Game #25: @ Dayton - Wed Feb 23, 7pm WHIO/SNY

[TruePoint]

Holy cow. Now we are doing ifs, buts, candies, and nuts? Metro State, LSU, and GMU wins were all one possession games under twenty seconds left. What if we change those to losses? This board would be apoplectic. If you change those three wins, you need to change them for every team in America that had close losses as a result of bad FT shooting or turnovers. Then you are back to where you were originally.

The record is what it is.

I don't disagree with you in terms of making excuses or whatever. You are what your record says you are, and this team is no exception to that. But it is helpful to keep in kind in terms of trying to get some perspective on where the program is. Even being 14-11 wouldn't be good enough in terms of a final destination, but it would make people perceive the process as being much further along, and the difference between that and where we actually are is razor thin - thin enough that it makes no meaningful difference in terms of what we should expect next year, for example.

[ramfan85]

We always like to think about the added wins we could have had and forget the losses we also may have had. As said, it is what it is.

[rjsuperfly66]

Well to be fair, an average team in theory should be .500 in toss-up, close one possession games. While you can't change the past games, URI is 3-7 in those essential "toss-up" games. It's not like you are unreasonable saying "Oh, let's switch every close game, look, we are 8-2." That said you are what you are, but the distance to being decent isn't as much as the record would suggest. It's a different situation when you lose a lot of close games, as opposed to getting waxed off the court every time out.

[Gonebarongone]

Well to be fair, an average team in theory should be .500 in toss-up, close one possession games. While you can't change the past games, URI is 3-7 in those essential "toss-up" games. It's not like you are unreasonable saying "Oh, let's switch every close game, look, we are 8-2." That said you are what you are, but the distance to being decent isn't as much as the record would suggest. It's a different situation when you lose a lot of close games, as opposed to getting waxed off the court every time out.

That's a good point. It's also why Kenpom is a better indicator. Not simply wins and losses and opponent. #130 right now. Which is probably fair.

[BPR2010]

While the argument for close wins/losses can be argued both ways, I've always been a firm believer in the term "Good teams find ways to win while bad teams find a way to lose them." It is so true in this sport, and this season has been a perfect example. Take a look at Syracuse. While they are undefeated, it hasn't come easy. They have been in approximately 7 or 8 games that have come down to the final 2 minutes, 5 of which were decided by 5 points or less, or went to OT. Now, if we're using the .500 logic, Cuse would have 4 losses on their resume and not too many of us think they are as strong a contender for a title. However, they're arguably the most complete team in the country, and they manage to win and close out these close games. You can't really put a winning percentage on it, because the games fell as they should have. You can't say would've or could've when the track record has been losing close games all year. St. Louis is 5-1 in games decided by less than 5 points this year. It's the reason why they beat us and are off to a historic start. It's the reason they are where they are, and we are where we are. We're contending, there's no doubt about that. But changing the results of games because of a standard logic, in my opinion, is irrelevant. We don't have a killer instinct, and most importantly we're horrid from the foul line. Until those things are corrected, these utterly painful losses will continue. I'd love to win them as much as everyone else here, but we've found a way to lose a lot of winnable games this year.