After looking at all of the matchups in this year's NCAA Tournament, I've picked the 16 teams that I believe will still be standing at the end of this weekend.  I'll break it down by region:

Midwest:

#4 Maryland: The Terrapins had a seven-game winning streak snapped by their first-round loss to Miami in the ACC Tourney.  That might not be a bad thing, as Maryland will be a well-rested team going into the NCAAs.  They posted two wins over Duke this year, along with a home win against North Carolina.  With freshman point guard Greivis Vasquez creating shots for Maryland's scoring threats, the Terrapins will be one of the most dangerous teams in the Tournament.

#8 Arizona: Arizona's primed to pull off the upset over Florida in the second round, as the Wildcats are one of the only teams that has enough size to matchup with the Gators.  6'7" forwards Marcus Williams and Chase Budinger, along with 6'9" Ivan Radenovic, are major scoring threats.  Also, Arizona will be well-rested after losing to Oregon in the quarterfinals of the Pac-10 Tournament.

#3 Oregon: Oregon's athletic guards were too much for opponents to handle in the Pac-10 Tournament.  The Ducks have won six in a row, and they've won their last five games by double digits.  They're one of the hottest teams entering the NCAA Tournament.

#10 Georgia Tech: Georgia Tech has one of the most explosive point guards in the country in Javaris Crittendon (14.6 ppg, 5.7 apg), and freshman forward Thaddeus Young complements him well (14.6 ppg, 4.9 rpg).  Georgia Tech had wins over North Carolina and Boston College at the end of the season, before losing to Wake Forest, 112-114, in the ACC Tournament.  Georgia Tech's athleticism will be too much for Wisconsin in the second round, as the Badgers interior defense could struggle with Brian Butch out.

West:

#2 UCLA: Even though the Bruins lost their last two games of the season, they're 26-5 (15-3 in the difficult Pac-10).  They'll be rested and ready to make a Tournament run.

#14 Wright State: Senior point guard Dashaun Wood (19.8 ppg, 3.9 apg) breaks down defenses, shoots the three-pointer, and causes turnovers on defense.  Wright State went 11-1 to end the season with their only loss coming at Youngstown State in a relatively meaningless regular-season finale (when the conference title was already clinched).  Wright State beat Butler twice in the last month of the season, which shows that they're capable of upending the nation's top teams.

#5 Virginia Tech: The Hokies beat North Carolina twice, won at Duke, and beat Maryland at home.  While they lost three of four to end the regular season, those losses might actually be good for motivation in the days leading up to the Tournament.  Virginia Tech is a balanced offensive team, with four players averaging over 10 ppg, and they have considerable depth, with nine players logging over 10 minutes per game.  The Hokies are also an efficient squad, shooting 47.2% while allowing opponents a 41.7 FG%.  Plus, Virginia Tech's size could cause matchup problems for likely second-round opponent Southern Illinois, as Virginia Tech boasts three 6'9" forwards.

#1 Kansas: The Jayhawks are probably the best team in the country right now.  They finished with a 30-4 regular season record and dominated the Big 12 (14-2).  Villanova's high-octane offense could be a tough test in the second round, but Kansas can run with anyone.  

East:

#8 Michigan State: If Drew Neitzel avoids a cold stretch of shooting, the Spartans could go far with their excellent efficiency (47.1 FG% and 38.3 opponents' FG%).  Against the offensive-minded Marquette and North Carolina, Michigan State's defensive prowess should send them to the Sweet 16.

#5 USC: The Trojans were embarrassed, 57-81, in the Pac-10 championship game, so they'll have some extra motivation in the early rounds of the NCAA Tournament.  With stout interior defense from 6'9" freshman Taj Gibson, along with experienced guard play from junior Nick Young (17.4 ppg), senior Lodrick Stewart (14 ppg), and junior Gabe Pruitt (12.6 ppg), USC has the necessary balance to go far.  Also, it'll help that USC avoids a tough second-round matchup with Texas, who will get knocked out in the first round by New Mexico State.  The Longhorns' immaturity and defensive ineptitude will lead to their early exit.

#3 Washington State: Washington State finished 13-5 in the Pac-10, which is arguably the best conference in college basketball this season.  They win with great team defense (40.5 FG% allowed) and an efficient offense (46.5 FG%).  They'll also have an easy road to the Sweet 16 with either Vanderbilt or George Washington being their second-round opponent.

#2 Georgetown: 7'2" Roy Hibbert makes life difficult for anyone trying to drive the lanes, and 6'9" Jeff Green is good at almost every aspect of the game.  Georgetown boasts a 50.6 FG%, while playing stingy defense (38.3 FG% allowed).  I can't wait for the Hoyas to play Washington State in what should be one of the best matchups of the Tournament.

South:

#1 Ohio State: The Buckeyes, who finished the season 30-3, with a 15-1 record in the Big 10, have an easy road to the Sweet 16.  They'll play either BYU or Xavier in the second round, and it's questionable whether either team belongs in this field.

#12 Long Beach State: Long Beach enters the Tournament on a six-game winning streak, and they've won 11 of their last 12.  All five starters are seniors, and four of them average over 10 ppg, so their balanced, high-scoring offense will cause problems for opponents.  Tennessee is ill-equipped for Long Beach, as the Volunteers allow a 45.7 FG%, while shooting only 44.3% on offense.  Virginia will be tougher, but they looked vulnerable against N.C. State in the ACC Tournament.

#3 Texas A&M: The Aggies are still stinging from their last-second loss to Oklahoma State in the Big 12 quarterfinals, but the extra rest is probably an advantage for a team that has championship aspirations.  Texas A&M is extremely physical inside, and they consistently hit their outside shots.  Their 50.1 FG% and 37.2 opponents' FG% rivals Georgetown's excellent numbers.  And you have to love the experience of the Aggies, as they're led by senior Acie Law IV, senior Antana Kavaliauskas, and junior Joseph Jones.

#2 Memphis: Memphis has an easy road to the Sweet 16, as they'll likely face #10 Creighton in the second round because #7 Nevada has struggled since they lost senior guard Kyle Shiloh to an injury.  I thought that a full-strength Nevada team would lead to a great matchup with Memphis in the second-round; unfortunately, that probably won't happen now.  Memphis has won 22 in a row, and they have three big guards who can rebound, along with two 6'9" forwards.  That creates a huge matchup problem for the smaller Creighton.

Yesterday: 5.7 - 2

Overall: 50.4 - 41

College Basketball (30.4 - 30)

Villanova at Marquette (-2.5): Marquette has now suffered three straight losses following an eight-game winning streak.  They're only 1-5 ATS in their last six games, and these performances have caused a bit of a public backlash, as Marquette is barely favored in a game where they'd be laying six points if it had been played a week ago.  Marquette's Feb. 10 loss at Georgetown was a blowout (58-76), but that's excusable because Georgetown is the hottest team in the country.  Last Wednesday's 67-72 loss at a Depaul came in a tight game against a team that's tough to beat on the road.  And there's no shame in losing on a buzzer-beating three-pointer against Louisville two nights ago, as Rick Pitino's squad is peaking at the right time.  Marquette's going to have a must-win attitude in this one, as they try to avoid a four-game losing streak, and their home court should have an electric atmosphere.  Villanova's coming off a tough home loss to Georgetown, so they might have trouble matching Marquette's intensity.

Pittsburgh at Seton Hall (+340): Pittsburgh is 23-4 overall this season, so they're already in the Tournament with at least a #3 seed.  As a result, these late-season games are less meaningful, and the doldrums have showed in Pittsburgh's recent lackluster play.  In a home game against Washington on Saturday, Pittsburgh barely held on for a 65-61 victory.  That game followed an unimpressive home loss to Louisville by 13 points, and Pittsburgh only won by six against Providence in the previous game.  During this three-game stretch, Pittsburgh is 0-3 ATS.  To make matters worse for Pittsburgh, star center Aaron Gray hurt is ankle on Saturday, and he probably won't play in a game that means little for Pittsburgh's season.  On the other hand, this game means everything for Seton Hall, whose 12-13 record means that they have almost no shot at making the Tournament.  Seton Hall could salvage some pride with a win against a top-ten team, so they'll play like it's their championship game.  Their 10-4 home record shows that they're capable of pulling it off tonight.

Butler at Wisconsin-Green Bay (+220): Butler's another team that's hitting a lull, as they've lost two of three after starting the season 23-2.  The last two losses came against tough schools (Southern Illinois and Wright State), and Wisconsin-Green Bay poses another challenge tonight, as they have momentum from two straight road wins over Northern Illinois and Illinois-Chicago.  While Wisconsin-Green Bay is just 16-12 overall this season, they've won four of their last five, and they boast an impressive 10-3 home record.

Kansas at Kansas State (+200): Kansas could be slightly complacent, as they're coming off of a 92-39 home thrashing of Nebraska.  Plus, the 23-4 Jayhawks are yet another team that's locked into the Tournament with a high seed, so it'll be hard to match Kansas State's intensity tonight.  This is one of those one-sided rivalries, where a victory means everything for Kansas State, while Kansas can't get too excited over a win, as that's expected from their top-notch program.  But Kansas State has a great shot tonight, as they've gone a surprising 19-8 in Bob Huggins' first year, with a terrific 12-1 home record.  Plus, they've won 9 of 11 since a three-game losing streak in early January.  A win here probably guarantees an at-large Tournament bid for Kansas State, so expect the atmosphere to be rocking tonight.  Also, this is a great situational play, as Kansas won 97-70 at home over Kansas State on Feb. 7, and Kansas State will be looking to avenge that loss tonight.

San Francisco (+220) at St. Mary's: San Francisco is just 12-15 this year, but they've won five of their last six games.  Meanwhile, St. Mary's has lost five of their last six to drop them under .500 at 13-14.  Both teams recently played the University of San Diego, so this common opponent provides a good method of comparing the schools.  On Feb. 3, San Francisco won by ten points at San Diego, while St. Mary's suffered a 72-76 home loss to San Diego on Feb. 5.  That shows that San Francisco's playing better basketball right now.

Yesterday: 7.9 - 10

Overall: 44.7 - 39

College Basketball (25.7 - 28)

Duquesne (+280) at Fordham: Although Duquesne's overall record is a mediocre 10-13, they're 5-3 since instituting the 10/40, which is a running offense where ten players sprint for 40 minutes. During this eight-game stretch under the new style of play, Duquesne is 5-0 when they score more than 90 points. Much like the Phoenix Suns of the NBA, this type of playing style is so much more up-tempo than what opponents normally see that it causes adjustment problems. Prior to instituting the new system, Duquesne lost to Fordham, 59-71, on January 14, so they'll be looking for revenge today. Also, Fordham has lost four straight games, including two at home, and they've only averaged 54 points in those four losses.

Georgia Tech (+290) at Duke: Georgia Tech's decent 17-8 overall record is somewhat marred by a 1-6 mark on the road, but the lone win came on Tuesday at Florida State. That upset victory gives Georgia Tech the confidence that it can win on the road, and confidence is important for a young team led by freshmen stars Javaris Crittendon and Thaddeus Young. Georgia Tech has also won four straight games, and this could be one of those young teams that's getting ready to make a Tournament run. On the other hand, Duke has struggled lately, losing four straight, including two home losses, before winning at Boston College last Wednesday. During the last few weeks, Duke's been exposed for its lack of an athletic, go-to scorer. This game is important for both teams' chances at earning at-large Tournament bids, so expect to see a lot of hustle and emotional play. In such an atmosphere, the better athletes usually win, so I like Georgia Tech.

Notre Dame (-6) at Cincinnati: While Notre Dame has struggled since Kyle McAlarney's suspension, the Fighting Irish are still 19-6 overall. Also, even though they've recently lost on the road to DePaul, South Florida, and St. John's, all three games were competitive, and Notre Dame's 103-91 win at Syracuse on January 30 showed that they can upset Big East competition away from home. Meanwhile, Cincinnati has struggled, going 10-15 overall, and the Bearcats are just 3-9-1 ATS in their last 13 games. During that time span, they've managed just one win SU. At home, Cincinnati has lost three straight games SU and ATS (losing by 9 nine points to St. John's, 16 points to Louisville, and 16 points to Pittsburgh). The intangibles are also in Notre Dame's favor, as this game is critical for an at-large Tournament berth for the Fighting Irish, while Cincinnati has no shot at making it to the Big Dance.

Virginia Tech at North Carolina State (+210): Coming off Tuesday's overtime road win at North Carolina, Virginia Tech must fight off a possible letdown, as that win probably guaranteed them an NCAA Tournament bid. Meanwhile, the younger N.C. State lineup needs to build up some momentum heading into the ACC tournament, as they might need a conference championship in order to extend their season. N.C. State is only 13-11 overall this season, but they're 11-6 at home. And while they've gone 3-7 in their last ten games, they've beaten North Carolina at home and Virginia Tech on the road during this span. N.C. State should come out on a mission today, as they've lost three straight games, including a 15-point home loss to Maryland last Wednesday. If 6' 8" freshman forward Brandon Costner and 6' 9" sophomore forward Ben McCauley bring their "A" games, this should be a highly competitive game.

Maryland (+160) at Clemson: Clemson has been in a bit of funk lately, losing four of five and six of eight. Most recently, they lost at Wake Forest, 65-67, and that won't do much for their confidence considering Wake's below-average performance this season. Maryland will be looking to sweep Clemson after winning 92-87 at home earlier in the year. Maryland is coming off two straight road wins, and they've been boosted by the recent improvement of freshman point guard Grievis Vasquez.

NBA Basketball (19 - 11)

East vs. West - Over 256: This prediction is based purely on life experience. For some reason, a few handicappers are predicting that the score will go under 256 because of the hangover factor. The theory goes that players have been up all night partying, so they'll stumble through the game in dazed fashion. I agree that the players will be tired, but the effect will be on defense, not offense. Defense takes more energy, and hangovers will lead the stars to save their energies for the offensive end. As a result, the stars will put forth even less energy at defense than usual (if that's even possible), so scorers will find easy lanes to the basket, where they'll finish with magnificent dunks. The Sophomores scored 155 points in the Rookie game, which lasts only 40 minutes (compared to the 48 minute All-Star game). That score foreshadowed the offensive showing that will occur Sunday night. The over seems pretty safe, as both squads should score over 130 points.

Damon Jones, 4-1: At 6-3, 195 lbs, Jones is too small to undergo the rigors of the shootout.  Jones will get worn out towards the end of each round, as smaller players tend to suffer from heavy legs after taking a bunch of shots in rapid succession.

Dirk Nowitzki, 4-1: Dirk was 2-1 when the odds were originally posted, so the 4-1 odds might be a product of the sportsbooks trying to balance the action with more Dirk wagers.  I highly suggest betting on the reigning 3-pt shootout champion, as he showed few signs of fatigue last year.  Dirk's 7' 0", 245 lbs frame is well-suited for the contest.  Also, five of the 13 historical winners repeated as champions, and Dirk could join that list tonight.

Gilbert Arenas, 3-1: The problem for Arenas is that there are a limited number of balls, so he can't continue to shoot all night.  For the season, Arenas has taken 400 three-point shots, but he's only connected on 36% of them.  Sharpshooting just isn't Arenas' strong point, as he's better off driving to the basket or pulling up from mid-range.

Jason Kapono, 5-2: Bettors have been on the Kapono bandwagon in the last day, driving his odds down from 7-2 to 5-2.  The reason for the heavy action is Kapono's amazing three-point percentage on the year, as he's been accurate on 56% of his attempts.  The problem with this play is that Kapono's only attempted 156 three-pointers on the year, so he's not used to taking a high-volume of long-distance shots.  Still, at 6' 8", 215 lbs, Kapono has a big enough build to endure the two rounds.  But I think he'll need to notch a year of experience before competing for the title.

Jason Terry, 6-1: At 6' 2", 180 lbs, Terry is the smallest player in the contest, but he nearly advanced to the final round last year, as he missed out by one basket.  Terry was 10-1 when the contest opened, so the time to select him has already passed.

Mike Miller, 6-1: At these odds, Miller might be the best bet on the board.  He's 6' 8", 218 lbs, which makes him capable of going two rounds without tiring out.  Also, he's used to taking a lot of three-point shots (374 this season), and he's converted a respectable 42%.  And this isn't Miller's first time at the contest, as he participated in 2002 when the NBA allowed more contestants.  This past experience could prove to be a valuable advantage for Miller over newcomers Kapono and Jones.

College Basketball

Mississippi State (+160) at LSU: Mississippi State's been a competitve SEC team, splitting their last ten games of conference play. Except for a 12-point loss at Mississippi, the losses came in tight games against tough opponents (Alabama, South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky). Plus, Mississippi State has some road momentum after winning by eight at Auburn last Saturday. Even though LSU's also played a lot of close games lately, the Tigers have lost two of their last three home games, and they've lost seven of eight overall.

UConn (+190) at Syracuse: After a rough five-game stretch, UConn's playing better lately, as the Huskies have won three of their last four games straight-up, including a 67-60 home win over Syracuse on Feb. 5. Also, UConn is a team that can only get better as the year progresses, as three freshmen and two sophomores get the majority of the minutes. Meanwhile, three seniors, a junior, and a sophomore comprise Syracuse' main lineup, which means that Syracuse has less room for improvement than UConn. Since you're getting some value from UConn's youth, they're a good pick at nearly 2-1.

Auburn (+475) at Georgia: My rationale for this recommendation is that because Auburn's been competitive against SEC opponents this season, they have a shot at winning this game -- thus, the +475 provides a lot of value. Even though Auburn's just 3-7 in their last ten games, the Tigers played close road games against LSU and Arkansas, and they won at South Carolina. Georgia's a good team, but they're not impervious to lapses, as demonstrated by separate losing streaks of three and four games.

Mississippi (+200) at Arkansas: Mississippi's riding a four-game winning streak, while Arkansas is coming off of two road losses.  Arkansas has also lost seven of their last ten games, which is a sign that they're in the middle of the SEC pack. Mississippi will try to show that they're legitimate SEC title contenders.

Iowa State (+500) at Kansas State: Kansas State will likely win this game, but the moneyline's too high to resist.  Iowa State is coming off a momentum-building home win over Oklahoma, and they played well in the second half at Texas in the previous game.  Meanwhile, Kansas State can lose on any given day, as shown by their loss at Nebraska last Tuesday.  

Memphis at Gonzaga (+190): Last Monday, Gonzaga lost on their home floor for the first time in 50 games.  They'll be amped to prevent that from happening twice in a row.  The fact that Memphis is a top-10 team will only further motivate the 'Zags and their fans.

Oregon (+125) at Stanford: Oregon has hit a bit of a rough patch lately, losing four of their last five, but three of those losses were by three points or less, and the other was an eight-point defeat at UCLA.  Oregon uses all four of their excellent guards (Aaron Brooks, Tajuan Porter, Bryce Taylor, and Malik Hairston), and this will cause matchup problems for Stanford, who rely too heavily on their big men, the talented but inconsistent Lopez twins.

Louisville (+200) at Marquette: In winning at Pittsburgh on Monday night, Rick Pitino's squad took a giant step forward, and they'll prove to be a factor in the Tournament.  With 6' 11" David Padgett and 6' 8" freshman Derrick Caracter, Louisville has a formidable front that can dominate the boards.  Marquette's 6' 10" Ousmane Barro will have his hands full trying to fight inside against Padgett and Caracter, as Barro doesn't get much help from his smaller Marquette teammates.  Marquette's also coming off two straight losses, while Louisville has won two in a row.

North Caolina at Boston College (+245): Even if freshman sensation Brandon Wright plays, he'll be handicapped by a recent shoulder injury.  But the public still loves UNC's scoring potential, so the Tar Heels remain heavy favorites.  Also, some handicappers have claimed that Boston College's 9-3 ACC record is a fluke, but in my opinion, it's hard to argue with the standings.  Boston College also handily defeated N.C. State and Virginia Tech, both of whom delivered upset blows on North Carolina.  North Carolina's good, but they're showing that they're not the invincible force that oddsmakers pegged them as a few weeks ago.  There seems to be a bit of lag before the public realizes that it received misinformation, so consider this moneyline a product of that lag.  Take advantage of it.

Yesterday: 3.3 - 0

Overall: 36.8 - 29

College Basketball (17.8 - 18)

Georgetown (-1.5) at Villanova: Yes, I know that I'm advocating underdog moneylines, but I can't pass up on the hottest team in the country. Georgetown poses nightmare matchup problems with 7'2" Roy Hibbert and 6'9" Jeff Green. These monsters in the middle force opposing offenses to rely on the outside shot, while Georgetown gets a lot of easy baskets in the low post on the other end. Hibbert's scored 20 or more points in four of the last five games, and he's shooting a remarkable 70.6% from the field. Villanova's 6'9" Dante Cunningham is their biggest man who sees playing time, and he's giving up five inches against Hibbert. Also, Georgetown has been on a roll lately, winning its last 8 games SU, and going 7-0-1 ATS during this span. The last time that Georgetown lost ATS was a home game against Villanova on January 8, when Villanova prevailed by a four-point margin. Hibbert didn't take a shot in that game, as Georgetown is a completely different team this time around. Look for the Hoyas to exact revenge on Villanova's home floor.

Florida State (+220) at Virginia: With an uspet win at Duke on February 4, Florida State showed that it can win on the road. The Seminoles have stumbled a bit lately, losing all three games SU since the Duke upset, but that could lead to them being extremely focussed against a beatable Virginia squad. After getting blown out by 27 points at Virginia Tech, Virginia's confidence
could be somewhat shaken. This is one of those toss-up games where you're best off in the long run by taking the 2-1 odds.

Florida at Vanderbilt (+230): Vanderbilt's very tough at home, where they're currently on a six-game winning streak (12-3 SU overall at home this season). Also, Vanderbilt's defeat of a very talented Alabama squad shows that they can probably hang with Florida's athletes. Moreover, Vanderbilt's one of the few teams with big enough starters to matchup against Florida's lineup. Of course, Florida's a terrific team, but this is a trap game for them, as losing would matter very little to their overall season. Actually, Billy Donovan probably needs his team to lose sometime soon in order to light a fire under them prior to the Tournament. On the other hand, Vanderbilt's home crowd will treat this one like it's a national title game. With all the intangibles going toward Vanderbilt, this is a good moneyline to hit.

UCLA (pick 'em) at Arizona: This one seems pretty easy, as Arizona's shown its true colors lately, going 4-6 SU in their last ten games, including a home loss to USC that creates some negative momentum. Meanwhile, UCLA will be looking to put together a complete game, as the Bruins narrowly edged a mediocre Arizona State squad on Thursday. Both teams will fight for this one, but UCLA's superior talent will be the difference.

Washington (+600) at Pittsburgh: Washington's a dismal 1-7 SU on the road, but they've shown some life away from their home confines recently by winning at Arizona State, taking California to overtime, and losing by a point at Stanford. Pittsburgh's a good team, but home losses to Louisville and Marquette show that they're beatable at home. And with two freshmen and two sophomores in the Washington lineup, they're a team with a higher ceiling than Pittsburgh, whose lineup is dominated by juniors and seniors. Even though Washington's 6' 7" Jon Brockman is giving up 5 inches to Pittsburgh C Aaron Gray, Brockman's Barkley-esque style could cause Gray problems inside. And Washington's 6' 11" C Spencer Hawes provides a low-post scoring presence for the Huskies. Also, Washington nearly beat Washington State, one of the best teams in the country, on Wednesday. Considering that the Pac-10 might be tougher than the Big East this year, I like Washington's chances in this one.

Iowa (+270) at Michigan State: Iowa's gone 7-5 against Big Ten opponents, while Michigan State's only 5-6. Also, Michigan State has lost four of its last five games, while Iowa's won four of its last five. Both teams realy on streak shooters (Adam Haluska for Iowa and Drew Neitzel for Michigan State), so this is another toss-up game where the underdog moneyline gives you the best return in the long run.

I'll be back at around 2:30 pm with afternoon and evening picks.

Yesterday: 3.5 - 1

(Note: Because USC won on the +250 moneyline, that counts as 2.5 wins).

Overall: 33.5 - 29

College Basketball (14.5 - 18)

Winthrop (+210) at Missouri State: Winthrop is 22-4 on the season, but they're underdogs in this one because most of their wins have come against weak opponents in the Big South Conference. But Winthrop has actually been competitive on the road against good teams this year. Although Texas A&M beat Winthrop 71-51 on January 2nd, Winthrop won 71-65 at Old Dominion, who's gone 20-7 this year. In early December, Winthrop took Wisconsin to overtime before losing by three points, and in mid-November, they narrowly lost to North Carolina, 66-73. Winthrop's only other loss came at Maryland on November 20, and the game was relatively close (71-60). On the other hand, Missouri State has lost to middle-of-the-road teams: Creighton (twice), Evansville, Northern Iowa, and Saint Louis. Also, Missouri State hasn't been able to hang with the best team in their conference, Southern Illinois, losing by a combined 24 points in their two contests. Winthrop has a great shot at winning this game because they have experience against top-level competition, and they're currently on 12-game winning streak.

Cornell (+120) at Princeton: After starting the season at 4-7, Cornell's won 9 of its last 11 games. On the other hand, Princeton has lost 7 of its last 8 games, and Cornell beat them 55-35 in Ithaca on January 13. This would be a revenge scenario for Princeton, but they're not good enough for such situational psychology to matter.

Come back at 10:30 am (central time) tomorrow morning for some of my early afternoon NCAA selections. I'll post the late afternoon and evening picks at around 3:30 pm.

Yesterday: 2-1

Overall: 18-16

NBA (11-6)

Clippers at Pistons (-8.5): The Clippers are just 4-6 ATS in their last ten, and they're playing the second night of a back-to-back. On the road this season, the Clippers are just 8-17-1 ATS. While the Pistons haven't been very good ATS at home (9-16), they have won five straight SU in Detroit, and they almost covered against a very good Raptors team on Saturday night. The Pistons shouldn't have a problem against the mediocre Clippers.

Hawks at Jazz (-8.5): The Hawks have been playing great lately, winning their first two games of this road trip, but that actually sets them up for a letdown tonight. Plus, the Hawks will be playing their second night of a back-to-back and their third game in four nights. Meanwhile, the Jazz are relatively well rested, as this will be only their second game in the last seven days.

College Basketball (7-10)

Louisville (+9) at Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh has been one of the best teams in college basketball this season, and they're still able to beat the spread despite being ranked #6 in the country (7-3 ATS in their last ten games). But Louisville's also done well ATS, going 7-2-1 in their last ten, which shows that they've been better than the public's giving them credit for. One of the reasons for the nine-point line is that Louisville C David Padgett might not play, which could pose a matchup problem against Pittsburgh's 7' 0" Aaron Gray. But 6' 9" freshman Derrick Caracter played well when Padgett went down against South Florida, as Caracter scored 16 points and grabbed 10 boards in just 18 minutes of play. Louisville's too competitive to pass up the nine points.

West Virginia at Georgetown (-9): Georgetown's been on a roll lately, going 8-1-1 ATS in their last ten games. They've also won seven straight games SU since losing by five points to Pittsburgh on January 13, and their average margin of victory during this stretch is a remarkable 15.57 points. Also, the Hoyas are 3-0 ATS when favored by 7.5-9.5 points. Although West Virginia upset UCLA on Saturday, that could set them up for a letdown. Plus, West Virginia's a streak-shooting team, and they almost lost their lead in the second half against UCLA due to their inability to control the lanes. That doesn't bode well against 7'2" Roy Hibbert, as West Virginia has no one to match up against him.

Oklahoma State at Texas (-6.5): Oklahoma State is probably the worst top-25 team in the country. They're just 1-7-1 ATS in their last nine games, and an atrocious 0-4 (SU and ATS) on the road. One of those road losses was against the hapless Colorado Buffaloes (6-14 overall) last weekend, and that loss epitomizes Oklahoma State's medicority. Basically, this team built their record against a bunch of softballs early in the season, and now they're struggling against quality opponents. Meanwhile, Texas has looked pretty average lately (4-6 ATS in their last ten games), but they should avenge last month's OT loss at Oklahoma State. Kevin Durant had 37 points in that one, and he could explode tonight after last week's relatively quiet showings.

The blog has undergone a transformation over the last few months, as most of my posts focus on handicapping sporting events. As money management has never been my best asset, I'm going to use my sports knowledge to post the best plays of the day (instead of betting on them), and I'll keep a running tally of my record. My goal is to have a 55% record picking the games (52.5 percent is the break-even point), and I hope that my readers can profit from my work.

NBA:

Magic (-1) at Bucks: The Magic beat the Bucks 98-73 last Wednesday, and they continued to roll with a 119-86 thumping of the Nets on Friday night. While the Magic lost the next night to the Knicks, that can be attributed to playing three games in four nights. Meanwhile, the Bucks will again be without leading scorer Michael Redd. Since Redd's injury, the Bucks are 2-13 overall and 5-10 ATS. While they have a respectable 10-9 record this season at home, they are just 1-4 in Milwaukee since Redd went down. The Magic have stumbled a bit in the last 10 games (3-7 ATS), but last week's surge is evidence that they have enough firepower to beat the struggling Bucks.

Clippers at Knicks (+1): In 2007, the Knicks are 11-5 ATS, including 6-1 ATS at Madison Square Garden. Meanwhile, the Clippers are just 7-15 overall on the road this season. The Knicks lost by 10 to the Clippers in LA on New Year's Eve, so they'll be looking to return the favor tonight. Plus, the Knicks are slightly more rested than the Clippers.

Rockets (-3) at Grizzlies: Houston's 4-1-1 ATS in its last six games, and they're still smarting from their offensive no-show on Saturday night. PG Rafer Alston's penetrating ability will break down the Grizzlies' poor defense, freeing SG Tracy McGrady for open looks. The Grizzlies are only 9-16 overall at home, while the Rockets are 13-11 on the road. Considering that the Rockets don't have many points to cover, it's hard to pass up this one even though the Rockets are playing their third game in four nights.

College:

LSU at Tennessee (-5): LSU's 2006 Final Four appearance has the public willing to place money on them despite this year's mediocre performance. LSU enters the game just 1-6 ATS on the road, while Tennesse has been terrific at home (9-0 straight up; 8-1 ATS). Moreover, the Volunteers could be getting a huge lift from the return of top-scorer Chris Lofton, although he'll only see limited action tonight if he does play. I have this one as Tennessee -8, so this play is highly recommended.

Nebraska at Texas Tech (-7): This game presents a great psychological situation for the Red Raiders. After losing on the road to Oklahoma on Saturday and at home to Texas last Wednesday, Bobby Knight's squad is in dire need of a conference win. Meanwhile, Nebraska's coming off an upset road victory over Missouri on Saturday, so they'll be susceptible to a letdown. Plus, Nebraska's a perimeter team, which presents fewer defensive problems for the disciplined yet undersized Red Raiders, who have had some trouble against big men in the lanes (Oklahomas' Longar Longar and Texas' Kevin Durant caused terrible matchup problems). Also, if you can find a first-half line at Texas Tech -3.5, I would jump on that because I believe the situational psychology factors play themselves out better in the first half than in the entire game.

I'm responding to a few of the comments on my last post about the Iverson-Miller trade.  Normally, I'd do this in the comments section, but this blog site only gives me a limited amount of space for each comment, so I'm doing it as a new post.

1. EdHardiman wrote: I like the post I just don't find arbitrarily cherry picking stats valid in micro-analyzing. It has some macro-validity in quantifying a team but no economic model however well padded with math has explained the movement of an individual item in any market, be it financial or sports. There are too many unquantifiable variables that exist from luck to injury to a butterfly flapping its wing in Mongolia that are and can't be accounted for. In other words no metric will ever predict the flip of a coin. Even if the metric is right 2300 times in a row, it is still simply an illusion that satisfies our need to impose order on a chaotic system. 

My Response: 

Regarding the cherry-picking of stats, I wanted to use the last four years of both Miller and Iverson in order to give me a sufficiently large sample size.  However, I ended up using the last five years of Iverson to be generous to Iverson fans, as Iverson had one of his better years five years ago.  If I had only used the last four years of his stats, his Win Score would have been even lower. 

I think that you are glossing over the value of statistical significance.  When the correlation between two variables is found to be statistically significant, there can be little argument that these variables move together, regardless of how minute the movement.  This is not to say that one variable "causes" the other one to move, but you cannot deny that a relationship exists.  And when you have a sufficiently large sample size (over 1000 observations), we know that the finding of statisical significance in the relationship between variables isn't just random luck of the draw.  On page 103 of Wages of Wins, the authors have a table that shows the impact on wins of a one-unit increase in any of 16 NBA statistics.  For example, every missed field goal decreases a team's total wins by .034.  Put another way, if you miss 100 field goals, you'll find that your team's wins will decrease by 3.4.  The calculations were made based on data from 1000s of NBA games, and the statistics were regressed against the dependent variable of winning.  These relationships will continue to exist as long as NBA basketball is played under its current rules.  I just don't see how such statistically significant figures can be compared to the "flip of a coin."

Also, while the metric doesn't predict who's going to win a game on any given night, it is very good at predicting how a team will perform over the course of a season.  Page 110 of Wages of Wins  shows the authors' predictions of team wins based on player production, compared to actual team wins from the 2003-04 season.  The average error was just 1.67 wins, and the largest amount that the authors' model was off is 4.41 wins.  I find this to be excellent empirical evidence of the validity of the models.  Moreover, the authors' model predicted that the Lakers should have won 51.7 games that year, and the Pistons should have won 56.7.  Actually, the Lakers won 56 games, while the Pistons won 54 games, and the sportsbooks had the Lakers as heavy favorites going into the Finals.  We all know who won that series, and the authors' calculations showed that it really shouldn't have been a surprise, as the Pistons players were more productive than the Lakers' players.  The unquantifiable factors of luck probably contributed to the Lakers overperforming during the regular season and the Pistons underperforming.  And when I say "luck," I'm talking about those factors that contribute to winning, yet are not quantified by any measurable statistic.

2. TrainontheBall wrote: I know all about win shares (consider ourselves in the minority), etc. I don't agree with it 100 percent (after all, it's a questionable formula that's being used), but I do think it makes a great gauge - if not fun one to check out.  Thus, bear in mind that the difference between Miller and Iverson is .054 points. Win Shares doesn't take into account variables like momentum, clutch performances, leadership, etc. But I understand what you're getting at, and yes, I would agree that Andre Miller is more efficient than Iverson.

My response:

The measurement that I used in my post actually isn't a Win Share.  Instead, it's a relative measure of player performance that doesn't actually have a meaning in terms of wins produced.  Win Score is simply a way of comparing the efficiency of players who play the same position.  However, it is possible to calculate each player's contribution to win production.  The authors use a measure called Wins Produced Per 48 Minutes (WP48), and this actually has a concrete meaning.  For example, Iverson's career WP48 is .086, meaning that he produces .086 wins for his team per 48 minutes that he plays.  Now, think about what an average player's WP48 would be.  If we assume that an average team wins 41 games, then the five "average" players on this average team would have a WP48 of .1 wins.  Since each contributes .1 wins per 48 minutes played, the summation of their efforts over 48 minutes is .5 wins.  82 games multiplied by .5 wins is 41 wins for the average team. 

Back to Iverson: his career WP48 of .086 is .014 wins below average.  That's not good if you're a Nugget fan thinking that he's the "answer" to the team's playoff woes.  Some of this is softened if you expect Iverson to perform closer to his performance in the last two years.  He had a .152 WP48 in 2004-05, and a .127 WP48 in 2005-06.  Still, that's a far cry from Andre Miller's .217 WP48 this year.  Perhaps, Miller would have eventually declined to his performance from last year of .170 WP48, but that's still better than Iverson has ever produced in a single year.  As a simple comparison, Steve Nash had a WP48 of .319 wins last year, so that's the elite level.  While Miller obviously hasn't approached that level this year, anything above .2 WP48 is great for an NBA point guard.  My main problem with the trade is that the Nuggets took a guy who had become a major contributor to their team in terms of win production, and they traded him for a commodity that's never been able to sniff a WP48 of .2 or higher.  Perhaps, George Karl will be able to harness Iverson's talent and turn him into a winner.  But Iverson's history suggests that won't happen.

I'm currently reading The Wages of Wins, which uses econometric methods to objectively valuate basketball statistics in terms of their impact on winning games.  The basic theory of the authors is that measurements of a player's efficiency are better tools for evaluating players than statistics like "points per game." Since teams have an equal number of possessions in a basketball contest, the team that efficiently uses those possessions is more likely to win.  Turning the ball over without scoring is "bad," while converting a possession into points is "good."  The authors regressed nine statistics to find their relative impact on wins.  Here's a simplification of their findings.

"Good" statistics: Each point, rebound, and steal have relatively equal impacts on winning.  They are about twice as important as each block and assist.  So, to quantify the positive statistics, here's a simple formula: points + rebounds + steals + 1/2(blocks) + 1/2(assists)

"Bad" statistics: field goal attempts and turnovers have equally negative impacts on winning.  They are twice as bad as free throw attempts and personal fouls.  Here's a simple formula for the "bad" stats: field goal attempts + 1/2(free throw attempts) + turnovers + 1/2(personal fouls)

Putting this all together we get what the authors call a "Win Score":

Points + Rebounds + Steals + 1/2(blocks) + 1/2(assists) - field goal attempts - 1/2(free throw attempts) - turnovers - 1/2(personal fouls)

Win Score proves to be an excellent method of comparing players who play the same position.  But since power forwards and centers tend to have higher average Win Scores than guards, adjustments need to be made when comparing little men to big men.  That's not necessary for this article, as I'm going to compare Allen Iverson to Andre Miller, who both play at the guard spot.  According to the authors of Wages of Wins, an average guard has a Win Score Per Minute of .13.

I used the last four years of Andre Miller's statistics and found that he had a Win Score of 1659.5 over that time period.  I then divided this number by the number of minutes Miller played (9449) to find that Miller's Win Score Per Minute is .176.   Clearly, Miller is an above average guard in terms of his contribution to winning.

For Allen Iverson, I used the last five years of his statistics because he was limited by injuries over some of the last few seasons.  Iverson's total Win Score over this time period is 1515.5, and he played 12,442 minutes.  That comes out to Win Score Per Minute of .122.  This reveals that Iverson is actually a below-average guard.

Now, before Iverson fans jump on me, let me point out that Iverson is definitely an athletically-gifted superhuman.  However, the statistics show that his usage of his abilities doesn't help his team win any more than an average guard's play.  A few stats jump out at me, including Iverson's large number of turnovers over this time period (1153) compared to his relatively low number of assists (2015).  When you consider that the authors' econometric analysis found that the costs of a turnover are twice as high as the benefits of an assist, Iverson's poor assist-to-turnover ratio actually cost his teams games.  When you half his assists, you get 1007.5, which is lower than the detriment (1153) caused by his turnovers. 

Another area where Iverson hurts his team is in the field-goal-attempts department.  Since there are a finite number of possessions in an NBA game, a team has a limited number of shot attempts.  When a player misses these shots, the team turns the ball over to the other team unless it can grab the offensive rebound.  By being a "volume shooter" who has trouble averaging better than a 42% field-goal percentage, Iverson causes his team to have many fruitless possessions.  (As a simple comparison, Jason Kidd also has a low career field-goal percentage, but he makes up for this inadequacy with his excellent assist-to-turnover ratio).  In the Win Score model, Iverson's 8675 points over the five-year span was almost completely offset by his 7071 field-goal attempts.

76er fans, you should be sending Christmas gifts to GM Billy King right now.  He just got you a point guard who can help you win games.  And the authors of Wages of Win predict that the 76ers will win about half their games the rest of the year now that they have Miller in the lineup.

Meanwhile, Nuggets fans should put coal in George Karl's and Rex Chapman's stockings.  What are they thinking in sending away a guy with a .176 Win Score Per Minute for a guy with a .122? Well, they probably weren't reading Wages of Wins, so maybe that should go in their stockings, too. 

This trade should be especially disappointing to Denver fans because of the development of Carmelo Anthony over the last two years.  Since the beginning of last season, his Win Score Per Minute has been .169.   That's a marked improvement after his awful field-goal percentage and selfish play during his first two years caused his Win Score Per Minute to be very below average among guards.  With Miller and a maturing Anthony, the Nuggets finally boasted one of the better backcourts in the Western Conference.  Plus, Miller and Anthony complemented each other, as Miller's assists aided Anthony's rise in field-goal percentage.  With Iverson, who isn't a true point guard,  now handling the ball, Anthony will see fewer open looks, and his ensuing frustrations could cause an ego clash between the two "superstars."

Remember, though, that the public still perceives Iverson as a superstar, so the betting world will favor the Nuggets once Anthony returns from his 15-game suspension and is paired with "The Answer." This will be a wonderful time for my blog readers to bet against the Nuggets until the public wisens up to the fact that the Nuggets aren't even going to make the playoffs this year (and, if they do, it'll be a first-round exit).

I also feel a bit sorry for George Karl, since his coaching efforts helped lead to Anthony's emergence as a premiere NBA player.  With Iverson "sharing" the backcourt, it's going to turn into a giant, inefficient headache.  But, you dug your own grave, George, so my sympathy is very minimal.

There's also a touch of irony here that stems from Saturday night's brawl against the Knicks.  Afterwards, Knicks coach Isiah Thomas stated that the fight wouldn't have happened if Karl hadn't been running up the score.  Karl, who's a close friend of Larry Brown, despises Thomas, and he emotionally called Thomas a "####" (among other terms) when the media confronted Karl with Thomas' comments.  (As an aside, Karl is correct that Thomas is a ####.  I know of few other people in business who can get away with incompetent decisionmaking for such a long time period.  But that's another story).  So, you'd think that if Karl was friendly enough with Brown to despise Thomas, shouldn't Karl have been clued in on Brown's nemesis from the Philadelphia days?  Iverson caused nothing but problems for Brown, who performed one of the all-time best coaching feats in guiding the 76ers to the NBA Finals in spite of Iverson's penchant for ballhogging.  Yet, two days after lambasting one of Brown's arch-nemeses, Karl embraces another one. 

As a jaded former Mavericks fan, I didn't think I'd have anything basketball related to be thankful about this Christmas.  Alas, I'm thankful that I'm not a Nugget.