Kansas Crimson

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:38 am

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:23 amIt looks pissy, I'm told.

Again, our discussion was never some grand conclusion that the team is and will be better w/o Vick.

It has always been that this stretch we've played better than we did in the similar in length immediate preceding stretch with Vick. We are winning games that we either lost in that stretch or would have lost. It's an indictment on how bad we were in late January/early February.

I don't get the point of keeping everyone's positivity in check by refusing to acknowledge that which is so plainly obvious. It's out of character.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:18 am None of the games we've won are surprising and would have been any different if Vick was or wasn't on the team.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:40 am Regardless of how you feel about Chai playing hard vs Vick playing hard - the argument remains, he scored 0 points and 2 points, so it wasn't as if the guy who replacing Vick was constantly making a difference in the games played since.

Chai's shot 8-26 in his last four.
Vick's worst stretch was his last four games where he went 15-32.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:35 am

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:21 am Or perhaps if Chai was consistently ( that was the big argument around here v Vick ) playing well ( instead of a 0 point, 2 point stretch ) you'd have something.

it's coincidental that both of their stat lines are similarly inconsistent.

but then realize that one of those guys is an otherwise redshirt freshman who we had to play in part cuz we were otherwise struggling with a senior who played the same position, and the other is the senior who played the same position.

all stats aside, which player is more consistent on the play hard chart? Which player is a more consistent positive off-court presence? Which player did Self think we needed this year? Which player did Self think we could afford to take a leave?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:57 am

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:40 am Regardless of how you feel about Chai playing hard vs Vick playing hard - the argument remains, he scored 0 points and 2 points, so it wasn't as if the guy who replacing Vick was constantly making a difference in the games played since.

Chai's shot 8-26 in his last four.
Vick's worst stretch was his last four games where he went 15-32.

it's not reasonable or realistic to expect an otherwise redshirt freshman to constantly make a difference.

it IS reasonable and realistic to expect a senior to not have to be replaced either way.

the argument remains...

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:46 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:38 am

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:23 amIt looks pissy, I'm told.

Again, our discussion was never some grand conclusion that the team is and will be better w/o Vick.

It has always been that this stretch we've played better than we did in the similar in length immediate preceding stretch with Vick. We are winning games that we either lost in that stretch or would have lost. It's an indictment on how bad we were in late January/early February.

I don't get the point of keeping everyone's positivity in check by refusing to acknowledge that which is so plainly obvious. It's out of character.

I don't think we were as bad as you're claiming in late Jan/early Feb. And I'm really not seeing improvement in terms of how we're playing on the court right now. For all the reasons pdub outlined.

We still play like shit on the road, we just happen to be playing awful awful teams right now. TTU and KSU both beat TCU by double digits on the road.

We've played really well at home all season, so I'm not really seeing the improvement there either.

You have to ignore a historically bad loss, the manner in which we're winning, who we're beating, and where we're playing to really convince yourself that we're significantly better now than a month ago.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:58 am

At the moment, i'm just not seeing a sudden spike or unexpected turn that is because Vick isn't playing. We're winning the games we should as a top 20 kenpom team ( as we were ranked with and after Vick ).

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:59 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:57 am

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:40 am Regardless of how you feel about Chai playing hard vs Vick playing hard - the argument remains, he scored 0 points and 2 points, so it wasn't as if the guy who replacing Vick was constantly making a difference in the games played since.

Chai's shot 8-26 in his last four.
Vick's worst stretch was his last four games where he went 15-32.

it's not reasonable or realistic to expect an otherwise redshirt freshman to constantly make a difference.

it IS reasonable and realistic to expect a senior to not have to be replaced either way.

the argument remains...

Doesn't relate to the argument of whether we're a better team/playing better without Vick.
I would agree with your statements - not sure why you are arguing them to me.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:03 am

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:46 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:38 am

Again, our discussion was never some grand conclusion that the team is and will be better w/o Vick.

It has always been that this stretch we've played better than we did in the similar in length immediate preceding stretch with Vick. We are winning games that we either lost in that stretch or would have lost. It's an indictment on how bad we were in late January/early February.

I don't get the point of keeping everyone's positivity in check by refusing to acknowledge that which is so plainly obvious. It's out of character.

I don't think we were as bad as you're claiming in late Jan/early Feb. And I'm really not seeing improvement in terms of how we're playing on the court right now. For all the reasons pdub outlined.

We still play like shit on the road, we just happen to be playing awful awful teams right now. TTU and KSU both beat TCU by double digits on the road.

We've played really well at home all season, so I'm not really seeing the improvement there either.

You have to ignore a historically bad loss, the manner in which we're winning, who we're beating, and where we're playing to really convince yourself that we're significantly better now than a month ago.

If you want to argue that a loss at @WVU, 10 point loss @UT, double digit loss @UK, and loss @KSU isn't that bad, then whatever, agree to disagree

But are you really going to argue it's the same as: 12 point win vs. OSU, 25 point win vs. WVU, 15 point win vs. KSU, 2 road wins (which tripled our total for the year), and an admittedly bad loss at Tech?

Come on, that's not even genuine.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:55 am Wins and Losses matter. I wouldn't deny that. And I feel better after a shitty win than a respectable loss. I take the win every time.

But, I think we played better in our loss @UK than we did in our wins @TCU or @OSU. And that's even with the fact that we were still, stupidly, trying to play one big. If we're talking about THOSE games in the past, the wins matter a ton...but if we're talking about what that means about the future success of the team, the @TTU game and the @OSU game are not indicators of anything good

When we had our loosing streak it sucked, but I was aware of the upcoming schedule, so I expected us to do what we've done the past 3-4 weeks, before Vick left. So, I guess, seeing that come to fruition is not surprising to me, which makes me have a tough time attributing it to any kind of turnaround.

I mean, you've tried to downplay the fact that we needed OT to win @TCU by pointing out that we played like shit the last few minutes after leading most of the game...but that's exactly what happened @WVU too. We had a ~ 5 pt lead most of the last 5+ minutes of the game then shit the bed in the final minute. I think we continue to do a lot of the same things now that we've done all year, play well at home, play like shit on the road, make late game mistakes, etc.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:00 pm It says something that you have to minimize it to the 2-4 stretch. I'm pretty sure you made a pretty big deal about pdub cherry picking stats.

Obviously, post-Vick there are only 6 games, but there were 23 games prior to that, not 6.

I mean, I could compare the past 6 games to the first 6 where we went 6-0 and beat 6 teams now ranked in the top 16.

I'm pretty sure, Tdub's argument is the one I've been making all along. Not sure why you've decided to carry on if you're trying to make the same point. If you're not saying we're significantly better without Vick then there was no reason for you to argue with me.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm My argument was never a defense of Vick.

It was that we aren't suddenly better with him gone. Which, whether you're willing to admit or not, has been a theme around here, and on local and national media, and other places.

I think we look like the third best team in the big 12, and probably a 3 seed in the tourney. I don't think that's changed appreciably since some time in mid-January.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:50 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:00 pm It says something that you have to minimize it to the 2-4 stretch. I'm pretty sure you made a pretty big deal about pdub cherry picking stats.

Obviously, post-Vick there are only 6 games, but there were 23 games prior to that, not 6.

I mean, I could compare the past 6 games to the first 6 where we went 6-0 and beat 6 teams now ranked in the top 16.

I'm pretty sure, Tdub's argument is the one I've been making all along. Not sure why you've decided to carry on if you're trying to make the same point. If you're not saying we're significantly better without Vick then there was no reason for you to argue with me.

The stretch just goes back to our discussion a little over a week ago when I stated we were indeed playing better than what we had been recently before Vick left. Which, coincidentally or not, was the worst stretch of the season.