To me these games don't tell you all that much. You could make a case that the team wasn't well prepared and simply wore down a badly overmatched opponent. But you could make a case that they showed what they can really do once they got comfortable in a game setting. and without knowing exactly what the coach's plan was, did he want to see what Daniels could do at the 4 and left him in there longer, did he want to give Nolan more time to adjust to big time consitions? all those things might or might not come into play. I do think, though that you need to keep in mind that this was the AIC Yellowjackets, not Georgia Tech.
I had considered that this was an exhibition game in which coaches try out things they might not try out during different parts of the season. I also factored in that AIC is picked to finish 15th in a mid major conference. I also factored in that each of us sees things the way we want to see them and believe that our observations and conclusions, which are perspectives, are objective.
All the things fgbrault and I have stated are conditions that exist coming into this season. Considering all the parameters - his, mine, and yours - I came to my opinion. But that is all I'm implying - I have an opinion that I support but which can easily be argued against because all of this is subjective. In order to substantiate any claim we want to make, all we have to do is point out parameters supporting our view and eliminate or undervalue parameters that refute our view.
fgbrault and I made a list of conditions inherent with this particular team. The degree these conditions will be considered during and at the end of this season will be dependent on the needs and agendas of the individuals making arguments supporting or attacking KO as a coach amongst many other things.
I highlighted in red one particular statement you made because I strongly agree with that point. You can make a case either way from this game. I expect that will be the case the entire season. There will be individuals arguing various viewpoints about games, players and the entire season. That's the way it has always been and always will be whether we talk about UConn bb, football, college sports, sports in general, academics, social issues, economic issues, men, women, relationships, religions, cultures, nations and so on. We have no way of differentiating objectivity from subjectivity when it comes to understanding human behavior and things associated with behavior. We have no way of testing the validity of our claims or conclusions because we can't retest things in a scientific manner to determine if our assertions would prove our points.
Anyone can make the claim Shaka Smart would have been the better choice over KO after JC retired. But to prove that point scientifically we would have to replicate the universe at exactly the point JC announced his retirement and substitute Shaka for Kevin as UConn's head coach. We would have to keep all other parameters exactly the same down to every subatomic particle. Only by comparing the two universes, ours and the "petri universe with the Shaka variation", can we legitimately determine which person was the better choice.
You'd be a better person than me if you could accomplish this.
