|
Nobody saw this because it wasn't there. My Shaq example is not so much of an 'if' as you think. There have been plenty of instances in his career when he's had good streaks. The full sample size, however, demonstrates that he is, on the whole, a poor free throw shooter. This doesn't mean, though, that the shots he hits during streaks are worth less, or that his team never benefits from them when he's on such a streak.
Similarly, nobody's saying that Michigan State and Wisconsin didn't help themselves by playing well during the NCAA Tournament. The point is that Michigan State's performance has been exceptional, as in "an exception." Illinois, Wisconsin and Duke were the only teams State played during the regular season that rated better than an eight seed. They were 0-3 against those schools. Playing great last weekend against Duke and Kentucky doesn't change their regular season.
Your argument seems to be that the post-season paints a full picture. That is akin to looking at the results of twenty free throws for Shaq and assessing his overall performance based on that tiny sample. You get burned when your sample happens to be exceptional.
I don't understand why Michigan State, Illinois and Wisconsin fans can't simply be thrilled with their performances and stop there. They're insulting the public when they say that the last two weeks mean that everybody else's eyes were lying to them all year.
|