[Papa John]

I agree with OF that Monty's NCAA tournament performance wasn't all that bad. Here's how I see it:

1989: #3 seed. Expectation based on seed: sweet 16. Result: lost in first round. -1
1992: #12 seed. Expecation: first round. Result: lost in first round. 0
1995: #10 seed. Expectation: first round. Result: lost in second round. +1
1996: #9 seed. Expectation: first round. Result: lost in second round. +1
1997: #6 seed. Expectation: second round. Result: lost in sweet 16. +1
1998: #3 seed. Expectation: sweet 16. Result: lost in final four. +1
1999: #2 seed. Expectation: elite 8. Result: lost in second round. -1
2000: #1 seed. Expectation: final four. Result: lost in second round. -1
2001: #1 seed. Expectation: final four. Result: lost in elite 8. -1
2002: #8 seed. Expectation: second round. Result: lost in second round. 0
2003: #4 seed. Expectation: sweet sixteen. Result: lost in second round. -1
2004: #1 seed. Expectation: final four. Result: lost in second round. -1

So by the sign test--I think that's what it's called?--Montgomery was -2 for the NCAAs. That's not horrible over 12 (!) NCAA appearances. But I think the notable decline in actual vs expected performance in his final six appearances is more salient in our collective memories than the overall career achievement.

Regardless, I for one would be absolutely thrilled if the Stanford men lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament this year.

[Papa John]

I agree with OF that Monty's NCAA tournament performance wasn't all that bad. Here's how I see it:

1989: #3 seed. Expectation based on seed: sweet 16. Result: lost in first round. -1
1992: #12 seed. Expecation: first round. Result: lost in first round. 0
1995: #10 seed. Expectation: first round. Result: lost in second round. +1
1996: #9 seed. Expectation: first round. Result: lost in second round. +1
1997: #6 seed. Expectation: second round. Result: lost in sweet 16. +1
1998: #3 seed. Expectation: sweet 16. Result: lost in final four. +1
1999: #2 seed. Expectation: elite 8. Result: lost in second round. -1
2000: #1 seed. Expectation: final four. Result: lost in second round. -1
2001: #1 seed. Expectation: final four. Result: lost in elite 8. -1
2002: #8 seed. Expectation: second round. Result: lost in second round. 0
2003: #4 seed. Expectation: sweet sixteen. Result: lost in second round. -1
2004: #1 seed. Expectation: final four. Result: lost in second round. -1

So by the sign test--I think that's what it's called?--Montgomery was -2 for the NCAAs. That's not horrible over 12 (!) NCAA appearances. But I think the notable decline in actual vs expected performance in his final six appearances is more salient in our collective memories than the overall career achievement.

Regardless, I for one would be absolutely thrilled if the Stanford men lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament this year.