It's Siena-Rider day, which means another round of questions for Pete Iorizzo of the Albany Times-Union.

My answers to Pete's questions are on his blog.

His answers to mine are right here:

Any sense of relief around the program after the Niagara loss?

I don’t know if “relief” is exactly the word I’d use. I think on some level all these guys are glad they don’t have to answer any more questions about going undefeated in the MAAC. Frankly, I think it was a much bigger deal to us and the fans than it was to them.

On the other hand, the Niagara game was an old-fashioned butt-kicking – on national television, no less. If you hadn’t watched Siena all year and didn’t know anything about the MAAC, what conclusion could you possibly draw from watching that game except, “This team is a fraud”?

When you’re a possibility for the Top 25 polls and trying to make your case for an at-large bid, your national reputation takes on new importance. The Saints’ took a hit that night.

The ironic thing is, that game has absolutely zero bearing on Siena’s season. If the Saints had beaten Butler, they would have remained in the at-large conversation. With the loss, they were out – whether they beat Niagara by 100 points or lost the way they did.

If you had a ballot, which Siena players would you vote first-team all-MAAC?

I think Alex Franklin and Ryan Rossiter are locks. I think Franklin will be the Player of the Year because he’s a senior, but you could make a terrific case for Rossiter. Pound for pound, Rossiter might be the most productive guy in the league – he averages a double-double and shoots almost 59 percent from the field. He’s also a better free-throw shooter than Franklin.

Edwin Ubiles will get a lot of votes from the coaches who saw him take over games. But because of injuries, that hasn’t happened as often as some might have expected. His numbers are certainly good enough for first-team consideration, but he may not get there – especially splitting votes with his teammates.

It pains me to say this about Ronald Moore, because I’ve stuck up for the guy every time he got snubbed from the all-MAAC teams. But I just don’t know if he’s a first-team player. The fact that he leads the country in assists is remarkable; in fact, you could argue he’s Siena’s MVP. But his shooting percentages have been so poor that there may be other guys with better all-around numbers.

What in the world happened in the second half at Butler? Watching on TV, that didn't look anything like the Siena team I've watched over the last three years.

Siena couldn’t score. I think that’s the first time in five years I’ve written that sentence. Really, their defense wasn’t awful. The back-to-back 3s from Zach Hahn were inexcusable, especially since Fran McCaffery had just reminded his players that the guy was in the game for no other reason than to fire away. But those wouldn’t have been the death blows they were if Siena could put the ball in the basket. As McCaffery said, when the three seniors shoot a combined 4-for-27, Siena’s not beating anybody.

Which teams, if any, do you think scare Siena most when looking at potential MAAC tournament matchups?

That seems to be the million dollar question around here. My take: Why does Siena have to be particularly wary of any of these teams?

The obvious candidate is Niagara, but that’s also a team Siena pummeled at Times Union Center. Iona has played Siena fairly tough, but does anyone really think the Gaels can score enough points to beat the Saints on their home court? I love what Ed Cooley’s done at Fairfield, but does he have enough horses to beat Siena in a de facto road game?

If Siena plays to its potential three consecutive nights, it will win a third consecutive MAAC title, regardless of the opponent.

I've heard arguments on both sides of this one: Is this Siena team better than last year's?

Great question.

I think Siena was deeper last year. There’s no Clarence Jackson coming off the bench, although getting Kyle Downey (broken foot) back for the MAAC Tournament would be a lift. There have been several times this year when McCaffery has played all five starters the entire second half. That’s not the sign of a deep team.

However, I’m not sure how deep Siena really needs to be. Its starting five is clearly the best starting five in the league. Those guys have been playing 32 to 38 minutes all year, so they’re used to it. McCaffery’s theory seems to be, why not leave them out there?

To answer your question, last year’s team was deeper, but this year’s starting five – with no disrespect to Kenny Hasbrouck – is better. Not because Jackson is better than Hasbrouck, but because Rossiter and Franklin are that much improved.

In the end, maybe that makes the two teams even.