Jump to content

Maryland vs. Michigan State


ArtVanDelay

Recommended Posts

78-66.

It's Michigan State, and it's kind of hard to stop a team that can't miss a 3 when you can't hit them yourself.  Other than Cowan playing kind of questionable at times, I didn't think we played that badly other than the fact that we couldn't hit open looks.  We also needed to pick up boards better.  I counted 3 triples off offensive rebounds that weren't really defendable because we were trying to scramble for the loose ball.  And then there's the 60 footer by Winston to end the first half...

Pretty generously called game for Maryland by the refs.  I still think they call too many touch fouls and not enough contact fouls in the paint, but it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan State was the number 1 team in the country in the preseason polls and they played like that on Saturday night.  They are the most talented team in the Big 10, and so after we came back and stole that game from them in East Lansing, I am not at all surprised they came out with payback on their minds and got it.  Seeing how fast they were moving out of the gate and whipping passes around, I knew it was going to be hard to beat them.  While there may have been areas where the Terps could have been better tonight, this to me just looked like a Spartans team that was determined to win after what happened two weeks ago.  At least if we meet in the Big 10 tournament, we won't be trying for an extremely difficult three game sweep on them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank god we had those two miraculous road wins over Michigan State and Minnesota, or we’d be 2 games behind MSU instead of 1 game ahead.

Here’s how I see the Big Ten shaking out:

Terps 14-6

MSU 14-6

Wisconsin 14-6

Illinois 13-7

Iowa 12-8

Ped State 12-8

Our only chance to win the B1G outright is to go on the road and beat Rutgers, who will be fighting for their tournament lives.  Tall task for a Turgeon team in March.  The final game against Michigan won’t be a cakewalk either.  At this point, I’m just hoping that we don’t lose out and not even get a share of the regular season title.

Would anyone be surprised if the Minnesota win ended up being our last of the season?  Lose to Rutgers and Michigan, lose our first Big Ten Tourney game (as we seem to do yearly), and then stumble into the tourney as a 5 seed and lose to Liberty or Stephen F Austin.  I don’t think it’s likely but I also wouldn’t be surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Posts

    • Let’s be clear. He’s pitching like an ace THIS YEAR. this is his first year in mlb and he was considered a back end starter when he was signed.  No one rational would say a 2.5 month performance in your first year in MLB requires the number one prospect in baseball PLUS MORE! Respectfully it’s lunacy.
    • I’m not saying we can’t trade for Scott. Or that we shouldn’t trade for someone. More that we basically already have one reliever we don’t have to trade for. But a guy who will likely have a relatively high whip due to command issues but have a well above average k rate… I also just don’t love rentals in general. Hit or miss as to whether they perform well anyway (hey jack flaherty) and then it’s gone. If you don’t win that year it’s all for nothing. For the right cost I’m okay with it, but I don’t want to give up a major prospect for a rental unless it’s the piece that puts us over the top 
    • They are not in a rebuild. And I don't want to waste time imagining that the team is bad and trading our best young players. As a matter of fact, I hope we don't have to do that for years to come. I envision adding good players not how can we get rid of the good ones that we have. I have waited my whole life to finally have a team this good. I don't mind at all trading good prospects. And have no delusional expectations that we can get value without surrendering value. Nor am I in love with the notion that we have to have a cheap, homegrown team. As a matter of fact, I want and expect the org to spend much more money on payroll than it is doing currently. Lastly, what happened with Gausman is in the past and under a totally different administration (ownership + front office). We were selling then. We are buying now.
    • Is there a reason it should be? He’s still walking 5.5+ batters per 9. He’s still got things he can work on. No rush to get him up unless it’s as a reliever down the stretch or a spot start. 
    • I mean Tanner Scott at least has a Major League track record. How much do you think Scott will really cost? Also, we have more position players and prospects that we could ever use. I understand maybe not wanting Scott, but I don't understand the logic of not wanting surrender any prospects (even some good ones). We almost have to at some point. Otherwise, you have 25 year old top level prospects like Kjerstad, who is in his prime now and killing it at AAA but has no place on the Big League roster. Stowers is even older and has contributed relatively nothing to the Orioles and is now age 26.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...