We're not 17 points better than KU, we also are not worse than Baylor. Things have a way of balancing out. The KU thumping definitely inflated expectations because it showed our potential. It's impossible to play to the top of your potential every game though. If you are really good, you can play poorly and still win, or hope the other team has a bad game. Baylor, unfortunately, played well, and shot the ball well enough to beat us when we weren't at our best.
Haaland: The perfect storm
- Thread starter khaal53
- Start date
Last year Oklahoma state swept Kansas. Not that these things happen often but they do happen.
If KSU starts out 1-12 with only 3 points in the first 12 minutes like they have the last two games, we don't have much to worry about. Our defense is good enough that I think that'd be almost impossible for them to overcome.
As your stats show. Opportunities to win on the road are rare. Baylor was one of the places where we had the best opportunity for a road win. Baylor, West Virginia and Okie State. We got one and lost one. As someone stated on another thread, you don't win the conference just by beating Kansas you need to beat those you should beat. Baylor on the road was a lost opportunity. Now we need to beat someone better on the road to stay in contention. With this team it is still entirely possible. So much talent and potential for great play.
I feel like every year we forget how much more variable basketball is than football. The difference in shooting percentage from game to game and randomness of close games makes upsets much more likely.
That's what WV prolly thought.
They won't shoot poorly Saturday.
It may come down to patience at both ends for ISU to win.
This. Some fans got way too high after the KU game and set themselves up for disappointment. Anyone paying attention knew that going to Waco immediately after was going to be a tough road game.
It's just such a long season; too long to draw much of anything this early other than "They won" or "They lost". Honestly, I don't know how some people make it to March living and dying with every game.
I fully agree with this, but no one truly knows how good or bad Baylor is yet. They have a few decent wins and a couple terrible losses. Sure they were picked near the bottom of the Big 12 but so were we and as stated in the article they are shown as the KenPom #58 which isn't that bad, but it was a winnable game and I think we will be wishing to have that one back toward the end of the season.
Competing for a Big 12 championship should still be expected with this roster and KU without Doke imo. The performance at Baylor should be improved on and be below our average output, but resembling 2000 is lofty. That team was very well coached in defense and rebounding, had two first round upperclassmen, and thus went 14-2. This team on the other hand has shown vulnerability on the boards even when at full strength, and the best wins coming under the guise of the opponents having a lot of unforced TOs.
Imo beating (KU) and competing (Baylor) with conference teams without coming close to your best means the ceiling is high, but there is still a floor. If one has any faith in the staff, expectations should be high that the former is reached.
Except WVU is terrible this year. Not to mention, KSU is one of the worst FT shooting teams in the country.
I'm much less worried about this game.
True, it does occur.
Interesting that OSU got the only sweep, but was 8-10 in conference. Among the biggest contenders, Tech also won at KU, but Kansas won the return game in Lubbock; and Kansas swept West Virginia. So the Oklahoma State sweep didn't cost KU the title the way it could've.
They may be terrible, but we’ll need to improve to avoid losing to them.
WVU is #54 in Kenpom. Baylor is #50, Arizona #53. KSU is #48.
Losing to them on the road, maybe. I don't think Konate is going to play again this year from some of the rumblings, he's my major fear with WVU.
Wade is set to return in the next week or so, we'll be underdogs in Manhattan by that point.
Can someone explain more the axiomatic truth of "Road Games Are Hard"?
I don't mean this as a jerky fan!...but just a simplistic one I guess. I get how doofuses like us would be intimidated, or how team is out of the rhythm due to the flight/bus travel, but for these guys they train 365 days a year to play 30 games per year, they've were playing "road games" in odd/quiet gyms for 100% of the time for their AAU circuits...so it seems like in MBB in particular this should be less of a factor. Run the same offense, set the same screens and make the same passes, shoot the same shots, etc. Have any of the players ever given their explanation of "what's different"?
Rob explained (below) how the statistics bear out there is some "ooga-booga road game factor". I'm looking for the "Why?". Maybe this is a question for the call-in show! Does anyone know if they use sports psychologists for the teams re: developing road game mindsets (besides the apparently ineffective 'business trip' cliche) a la Phil Jackson and the Bulls? (Probably do...)
Excerpted from the article:
I don't mean this as a jerky fan!...but just a simplistic one I guess. I get how doofuses like us would be intimidated, or how team is out of the rhythm due to the flight/bus travel, but for these guys they train 365 days a year to play 30 games per year, they've were playing "road games" in odd/quiet gyms for 100% of the time for their AAU circuits...so it seems like in MBB in particular this should be less of a factor. Run the same offense, set the same screens and make the same passes, shoot the same shots, etc. Have any of the players ever given their explanation of "what's different"?
Rob explained (below) how the statistics bear out there is some "ooga-booga road game factor". I'm looking for the "Why?". Maybe this is a question for the call-in show! Does anyone know if they use sports psychologists for the teams re: developing road game mindsets (besides the apparently ineffective 'business trip' cliche) a la Phil Jackson and the Bulls? (Probably do...)
Excerpted from the article:
Topic one – Road games are hard
In general, fans tend to not fully understand or account for how difficult road games are. On the shallow level, it is something that is accepted but not fully understood.
... ...
Further, let’s look at the difference in probability to beat a certain team on Iowa State’s schedule and how it changes in home games versus road games:
As you can see, Iowa State increases its probability of beating a Big 12 team on average of about 22 percent just by playing them at home instead of on the road. That is a big swing that I don’t believe we fully and accurately account for with how we perceive wins, losses, and performances.
They haven’t had Konate is their close losses against TT, Texas, and KSU. Plus, Culver is a load, and offensively putting up similar numbers against legitimate competition. If Konate were to come back alongside Esa and Culver, WVU would have the best frontcourt in the conference.
Are you questioning the existence of home court advantage or more seeking why it exists in the first place?
Arena familiarity, crowd influence, human bias of officials, etc.
Ok but don't be surprised if it's a really tricky win.
Baylor was one of the worst 3 point shooting teams coming in. They didn't shoot too much higher than average, but it was a difference maker.
I'd recommend reading the book "Scorecasting". Talks about a lot of this stuff in great detail.
The hope is that ISU is a virtual lock in the tourney by a wide margin by that time and the rest is change.
