meatwad

It's official! ESPN.com Story

I would say it's standard. If you recall Steve-o was coming off the bench at the beginning of the year last year. If Teal earns the playing time more power to him, but it's not a big deal that he's not playing much right now. What's much more of a surprise in my opinion, is how quickly Zemanski earned a starting spot next to Blair. For someone that wasn't expected to be drafted that's amazing.

Guess I can't cheer for Akron since I never went there. And no "Joe Akron" can cheer for the Zips because they have no connection besides living in the city. What a ridiculous argument.

Ryan Howard Derrick Lee Carlos Lee Baseball three pack.

It's in 'off topic...' section. And it is...off topic. I'm amazed that anybody can have such an opinion/understanding of the economic ramifications of a 2800 pg health care bill. Good for you guys. I have a hard enough time figuring out what kind of offense our basketball team runs. I'm really looking forward to the ZN debate on religion in next months poll entitled 'Religion, Which One is Right'. I think it is a good step. Health care should be and now is a right. Sorry you rich people had your taxes go up. Sucks. But at least now that everyone will be forced to be covered, the insurance industry will concentrate on controlling costs to profit and not finding more ways to screw you out of medical care. You know what I'm sorry about? I'm not rich, so my "taxes" didn't go up. But it is an objective fact that everyone that currently has health insurance will see their premiums go up. That sucks the big one considering how crazy costs already are.

Correct on Roberts' scholarship, which he received this past season after playing his first 2 (not 3) sesons as a walk-on. Huh. I don't know how I missed that!?

Rasor even confirms something he shouldn't be confirming because it's dead wrong. Maybe it's a sign that his head is more into politics these days than basketball. With the departure of the three transfers and two seniors (Jimmy Conyers and Chris McKnight), Akron has five open scholarships. Abreu and the other three recruits will account for four of them. Barring another signee, guard Darryl Roberts will use the fifth scholarship, after playing his prior three years as one of the most productive walk-ons in the country. Why is this dead wrong, if you will pardon my ignorance?

GP1, your dream might be coming true... Paul - Obama Dead Heat

+1 Hell of a game. That last shot was sooo close.

Huh? Easier than Butler's I suppose, but Duke was a 1 and Butler was a 5. You would expect that Duke would have an easier run. Or are you referring to all of the 1 seeds?

His player was too.

From top to bottom, definitely. Akron, Can't, and Ohio are the best in the MAC and then there is a huge drop off from there on out. From top to bottom, the Horizon League is definitely deeper. How can you say that? If the MAC and Horiizon played their respective number 1 teams against each other and so forth down the line, The MACs 11 and 12 teams would win going away. Let's settle this like the ACC and Big Ten. I propose the Horizon - Mac challenge (Sponsored by MarathonTM) Play em every year, switch the sites, etc. Could be a lot of fun.

This is silly.

LOL, Bubba is back. What a tool.

Did you know every player that has ever played for Tom Izzo has been to a final four? That's pretty neat. That is pretty cool. Somehow that guy sneaks into the Final Four or Elite Eight every year it seems. Crazy.

With the logic and stats and facts that he employed, no I will not change my mind. Because the facts did not warrant me changing my mind. I will if there are different/more useful/better stats and facts that can be used to back up his assertion.

Really?

After he said I was "arguing just to argue" it became a moot point to me. Facts were not going to change his mind.

So it eliminated half the field right away? This is getting worse. so what exactly is your point? ND is a better defensive team? Or are you saying these teams are there because of their offense? No one has really presented any other points, beside arguing against mine...enlighten me. My point: A ) Your sample size is ridiculously small, because it only includes 4 games and in such games there are many factors that can affect the number of points you give up. B ) All of these teams are good at defense; no one is arguing that. But they are also pretty good (even better!) at scoring than they are at playing defense. C ) You were trying to call someone out based on faulty logic and statistics. My overall point is you are wrong. Exactly, you have no actual point, you're kind of just arguing to argue. Thanks, come again. See point B above. Offense is important, too. Happy now? Also, it still does not change the fact that you are wrong.

So it eliminated half the field right away? This is getting worse. so what exactly is your point? ND is a better defensive team? Or are you saying these teams are there because of their offense? No one has really presented any other points, beside arguing against mine...enlighten me. My point: A ) Your sample size is ridiculously small, because it only includes 4 games and in such games there are many factors that can affect the number of points you give up. B ) All of these teams are good at defense; no one is arguing that. But they are also pretty good (even better!) at scoring than they are at playing defense. C ) You were trying to call someone out based on faulty logic and statistics. My overall point is you are wrong.

So it eliminated half the field right away? This is getting worse.

Really? That's "the DiG strategy" now? I'm the best example you can cite for doing that on ZN.O? Amazing. Haha, I'm sure it's not exclusive to you (I'm sure I've done it myself in fact)... just the most recent example of someone arguing the same point. My points are that you're using borderline useless data (I assume you're using averages from tournament games only?) and that this year's Final Four is not representative of the norm anyway. Averages from tournament games, to show success in the tournament? useless? their regular season stats have nothing to do with this tournament. Maybe there's a reason this year's final four isn't representative of the norm? Things change. This isn't 2009 anymore The data isn't even right anyway. Duke has given up 56.25 ppg in this tournament. You claim that they are one of the three teams giving up the least points in the tournament. However you do not realize that Notre Dame had a ppg against of 51 in the tournament. Guess how many games they won? Texas A&M gave up 56 ppg (adjusted for the OT game they played). I just did a quick glance at the bracket so there could be more. Might want to get your stats right next time.

At least we're not latching onto "Conventional Wisdom" and have points to back up our assertions. I'll take the informed position any day of the week.

We've been over this. PPG means nothing. That just means they hold the ball for 32 seconds on offense and the other team has the ball for less time. We are all more interested in defensive efficiency for the tournament. Can you provide that please and then we can revisit this? Found it. Duke 8 Butler 16 Wv 59 MSU 70 And offensive efficiency: Duke 6 WV 22 MSU 44 Butler 54 Hmmm. Care to revisit your previous assessment? *FYI, I edited this after I realized I was looking at the wrong thing originally on Ken Poms site.

We've been over this. PPG means nothing. That just means they hold the ball for 32 seconds on offense and the other team has the ball for less time. We are all more interested in defensive efficiency for the tournament. Can you provide that please and then we can revisit this?