So MoCo played without Jones. They are, according to most, the top team in our region. Therefore, playing without Jones they still should have won IMO.

With the close parity in the 10th this year no team can afford to lose a double-double guy or the leading scorer.

So MoCo played without Jones. They are, according to most, the top team in our region. Therefore, playing without Jones they still should have won IMO.

 

If this is true, this is the weakest I have seen the 10th in years.

The point some are overlooking here is that the shots that Jones would have taken, were taken by someone else - they weren't lost points. Same with rebounds - those rebounds he would have had were up for grabs and somebody got them.

 

I totally agree that MoCo would have been a better team with him. However, it does not necessarily mean that his absence creates a 20 point difference.

Ok basketball analyst........you guys win it doesn't matter. Good win Scott you deserved it....

 

SCOREBOARD!

The point some are overlooking here is that the shots that Jones would have taken, were taken by someone else - they weren't lost points. Same with rebounds - those rebounds he would have had were up for grabs and somebody got them.

 

I totally agree that MoCo would have been a better team with him. However, it does not necessarily mean that his absence creates a 20 point difference.

 

Great minds (#29)

The point some are overlooking here is that the shots that Jones would have taken, were taken by someone else - they weren't lost points. Same with rebounds - those rebounds he would have had were up for grabs and somebody got them.

 

I totally agree that MoCo would have been a better team with him. However, it does not necessarily mean that his absence creates a 20 point difference.

I disagree, good example was Pendleton Co. when Allen wasn't playing, they go from scoring in the 70's to the 30's. To me its the caliber of player your talking about thats out.

The point some are overlooking here is that the shots that Jones would have taken, were taken by someone else - they weren't lost points. Same with rebounds - those rebounds he would have had were up for grabs and somebody got them.

 

I totally agree that MoCo would have been a better team with him. However, it does not necessarily mean that his absence creates a 20 point difference.

 

I agree. You play with what you have and if you win, you win. If you lose, you lose!

 

But what you said in bold does not make sense. Sure the shots taken by Jones were probably taken by someone else, BUT WERE THEY MADE? And I am sure that rebounds that Jones would have gotten were rebounded by someone else, BUT WAS IT A MONTGOMERY COUNTY someone else! According to KHSAA stats, Scott was averaging 26 rebounds per game and finished with 29 in this game. Montgomery County was averaging 30 rebounds per game and only got 26. Alot of "ifs". Good win for Scott and learning experience for Montgomery County. Whether it is injuries, foul trouble, etc., they have to learn to win with what the game gives them!

With the way Scott plays, they are dangerous on the W or L side against anyone.

The point some are overlooking here is that the shots that Jones would have taken, were taken by someone else - they weren't lost points. Same with rebounds - those rebounds he would have had were up for grabs and somebody got them.

 

I totally agree that MoCo would have been a better team with him. However, it does not necessarily mean that his absence creates a 20 point difference.

 

Not necessarily, but likely the absence of a top 10 player in the region is going to be at least some amount of difference. If that difference is 3 or 20, it still would have changed the outcome of the game. While it is foolish to say having Jones would have certainly changed the outcome by 20 points, it's also foolish to say it certainly wouldn't have.

 

Regardless, this is a good win for Scott. They needed this result regardless of who was out.

Some very solid arguments from both sides. The one potential point not considered is Coach Carr is no dummy. Whose to say he didn't have a shut down game plan for Jones and his absence forced an in-game adjustment that was less effective for Scott. No one wants to lose their best, but his absence might have actually elevated the balance beyond their capabilities. I believe the long bus ride was a heavy contributor to the outcome.

Second year in a row the game was decided by one possession. Last years contest was 68-67 Scott in Mt. Sterling.

A lot of chatter about the impact of the loss of a top player in a game that doesn't matter. At all. Not districts. Not regional. Not state. Not relevant. Who cares if Scott won by 50. These games are scrimmages. Nothing more.

 

If they meet in the 10th region tournament, then it will matter.