Which makes the Stokes and Hawthorne quotes moot, right? I mean if Rosenberg used two true freshmen's quotes, the only time they could've been referencing is this past summer. I still see a double standard in all of this.
Hey Dex, it's not about being pissed because it's a statistical analysis. Leaving the substantive stuff aside, almost every mgoblog post re: basketball has been "yea, but," or "we're really not thattt good." Except, of course, for the post-win revelry.
For a program that's been getting shit on nationally and locally, it'd be nice to be able to read more positive things without the overaching tone of pessimism. Maybe it's more subtle in this post - but it's there - and has been all too much in basketball discussions. Hate to tell you, but realism and wet-blanket are not synonyms.
Either way, go blue.
I'm not saying statistics don't play a role, my point is that sometimes people put too much emphasis in a bunch of numbers that a computer cranks out. And beyond that, why does everything always come back to kenpom? Let's look at some of the teams that kenpom ranks in the top 40.
Georgetown, Wisconsin, San Diego St., Notre Dame, Miami (Fl.), New Mexico, Washington St.? Riiiight.
If you're going to draw an argument from any rankings, please diversify once and a while. There are plenty of sites and blogs out there with their own viewpoints and logarithms blah blah blah. Throw enough shit together and you might come up with something fair and coherent.
And sorry I didn't have time to write you a blog post with all my factors, big guy, considering I'm at work and all that. In any case, I've been watching basketball long enough (and I'm sure you have) to realize that in the NCAA tournament especially, numbers only go so far, and emotion, momentum, and coaching are of major import. Breaking down a matchup by numbers would essentially call for a mostly chalk bracket, and we sure as hell know that isn't going to happen this year, or any year for that matter. I'll take a Beilein team in March (which has CONSISTENTLY reflected a statsitcal outlier through all of its success) against a team that is a ticking time bomb with a coach that is 0-4 in the tournmament.
Why does every single one of your basketball arguments revolve around kenpom and goofy charts and graphs? And beyond that, why should anyone take your b-ball comments (which have always, always been imbued with negative undertones this year) seriously? You try to argue both sides, but everything you write about this team this year has tilted toward pessimism and doubt. Beilien's teams' performances have probably been more luck than anything, right? Maybe his teams' numbers never positively correlate with kenpom's numbers, but the man knows how to prepare his teams in crunch time, and that is undisputed.
Let's look at the real factors in this game. Clemson has been a mess the last few weeks, lacking any consistency and fighting among each other. Terrible sign. Purnell is 0-4 in the tournament, and is notorious as a coach for watching his team play sub-par in the 2nd halves of seasons. And the team lacks height, which you point out.
I'm not saying we win, but I'm going to use something other than kenpom to make a judgment (and this isn't bias), and say we are going to be in this game without a doubt and could very well win. But hey, keep up your negativity, it worked well for us this year.
First, I would agree that losing Threet does hurt. There's no way to argue against it. Two true frosh and Nick Sheridan (gasp) as our possible starters is not an ideal situation.
Getting to Threet as a player though, it's not as if he was killing it out there. His numbers were certainly better than Sheridan, and he would provide more competition with the current batch, but let's not forget that he looked abysmal for the better part of a year. I respected him for his heart, and he gave a lot for us, but I don't see him being substantially better than Sheridan (best offensive game of the year was Minnesota, with Sheridan as a starter). And let's not forget, we return everyone on offense and do have some degree of experience in Nick Sheridan.
And as far as RR possibly urging him to leave, give me a break. What are you basing this on? A gut instinct? Last time I checked, Threet transferred once already (mind you, with Gailey as coach and no ideas of being inserted into the option offense of Paul Johnson). The only concrete evidence in this argument is Threet having a tendency to bolt under a sign of competition. So what, RR praised our recruits in the press? He was hard on our Threet and Sheridan all year in practice? Please don't put any more blame on RR for baseless assumptions. Leave that to Drew Sharp.
Recent Comments
Michigan 32 - Wisconsin 13