if Appling was healthy we bet unconn by 20+

Or completely blow them out and everyone else left in the final four.

Here me out:

Appling score 29 vs Kentucky when he was healthy. So take that 29 and add it to the 6 pt loss and we win by 20 easily.

And anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot and cannot rely on any facts to prove me wrong. I own your ass!

We beat UCONN by 20+ OR blow them out?

There is no way Appling even scores 20 against UConn. Sorry to anyone who thinks that. He didn't do very well in our losing games each of the years he was here.

UCLA, 2011: 29 mins, 9 pts
Louisville, 2012: 32 mins, 6 pts
Duke, 2013: 36 mins, 16 pts
UConn, 2014: 28 mins, 2 pts

2012 was especially bad, and shows that healthy Appling could easily disappear in big games, too.

Giant Moose wrote:There is no way Appling even scores 20 against UConn. Sorry to anyone who thinks that. He didn't do very well in our losing games each of the years he was here.

UCLA, 2011: 29 mins, 9 pts
Louisville, 2012: 32 mins, 6 pts
Duke, 2013: 36 mins, 16 pts
UConn, 2014: 28 mins, 2 pts

2012 was especially bad, and shows that healthy Appling could easily disappear in big games, too.

Not this shit again.

If Blanch32 actually understood sports, maybe he could have a productive conversation.

Giant Moose wrote:There is no way Appling even scores 20 against UConn. Sorry to anyone who thinks that. He didn't do very well in our losing games each of the years he was here.

UCLA, 2011: 29 mins, 9 pts
Louisville, 2012: 32 mins, 6 pts
Duke, 2013: 36 mins, 16 pts
UConn, 2014: 28 mins, 2 pts

2012 was especially bad, and shows that healthy Appling could easily disappear in big games, too.

Dont think I am agreeing with blanch... cause for obvious reasons and whatnot... BUT

Previous year's were different teams. He was the main option the beginning of this year and he delivered pre injury. Not saying 29 against ucon, but I know he would have played better (O and D).

AvgMSUJoe wrote:

Dont think I am agreeing with blanch... cause for obvious reasons and whatnot... BUT

Previous year's were different teams. He was the main option the beginning of this year and he delivered pre injury. Not saying 29 against ucon, but I know he would have played better (O and D).

Appling had our best stretch of seeds (1, 3, 4) that we have had since 1999-2001. He showed at times that he could be a good player, but when the Dance came around each year, he just didn't get it done.

For Appling to not come up with a Final Four in one of those years just shows that he wasn't the right PG for the team, healthy or not.

You dicks all realize that Payne was playing half dead since January a-cuz he got the clap or some shit from some skeez.

tTy wrote:You dicks all realize that Payne was playing half dead since January a-cuz he got the clap or some shit from some skeez.

Wonder how many natty's MSU missed out on cause of the skeezes?

Prolly at least 20 or 30.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:

Wonder how many natty's MSU missed out on cause of the skeezes?

Prolly at least 20 or 30.

Not as many as we've missed out on because one of our recruits gets injured before he ever plays a game for us.

Blanch32 wrote:Or completely blow them out and everyone else left in the final four.

Here me out:

Appling score 29 vs Kentucky when he was healthy.  So take that 29 and add it to the 6 pt loss and we win by 20 easily.

And anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot and cannot rely on any facts to prove me wrong.  I own your ass!

You are as clever as you are knowledgeable. I'm glad it took you over a day to think up this gem. Can't wait to see your follow-up. How are your going to top yourself this time?

"here me out"   

The problem against UConn was a season-long issue: lack of post presence resulting in a reliance on 3-pt shooting. Appling might have been able to open things up more for Dawson and Payne, but UConn was the perfect matchup for exploiting MSU's weaknesses.

Live in the now!

Are we sure Appling wasn't completely healthy by the end?

Oh well it is all water on under the bridge now

You're an idiot. We'd have won by 50+. You don't have any facts to disprove that. JUST TRY ME!!

Did anybody ever yell "apple sauce!!!" When KA hit a bug 3?,should a totally done that.

Giant Moose wrote:
Appling had our best stretch of seeds (1, 3, 4) that we have had since 1999-2001. He showed at times that he could be a good player, but when the Dance came around each year, he just didn't get it done.

For Appling to not come up with a Final Four in one of those years just shows that he wasn't the right PG for the team, healthy or not.

What are you talking about? Izzo said he's tough so he's got to be tough.....right?

JEK wrote:You're an idiot. We'd have won by 50+. You don't have any facts to disprove that. JUST TRY ME!!

Rods. Lock this thread. I've been owned. Season over as I'm typing this with both hands over my face.

Cosmo_Kramer wrote:"here me out"   

I'm definitely going to add that one to my rep of trois   

Ted Brogan wrote:The problem against UConn was a season-long issue: lack of post presence resulting in a reliance on 3-pt shooting. Appling might have been able to open things up more for Dawson and Payne, but UConn was the perfect matchup for exploiting MSU's weaknesses.

In most cases, you need very good guard play - especially PG play - to win the NCAA tournament. I personally don't think you win without maximizing guard productivity, which does open up the floor for the rest of the positions. When I saw those "build your MSU team for $15" posts, I was amazed at how many people were not taking Johnson or Cleaves. Most of the time a national title run goes as far as your PG will take you. I don't think MSU lost because their frontcourt was absent, I think MSU lost because their backcourt was dominated.

Turtleneck wrote:

In most cases, you need very good guard play - especially PG play - to win the NCAA tournament. I personally don't think you win without maximizing guard productivity, which does open up the floor for the rest of the positions. When I saw those "build your MSU team for $15" posts, I was amazed at how many people were not taking Johnson or Cleaves. Most of the time a national title run goes as far as your PG will take you. I don't think MSU lost because their frontcourt was absent, I think MSU lost because their backcourt was dominated.  

Yup, you nailed it.

Trice is not a driver, nor is he world-class quick. And DV can't guard lightning quick small pgs. Appling was the answer to balancing that match-up out and making their pg work hard on both ends of the floor. Against MSU, they didn't have to worry about the PGs driving, could stay on the perimeter and even do some freelancing while not having to use a lot of energy or risk any real foul trouble.

Turtleneck wrote:In most cases, you need very good guard play - especially PG play - to win the NCAA tournament. I personally don't think you win without maximizing guard productivity, which does open up the floor for the rest of the positions. When I saw those "build your MSU team for $15" posts, I was amazed at how many people were not taking Johnson or Cleaves. Most of the time a national title run goes as far as your PG will take you. I don't think MSU lost because their frontcourt was absent, I think MSU lost because their backcourt was dominated.  

I completely agree with your points about needing great guard play in the tourney, but MSU had something like 6 points in the paint in that game. A November/December caliber Apping could have helped MSU win, but being shut down completely in the frontcourt was imo the major issue. The offense stagnated and the turnovers piled up in the second half when the jumpers stopped falling.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that while we expected UConn's guards to outplay MSU's, getting dominated inside caused those matchups to be further exploited. MSU might have been able to overcome the guard play from UConn had they been able to feed the ball inside and score with the bigs. UConn executed their game plan perfectly, taking away MSU's "physical" and interior advantages and forcing them to to try and outplay UConn's guards on the perimeter.

You need great guard play to win the tourney.

Really? I don't think that's ever been said. Blanch level approach.

The sick thing is late in the 2nd, Payne had a nasty drive dunk which would have changed the whole complexion of the game if he did that off the bat instead of jacking up outside shots.

Why are we betting with UConn? I thought gambling was illegal?

Agree. Having him as a close to 40% 3pt shooter like he was when healthy instead of an offensive non factor and I don't know who would have beaten us.

Coach woulda put me in fourth quarter, we would've been state champions. No doubt. No doubt in my mind.

Timely thread.

Turtleneck wrote:

In most cases, you need very good guard play - especially PG play - to win the NCAA tournament. I personally don't think you win without maximizing guard productivity, which does open up the floor for the rest of the positions. When I saw those "build your MSU team for $15" posts, I was amazed at how many people were not taking Johnson or Cleaves. Most of the time a national title run goes as far as your PG will take you. I don't think MSU lost because their frontcourt was absent, I think MSU lost because their backcourt was dominated.

Not true. A healthy Appling totally shuts down both UConn guards.... At the same time!!

DroppedByADime wrote:You need great guard play to win the tourney.

Really? I don't think that's ever been said. Blanch level approach.

So obsessed.....

DroppedByADime wrote:You need great guard play to win the tourney.  

Really?   I don't think that's ever been said.   Blanch level approach.  

 We're you referring to my post?

I've got to give it to blanché, I don't think anyone has every had a more appropriate avatar.