Poll Watch (2013-14 Edition)

[1972Shocker]

Even mentioning Henderson in the same article as Pistol Pete is simply an insult to Pete's memory. Mr. Morris should be ashamed of himself but I get the feeling he is of comparable character to Marshall Henderson. Yes the Pistol was flamboyant on the court. But he was flamboyant with his play, not with his disrespectful antics. Too bad that Pistol Pete left this world at such a young age due to a congenital heart defect.

[im4wsu]

Would anybody on this board agree that Syracuse "struggled" at Pitt?

[pogo]

No. It just shows how tough Pitt is and how good Syracuse is to overcome such an obstacle on the road. Anyway thats the way it will be viewed by the voting press.

[kcshocker11]

Even mentioning Henderson in the same article as Pistol Pete is simply an insult to Pete's memory. Mr. Morris should be ashamed of himself but I get the feeling he is of comparable character to Marshall Henderson. Yes the Pistol was flamboyant on the court. But he was flamboyant with his play, not with his disrespectful antics. Too bad that Pistol Pete left this world at such a young age due to a congenital heart defect.

The greatest PM

[ShockTalk]

Would anybody on this board agree that Syracuse "struggled" at Pitt?

No. It just shows how tough Pitt is and how good Syracuse is to overcome such an obstacle on the road. Anyway thats the way it will be viewed by the voting press.

You guys are funny. Yes, Cuse "struggled" against Pitt and was damn lucky to win. However, there is a difference between the #1 ranked team struggling on the road against a ranked top 25 team (barely), a top 50 RPI team (where most of us have them), a top 100 team where Fev might have them, and the Vegas favorite by 2 versus the #2 ranked team struggling at home against a 200+ RPI team and the Vegas dog by 17-19 points.

I think SIU has greatly improved from what they were just a few weeks ago, but, outside Valley fans, who else would really know or care about that.

Pitt might have been a tough team to put themselves in a position where they should have won the game, but their coach and players were anything but tough on that last play. In fact, the several of the last plays. Why call a timeout at that moment of the game if that's all you can come up with to defend the last 4 seconds? Soft, soft, soft.

[Cdizzle]

You guys are funny. Yes, Cuse "struggled" against Pitt and was damn lucky to win. However, there is a difference between the #1 ranked team struggling on the road against a ranked top 25 team (barely), a top 50 RPI team (where most of us have them), a top 100 team where Fev might have them, and the Vegas favorite by 2 versus the #2 ranked team struggling at home against a 200+ RPI team and the Vegas dog by 17-19 points.

I think SIU has greatly improved from what they were just a few weeks ago, but, outside Valley fans, who else would really know or care about that.

Pitt might have been a tough team to put themselves in a position where they should have won the game, but their coach and players were anything but tough on that last play. In fact, the several of the last plays. Why call a timeout at that moment of the game if that's all you can come up with to defend the last 4 seconds? Soft, soft, soft.

There's also a difference in the use of "struggling" here. Like, the #1 team "struggled" on the Road against an average team and trailed almost the entire game, needing a miracle heave to avoid losing. Where the #2 team "struggled" at home against a below average team, and led the final 16 minutes before winning by 11.

[im4wsu]

There's also a difference in the use of "struggling" here. Like, the #1 team "struggled" on the Road against an average team and trailed almost the entire game, needing a miracle heave to avoid losing. Where the #2 team "struggled" at home against a below average team, and led the final 16 minutes before winning by 11.

Perhaps, another way of looking at it might be, a team struggled during the first 24 minutes of the game or a team struggled for the first 39 minutes of a game.

In almost every game, every team has a period where they struggle. Sometimes that period is in the first half, sometimes it's in the second half. Sometimes it lasts 2 minutes, sometimes 10-15-20 minutes. Sometimes the opponent is "average," sometimes the opponent is "garbage" (like Pitt, Fev) and sometimes the opponent is "good"or "superior" or "the best." Since it happens to almost every team, every game, it is small-mindedness to use the term in the situation where the team won by 11 and led the final 16 minutes.

[ShockTalk]

Perhaps, another way of looking at it might be, a team struggled during the first 24 minutes of the game or a team struggled for the first 39 minutes of a game.

In almost every game, every team has a period where they struggle. Sometimes that period is in the first half, sometimes it's in the second half. Sometimes it lasts 2 minutes, sometimes 10-15-20 minutes. Sometimes the opponent is "average," sometimes the opponent is "garbage" (like Pitt, Fev) and sometimes the opponent is "good"or "superior" or "the best." Since it happens to almost every team, every game, it is small-mindedness to use the term in the situation where the team won by 11 and led the final 16 minutes.

Is it small-mindedness to use the term "struggle" for a team on the road that was not favored to win in the first place, but did? Unless a team not favored wins fairly easily, one would expect it to be a struggle for them to win. It would be the norm, not the exception. So no surprise.

Vegas might consider a team that didn't cover the spread, but won, as struggling. Since you didn't say, just what term would you use for a 200+ RPI team if you consider a top 50 team as garbage? Let's not use the "sometimes teams struggle for 2, 5, 10, or 20 minutes" either. WSU lead for less than 1 minute in the first 20 minutes and, while they lead for the last 16 minutes, still had only a 3 point lead with a little over 4 minutes to go, lead by more than 2 possessions for less than 5 1/2 minutes total for the game, the first double digit lead was under 2 minutes left, and they never came close to covering the spread. Sorry to disagree, it was a struggle and you know it.

[pie n eye]

I'm struggling to follow this conversation.

[Cdizzle]

Is it small-mindedness to use the term "struggle" for a team on the road that was not favored to win in the first place, but did? Unless a team not favored wins fairly easily, one would expect it to be a struggle for them to win. It would be the norm, not the exception. So no surprise.

Vegas might consider a team that didn't cover the spread, but won, as struggling. Since you didn't say, just what term would you use for a 200+ RPI team if you consider a top 50 team as garbage? Let's not use the "sometimes teams struggle for 2, 5, 10, or 20 minutes" either. WSU lead for less than 1 minute in the first 20 minutes and, while they lead for the last 16 minutes, still had only a 3 point lead with a little over 4 minutes to go, lead by more than 2 possessions for less than 5 1/2 minutes total for the game, the first double digit lead was under 2 minutes left, and they never came close to covering the spread. Sorry to disagree, it was a struggle and you know it.

If you are going to use Vegas' opinion to define "struggling," you should probably

A. Read up on what Vegas is trying to do by setting spreads.
B. Remove yourself from this argument.

You're basing your definition of "struggling" on the opinions of the public, not the metric of winning a basketball game.

[im4wsu]

Is it small-mindedness to use the term "struggle" for a team on the road that was not favored to win in the first place, but did? Unless a team not favored wins fairly easily, one would expect it to be a struggle for them to win. It would be the norm, not the exception. So no surprise.

Vegas might consider a team that didn't cover the spread, but won, as struggling. Since you didn't say, just what term would you use for a 200+ RPI team if you consider a top 50 team as garbage? Let's not use the "sometimes teams struggle for 2, 5, 10, or 20 minutes" either. WSU lead for less than 1 minute in the first 20 minutes and, while they lead for the last 16 minutes, still had only a 3 point lead with a little over 4 minutes to go, lead by more than 2 possessions for less than 5 1/2 minutes total for the game, the first double digit lead was under 2 minutes left, and they never came close to covering the spread. Sorry to disagree, it was a struggle and you know it.

Takwe a deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep breath!

[ShockTalk]

If you are going to use Vegas' opinion to define "struggling," you should probably

A. Read up on what Vegas is trying to do by setting spreads.
B. Remove yourself from this argument.

You're basing your definition of "struggling" on the opinions of the public, not the metric of winning a basketball game.

You, sir, are totally correct on the Vegas angle. Should not have used that, but used basketball sites such as rpiforecasting and the such and how they come up with their guide of margin of victory or loss. Correct me if I'm wrong or not stating it right, but I look at that margin as one means to determining whether a team over or under performed after the game is played. Of course, one needs to look at the whole game and how it played out. Basically, the larger the margin of projected victory, the more it could be perceived as a potentially easier win. Without looking in more detail to the game, if a team came up way short of that projection, the more they are perceived to have underperformed or possibly struggled.

That said, I still like your opinion (minus the Vegas statements) on my overall comments and how you view whether a team is struggling or not.

[ShockTalk]

Takwe a deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep breath!

I'm just fine, thank you for your concern.

After reading my reply to @Cdizzle:, I'd still like your opinion to my reply to your post.

I'm just saying that because a team wins by 11 and lead the last 16 minutes, doesn't tell the whole story. Marshall was not pleased with his players performance, most likely because they struggled more than he thought they should have. Likewise, how a team who is not favored to win a game but does win would be "news" if that was a struggle. It most likely should have been a struggle.

[im4wsu]

I gave my opinion and you attacked it. That is your privilege, although you might get a better response from a less combative presentation. You've presented your point multiple times, and it is beginning to resemble dead horsemeat.

But simply, to me, every team has portions of a game where they give up a run and "struggle." That you choose to ingnore Cuse's struggle, being that they were either tied or behind for 39:03 and trailed by as many as 9 well into the second half, I don't care if the team is favored by 2 or the underdog, I consider that to be a struggle. Now, I am not wise enough to be able to create a rating system for degree of struggling, I'll leave that to you.

[shockmonster]

I guarantee you that Marshall is going to find performance problems to quibble about with a 25-0 team. He is going to point out that the past two games have been poor rebounding games. He's going to point out that if they rebound like they did in the first half against SIU, they won't win the next game or any remaining games.