The question was asked by tonyc how USC would respond to getting worn down themselves in a tight game against a quality opponent like UConn. He turned the question - which was submitted for UConn - around to USC. I stated that the Duke game may be a solid example, because it was on their floor, it was a very tight game, and Duke was highly ranked. It's only my opinion. No one has to agree with it, but certainly shouldn't get upset over it.
But then people questioned the validity of the number of USC players that actually appeared in the Duke game. They started rationalizing and subjecting, and before one knew it, players that played in the game no longer existed, nor should be regarded. Yes, Gaines only played 1 minute, but she also contributed to the game's outcome. She got a certain steal in that 1 minute that was unarguably the most important steal of the game, and without such USC probably would've lost. In fact, Gaines got 2 steals in that 1 minute. So, her participation mattered.
If a player gets into a game, then she counts. When I compared the # of players who played in each team's conference games, I didn't dissect how many minutes they played, or if they led their team in a major statistical category, etc. If they count, then they should count, simply put.
But my comparison was the usage of each team's reserves in games played this season, in a general sense. How one team used its bench more than the other, despite having a harder time winning its games than the other. In tight games, it makes sense that younger, inexperienced players might not see the court. It's too risky putting them into critical situations that they might not be ready for. So I understand the concept - it really wasn't something I was arguing against.
In your response to me, you challenged the validity of USC bench players playing quality minutes in tightly-contested games versus Duke & Syracuse, and essentially discounted Gamecock players who factually appeared in those games because YOU deemed their contributions unworthy of mentioning. I must disagree, as I haven't discredited any of UConn's reserves playing in their games for the same reasons. If they appeared in the official stats, I counted them.
But most importantly, it missed the point I made earlier: that the comparison I made overall on each team's usage of their reserves seem to indicate that USC uses it's bench more than UConn has, in games that were more closely fought than UConn's games have been. This based on the average margin of victory for each team.
As far as the Sagarin's SOS for each team's schedules: it doesn't really matter. If a team is ahead by 5 points in the 2nd half of a game and sends out it's reserves - compared to a team that's ahead by 35 points in the 2nd half of a game, and keeps it's starters in the game - what matter does anybody's SOS ranking make in my argument?