There's no reason to argue anything... because everything is opinion.
Opinions differ based on bias.

At that end of the NCAA tourney is where the talking should begin; and even at that there are too many "What if's?"

Well, they did beat the #2 seed and then DEMOLISHED the #3 seed Wisconsin on their way to lose to Kansas, but don't let get facts get in your way or anything, by all means, carry on.

42.4FG% allowed is not an opinion. Neither is 64PPG.

8.8 and 7.5 aren't opinions either. Those are steals per game for MU and KU respectively. MU also has about the 4th highest turnover margin in the country. I don't know what KU is because they aren't in the top 50 on the NCAA website. Yeah, MU doesn't play defense at all.
Posted via Mobile Device

They really don't.

http://kenpom.com/

Check out the defensive ratings there (AdjD). Missouri isn't impressive at all, but Duke is even worse.

Hmmm, Kansas is #4, MU is #49? That's better than I thought they were. They're just a little pathetic on D, and not completely inept like I thought.

It would appear so. And I don't believe stats have an agenda.

I don't know much about those ratings. What does adj o mean? What does that "1" mean next to Missouri for that category? That's probably not good right?
Posted via Mobile Device

Missouri's defense definitely struggles in terms of FG percentage, due to the lack of size.

Being forced to double-team in the post creates a lot of open perimeter shots for opposing teams. If you don't double-team, you open up to a lot of high percentage shots for the guy English is guarding (either from English playing behind him or trying to front him). Fronting is dangerous because you still have to commit help over the top.

The Tigers' FG percentage D does not tell the entire story. They make up in part for their size deficiency by winning the turnover battle by a significant margin (6 TO/game). That's why Mizzou's adjusted defensive ranking is in the top 50 rather than top 200 it's pure FG percentage numbers show.

I'm not sure how the guys that do those efficiency rankings, but it makes sense that they rank Mizzou around 50. If you consider the +6 turnover a game as 6 missed baskets, that adjusts Mizzou's FG percentage D into the 39 percent range, which would rank in the top 50.

Having a big shot-blocker at the back end who can also help on the glass would be really helpful as well. Bowers is that type of player (he's not Anthony Davis, but he is a talented shot-blocker and decent rebounder), but obviously he's not a factor this year...

What really hurts is not having Tony Mitchell. His defensive prowess (and flexibility) would really fill a lot of defensive holes, especially against athletic 3 men (who have consistently killed Mizzou).

Nobody said MU couldn't score with anybody.

That means MU has the best offense in the country p/Kenpom. That was never a point of contention. Denmon ripped KU a new asshole all by himself in the last meeting.

Too bad you guys don't have the number 3 defense then. You might have won that game.
Posted via Mobile Device

Right. Right.

It's not like they put extreme pressure on ballhandlers when they're trying to make entry passes ... or work really hard and fight for position defensively ... or have a 6-5 wing who kills himself on defense to defend bigger posts.

Ask Jeff Withey if Kim English plays defense.

Yeah, snatching that loss from the jaws of victory kind of sucked. Hopefully we can do better on the 25th.