Reading Too Much Into One Game?

[ShockBand]

Interesting article by Gary Parrish:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/14724764/reading-into-one-outcome-read-this-its-all-bull

[wu_shizzle]

The team with the better players usually wins when said team plays well, executes and makes shots. But the team with the better players doesn't always play well, execute and make shots. So sometimes the team with the better players loses, and those are what we call upsets. Yes, upsets are a result of masterful "coaching" performances on occasion.

But more times than not, upsets are what happens when shots that typically fall for one team don't fall and shots that typically miss for the other team don't miss.

I can tell you that any coach worth his salt doesn't believe that "sometimes the shots fall and sometimes they don't".

Good coaches put their players in position to make high percentage shots while forcing the opposition into low percentage shots.

The tone of this article just seems to follow Jim Boeheim's coaching style and brand of basketball.

[kcshocker11]

Another great article and it is so true. Sometimes you just cant make the ball go through the net.

[JaminShock]

The team with the better players usually wins when said team plays well, executes and makes shots. But the team with the better players doesn't always play well, execute and make shots. So sometimes the team with the better players loses, and those are what we call upsets. Yes, upsets are a result of masterful "coaching" performances on occasion.

But more times than not, upsets are what happens when shots that typically fall for one team don't fall and shots that typically miss for the other team don't miss.

I can tell you that any coach worth his salt doesn't believe that "sometimes the shots fall and sometimes they don't".

Good coaches put their players in position to make high percentage shots while forcing the opposition into low percentage shots.

The tone of this article just seems to follow Jim Boeheim's coaching style and brand of basketball.

I know quite a few coaches well worth their salt who would disagree with you. High percentage shots don't always fall either, and there will always be nights where nothing falls and you are vulnerable to getting beat.

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

Name the last team to go undefeated in a season, ultimately winning the championship?

How many teams have lost only 1 or 2 games only to lose early in the tournament?

The thing that makes March Madness great is that EVERY team gets the opportunity to show what they are made of. THEY have the opportunity to get to the championship game by winning their conference tourney and 5 games.

Let's just hope we can punch the auto ticket and give ourselves to prove what we can do.

[im4wsu]

The team with the better players usually wins when said team plays well, executes and makes shots. But the team with the better players doesn't always play well, execute and make shots. So sometimes the team with the better players loses, and those are what we call upsets. Yes, upsets are a result of masterful "coaching" performances on occasion.

But more times than not, upsets are what happens when shots that typically fall for one team don't fall and shots that typically miss for the other team don't miss.

I can tell you that any coach worth his salt doesn't believe that "sometimes the shots fall and sometimes they don't".

Good coaches put their players in position to make high percentage shots while forcing the opposition into low percentage shots.

The tone of this article just seems to follow Jim Boeheim's coaching style and brand of basketball.

I know quite a few coaches well worth their salt who would disagree with you. High percentage shots don't always fall either, and there will always be nights where nothing falls and you are vulnerable to getting beat.

That's why these coaches believe defense wins championships because defense does not depend on the whims of the bounce of the ball or tightness of the rims.

Sometimes, howwever, it seems that even when good defense forces teams into poor shot selection, those poor shots can still go in the basket, and opponents at Koch seem to thrive on that.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Excellent article!

[RoyalShock]

Excellent article!

Yep!

:good:

[kochHead]

The team with the better players usually wins when said team plays well, executes and makes shots. But the team with the better players doesn't always play well, execute and make shots. So sometimes the team with the better players loses, and those are what we call upsets. Yes, upsets are a result of masterful "coaching" performances on occasion.

But more times than not, upsets are what happens when shots that typically fall for one team don't fall and shots that typically miss for the other team don't miss.

I can tell you that any coach worth his salt doesn't believe that "sometimes the shots fall and sometimes they don't".

Good coaches put their players in position to make high percentage shots while forcing the opposition into low percentage shots.

The tone of this article just seems to follow Jim Boeheim's coaching style and brand of basketball.

I know quite a few coaches well worth their salt who would disagree with you. High percentage shots don't always fall either, and there will always be nights where nothing falls and you are vulnerable to getting beat.

Yep, i think i have heard HCGM say something to the effect that 10 games you will play better than you are, 10 games you will play worse, and the other 10 games are who you are.

[ShockTalk]

I have mixed opinions about the article. Sure, anything can happen in one game. Sometimes that's what happens to a top team who loses in the first round of the NCAA. You can't make much of, if any, opinion about a team based on one game. If that's the heart of the article, I agree, but frankly think such a discussion a waste of time.

On the other hand, Parrish discusses trends. Yes, a team who has won a number of close games may not necessarily win the next close game. However, I do think, based upon the relative quality of the opposing teams played in those close games, one can make a judgement as to the team's ability and likeliness to win another if it goes to the wire. That doesn't mean they will, but their chances are better than the average.

Sorry, I don't buy the fact that Boeheim's generally soft OOC, has no more negative impact against future tough opponents than if he had scheduled a slightly tougher OOC schedule. It's called having your team not only prepared for those tougher games, but having them experience and deal with it in advance to your conference schedule. Also, instead of waiting until some tough conference games come along, as a coaching staff, you have already made some adjustments, hopefully, for improvement. But none of this says they can't or won't win a national championship.

As a Shocker fan, how confident are you that they can win a close game at the end? If you doubts because of past experience, then most likely, so do the players. That doesn't mean they can't or won't win the next close one, it may just be less likely. Do you not believe that the success the Shocks have had on the conference road, averaging double digit wins, gives them a confidence and experience edge? Sure it does. It also might just put a little doubt into some of the MSU players, whether they admit it or not. In the end, you may never really know why they won or lost. However, as a coaching staff, you can only hope to have the team as prepared and confident as possible and past experience, good or bad, can play in to that.