Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

tOFFICIAL M v MSU For the B1G SpartyBoard Mens Hoops Tournament Title Thread

Jr had some comic value

Davis was terrible because he didn't dunk enough, put backs off the glass didn't count

Bowl wins matter over everything, that's why bobby Williams was better than saban and md
 
Jr had some comic value

Davis was terrible because he didn't dunk enough, put backs off the glass didn't count

Bowl wins matter over everything, that's why bobby Williams was better than saban and md

Or my favorite. Derrick Nix (after his sophomore season) would be better off as a player if he stayed fat vs getting in shape and adding muscle.
 
Or my favorite. Derrick Nix (after his sophomore season) would be better off as a player if he stayed fat vs getting in shape and adding muscle.

Saying "hed whip Shaquille Oneal in a fight because big guys like that cant fight" He then used Bruce Lee against Abdul Jabar example from "Game of Death" to support his claim :yay: Good riddance
 
Amazing. In summary, you made the following statements suggesting that MSU would have had a much more difficult game against UofM if they played in the first round rather than in the finals.

I and others (sbee, jwlcosu, lucke, msumatt28, and johnny2x2x totaling 6) suggest a difference of opinion. Pretty harmless.

Then I paraphrase your position as MSU being fortunate to have played UM in the finals, the 3rd game in 3 days and you take significant objection. I believe it?s a totally fair characterization based on your explained view of the game. I never read your take to be that UofM would have otherwise won, yet you go all batshit crazy. Truly amazing.

Quick review on how I arrived at that paraphrase of your position:

Sure just not too excited. Michigan was exhausted the entire second half - we can't take all the credit for that. In fact, the 2h was very sloppy for both teams. Nice to win another BTT and extend Michigan's drought to 16 years but he real games start next week.

Did you watch the second half? michigan had no life, couldn't get anyone open, couldn't make shots when they did. Some of the credit goes to MSU's defense but that game is not representative of what would happen if that game was played in the first round and not the final.

It was the game plan but it was clearly aided by Michigan not having the legs to overcome it. When healthy I think we're the better team but I wouldn't expect that result against a fresh squad. Our guys were tired too, the whole second half sucked at both ends but fatigue definitely made them easier to defend.

Michigan was clearly worn down. I'm not saying we lose if that was game was played in the first round but it's probably a much tougher win.

I think the fatigue factor worked heavily in our favor playing with a lead in the 2nd half. I would expect MSU to win as many as 7 of 10 with both squads fresh but I wouldn't expect many if any to be double digit leads the whole way. There was no way michigan was coming back last night. Give them fresh legs, good chance they make a better game of it.

If you watched that game it got progressively worse from about the 12 minute mark in the first half. At that point, they were on pace for a high 70s halftime total but the half finished at 67 and got worse with just 57 points scored in the second half. Lots of folks out here saying they don't want us to get into a half-court battle, they prefer to open it up. The last 30 minutes were mostly played in half court, but against a team that couldn't do crap - partly due to matchups but also largely due to the fact that they didn't have the energy to execute.

I find it a big stretch that someone would read your comments (particularly the bolded portions) and feel my paraphrase/characterization of the writers position as "MSU was fortunate" is totally unfair or off base. I think it's a totally fair characterization of the totality of your position.

Your protest is duly noted, but I believe it's simply over the top. Again, simply a disagreement.

I'm done. You get the last word, or I hope someone puts this stupid thread out of it's misery.
 
I feel like I'm watching a retarded child repeatedly poke himself in they eye with a spoon every time I read one of your responses. You keep quoting posts that I never denied saying then say I deny saying them and/or insist your misinterpretation of my opinion is absolutely what I was saying.

You're the one going off on rants and blowing your top. I'm simply trying to explain to you that you've made a mistake interpreting my posts. I would try explaining it again but I no longer care what you think or how you arrived at the incorrect paraphrasing of my position - it's my opinion, I know what it is and you are wrong about my opinion. It's just that simple. If it makes you happy, I will say it's not unreasonable for you to draw your conclusions. I even said my comments were somewhat vague. But it's just beyond unreasonable that you won't accept that you're wrong about my opinion. Why is it so hard to accept that could be wrong about something so subjective? I do however think it's funny that you split hairs about "consensus", "collective", "collectively", "everyone" etc and accuse me of misinterpreting your post while stubbornly insisting there is zero possibility that maybe you misinterpreted what I've said and you know better what my opinion is than I do. I'm just going to let you go ahead and keep poking yourself in the eye with that spoon.

But while we're here, here are sbee's and MSUMatt28's quotes that you think agree with you:

when you play 3 games in 3 days, you simply don't have the legs on day 3 that you did on day 1. the first thing that goes is the jump shot, MSU and Michigan both shot poorly, we shoot a higher % from 3 than they do and we shot about 15%, we did shoot 50% from the floor even with the bad outside shooting.

the difference is that we can score other ways, we got so many easy looks at the basket. even with Morgan in there Michigan was tissue paper soft on the interior.

I'm sure Michigan was somewhat tired. It was their third game in 3 days and they aren't very deep. MSU was tired too, otherwise maybe they shoot better than 2 for 17 on 3's. But that's what MSU has done over the years when they're at their best though, when they're really guarding. They make you use all of the shot clock looking for any kind of shot and you expend so much energy to get a shot that you can't make them consistently once you do. We haven't seen that kind of defense from them often enough this year.

UM's body language in the second half also might have had as much do to with the fact that they were down 15 points and the fact that they were taken to the limit in both their previous games.

Not saying they agree that the game is better (not great or even good, just better) if both teams are fresh, but neither explicitly says I'm wrong or explicitly agrees with you. Both clearly say fatigue played a role and both seem to indicate it it affected michigan more (sbee because they have fewer options to score (no inside game) and MSUMatt points out that michigan went to the wire in both their prior games - recall MSU coasted through both of theirs).

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that if fatigue took away michigan's only options (jump shots and drives) while we could still score inside, that maybe, just maybe if michigan was fresh and had those options, he might think michigan could make it a better game (again, not great or even good, just better). But they don't explicitly say one way or another so I can't know for sure - but I bet you can since you clearly know people's opinions better than they do.

As for this one:

Sorry, but your logic still doesn't make sense. They both played 3 games in 3 days, and UM actually had a few hours more to rest up since they played earlier on Sat. Plain and simple fact is that State flat out outplayed UM.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Clearly this guy missed the point altogether - he thinks he has this big ah-ha moment with his revelation that MSU played just as many games in just as many days. If you want to count this guy among your "everyone" go ahead, you're up to 3. Congrats. Just be nice and make sure you share your spoon with the other two geniuses.
 
Last edited:
To clarify my position on this, I think playing 3 in 3 days helped us because we can score in other ways, it exposed michigans soft interior play.

If we both shot our usually 3pt % we win my more.
 
To clarify my position on this, I think playing 3 in 3 days helped us because we can score in other ways, it exposed michigans soft interior play.

If we both shot our usually 3pt % we win my more.

Serious question - why do you say that when we're 282/702 for .402 to their 281/705 for .399? To me, that's clearly a wash, assuming we both took the same number of 3s in the game, which on the season we have taken almost exactly the same number but we've played 1 game more than them so they're averaging almost 1 more attempt per game.

Granted Payne missed a lot of games and shot above the teams average at .442 but even if you assume he played 10 more games, shoots 3.07 3s per game, hits at his season rate and doesn't take other 3 opportunities away (i.e. his are all incremental), it doesn't materially change the team's average - goes from .4017 to .4025, that's an increase of 8bps or .08%. If Payne's shots are all incremental, then we're both averaging ~ 21 attempts per game. Again, a wash.
 
Last edited:
Serious question - why do you say that when we're 282/702 for .402 to their 281/705 for .399? To me, that's clearly a wash, assuming we both took the same number of 3s in the game, which on the season we have taken almost exactly the same number but we've played 1 game more than them so they're averaging almost 1 more attempt per game.

Granted Payne missed a lot of games and shot above the teams average at .442 but even if you assume he played 10 more games, shoots 3.07 3s per game, hits at his season rate and doesn't take other 3 opportunities away (i.e. his are all incremental), it doesn't materially change the team's average - goes from .4017 to .4025, that's an increase of 8bps or .08%. If Payne's shots are all incremental, then we're both averaging ~ 21 attempts per game. Again, a wash.

I say that because they made a better % in the game against us so if we both a shot the way we normally shoot it would benefit us more.

Sorry I got in this thread, I was just clarifying my position since ot was mentioned
 
I say that because they made a better % in the game against us so if we both a shot the way we normally shoot it would benefit us more.

Sorry I got in this thread, I was just clarifying my position since ot was mentioned

Oh, in that game, all else equal, yes we win by more - 6 more just using the shot totals as they are (obviously actually hitting some of those shots would alter the outcome in other ways). But in the hypothetical case where both teams are fresh, take and hit their typical season average, the 3 pt game is basically a wash. Maybe we defend the 3 better and maybe they get so hot it doesn't matter. Who knows.

and no apologies, so long as I'm not being told what my opinion is I enjoy these conversations and don't expect everyone to share the same opinion.
 
Back
Top