Louisville, Cal make for strange 8-9 pick 'em
The Golden Bears were a preseason top-15 club and expected to be the one shining star in an otherwise dull Pac-10 campaign. It didn't work that way for Cal, though bettors have been getting healthy backing the Bears lately. They'll face Rick Pitino's Louisville squad, the epitome of inconsistency this season thanks in part to a shoddy defense. Which Cardinals show up on Friday, and can Cal finally knock off a non-con opponent?
Does anybody like Rick Pitino?
Enough negative ink has been spilled on Pitino to fill the Grand Canyon. I won’t bother getting into his personal life here, but as far as handicappers are concerned, Pitino’s Louisville Cardinals (20-12 SU, 10-17 ATS) are one of the least trustworthy teams in Division I. You just never know what kind of effort the Cardinals are going to deliver – including this Friday (9:45 p.m. ET, CBS) against the California Golden Bears.
No argument that the Cardinals have tasted success since Pitino’s arrival in 2001. They’ve been to the Tournament almost every year, keeping up the school’s long tradition of basketball excellence, and they reached the Final Four in 2005. But this current batch of Cardinals is as capable of getting blown out as it is of winning. Louisville ranks No. 293 out of the 347 Division I teams in consistency, as measured by Ken Pomeroy’s comparison of winning and losing point margins throughout the season.
The Cards were even worse at No. 300 in consistency last year. If you look at the 2008-09 season as a whole, you won’t find much to complain about; Louisville rode one of the best defenses in the league to the Big East title and a No. 1 Tournament seed, finishing the year at 31-6 SU and 22-15 ATS. But it was a nerve-wracking ride, punctuated by ATS winning and losing streaks and ending with a 1-3 ATS performance at the Big Dance.
This year’s team doesn’t have Earl Clark (Phoenix Suns) on offense or Terrence Williams (New Jersey Nets) on defense, and it shows. Pitino’s pressure defense has dropped from No. 2 in the nation in efficiency to No. 78, with a particular weakness on the defensive boards.
And the Cards are only shooting 33.9 percent from behind the arc. That’s down from 36.9 percent last year – a very bad sign when comparing the 2009-10 Cardinals to Pitino’s better teams.
This wasn’t quite the kind of season California (23-10 SU, 19-13 ATS) was looking for, either. But it’s worked out well thus far for handicappers. The Bears struggled to get through their non-conference slate at 8-4 SU and 6-5 ATS, going 0-4 SU and ATS against Kansas, Syracuse, Ohio State and New Mexico. What little attention Cal was getting as the No. 13 team in the preseason AP poll quickly evaporated once the Bears dropped out.
How convenient for us. Those four non-con opponents in question turned out to be pretty good; New Mexico is the lowest ranked going into the postseason at No. 8 in the polls.
Cal, meanwhile, feasted on the weak Pacific-10 at 15-5 SU and 13-7 ATS before getting tripped up by Washington (+2) at the tournament final. The Golden Bears just barely made the top half of the March Madness bracket after that loss. But on the season, Pomeroy has California ranked No. 14 overall in team efficiency. Louisville is way down the list at No. 39.
The dubious Cardinals defense is going to have to contend with one of the top scoring teams in the nation. California ranks No. 3 in offensive efficiency (behind Kansas and Duke) and can find the bottom of the basket from anywhere on the floor, including 37.3 percent from long range.
The Bears also limit their turnovers (Louisville does not) and clean up the offensive boards – as you may recall, something the Cards are especially bad at preventing. Cal head coach Mike Montgomery guided Stanford to the Final Four in 1998 and was named the Naismith College Coach of the Year in 2000. Montgomery got the Bears back into the Tournament last March in his first year back in college; most of those players are back and hungry for a shot at the Sweet Sixteen.
The betting odds suggest it’ll be close. California is a one-point chalk at most books, while others have this matchup as a pick ‘em. It doesn’t look that close on paper.
The Golden Bears were a preseason top-15 club and expected to be the one shining star in an otherwise dull Pac-10 campaign. It didn't work that way for Cal, though bettors have been getting healthy backing the Bears lately. They'll face Rick Pitino's Louisville squad, the epitome of inconsistency this season thanks in part to a shoddy defense. Which Cardinals show up on Friday, and can Cal finally knock off a non-con opponent?
Does anybody like Rick Pitino?
Enough negative ink has been spilled on Pitino to fill the Grand Canyon. I won’t bother getting into his personal life here, but as far as handicappers are concerned, Pitino’s Louisville Cardinals (20-12 SU, 10-17 ATS) are one of the least trustworthy teams in Division I. You just never know what kind of effort the Cardinals are going to deliver – including this Friday (9:45 p.m. ET, CBS) against the California Golden Bears.
No argument that the Cardinals have tasted success since Pitino’s arrival in 2001. They’ve been to the Tournament almost every year, keeping up the school’s long tradition of basketball excellence, and they reached the Final Four in 2005. But this current batch of Cardinals is as capable of getting blown out as it is of winning. Louisville ranks No. 293 out of the 347 Division I teams in consistency, as measured by Ken Pomeroy’s comparison of winning and losing point margins throughout the season.
The Cards were even worse at No. 300 in consistency last year. If you look at the 2008-09 season as a whole, you won’t find much to complain about; Louisville rode one of the best defenses in the league to the Big East title and a No. 1 Tournament seed, finishing the year at 31-6 SU and 22-15 ATS. But it was a nerve-wracking ride, punctuated by ATS winning and losing streaks and ending with a 1-3 ATS performance at the Big Dance.
This year’s team doesn’t have Earl Clark (Phoenix Suns) on offense or Terrence Williams (New Jersey Nets) on defense, and it shows. Pitino’s pressure defense has dropped from No. 2 in the nation in efficiency to No. 78, with a particular weakness on the defensive boards.
And the Cards are only shooting 33.9 percent from behind the arc. That’s down from 36.9 percent last year – a very bad sign when comparing the 2009-10 Cardinals to Pitino’s better teams.
This wasn’t quite the kind of season California (23-10 SU, 19-13 ATS) was looking for, either. But it’s worked out well thus far for handicappers. The Bears struggled to get through their non-conference slate at 8-4 SU and 6-5 ATS, going 0-4 SU and ATS against Kansas, Syracuse, Ohio State and New Mexico. What little attention Cal was getting as the No. 13 team in the preseason AP poll quickly evaporated once the Bears dropped out.
How convenient for us. Those four non-con opponents in question turned out to be pretty good; New Mexico is the lowest ranked going into the postseason at No. 8 in the polls.
Cal, meanwhile, feasted on the weak Pacific-10 at 15-5 SU and 13-7 ATS before getting tripped up by Washington (+2) at the tournament final. The Golden Bears just barely made the top half of the March Madness bracket after that loss. But on the season, Pomeroy has California ranked No. 14 overall in team efficiency. Louisville is way down the list at No. 39.
The dubious Cardinals defense is going to have to contend with one of the top scoring teams in the nation. California ranks No. 3 in offensive efficiency (behind Kansas and Duke) and can find the bottom of the basket from anywhere on the floor, including 37.3 percent from long range.
The Bears also limit their turnovers (Louisville does not) and clean up the offensive boards – as you may recall, something the Cards are especially bad at preventing. Cal head coach Mike Montgomery guided Stanford to the Final Four in 1998 and was named the Naismith College Coach of the Year in 2000. Montgomery got the Bears back into the Tournament last March in his first year back in college; most of those players are back and hungry for a shot at the Sweet Sixteen.
The betting odds suggest it’ll be close. California is a one-point chalk at most books, while others have this matchup as a pick ‘em. It doesn’t look that close on paper.
