Jump to content

Big Ten Tournament


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, WI_Hoosier said:

Getting their @$$ kicked by Terps right now. Sparty is just not good, and IU got swept by them.

Maryland beat them in the regular season too...I think it's a bad matchup for Sparty because the have a bunch of those 6'5-6'7 guys that can guard Henry (Morsell, Ayala, Wiggins, and Hart)...But Sparty did beat Illinois (with Ayo), OSU, and Michigan down the stretch...So I wouldn't say they're "not good."

53 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

No. Maryland was driving all game, and Sparty was trying to play too physical. That’s all they have this year. This game, the refs actually called it. Unfortunately, after his T, the refs have let them foul more without calling it as much. 

I just wish B1G refs would be consistent...I see some games where they swallow their whistles, and others where they call every little touch...MSU has always played a physical game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply
35 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Maryland beat them in the regular season too...I think it's a bad matchup for Sparty because the have a bunch of those 6'5-6'7 guys that can guard Henry (Morsell, Ayala, Wiggins, and Hart)...But Sparty did beat Illinois (with Ayo), OSU, and Michigan down the stretch...So I wouldn't say they're a "not good."

Fair, but IU did beat Iowa twice, took UI to the wire both time as well as overtime with FSU out of conference. Those may have been virtuous match ups too. Especially Iowa.

I honestly don't watch enough Sparty, so probably shouldn't have gone that far, but they just did not look like a good club today or against IU either. Maybe it's just my mood, because I was also not impressed with the Zags the other night, and they are now 25-0. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WI_Hoosier said:

Fair, but IU did beat Iowa twice, took UI to the wire both time as well as overtime with FSU out of conference. Those may have been virtuous match ups too. Especially Iowa.

I honestly don't watch enough Sparty, so probably shouldn't have gone that far, but they just did not look like a good club today or against IU either. Maybe it's just my mood, because I was also not impressed with the Zags the other night, and they are now 25-0. 

Oh, I think matchups are huge in the B1G this year...And you're right about us and Iowa...Garza is always going to get his, but Rob holding down Bohannon in both games and our team D keeping Wieskamp from killing us (at least in the 2nd half) gave us the edge...

The Hawkeyes not having CJ Fredrick for either game didn't hurt any either... :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the big ten is supposed to be the best conference but is it more on reputation than actual play.  Since we didn't have much of a non conference games how do we know that we are a lot better and why is teams that barely are .500 still considered great teams.  Just watching the games all year and the BTT the last two days I see a lot of mediocre play.  It seems like each team has a long stretch of poor offensive play and goes like 4 minutes without a point.  Like OSU got out to 13-0 lead after 6 minutes but now it is 19-9 with 6 to go in the half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

I know the big ten is supposed to be the best conference but is it more on reputation than actual play.  Since we didn't have much of a non conference games how do we know that we are a lot better and why is teams that barely are .500 still considered great teams.  Just watching the games all year and the BTT the last two days I see a lot of mediocre play.  It seems like each team has a long stretch of poor offensive play and goes like 4 minutes without a point.  Like OSU got out to 13-0 lead after 6 minutes but now it is 19-9 with 6 to go in the half.

Knowing how you love metrics...

Look at SRS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IUFLA said:

I like the eye test better.  I understand what the stats say but since most of the games this year was conference games how do they really determine who is good.  This determines the strength of the record or whatever it is so what info did they use to determine all of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I know the big ten is supposed to be the best conference but is it more on reputation than actual play.  Since we didn't have much of a non conference games how do we know that we are a lot better and why is teams that barely are .500 still considered great teams.  Just watching the games all year and the BTT the last two days I see a lot of mediocre play.  It seems like each team has a long stretch of poor offensive play and goes like 4 minutes without a point.  Like OSU got out to 13-0 lead after 6 minutes but now it is 19-9 with 6 to go in the half.

I think it's going to lead to some teams getting seeded too high and getting knocked out of the tournament early. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IUFLA said:

 

Any lawyer will tell you, the worst kind of evidence is eye witness testimony ;) 

Well I am not a lawyer and this is basketball so I go by the eye test.  I don't need a bunch of stats to tell me who looks good and who isn't.  Also these stats are used with certain criteria and percentages that are weighted.  So an actual person determines what they feel are the most important things so they can make those stats be whatever they want.  I don't want a bunch of computer geeks who probably never played a sport intheir life telling me who is better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I know the big ten is supposed to be the best conference but is it more on reputation than actual play.  Since we didn't have much of a non conference games how do we know that we are a lot better and why is teams that barely are .500 still considered great teams.  Just watching the games all year and the BTT the last two days I see a lot of mediocre play.  It seems like each team has a long stretch of poor offensive play and goes like 4 minutes without a point.  Like OSU got out to 13-0 lead after 6 minutes but now it is 19-9 with 6 to go in the half.

I'm starting to agree. I guess it was partially based off the B1G v ACC challenge. I just don't think the ACC is very good either.

I wonder if mediocre play is the new top play. As I said earlier, I watched Zags v BYU and was not impressed with either. I watched Baylor recently and was not really impressed. I'm just starting to believe that the game is just not very good anymore. I know it's become boring to me. I long for the days where even teams like UE put 5 guys on the court that can shoot lights out.

I also hear a lot about the "athletes" today, but are people really saying guys like Jordan, the Fab 5 and Graham, Cheaney, Henderson where not athletic enough to play today? I know they could all shoot... and the game is still about putting the ball in the hoop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Well I am not a lawyer and this is basketball so I go by the eye test.  I don't need a bunch of stats to tell me who looks good and who isn't.  Also these stats are used with certain criteria and percentages that are weighted.  So an actual person determines what they feel are the most important things so they can make those stats be whatever they want.  I don't want a bunch of computer geeks who probably never played a sport intheir life telling me who is better

I always felt like computers are only good to help separate a handful of teams that I can't tell the difference visually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WI_Hoosier said:

I'm starting to agree. I guess it was partially based off the B1G v ACC challenge. I just don't think the ACC is very good either.

I wonder if mediocre play is the new top play. As I said earlier, I watched Zags v BYU and was not impressed with either. I watched Baylor recently and was not really impressed. I'm just starting to believe that the game is just not very good anymore. I know it's become boring to me. I long for the days where even teams like UE put 5 guys on the court that can shoot lights out.

I also hear a lot about the "athletes" today, but are people really saying guys like Jordan, the Fab 5 and Graham, Cheaney, Henderson where not athletic enough to play today? I know they could all shoot... and the game is still about putting the ball in the hoop.

For me basketball is about competition, emotion and and it is for entertainment.  To me college basketball is to regimented and micro managed instead of relying on the human element.  People basing everything on stats is taking all of that away and making everybody like robots which is not what i want from sports.  Also all of these stops to go to the monitor takes away the flow of the game and makes it hard to watch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

For me basketball is about competition, emotion and and it is for entertainment.  To me college basketball is to regimented and micro managed instead of relying on the human element.  People basing everything on stats is taking all of that away and making everybody like robots which is not what i want from sports.  Also all of these stops to go to the monitor takes away the flow of the game and makes it hard to watch

Yep. It's also about teamwork and movement. I just cringe every time I see one guy dribbling around with blinders on while his 4 team mates just stand.... even if he does make a shot.

giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47w1p846wurj0mklwuik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...