Kind of nice to have 2 grinder wins...

[kso_FAN]

Against good teams; UT and MU.  Both games where we were under 90 in offensive efficiency, but held the opponent to under 80.  Could come in handy during the dance.

[Stupid Fitz]

Yep, it wasn't long ago where we would have lost both of those games.  Not anymore.  Great game.  Way to go Frank.   
 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Come up against a Wisconsin is what comes to mind.  All their games are grinders.

[sys]

11 conference wins.

[felix rex]

Watching the replay. Just amazing that we had less than ten total points until Sutton's free throws at 7:10 in the first half. Unreal. We scored 8 freaking points in the opening 13 minutes and won.  That put us on pace to score 25 for the game.

[catzacker]

All powetardness aside, did we look tired or something?  I kind of thought we were.  There were times when we seemed content jogging it up and frank had to chew ass mid jog to get denis to push it. and the exception was going hard after a rebound or loose ball, the rule was lazily getting after it.  maybe it's just what mu makes teams look like, I dunno.  it's almost like when we're at home, we assume we're going to get the rebound, assume we're going to get the call, assume we're going to hit the shot, assume we're going to come back.  I thought the only two games in conference where we played with any real and true aggressiveness was ut and ku.  the rest we kind of sleeped walked through. 

[kso_FAN]

I thought we played really hard last night.  If anything in the first half I thought we were extremely tight, and didn't loosen up until the run to tie it at half.  But you can't defend MU like that and be sleepwalking IMO, I thought the game was very similar to the UT game.

[sys]

kstate's defense was outstanding last night.  by far the best they've defended in a long time.

[michigancat]

That was easily MU's worst offensive performance.  You don't sleepwalk into performances like that, especially this late in the season.

[Dugout DickStone]

We missed a lot of tip ins/bunnies.  That seems to come from playing tight...

[kso_FAN]

MU played pretty good defense too, especially 1st half.

[sys]

MU played pretty good defense too, especially 1st half.

yeah, they were really impressive in the first.

[williamthewildcat]

All powetardness aside, did we look tired or something?  I kind of thought we were.  There were times when we seemed content jogging it up and frank had to chew ass mid jog to get denis to push it. and the exception was going hard after a rebound or loose ball, the rule was lazily getting after it.  maybe it's just what mu makes teams look like, I dunno.  it's almost like when we're at home, we assume we're going to get the rebound, assume we're going to get the call, assume we're going to hit the shot, assume we're going to come back.  I thought the only two games in conference where we played with any real and true aggressiveness was ut and ku.  the rest we kind of sleeped walked through. 

I sat behind the MU bench as a guest. And to me the team just looked really frustrated on O. I do think it had a lot to do with the D MU was playing.  It was aggressive (much like KSU's) and was quick to beat our players (especially the guards) to favorite spots for looks. That led to Lou holding the ball on several straight possesions, which resulted in a possible TO, missed shot, or short clock to work with. Credit MU for a pretty solid defensive effort.

Being inefficient in those possessions only magnified the issue of rebounding. They sent 4 to the defensive board and were perfect on box outs for most of the game. From my perspective this led to some anxiety on part of the team to make a play. And eventually they did.

I thought the D by KSU was outstanding for the most part.  The didn't seem flustered at all on D after so many empty possesions on the other end.  Credit Frank and company for keeping their heads in that situation.

[catzacker]

I thought we played really hard last night.  If anything in the first half I thought we were extremely tight, and didn't loosen up until the run to tie it at half.  But you can't defend MU like that and be sleepwalking IMO, I thought the game was very similar to the UT game.

prolly just semantics, but our "defense" was good, but our aggressiveness for rebounds and loose balls wasn't or maybe that's just the way the ball bounced?  And offensively, we looked tired, unfocused, and/or were not playing through contact very well.  we missed countless bunnies, let balls go right off our hands, couldn't punish MU in transition off their turnovers (especially in the first half).  these are all just nitpicky type things.

[asava]

I thought we played really hard last night.  If anything in the first half I thought we were extremely tight, and didn't loosen up until the run to tie it at half.  But you can't defend MU like that and be sleepwalking IMO, I thought the game was very similar to the UT game.

prolly just semantics, but our "defense" was good, but our aggressiveness for rebounds and loose balls wasn't or maybe that's just the way the ball bounced?  And offensively, we looked tired, unfocused, and/or were not playing through contact very well.  we missed countless bunnies, let balls go right off our hands, couldn't punish MU in transition off their turnovers (especially in the first half).  these are all just nitpicky type things.

i'm pretty sure Energy would disagree with this.

[ChiComCat]

I'll agree with 'zacker that in the parts that I saw, I didn't really see Denis pushing the ball up as fast as he normally does.  Maybe his early foul trouble affected his aggresiveness?

[catzacker]

I thought we played really hard last night.  If anything in the first half I thought we were extremely tight, and didn't loosen up until the run to tie it at half.  But you can't defend MU like that and be sleepwalking IMO, I thought the game was very similar to the UT game.

prolly just semantics, but our "defense" was good, but our aggressiveness for rebounds and loose balls wasn't or maybe that's just the way the ball bounced?  And offensively, we looked tired, unfocused, and/or were not playing through contact very well.  we missed countless bunnies, let balls go right off our hands, couldn't punish MU in transition off their turnovers (especially in the first half).  these are all just nitpicky type things.

i'm pretty sure Energy would disagree with this.

exception, not the rule. also, should have been a travel or a foul on c-merr, terrible call by the official.

[Kat Kid]

I think we definitely thought we were going to get some calls on offense and had to adjust.  That was the most physical game of the year and I just think we were frustrated by the misses and the contact.  Mizzou's trap slows you down bringing the ball up and I think Denis just wasn't  thinking about the opportunity being there.

[asava]

I thought we played really hard last night.  If anything in the first half I thought we were extremely tight, and didn't loosen up until the run to tie it at half.  But you can't defend MU like that and be sleepwalking IMO, I thought the game was very similar to the UT game.

prolly just semantics, but our "defense" was good, but our aggressiveness for rebounds and loose balls wasn't or maybe that's just the way the ball bounced?  And offensively, we looked tired, unfocused, and/or were not playing through contact very well.  we missed countless bunnies, let balls go right off our hands, couldn't punish MU in transition off their turnovers (especially in the first half).  these are all just nitpicky type things.

i'm pretty sure Energy would disagree with this.

exception, not the rule. also, should have been a travel or a foul on c-merr, terrible call by the official.\

definitely was a joke.

[catzacker]

I thought we played really hard last night.  If anything in the first half I thought we were extremely tight, and didn't loosen up until the run to tie it at half.  But you can't defend MU like that and be sleepwalking IMO, I thought the game was very similar to the UT game.

prolly just semantics, but our "defense" was good, but our aggressiveness for rebounds and loose balls wasn't or maybe that's just the way the ball bounced?  And offensively, we looked tired, unfocused, and/or were not playing through contact very well.  we missed countless bunnies, let balls go right off our hands, couldn't punish MU in transition off their turnovers (especially in the first half).  these are all just nitpicky type things.

i'm pretty sure Energy would disagree with this.

exception, not the rule. also, should have been a travel or a foul on c-merr, terrible call by the official.\

definitely was a joke.

i don't joke around about c-merr.

[Cire]

If mizzou doesn't rebound out of their minds we win by 20 IMO.

[Andy]

All powetardness aside, did we look tired or something?  I kind of thought we were.  There were times when we seemed content jogging it up and frank had to chew ass mid jog to get denis to push it. and the exception was going hard after a rebound or loose ball, the rule was lazily getting after it.  maybe it's just what mu makes teams look like, I dunno.  it's almost like when we're at home, we assume we're going to get the rebound, assume we're going to get the call, assume we're going to hit the shot, assume we're going to come back.  I thought the only two games in conference where we played with any real and true aggressiveness was ut and ku.  the rest we kind of sleeped walked through. 

the last 5-7 min or so both teams looked pretty tired.  slowed it down a lot too last 8 min or so.