Story Poster
Photo by Jack Mackenzie - SicEm365
Baylor Basketball

Gameday Thread: 3 Seed Baylor (24-10) vs 6 Seed Clemson (22-11)

March 23, 2024
107,591

3 Seed Baylor (24-10) takes on 6 Seed Clemson (22-11) Sunday March 24th at 5:10pm CST at the FedEx Forum with a trip to the Sweet 16 on the line.  The game will be televised on TNT.  

KenPom Prediction:  Baylor 75 Clemson 73

Torvik Prediction:  Baylor 74 Clemson 72

Evan Miyakawa:  Baylor 75 Clemson 73

Haslametrics:  Baylor 73 Clemson 71


Coaches

Clemson:  Brad Brownell (55) 430-273 (263-188 at Clemson); 7 NCAAs; Sweet 16

Baylor:  Scott Drew (53); 465-252 overall (435-241 at Baylor); 12 NCAAs; 5 Sweet 16s; 3 Elite 8s; FF; 1 National Championship

Head to Head:  0-0


Clemson Starters

Guard:  Joe Girard (SR) 6-2 190 lbs; 15 ppg; 3 reb; 3 asst; 43% FG; 42% 3pt; 95% FT

Guard:  Chase Hunter (SR) 6-4 200 lbs; 13 ppg; 2 reb; 3 asst; 42% FG; 32% 3pt; 85% FT

Forward: Ian Schieffelin (JR) 6-8 240 lbs; 10 ppg; 10 reb; 57% FG; 50% 3pt; 76% FT

Forward:  PJ Hall (SR) 6-10 240 lbs; 19 ppg; 7 reb; 2 blocks; 49% FG; 32% 3pt; 79% FT

Forward:  Jack Clark (SR) 6-10 210 lbs; 4 ppg; 5 reb; 38% FG; 28% 3pt; 82% FT

Clemson Bench

Forward:  RJ Godfrey (SO) 6-8 230 lbs; 6 ppg; 3 reb; 59% FG; 33% 3pt; 56% FT

Guard:  Dillon Hunter (SO) 6-4 185 lbs; 3 ppg; 40% FG; 27% pt; 44% FT

Forward:  Chauncey Wiggins (SO) 6-10 210 lbs; 6 ppg; 2 reb; 44% FG; 34% 3pt; 71% FT


Baylor Starters

Guard:  RayJ Dennis (SR) 6-3 180 lbs; 13 ppg; 4 reb; 7 asst;  48% FG; 34% 3pt; 72% FT

Guard:  Jayden Nunn (JR) 6-3 190 lbs; 11 ppg; 3 reb; 2 asst; 47% FG; 45% 3pt; 71% FT 

Guard:  Ja’Kobe Walter (FR) 6-5 185 lbs; 14 ppg; 4 reb; 37% FG; 34% 3pt; 81% FT

Forward:  Jalen Bridges (JR) 6-9 225 lbs; 12 ppg; 6 reb; 46% FG; 41% 3pt; 83% FT

Forward:  Yves Missi (FR) 6-11 220 lbs; 11 ppg; 6 reb; 2 blocks; 62% FG; 62% FT

Baylor Bench

Forward:  Caleb Lohner (JR) 6-8 235 lbs; 3 ppg; 2 reb; 57% FG; 25% 3pt; 77% FT

Forward:  Josh Ojianwuna (SO) 6-10 240 lbs; 5 ppg; 3 reb; 73% FG; 63% FT

Guard:  Miro Little (FR) 6-4 185 lbs; 2 ppg; 43% FG; 36% 3pt; 72% FT

Discussion from...

Gameday Thread: 3 Seed Baylor (24-10) vs 6 Seed Clemson (22-11)

51,113 Views | 379 Replies | Last: 8 mo ago by CHP Bear
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tomiathon said:

bear2be2 said:

tomiathon said:

Not sure how the computers measure efficiency, but their metrics are clearly wrong for this team when the offense stinks out loud for all but about 8 mins per game waaaaaaay too often. Those 8 minutes are admittedly exhilarating, but the other 32 minutes are pure torture.
That's just the way you remember it because we've had a few games where it was legitimately bad. But our offense has been pretty consistently good this season. The problem is we have a defense that requires it to be virtually perfect, and nobody's offense is perfect.

There aren't a lot of teams in college basketball that can score the way we do. All of these games that turned out close at the end that we had no business being in did so precisely because we are capable of elite offense for extended stretches. If we weren't, we'd have been blown out seven or eight times instead of twice.


No, it's the way I remember it because it has been exactly the way its been in literally every single game I've watched this season except maybe 2. The numbers can lie all they want, but the eye tells a different story, and it's that this offense has been incredibly inconsistent all season long. Again, yes, it will play incredibly for a short duration each game, but that does NOT in ANY way make up for the MUCH lengthier periods of absolute garbage where we throw up stupid contested threes or drive straight into an opponent's chest and throw up a shot that has no chance of going in and pray for a bailout call that we don't deserve because we're out of control. To say nothing of the missed FTs and mindless TOs. I don't care what the metric says. It's wrong.
You realize offensive efficiency isn't some nebulous formula, right? It's points per possession, adjusted for schedule strength. You can't rig that stat. We're talking about concrete, results-based numbers here.

Our offensive efficiency is high because we score at a high rate. We're inconsistent at times. But over the course of a 40-minute game, our offense almost always shows up, which is why almost every one of our losses came by single digits despite a defense that was dreadful as often as not.
BUCANDOIT82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


When McCullar was healthy Kansas had the best starting five in the country. Their team had no one else with his skill set to step in.
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUCANDOIT82 said:

bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


When McCullar was healthy Kansas had the best starting five in the country. Their team had no one else with his skill set to step in.
And still struggled almost every time it played away from home and had no one on its bench capable of impacting a game. In terms of tournament success, that was a low-ceiling team before its injuries.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:


Most one-and-dones are sad after losing in the tournament. Kentucky's were the exact same way.

The vast majority of these guys are good kids who are fully committed to their teams. They just have natural flaws based on where you're getting them in their development.
tomiathon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We'll have to agree to disagree. I'll concede it's possible I've just been unlucky in the sample of games I've managed to see, but there hasn't been a single game I've seen against a halfway decent team where I thought any struggles we had were more on the shoulders of the defense than on the offense (that's not to say there wasn't blame to share. But if I had to pick one side that's MORE to blame, it's been the offense without exception)
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tomiathon said:

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'll concede it's possible I've just been unlucky in the sample of games I've managed to see, but there hasn't been a single game I've seen against a halfway decent team where I thought any struggles we had were more on the shoulders of the defense than on the offense.
This is a wild take. I think you're outing yourself as a casual with this one.
tomiathon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

tomiathon said:

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'll concede it's possible I've just been unlucky in the sample of games I've managed to see, but there hasn't been a single game I've seen against a halfway decent team where I thought any struggles we had were more on the shoulders of the defense than on the offense.
This is a wild take. I think you're outing yourself as a casual with this one.


And I think you're outing yourself as an ass.
Quinton
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUCANDOIT82 said:

bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


When McCullar was healthy Kansas had the best starting five in the country. Their team had no one else with his skill set to step in.


UConn's is better. And yes I'm aware they squeaked out a win at home v UConn.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Heisman25g
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


You really are a know it all jerk who doesn't know as much about basketball as you think you do. If we have Langston we win today, we couldn't throw it into an ocean and that kid can flat out score. Reference the UCF game.

It's ok to disagree, but please stop acting like you're the end all be all and talking down to everyone
DP4LIFE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.
And both lost one of their leading scorers down the stretch to injury. The domino effect of losing guys like Love and McCullar means more minutes and wear and tear on the rest of the rotation. Kansas dealt with it all season and we felt it the down the stretch. Today was a tired leg game. Almost all open 3's and missed free throws were short. That's the cumulative effect of playing more minutes than they would have had Love been in the rotation.
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


You really are a know it all jerk who doesn't know as much about basketball as you think you do. If we have Langston we win today, we couldn't throw it into an ocean and that kid can flat out score. Reference the UCF game.

It's ok to disagree, but please stop acting like you're the end all be all and talking down to everyone
We had Langston when we got our ass kicked by Michigan State, couldn't stop Duke and opened Big 12 play 3-3 with back-to-back-to-back losses to Big 12 also-rans. We've been ranked between about 60 and 90 in defensive efficiency all season long.

This team had serious defensive issues it never came close to addressing. It also leaned way too heavily on freshmen to do jobs they weren't physically or emotionally equipped to handle -- at least on a consistent enough basis to contend for championships.

Love would have helped us score more efficiently. He wouldn't have fixed either of those things or raised our ceiling past the Sweet 16.
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DP4LIFE said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.
And both lost one of their leading scorers down the stretch to injury. The domino effect of losing guys like Love and McCullar means more minutes and wear and tear on the rest of the rotation. Kansas dealt with it all season and we felt it the down the stretch. Today was a tired leg game. Almost all open 3's and missed free throws were short. That's the cumulative effect of playing more minutes than they would have had Love been in the rotation.
We had 20-plus games of data on these teams before they lost anyone.

We were accurately diagnosing these teams' flaws long before injuries even came into play or became a convenient excuse.

Could both have won a game or two more without losing McCullar or Love? It's possible. Were either winning or even competing for a title-- conference or national? No way in hell. They weren't good enough at full strength to do that.
Heisman25g
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

DP4LIFE said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.
And both lost one of their leading scorers down the stretch to injury. The domino effect of losing guys like Love and McCullar means more minutes and wear and tear on the rest of the rotation. Kansas dealt with it all season and we felt it the down the stretch. Today was a tired leg game. Almost all open 3's and missed free throws were short. That's the cumulative effect of playing more minutes than they would have had Love been in the rotation.
We had 20-plus games of data on these teams before they lost anyone.

We were accurately diagnosing these teams' teams flaws long before injuries even came into play or became a convenient excuse.

Could both have won a game or two more without losing McCullar or Love? It's possible. Were either winning or even competing for a title-- conference or national? No way in hell. They weren't good enough at full strength to do that.


That wasn't you're original argument Mr know everything lol

You know so much it's hard to keep up with what you're arguing. Seriously, just stop. It's sports, sometimes you lose. You wine like a spoiled daddy's boy
IvanBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


You really are a know it all jerk who doesn't know as much about basketball as you think you do. If we have Langston we win today, we couldn't throw it into an ocean and that kid can flat out score. Reference the UCF game.

It's ok to disagree, but please stop acting like you're the end all be all and talking down to everyone
We had Langston when we got our ass kicked by Michigan State, couldn't stop Duke and opened Big 12 play 3-3 with back-to-back-to-back losses to Big 12 also-rans. We've been ranked between about 60 and 90 in defensive efficiency all season long.

This team had serious defensive issues it never came close to addressing. It also leaned way too heavily on freshmen to do jobs they weren't physically or emotionally equipped to handle -- at least on a consistent enough basis to contend for championships.

Love would have helped us score more efficiently. He wouldn't have fixed either of those things or raised our ceiling past the Sweet 16.



Let's be clear the only reason freshman had to carry that load is Bridges never stepped up and matured, he stayed the same slightly moody guy with no motor his entire career. I don't blame the coaches, I think we close to maximized him. I blame him for not stepping up and being the senior leader he was supposed to be.


The idea this was a tied leg game is absurd, this team never shot well against P5 teams, we dominated mid majors and looked like chumps against other talented teams.
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

DP4LIFE said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.
And both lost one of their leading scorers down the stretch to injury. The domino effect of losing guys like Love and McCullar means more minutes and wear and tear on the rest of the rotation. Kansas dealt with it all season and we felt it the down the stretch. Today was a tired leg game. Almost all open 3's and missed free throws were short. That's the cumulative effect of playing more minutes than they would have had Love been in the rotation.
We had 20-plus games of data on these teams before they lost anyone.

We were accurately diagnosing these teams' teams flaws long before injuries even came into play or became a convenient excuse.

Could both have won a game or two more without losing McCullar or Love? It's possible. Were either winning or even competing for a title-- conference or national? No way in hell. They weren't good enough at full strength to do that.


That wasn't you're original argument Mr know everything lol

You know so much it's hard to keep up with what you're arguing. Seriously, just stop. It's sports, sometimes you lose. You wine like a spoiled daddy's boy
I don't even know what you're trying to say. But you can go back and read every post I've made this season if you'd like. I've been anything but inconsistent.

And everything I'm saying now was said in January about both Baylor and Kansas. Both had better resumes than teams. And those resumes were built on the backs of wins over teams like Tech, BYU, Texas, TCU, Oklahoma, etc., which played absolutely garbage noncon schedules.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IvanBear said:

bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Heisman25g said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.



Both us and Kansas got hamstrung by injuries to key players late in the year lol. This was the exact game where we desperately needed Langston love, losing him hurt more than ppl realize
If you think those were the only reasons those teams made early exits, you didn't watch either enough when they were healthy. Injuries exacerbated previously existing issues for both. It didn't create any.


You really are a know it all jerk who doesn't know as much about basketball as you think you do. If we have Langston we win today, we couldn't throw it into an ocean and that kid can flat out score. Reference the UCF game.

It's ok to disagree, but please stop acting like you're the end all be all and talking down to everyone
We had Langston when we got our ass kicked by Michigan State, couldn't stop Duke and opened Big 12 play 3-3 with back-to-back-to-back losses to Big 12 also-rans. We've been ranked between about 60 and 90 in defensive efficiency all season long.

This team had serious defensive issues it never came close to addressing. It also leaned way too heavily on freshmen to do jobs they weren't physically or emotionally equipped to handle -- at least on a consistent enough basis to contend for championships.

Love would have helped us score more efficiently. He wouldn't have fixed either of those things or raised our ceiling past the Sweet 16.



Let's be clear the only reason freshman had to carry that load is Bridges never stepped up and matured, he stayed the same slightly moody guy with no motor his entire career. I don't blame the coaches, I think we close to maximized him. I blame him for not stepping up and being the senior leader he was supposed to be.


The idea this was a tied leg game is absurd, this team never shot well against P5 teams, we dominated mid majors and looked like chumps against other talented teams.
Bridges had a really good year. He's not the culprit. There are only a handful of fans here who thought he was capable of handling an alpha role, and he was never expected by anyone in the program to assume one. He was exactly what most thought he would be for us -- an excellent role player and glue guy.

The reason we leaned so heavily on freshman is we recruited freshmen to be impact players. That's the case with most elite, five-star one-and-dones.

The way we built our roster, we needed Walter and Missi to be impact players, and they were at times. But like all freshman, they were too inconsistent and competitively immature to be what we needed them to be consistently.
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:


I think it's likely, based on the way I've heard him talk about it all year, that Drew had a blind spot for this team. He truly believed this was a Final Four caliber team.

Many of us here felt the same way about it early, but I think it became pretty clear in conference play that there were cracks under the surface.

This year's team was a great group of guys, and I really wanted them to do something special. But in my heart of hearts, I haven't really felt that they were capable of accomplishing special things since probably mid-January.

Tonight's outcome didn't catch me off guard at all. I half expected it.
BUCANDOIT82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DP4LIFE said:

bear2be2 said:

Johnny Bear said:

Big12Fan2024 said:

It is starting to look like Clemson's coach and others are correct. The Big 12 has figured out a way to game all of the metrics through scheduling and beating the pulp out of non-conference patsies and now is getting exposed in the tournament.

Obvious troll.
Not really. The Big 12 has gamed the system where the NET and KenPom ratings are concerned.

Our teams are consistently seeded higher and rated better by the computers than their play on the court warrants.

Us and Kansas are perfect examples. We actually did play solid noncon schedules, but our reputation was artificially boosted by beating teams that didn't.
And both lost one of their leading scorers down the stretch to injury. The domino effect of losing guys like Love and McCullar means more minutes and wear and tear on the rest of the rotation. Kansas dealt with it all season and we felt it the down the stretch. Today was a tired leg game. Almost all open 3's and missed free throws were short. That's the cumulative effect of playing more minutes than they would have had Love been in the rotation.


Well said!
IvanBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2be2 said:

boognish_bear said:


I think it's likely, based on the way I've heard him talk about it all year, that Drew had a blind spot for this team. He truly believed this was a Final Four caliber team.

Many of us here felt the same way about it early, but I think it became pretty clear in conference play that there were cracks under the surface.

This year's team was a great group of guys, and I really wanted them to do something special. But in my heart of hearts, I haven't really felt that they were capable of accomplishing special things since probably mid-January.

Tonight's outcome didn't catch me off guard at all. I half expected it.


Drew always thought way too highly of this team. Calling it his best offensive team ever, completely ignores who the elite offensive performances were against and the constant scoring droughts in conference play.

I would argue it became clear this team was questionable when they got smoked by Michigan State and then couldn't compete with Duke.

No doubt this team was likable, from the outside it seems very high characters.

Either way high character doesn't equal good leadership and consistent play.

Offensively I can think of a number of Baylor teams that would smoke this one.
BaylorLit 01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll miss Missi. There aren't many centers that play like him.
bear2be2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorLit 01 said:

I'll miss Missi. There aren't many centers that play like him.
I love Missi, but he was pretty bad the last five or so games of this season. He was outplayed significantly by Josh O over that stretch, especially on the defensive end, and we couldn't have that if we wanted to do anything of significance in the tournament.

I would love to have him back for a second year if there was even a remote possibility of that happening. But he was a another example of the folly of leaning on immature players in a grown man's game.

I think he'll be a great pro, and I wish him all the luck in the world. He gave us some great memories and seems like a great kid. I just wish we had him later in his career when he was able to do the things he'll soon do with regularity on a more consistent basis.
Crawfoso1973
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Missi was obvioulsy playing hurt the past 2-3 games. Kudos to him for gutting it out, but he wasn't the same guy.
CHP Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
True Grit said:

Free throws… free throws… free throws
There is a bright side. Wilt's career FT % was 51.1 and Shaq's was 52.7, and we were 61.5 last night. Wilt made 28 FTs when he scored his 100. Never understood why Wilt was at 51,1%? He should have been at 99.9%. After all they were uncontested dunks. Lol
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
time to saddle up the ponies.

- kkm

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

maybe start some new combo sports??

we can dominate for a while....

acrobatics and archery??

equestrian and tumbling??
Are you a man or a mouse!? - F. D.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Clemson shot 83% from the FT line in their win over us.

Tonight they are shooting 50%.
CHP Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:

Clemson shot 83% from the FT line in their win over us.

Tonight they are shooting 50%.
At 83.3% we'd still have the short end of the stick. However, your point is well taken.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.