was Miller’s best defensive team yet, but it still wasn’t an elite defensive team. Until Miller gets his team to play great defense for a full season, there will always be reasons to be skeptical.

Marquette: Vander Blue, Davante Gardner, and Jamil Wilson are back. Buzz Williams has his best recruiting class yet, and the team should have more Top 100 talent than it has ever had in his tenure. Plus Buzz Williams gets the most out of his players by studying the data and eliminating bad possessions. Still, even if the model likes Marquette as a top 10 team, I am concerned that Williams typically has a short-leash with his freshmen. And if they don’t contribute, Marquette may still lack the talent to be an elite team.

Duke: Quinn Cook hasn’t been dominant yet, but he was a Top 10 recruit out of high school, and he is still a high potential player. Andre Dawkins should return from his sabbatical and paired with Rasheed Sulaimon on the perimeter, the Duke back-court looks strong. In the front-court, Amile Jefferson was a solid offensive player when filling in for Ryan Kelly and Jabari Parker is an instant impact recruit. And don’t overlook Mississippi St. transfer Rodney Hood. Duke loses a lot, but the lineup still looks dominant.

Wisconsin: Once again, a model based on the tempo free numbers loves Bo Ryan’s squad. I’m skeptical, but the lineup does look legitimate next year. Remember Josh Gasser is coming back after missing all of last year with an injury. The team’s most important scorer Ben Brust is back. Frank Kaminsky played well in limited minutes. And most importantly, Sam Dekker might be the best post player Bo Ryan has ever had. Seriously, the Badgers lose 45% of their possessions from last year, and the tempo free model still loves them.

Click here for Teams 11 to 25.

Inconsistency can be a good thing. Illinois is a borderline NCAA tournament team this year. But thanks to the peaks of their inconsistency, the Fighting Illini won the Maui invitational, won at Butler, and beat the top ranked Hoosiers. Sure, the Illini were blown out by 20 at home by Northwestern, but the season wouldn’t have nearly been as fun if the Northwestern and Indiana victories were flipped.

On the flip side, if your team is a national title contender, inconsistency is a bad thing. If you want to win six games in the NCAA tournament, you cannot afford to have lapses every few games. In the next table, I attempt to determine which teams are most likely to have those lapses.

I take the teams in the Top 16 of the Pomeroy Rankings and figure out how often they look beatable on the basketball court. Determining a cut-off for beatable is somewhat hard, but I decided to count any game where the team’s game-specific Pythagorean Rating would be less than 0.9000. (Pythagorean Rating adjusts for opponent and venue as on kenpom.com.) 

This cut-off is quite different from counting losses. A team doesn’t have to lose to have a bad game. Miami’s two-point win at Clemson and one-point win at Boston College were bad games even though the Hurricanes ultimately prevailed. Those games showed Miami was beatable, even when at full strength. Similarly, Michigan St.’s three-point home win against Louisiana-Lafayette was one of the worst performances of the season by an elite team, even if the Spartans were victorious.

On the flip side, by using the 0.9000 cutoff, a few losses will not be counted as bad performances. Michigan lost by three at Ohio St. and in overtime at Wisconsin, but neither of those count as bad games. Florida lost by one point at Arizona and Georgetown lost in OT to Indiana, but those do not count as bad games either.

One thing I noticed is that a lot of games against teams ranked 300+ in the rankings looked like bad performances. Even if you beat a team ranked 300+ by 20 points, that doesn’t look like a dominant game because everyone beats those teams by 20 points. But I don’t think a 20-point win should ever count against a team, so I’m throwing those games out. The table only includes games against teams ranked 1-300 in the Pomeroy Rankings.

Surprisingly, this metric paints a different picture than the Pomeroy rankings. While Indiana and Louisville have had disappointing moments this season, the truth is that both teams rarely look beatable. Indiana and Louisville have only played poorly about 15 percent of the time this year. Conversely, Kansas has looked beatable 43 percent of the time. And while Michigan St. has played better in-conference, the Spartans were simply pedestrian throughout the non-conference schedule. 

Next, I wanted to look for the common-denominator in these bad performances.  This can be different from an overall weakness. For example, Florida’s overall weakness is getting to the free throw line. But that does not explain what happens when the Gators play poorly. When the Gators play poorly the problem is that the defense isn’t playing at an elite level. In the five games listed above, the Gator’s opponents have an eFG% of 52 percent compared to 41 percent during the rest of the season. 

When Teams Play Poorly 

Indiana: The Hoosiers struggle most in slow-paced games where their opponents avoid turnovers. Presumably, the Hoosiers do not want to see a team like Notre Dame running the burn offense in their bracket. The Hoosiers have been nearly identical on offense in their good and bad games. But forcing turnovers is key to their defensive success, and when they don’t force turnovers, the Hoosiers are beatable.

Louisville: The 0.9000 cutoff is a little generous for Louisville. Both the Syracuse and Georgetown losses do not count as bad games. If we raised the cutoff to 0.9100, Louisville would actually have two more bad games on their ledger. Still, I think Louisville’s bad performances are illuminating. In the team’s four worst performances on the season (the loss to Villanova, a home squeaker against Kentucky, a home squeaker against Illinois St., and the loss to Notre Dame), Russ Smith has struggled to make good decisions with the basketball. Louisville needs Russ Smith to play well to win. Louisville also plays poorly when a lot of fouls are called in the game and they cannot force clean turnovers.

Michigan: If Russ Smith is an indicator of whether Louisville will win or lose, Tim Hardaway Jr. is equally important for Michigan. Hardaway had an ORtg of 19 in the team’s loss at Michigan St., an ORtg of 68 at Bradley, and an ORtg of 73 vs Penn St. The other issue for the Wolverines is offensive rebounds. Michigan is not a great offensive rebounding team, but in the Wolverines worst offensive games, they’ve seen their offensive rebounding percentage plummet from 34% to 26%. Finally, Michigan’s biggest strength is avoiding fouls, but against a team like Wisconsin, that doesn’t need to get to the free throw line to score, that asset was less valuable. Mid-majors like Creighton or South Dakota St. could be a nightmare for Michigan, because both teams can score without needing to get to the free throw line, and both teams do a solid job on the defensive glass.

Florida: When the Gators play poorly, it is usually about shooting. They shoot worse and their opponents shoot better. That’s a little hard to predict, but one thing to keep in mind, Florida does seem to do better when the pace is in the 50s. Missouri and Arkansas had success against Florida by upping the tempo. But this isn’t all about turnovers. Florida played poorly against Kansas St. in a game where they didn’t turn the ball over much at all. I think a team like Memphis that can push the ball up and down and attack before the Florida defense gets set, might be the true kryptonite for the Gators.

Duke: Duke’s five worst performances have come since Ryan Kelly went down. But before we get too excited about his return, remember that not all players return from injury and dominate. Mike Moser is still getting back into shape for UNLV, and we cannot guarantee that Ryan Kelly will return Duke to early season form. For Duke, throwing off the pace also seems like a big deal. They struggled in a very slow game at Boston College, and in very high-paced games at Maryland and Miami FL. With Kelly out and Seth Curry playing through an injury, I don’t think Duke wants to play high possession games quite like in past seasons.

Syracuse: Syracuse’s weaknesses are the typical ones with a zone defense. If a team has a forward who can dominate from the high post (see Davante Gardner), that team can carve up Syracuse. And as is typical with the zone, when Syracuse doesn’t grab defensive rebounds, the Orange do not play well. Syracuse struggled with defensive rebounding in narrow wins over Cincinnati and Detroit and losses to Pittsburgh, Connecticut, Villanova, and Temple. A strong offensive rebounding team like Colorado St. or Minnesota is presumably Syracuse’s worst nightmare. This year, without depth on the perimeter, Brandon Triche is also a concern. Triche isn’t a perfect predictor of Syracuse’s poor play (he did play well against Temple and Villanova), but when Triche is struggling, Syracuse also typically struggles. Finally, Syracuse struggles in slow-paced games this year. Because they are not a great half-court team, Syracuse needs transition opportunities to play well.

Pittsburgh: When Pittsburgh plays poorly, it is usually about the offense not working. Their adjusted offense is 123.1 in their good games and 104.9 in their bad games. Teams that have perimeter depth and can keep Tray Woodall, James Robinson, and Lamar Patterson out of the lane are Pittsburgh’s biggest problem. Guard-oriented teams from Rutgers to Cincinnati to Marquette to Michigan have been able to do that.

Arizona: The Wildcats might win the Pac-12, but seven of Arizona’s eight bad performances have come in conference play, so I am worried that this team is not peaking. Arizona is a team that really relies on getting to the free throw line, and teams that avoid fouls can be Arizona’s kryptonite. In the tournament, Arizona does not want to see a team that can defend well without fouling. Whether it would be a team with size (like Maryland) or just good fundamentals (like Wisconsin), there are a lot of teams that fit this profile.

Gonzaga: Gonzaga hasn’t been challenged much lately, so it is hard to find a stat that really does the job, but I’m going to focus on defensive rebounding. Since Gonzaga does not have a great eFG% defense, they cannot afford to give up second chance points. Teams like San Diego and Santa Clara hung with the Zags in conference play by crashing the glass. In most games Gonzaga grabs 72% of the defensive boards, but that percentage has dipped to 66% in their worst games. Gonzaga’s defensive rebounding also nearly cost them the game against Washington St. Gonzaga’s defense also has trouble containing great point-guards, but there are not enough of those in the WCC to really prove the point.

Ohio St.: Ohio St. has been Jekyll and Hyde defensively this year. In the 16 good games, the adjusted defensive efficiency has been 83.3. But in the team’s 9 worst performances on the year, the adjusted defense has only been 97.9. It seems like the Buckeyes have struggled more with perimeter-oriented-teams. Northwestern, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Illinois have all made the Buckeye defense look porous this year by shooting lights out. But you have to blame the Ohio St. offense a little too. When the team falls behind, because the offense isn’t good enough to score points in bunches, they have to take more chances defensively. And those gambles have led to some ugly final margins. Really, I wish someone could explain why Ohio St.’s defense is so bad in some games, because I really believe defense is Ohio St.’s strength.

Georgetown: Georgetown’s worst games have come at a slow pace against mediocre teams. See Liberty, Towson, and South Florida. They also usually involved a horrible offensive performance by the team, but that has been changing. Only one of the Hoyas bad performances has come in February, the narrow win at Rutgers.

Miami: Miami should probably be a little higher on this list, because some of the worst performances (like the Florida Gulf Coast game) came with personnel missing. Still, I think it is revealing that four of Miami’s worst performances have come in February. Miami may only have one ACC loss, but that doesn’t mean they have been dominant every time out. Much like Georgetown, Miami has struggled against some bad teams (Boston College, Wake Forest).

Kansas: Kansas has looked like an average team remarkably often this season. When the offense isn’t working, turnovers are almost always to blame. Kansas has to feed Ben McLemore and Jeff Withey to score consistently, and teams that can take the ball away on entry passes are potentially a big problem for the Jayhawks. A team like Robert Morris could be a nightmare first round opponent, given the Colonials ability to create turnovers. This is especially true given that Kansas has struggled against mediocre teams this year from Chattanooga to TCU.

Oklahoma St.: Oklahoma St. is not a great shooting team, particularly from the perimeter. So they need offensive rebounds and free throws to compete. Baylor and Virginia Tech avoided fouls and beat the Cowboys. Kansas St. crashed the defensive glass and did the same thing.

Michigan St: While most of the Spartans mediocre performances came in the non-conference schedule, the Spartans have struggled to put away Penn St. and Nebraska in conference play too. The story for Michigan St. always seems to be about turnovers, good or bad. When the Spartans force them, they win. When the Spartans give the ball away, they look bad.

Wisconsin: Wisconsin has seven games where they were completely dominant. In the blowout wins over Ohio St., Northwestern, Illinois, Cornell, California, and Southeastern Louisiana, and the big time win at Indiana the Badgers had a Pythagorean winning percentage above 0.9900. But over the rest of the schedule the Badgers have been remarkably pedestrian. As the numbers listed above show, Wisconsin has looked beatable on 14 occasions. It usually comes down to shooting. In Wisconsin’s 11 best games of the year, they have an eFG% of 54%. In the 14 games where they were beatable, the Badgers eFG% has only been 44%. Even if Wisconsin has snuck back into the Top 10 of Sagarin’s Predictor and Pomeroy’s rankings, with that kind of offensive inconsistency, they do not look like a Final Four team.