3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Someone in the game day thread made the statement "With Reed and Mitchell we would be winning the A-10 right now". Do people really believe that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcglotherirvin Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Absolutely. The a10 is down. We've had a lot of close games that we would have won with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HusakAttack Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 who are reed and mitchell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Absolutely. The a10 is down. We've had a lot of close games that we would have won with them. All of those close games? You realize that Mitchell and Reed can have bad games. Especially on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Absolutely. The a10 is down. We've had a lot of close games that we would have won with them. Yes. I just went thru the schedule. At best I've got us 20-3 at worst 18-5. That's based on the scores of the actuals and figuring WR and KM would have added about a net + 15 points for SLU. That may sound overly simplistic, it is, but look at the Portland game for example. They killed us on the inside. Sikma goes off for about 25 or so. Does he do that against WR? Highly doubtful. So add the net 15 to SLU's score we leave Portland with a 75-69 win. I figure the for sure L's to be Duke, Duquense, and MoSt. And I'm not so sure about MoSt. Also factor in KM's leadership and WR's unbridled enthusiasm, we may very well have been a ranked team right now and leading the A-10. Of course, I'm assuming the frosh would still be developing like they have been and BC's strong play would have largely been there as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 All of those close games? You realize that Mitchell and Reed can have bad games. Especially on the road. Last year we finished 9-5 in conference with those two (and Smith and JJ). I don't believe that the difference between this year and last is due to Smith and JJ so its not hard for me to believe that with WR and KM we'd be at or near the top of the league. Winning at Temple or Xavier or Richmond would still be hard, but none of these home losses or the GW game would have happened... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HusakAttack Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Last year we finished 9-5 in conference with those two (and Smith and JJ). I don't believe that the difference between this year and last is due to Smith and JJ so its not hard for me to believe that with WR and KM we'd be at or near the top of the league. Winning at Temple or Xavier or Richmond would still be hard, but none of these home losses or the GW game would have happened... we were 11-5 in conference last yr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Do people really believe that? Yes. We'd be somewhere in the top 3. Keep on trolling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Last year we finished 9-5 in conference with those two (and Smith and JJ). I don't believe that the difference between this year and last is due to Smith and JJ so its not hard for me to believe that with WR and KM we'd be at or near the top of the league. Winning at Temple or Xavier or Richmond would still be hard, but none of these home losses or the GW game would have happened... The Dayton home loss wouldn't have happened? No way? They lost that game by 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HusakAttack Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 The Dayton home loss wouldn't have happened? No way? They lost that game by 10.Were you at that game? If so, I doubt you would question that being a win with those 2. Dayton tried to give that game away and that was one of our worst games this year. Dayton is not that good of a team and horribly coached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 -3jack, what is your desire with this thread? the premise to the thread is pure speculation and so you come to the fans' site (thanks Steve for allowing us to play in your sandbox) and speculate to the negative, what do you think the reaction will be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamitalian85 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 It's hard to say what our record would be with Reed and Mitchell, but it isn't hard to imagine being near the top of the league. Imagine adding 2 consistent scoring threats and a big that can rebound. The lack of both of these has hurt the Bills in a lot of games this year. Reed and Mitchell are enough to swing a game by 10 pts, so yes we probably would have beaten Dayton. We beat them last year with those 2 and they aren't nearly as good this year. And so we wait another year and have to put up with close losses for the time being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Last year we finished 9-5 in conference with those two (and Smith and JJ). I don't believe that the difference between this year and last is due to Smith and JJ so its not hard for me to believe that with WR and KM we'd be at or near the top of the league. Winning at Temple or Xavier or Richmond would still be hard, but none of these home losses or the GW game would have happened... But Temple was w/o a top player this year as I recall. Makes it easier for us. X game who knows there. I figured a ,however, as WR would have contained Frease a little better. KC could have solely concentrated on D against Holloway. The biggest factor though is we would not have had those maddening scoring droughts with KM and WR in the lineup. Remember K we lost 27 points with these two and a shutdown defender on the inside and a floor leader. All speculation of course, but this year it's more fun thinking about what might have been than what has actually been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 All of those close games? You realize that Mitchell and Reed can have bad games. Especially on the road.KM's a pretty consistent player. WR granted can have his ups and down, but last year he had more ups. The biggest question would have been would the frosh have developed as well as they have given they'd have less minutes. I think having WR around would have been a plus for RL and CE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Some game lines for Mitchell last year: @Iowa St - 2-10 from the field 5 pts 2 assts 2 turnovers @ Charlotte - 2-14 from the field 12 pts 1 assts 3 turnovers @ GW - 4-15 from the field 13 pts 4 assts 2 turnovers @ St Joes - 4-10 from the field 9 pts 2 assts 5 turnovers Temple - 3-8 from the field 7 pts 2 assts 2 turnovers Some lines for Reed from last year: @ BGU - 4 pts 0 rbs 0 blocks UMKC - 3 pts 5 rbs 1 blck Dayton - 2 pts 7 rbs 1 block @ Dayton - 5 pts 6 rbs 2 blocks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Some game lines for Mitchell last year: @Iowa St - 2-10 from the field 5 pts 2 assts 2 turnovers @ Charlotte - 2-14 from the field 12 pts 1 assts 3 turnovers @ GW - 4-15 from the field 13 pts 4 assts 2 turnovers @ St Joes - 4-10 from the field 9 pts 2 assts 5 turnovers Temple - 3-8 from the field 7 pts 2 assts 2 turnovers Some lines for Reed from last year: @ BGU - 4 pts 0 rbs 0 blocks UMKC - 3 pts 5 rbs 1 blck Dayton - 2 pts 7 rbs 1 block @ Dayton - 5 pts 6 rbs 2 blocks Ok, so KM wasn't near his average in 3 games. Willie in 4 games. But there are 3 others on the court with them. I guess you're assuming they don't pick up the slack when the leaders are having bad games? Take Holloway and Frease away from X this year. What's their record gonna be? And one other thing about KM. He's the type of player who makes everyone around him a little better. Please let us know who we would have lost to this year with them on the floor? I can't count more than 5 L's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archy McNally Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 X would have been a win. Holloway tore up McCall and Jett. Mitchell is still a much better defender than either of them. Not that Holloway wouldn't have scored, but he would not have got into the lane as near as easy as he did. KC would still have guarded the shooting guard, like he did the vast majority of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 The Dayton home loss wouldn't have happened? No way? They lost that game by 10. 3Jack has always been trollish, but I will play along. Dayton had a better team last year and we beat them twice with Mitchell and Reed, so why couldn't we have done it again this year with a better supporting cast? Regarding the Bills possibly winning the league this year, it's not just blue kool-aid drinkers who feel that way, the announcer on tv last night raised that possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 X would have been a win. Holloway tore up McCall and Jett. Mitchell is still a much better defender than either of them. Not that Holloway wouldn't have scored, but he would not have got into the lane as near as easy as he did. KC would still have guarded the shooting guard, like he did the vast majority of the time. Absolutely would have been a win huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Dominoes. With Reed and Mitchell, the load now on Cassity, Remekun, McCall and Jett changes significantly. The Reed/Mitchell presence allows others to do other things. At a mini,um, we would be at the top of the second bracket in this league, not trying to stay out of the bottom spot. I think we certainly beat Rhode Island and La Salle and GeeDub. I think we also beat Dayton and, if things stay the way they went (highly unlikely of course), we beat Temple. Only X and Duquesne are who knows. The record of 3 and 7 is now 8 and 2 and smack into the Top Four. Of course,its all specualtion but better? Absolutely, positively ..... you'd be nuts to suggest otherwise and doing so only reveals troll-like desires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 3Jack has always been trollish, but I will play along. Dayton had a better team last year and we beat them twice with Mitchell and Reed, so why couldn't we have done it again this year with a better supporting cast? Regarding the Bills possibly winning the league this year, it's not just blue kool-aid drinkers who feel that way, the announcer on tv last night raised that possibility. Of course it is a possibility. It is also possible that the Bills lose that game and would have 2 or more losses at this point. Some on this board don't seem to want to entertain that idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Dominoes. With Reed and Mitchell, the load now on Cassity, Remekun, McCall and Jett changes significantly. The Reed/Mitchell presence allows others to do other things. At a mini,um, we would be at the top of the second bracket in this league, not trying to stay out of the bottom spot. I think we certainly beat Rhode Island and La Salle and GeeDub. I think we also beat Dayton and, if things stay the way they went (highly unlikely of course), we beat Temple. Only X and Duquesne are who knows. The record of 3 and 7 is now 8 and 2 and smack into the Top Four. Of course,its all specualtion but better? Absolutely, positively ..... you'd be nuts to suggest otherwise and doing so only reveals troll-like desires. I'm still seeing X as a win with KM and WR out there. Especially, if BC and RL played like they did. I don't know about Duquense. Are they that good or did we play that bad? And how did Duquense get so many good players. Their coach has to be the greatest salesman on the planet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Speculation and what if's are great for the water cooler, but Reed and Mitchell wouldn't have been the only players to improve after their sophomore slumps -- I think those guys would have made everyone else play better and would have taken the proverbial weight of the world off the timid Cassity who truly has folded like me against Phil Ivey in Vegas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 3JackA, Have you seen Kwamain play lately? Just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Jack Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 3JackA, Have you seen Kwamain play lately? Just curious. No. But you should be asking this question to the folks who are making absolute predictions on this board not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.