Is 10 points a rout?

10 is sort of a magical number in the game of basketball. Whenever I watch a game, I base it upon the number 10. How far are they from a 10-point game? Can this team pull to a 10-point lead?

I used to think I was the only one who watched basketball this way until I heard coaches say in huddles during timeouts, "If we can get it to 10, we'll be okay."

As such, in my mind, 10 can never be a rout. Rout is a very strong word. 10 is a benchmark.

And with the 3-point line and timeouts... 10 points can be made up in about... 10 seconds. So no, it's never a rout.

Just my take.

 

15-20 points a rout. Anything more, a blowout. ... If team was ahead by 23 and won by 10, they held on or held off a late rally. ...

 

I actually caught the end of this game. The Nuggets got it down to nine and had chances to get closer. The announcers didn't declare the game over until about a minute left, when someone (I didn't have my glasses on, I couldn't tell) hit an open layup.

In that context, I wouldn't call it a rout.

 

OK, I concede the first point.
But if the same 23-point lead is cut to 10 with by the winning team's bench against the losing team's starters, is it still a close game?

 

Slappy, I think you have it twisted. I think you mean if the 23-point lead by the winning team is cut to 10 against the loser's starters. At any rate, you know the difference between a rout and a close game. The above would be a rout.

 

I say under no circumstance is a 10-point win a rout, even if the losing team was down 20, 23 or 35 points and cut it to 10 in the last 5 minutes of the game or whatever. Because if a team was able to cut such a large deficit, then it did not get routed.

 

I've seen games where teams were up by 30 and the opposing team cut it to 10. I called it rout because the comeback came against a third-unit team and the play was very sloppy. Even during the comeback, the team with the lead was in command.

 

Exactly. Why is this even an issue? If the AP morons used "beat" then went on to describe one team was leading by 23, that lets the reader decide if he or she thinks it was a rout.

 

Regardless of the score, I'd just say "defeated" or "beat" or something like that.

 

Explain that the score did not indicate the one-sideness of the game, but calling a 110-100 basketball game a rout is sort of like calling a 7-5 hockey game a rout, even if the losing team scored three goals in the final five minutes.

 

MM, I don't agree with that comparison. When hockey teams score three goals late, it's not because they've pulled their starting goalie for a scrub and put in the Black Aces for a little ice time.

I'm fine with calling the 10-point game in this case a rout. It's a close call, but God knows there's enough other copy to agonize over than to split hairs over this one.

 

But the use of the term "rout" juxtaposed with a close score is what's at issue, and it looks funky for a 10-point basketball game or a two-goal hockey/soccer game, whether it was a blowout made respectable by playing against backups or a nip-and-tuck game where the winning team hit their free throws down the stretch.