In Reply to: Re: This tourney undercuts CMC's "theory of the case"... posted by Cachorro on March 28, 2025 at 12:23:34
listening last night I loved the segment when they asked a player - forget which game - about one of his team's stars getting injured in the first half, his status uncertain for the rest of the game, and the player immediately said "Next man up" - we'll be okay Gundy just went off about that - saying yes indeed it's next man up, provided the next man is as skilled and effective as the player he's replacing.
To win a championship you obviously need a combination of offense and defense - you have to wind up with at least one more point on the scoreboard than your opponent. The great teams don't rely solely on one or the other and most fan arguments leave me a bit cold as they harp on one side or the other
The argument I believe in is that defense is more reliable than offense, as Cronin likes to say, it travels better. Defense is about habits, focus (follow the dang scouting report and game plan!) and effort. Shooting gets into skills and is greatly effected by runs and hot and cold spells. So yes, base on defense. But if you can't also put the ball in the hoop, you can't win either. But that means I agree with your point. My own picks coming in to this tournament were Duke or Houston, but the thing in favor of Duke is the they have Flagg and no one else can match that