The Willmar paper enlightened me on an aspect of Monday night's game at Willmar. It was a game re-scheduled from Saturday due to all the downer weather we've had. I was not assuming the Tigers were going to win. I was not even inclined to think we'd win. But what do I know?
The Willmar paper asserted in its lead sentence (3/12) that MACA was the "prohibitive favorite." I did a double-take. What this sentence means, is that we were practically guaranteed to win. Like maybe 95 percent guaranteed. Not that I need a dictionary re. this, but Merriam-Webster informs us "prohibitive" means an "almost certain" outcome. A losing outcome would be "prohibited."
If it was, Redwood Valley defied it.
Jeez, the game outcome didn't surprise me at all. Consider: our Tigers actually trailed the No. 6 seed ACGC at halftime of the playoff opener. We were seeded third. Redwood Valley was No. 4. A game of 3 vs. 4 can be expected to be pretty competitive, can't it? I should hope so.
The writer of the Willmar article, Tom Larson, said we were the "prohibitive favorite based on numbers like win-loss record and seeding." We've already dismissed seeding as being much of a factor in laying odds here. As long as we're into words, let's say the seeding difference was "negligible." I suspect my grasp of the language is better than Larson's.
If you accept Larson's assertion of MACA being the "prohibitive" favorite, then how do we assess things, coming out of our 86-74 defeat? Should there be fingers pointed somewhere? We don't want to point fingers at the student athletes, of course. So does the fault lie with the coach, fault for the loss by his "prohibitive favorite" squad? We lost by double digits.
Frankly I think we can dismiss Larson's word choice. I think this would be a "prohibitive" conclusion. Unless you want to truly blame the coach?
As far as I'm concerned, coach Torgerson has had a pedestrian past with his coaching. Maybe an indictment of his work at this time is apropos. It hasn't been unusual through the years to hear a great many rank and file citizens of Morris express skepticism about the coaching. Curiously, though, there has been a separate tier in the community, the true leadership one, that stomps this down to the point where it's intimidating.
Is it true the coach doesn't teach anymore? He's on the second generation of players, right? Has he been at it long enough? He wasn't even the first choice of our top administration back when he first got the job. Chris Baxter was. I know because I was told directly by top administration. The appointment came at a time of very disruptive conflict in the school district. I suspect things are basically placid now. You should know there is a background of contentiousness.
Writer Larson says that his "numbers" angle includes won-lost record, where Redwood Valley might be judged not that good. Well Katy bar the door, I've heard throughout my sports background that W/L is often not to be taken at face value. A fan told me this morning that Redwood Valley was without some key players at the start of the season. Hence, they didn't roll through their whole schedule at 100 percent.
"A fan told me" isn't the best attribution, yes. But we have a president of the U.S. now who, when caught in a misstatement or lie, will say "that's what I was told." Oh, passive voice too. You might offer the retort "well, that doesn't mean anything because we all know the president is just a nut or lunatic (or whatever)." Well, that's an indictment of our U.S., I guess. Would we even want a mayor with the comportment of Donald Trump? It's like I have said before: the Beltway (around Washington D.C.) is an alien place not setting an example for anything else. Look at Rudy Giuliani.
The Tigers played Redwood Valley for the sub-section championship Monday at Willmar. I'm not surprised at Redwood Valley's success considering their style of play with considerable pressure and speed. Don't ever bet against a team like this. The Cardinals charged out to a commanding position early. There never seemed any suspense as the game developed. It was a dreary night for the MACA crowd, having to travel so soon after another of those winter blasts.
The Cardinals now go on to play St. James, the No. 1 seed, Friday in the 3AA title contest.
Redwood Valley had scouted us well and worked to limit Jackson Loge's effectiveness. The Tigers put up bricks from three-point range. Clang! We were three of 17. Our turnovers were frequent too: a stat of 20. Yes, Redwood Valley's pressure was a factor.
We finish the season with an 18-9 record.
All three of our 3-pointers were made by Jaret Johnson. But it was Cam Arndt leading our scoring with 25 points. Loge did come through with 23 points and Johnson put in 19. Zach Hughes scored five points and Durgin Decker two. Yes, there were just five Tigers in the scoring column. Loge's 12 rebounds put him on top there. Arndt grabbed ten rebounds. Arndt had four assists followed by Hughes, Johnson and Thomas Tiernan with three each. Arndt and Johnson each had two steals.
Redwood Valley had many more of their players score. Cole Woodford led their charge with 32 points. Their other double figures scorers were Bryant Haas (17) and Colin Wells (12). Let's cover the rest of the list: Connor Josephson 2, Bronson Smith 7, Kyle Huhnerkoch 4, Carter Guetter 3, Carson Woodford 5, Alex Lang 2 and Brennan Sander 2. Cole Woodford connected four times from 3-point range. Wells and Carson Woodford each made two 3's, and Huhnerkoch made one.
Josephson and Haas each grabbed eight rebounds. Josephson led in assists and steals with three in each category. Redwood Valley led 45-32 at halftime. I wonder if the Willmar paper's sports editor still smokes cigarettes. Well, I don't.
 |
| A well-liked guy, P.F. |
On page 4 of the current Morris newspaper, you'll see a very minimal obituary for Perry Ford, the well-remembered and well-liked UMM men's basketball coach. He was Mr. Personality.
The "obit" of four sentences noted we could read the full obituary at the Cremation Society of Minnesota website. Well, yes we can. All obits are available to read online today. But why not publish the full obit in the paper? I notice that other deceased people get a full obit in the Morris paper. Why the shrug and mere reference to the online version? It seems like a diss. In mere seconds that online obit could be pasted and placed in the Morris paper. I must shake my head. It's an ethical lapse.
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment