Note de ce sujet :
  • Moyenne : 0 (0 vote(s))
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A Cubs-centric NCAA bracket, Part 1
Normally, I forget about this until it too late The NCAA Basketball Tournament used to be my thing. My mom let me play hooky from school once during the tourney. It was equally unlikely that I ask, or she let me. DePaul was good then. My bracket, as noted, is very -centric. Schools that have had numerous  Cubs contributions since the mid-1960 are rewarded. Those without are likely dispatched quickly.I decided to do this in multiple parts. That way, if another writer or fan digs the idea, they can spin their own version. I try to limit the rules, but I imagine there will be a 20-side die roll for each game, which is how I got the scores you will see below. The seeding has a part in who advances, as does the Cubs?representative. Teams that play three games have to use three different players in those games. The representative, and how much Cubs success they had, is rather useful.The first part gets us through the introductory round, and posts matchups for Thursday and Friday Shawon Dunston Flag. Teams with no Cubs player representative are at a massive disadvantage. Now that you totally confused, it on to Tuesday play-in games.East BracketMount St. Mary  vs. Texas Southern No Cubs prospect has been drafted from either school, nor has played at the big-league level representing either school. This is a dead-level coin-flip. Neither team has any remote edge over the other, by my rules, in any shape, form, or fashion. As such, both teams roll once for each half, and the winner advances.TS 28, MSM 27 at the half.Final score: MSM 61, TS 65. Texas Southern, without a Cubs player representative, advances to play Michigan in Part 2. vs. Mekkes was drafted out of East Lansing in the 10th Round of 2016. That would give him, and  his school, a huge edge over a team with no representative. However, Amaral played at the MLB level, albeit not with the Cubs. In this matchup Kosuke Fukudome Shower Curtain, based on representative experience, the Bruins have a rather large edge. Amaral was a second-round choice in 1983 by the Cubs, and was Rule 5 by the crosstown in Part 2.West BracketAppalachian State  vs. Norfolk State Appalachian State had Alexander drafted by the Cubs in  the 22nd Round of 1986, well before teams audio-streamed games over the internet. Alexander was sent to Wytheville in the now dismantled Appalachian League, where he pitched in 12 games for a bit over thirty innings. Even back then, pitcher wins weren king. Alexander was 3-1, but his ERA was 5.46. Perhaps it was the 25 walks.Eaddy was selected as a shortstop in the 17th Round in 1997. He played two seasons with the Cubs, advancing to Williamsport in the New York/Penn League. At that level, his OPS was .581, despite being as old as the average age level. Neither team holds any advantage.App. State 34, Norfolk State 33 at the half.Final score: Norfolk State 62 App. State 59.NSU gets Gonzaga next, with no player representatives remaining.Wichita State  versus Drake The Cubs drafted Steenstra in the 12th Round in 1992. He moved through the system, and played briefly for the parent club in 1998. His four games at the top level gives Wichita State a massive edge over Drake, who has never had a player play in the Cubs pipeline.WSU 30, Drake 30 at the half Final score: Wichita State 72, Drake 58.In a fascinating game next round, one figures Wichita State might go with Joe Carter against Southern California Mark Prior.

Atteindre :

Utilisateur(s) parcourant ce sujet : 1 visiteur(s)