Wichita State vs Cincinnati Game Thread

[Stickboy46]

The move to the American is also about academics. We are in a conference with schools that have much higher academic standards than the MVC schools. Plus, the time was right. Bardo’s vision of Wichita State including raising the standard across the board, including athletics.

We could possibly lose 7-8 conference games this year and still get in the tourney.... anyone still longing for the Valley is crazy. UNI is sitting over there on the wrong side of the bubble with 2 conference losses and ZERO chances left to make a statement. They haven't had a potential statement game since ... Dec 10th. We still have at least 4 left.

[JVShocker]

Cinncy nearly gift wrapped this for us by jacking 3 quick 3’s (and missing them all), at the end. Without it, I’m not sure we even get a chance to get ahead.

[WstateU]

Yeah, I know, but I'm gonna do it anyway...…...what would y'all thought if Cumberland came out to center court afterwards and blew kisses to all of us?

Not sure... nobody would have seen it anyway, because we were flooding out of the arena like rats on the Titanic...

[JVShocker]

We could possibly lose 7-8 conference games this year and still get in the tourney.... anyone still longing for the Valley is crazy. UNI is sitting over there on the wrong side of the bubble with 2 conference losses and ZERO chances left to make a statement. They haven't had a potential statement game since ... Dec 10th. We still have at least 4 left.

But those 4 are kind of looking like....

[Stickboy46]

But those 4 are kind of looking like....

Maybe. At SMU and At Memphis seem like possibilities to me.

[Dan]

SMU and Memphis are comparable to us. Both games could go either way and I feel like all 3 of us are fighting for our lives for an NCAA berth.

[Stickboy46]

SMU and Memphis are comparable to us. Both games could go either way and I feel like all 3 of us are fighting for our lives for an NCAA berth.

Memphis is definitely fighting for a berth ... SMU? I'm not sure if they can. 16 of their 21 games have been Q3/Q4 so far. OOC SOS of 311. Only 1 Q1/Q2 win (4 losses). They have no Q1 games left on their schedule and have a Q3 loss.

If they win out? Sure, but that seems unlikely.

[Kel Varnsen]

They are the 34th most experience team ... we are 329th ...

Then how the heck have we won so many games this year against teams that are more experienced?

I bet if I gave this entire board 300 guesses, it would be unlikely they would come up with the answer as to who's the most experienced team in the country (it's South Carolina State). The top five:

South Carolina St
Iona
South Alabama
Central Michigan
South Dakota

All else being equal, I haven't found a whole lot of non-anecdotal evidence that "experience wins games" in February, March, or when Mercury is in retrograde and I had a big breakfast that morning. However, "players x, y, and z have put in a lot of work to improve these aspects of their game, which led to them winning more games this season because they're a threat to shoot/they're better at communicating defensively/pick your explanation" can be an accurate statement.

It's a pet peeve of mine when media members (and others) push this narrative that has zero evidence whatsoever. Experience doesn't win games. Better players do.

[Stickboy46]

Then how the heck have we won so many games this year against teams that are more experienced?

I bet if I gave this entire board 300 guesses, it would be unlikely they would come up with the answer as to who's the most experienced team in the country (it's South Carolina State). The top five:

South Carolina St
Iona
South Alabama
Central Michigan
South Dakota

All else being equal, I haven't found a whole lot of non-anecdotal evidence that "experience wins games" in February, March, or when Mercury is in retrograde and I had a big breakfast that morning. However, "players x, y, and z have put in a lot of work to improve these aspects of their game, which led to them winning more games this season because they're a threat to shoot/they're better at communicating defensively/pick your explanation" can be an accurate statement.

It's a pet peeve of mine when media members (and others) push this narrative that has zero evidence whatsoever. Experience doesn't win games. Better players do.

When there are 353 combinations of Experience, Talent, coaching, etc you get all sorts of variations and outliers. Experience can overcome small talent/coaching deficits. It can't overcome large ones.

Looking at last night .. Cumberland was by far the best player on the floor .. but would I trade any of our starters for any of their other 4 starters? No probably not IMO. The rest of their team wasn't crazy talented, but they did know how to execute well.

[Topshock]

Then how the heck have we won so many games this year against teams that are more experienced?

I bet if I gave this entire board 300 guesses, it would be unlikely they would come up with the answer as to who's the most experienced team in the country (it's South Carolina State). The top five:

South Carolina St
Iona
South Alabama
Central Michigan
South Dakota

All else being equal, I haven't found a whole lot of non-anecdotal evidence that "experience wins games" in February, March, or when Mercury is in retrograde and I had a big breakfast that morning. However, "players x, y, and z have put in a lot of work to improve these aspects of their game, which led to them winning more games this season because they're a threat to shoot/they're better at communicating defensively/pick your explanation" can be an accurate statement.

It's a pet peeve of mine when media members (and others) push this narrative that has zero evidence whatsoever. Experience doesn't win games. Better players do.

It's quite simple. Experienced good players beat inexperienced good players.

[Kel Varnsen]

When there are 353 combinations of Experience, Talent, coaching, etc you get all sorts of variations and outliers. Experience can overcome small talent/coaching deficits. It can't overcome large ones.

Looking at last night .. Cumberland was by far the best player on the floor .. but would I trade any of our starters for any of their other 4 starters? No probably not IMO. The rest of their team wasn't crazy talented, but they did know how to execute well.

Maybe it can, and maybe it can't. I still have not seen any evidence that it's significant in any way when other factors are equal.

[Kel Varnsen]

It's quite simple. Experienced good players beat inexperienced good players.

According to whom? There's nothing that I have seen to confirm this fact. A lot of assumptions are made and very little (if any) non-anecdotal evidence is offered.

[Stickboy46]

Maybe it can, and maybe it can't. I still have not seen any evidence that it's significant in any way when other factors are equal.

You will never get evidence .. why? How do you measure "talent"? Recruiting rankings? So Fred and Ron weren't talented? Who won? well that's a self confirming bias there.

Frankly you just have to believe what you want to believe, but there is a reason very few National Titles are won by teams playing primarily freshman.

[Topshock]

Maybe it can, and maybe it can't. I still have not seen any evidence that it's significant in any way when other factors are equal.

Then why doesn't Kentucky win the title almost every year?

[Topshock]

I thought this team improved, at least offensively last night. GM is good at the big picture and hopefully he can transfer that to the players. They just need to keep getting better and the wins will come.. This team is a long term project that goes beyond just this year.