MSU
- Thread starter kougkurt
- Start date
The reasons why WSU lost to a likely Quad 1, NIT, NCAA team is:
1. 9, Nine NEW pieces, that did not had experience against teams like MSU, and that hadn't been tested yet, hadn't learned how to play together, Jell, etc, yet.
2. MSU was MAKING A LOT, ALL KINDS of TOUGH, CLOWN, CIRCUS, etc, shots, like FALL AWAY, FALLING DOWN 3 POINT HEAVES, etc, VS WSU's TIGHT, TOUGH DEFENSE that kept the game, lower scoring, VERY CLOSE, MOST of the game, despite MSU going 1 out of 7 type shooting droughts. Take away those miracle makes, and WSU would have likely won by at least 1 point.
3. WSU's offense was playing good enough to get LOTS OF WIDE OPEN LOOKS THAT THEY MISSED ABOUT 90% OF THE TIME. If WSU had hit some of those shots, WSU would have won by 5, etc.
WSU's shooting the first 2 games had put WSU into the top 25 best shooting teams of the nation. I think WSU is, will be a decent, ok shooting team that just got UNLUCKY to have one of those rare couple, few games in a season where they couldn't hit the ocean if they aimed to hit the ocean.
4. WSU had a BAD freethrow shooting night, and MSU had a semi good freethrow night. If WSU had had a good freethrow night, WSU would have won.
5. Turnovers. WSU did not get a lot of points on the lots of turnovers they forced, while MSU scored lots of points on the semi lots of turnovers that WSU had.
6. WSU played HARD, ok versus a TOUGH MSU team, and were unlucky, had a lot of bad bounces, etc, that caused the loss.
The Silver Lining of the Loss, is that WSU can hang with, and might probably even be able to beat Quad 1, NIT, NCAA tourny teams like MSU at either at home or on a neutral site, and probably lose on the road to Quad 1, NIT, NCAA teams.
We'll see if that is true when if WSU plays Rhode Island, another likely Quad 1, borderline NIT, NCAA tourny team.
1. 9, Nine NEW pieces, that did not had experience against teams like MSU, and that hadn't been tested yet, hadn't learned how to play together, Jell, etc, yet.
2. MSU was MAKING A LOT, ALL KINDS of TOUGH, CLOWN, CIRCUS, etc, shots, like FALL AWAY, FALLING DOWN 3 POINT HEAVES, etc, VS WSU's TIGHT, TOUGH DEFENSE that kept the game, lower scoring, VERY CLOSE, MOST of the game, despite MSU going 1 out of 7 type shooting droughts. Take away those miracle makes, and WSU would have likely won by at least 1 point.
3. WSU's offense was playing good enough to get LOTS OF WIDE OPEN LOOKS THAT THEY MISSED ABOUT 90% OF THE TIME. If WSU had hit some of those shots, WSU would have won by 5, etc.
WSU's shooting the first 2 games had put WSU into the top 25 best shooting teams of the nation. I think WSU is, will be a decent, ok shooting team that just got UNLUCKY to have one of those rare couple, few games in a season where they couldn't hit the ocean if they aimed to hit the ocean.
4. WSU had a BAD freethrow shooting night, and MSU had a semi good freethrow night. If WSU had had a good freethrow night, WSU would have won.
5. Turnovers. WSU did not get a lot of points on the lots of turnovers they forced, while MSU scored lots of points on the semi lots of turnovers that WSU had.
6. WSU played HARD, ok versus a TOUGH MSU team, and were unlucky, had a lot of bad bounces, etc, that caused the loss.
The Silver Lining of the Loss, is that WSU can hang with, and might probably even be able to beat Quad 1, NIT, NCAA tourny teams like MSU at either at home or on a neutral site, and probably lose on the road to Quad 1, NIT, NCAA teams.
We'll see if that is true when if WSU plays Rhode Island, another likely Quad 1, borderline NIT, NCAA tourny team.
Also like I said, this team was going to lose a early season game they could have, should have won, because of how 9 NEW pieces that have to learn how to develop, jell, have chemistry, play together, learn how to beat tougher teams, etc.
I'm glad that so far that happened vs a very tough team, instead of a easier to beat team, so far.
Your OVER SIMPLIFYING.
The is a DIFFERENCE between missing BAD SHOT SELECTION SHOTS, TOUGH SHOTS and missing WIDE OPEN, EASY SHOTS.
you don't just say that if they just miss less shots either way, regardless of what TYPE of miss, they win more is OVERSIMPLIFYING.
There is a DIFFERENCE between a opponent making STANDARD, SEMI EASY, REGULAR shots, and making ABSOLUTE MIRACLE shots, makes.
It's a OVERSIMPLIFICATION to simply say if opponent misses more either way in general, that you'll probably win.
Opponent was making ABSOLUTE MIRACLE shots comparable to a desperation half court heave.
If take away those ABSOLUTE MIRACLE makes, WSU wins. Saying that is DIFFERENT then the OVERSIMPLIFIED if opponent misses more shots, in general, no matter whether standard, regular, easier, etc, shots, or whether NEEDING A MIRACLE to hit tougher shots, then WSU win more.
Your either saying, or trying to say that shots are shots, and that it doesn't matter how ridiculously hard a shot is or isnt, and that it doesn't matter if a opponent MIRACLE makes a semi lot of need a MIRACLE shots to win, because shots are shots, and makes are makes period.
What your saying either downplays or ignores legit reasons, nuances, things like a opponent making a lot of miracle makes, things like playing GOOD DEFENSE, because despite the GOOD DEFENSE, opponent still made a lot of MIRACLE MAKES.
People like you think or say, imply, mean, etc, that WSU's defense must suck, because shots made are shots made and doesn't matter what type of shots, that because opponent made more shots, opponents offense is better and WSU's defense SUCKS, shots.
By pointing out that opponent made a lot of MIRACLE makes, despite good defense, then your rightfully saying that if opponent hadn't gotten BUTSHETLUCKILY, MIRACULOUSLY made need a MIRACLE to make shots, then WSU would have won, and WSU played TOUGH, GOOD DEFENSE.
Saying, implying, meaning, etc, shots are shots, and that if opponent misses more shots in general, they will probably lose is a OVERSIMPLIFICATION that tries to deny, take away from THE VALID POINT that if opponent hadn't gotten so miraculously lucky, they would have lost, and that WSU did play GOOD TOUGH DEFENSE, and that there was legit reasons, excuses for the loss, etc.
Similar threads
