goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Basketball is hard => Topic started by: kso_FAN on February 01, 2014, 03:04:09 PM
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg203%2F4241%2Fn4vl.png&hash=d2da0c60532a595fe8971d23dde967446d59523f)
Another bad first half, comeback, and eventual loss on the road. The script continue for this team and most disappointing is that today it was older players with dumb mistakes when the game was in reach.
If anyone would've said we'd be 5-4 at the beginning of December, most fans would've been ecstatic. But blowing a 4-1 start with 3 road losses that followed the same pathetic script and its more than justifiable to be disappointed.
The margin for error in the 2nd half of Big 12 play is not very big and now the Cats (and fans) get a week to think about it.
:frown:
-
oscar Weber coaching.
-
west virginia (horribly awful team) has a better conference record than we do :frown:
-
Maybe oscar is only good when nobody likes him. :dunno:
-
I would have gone with "To Eer is human"
-
I would have gone with "To Eer is human"
That's a good one.
-
Was Shane responsible for one or two of those turnovers that occurred right before I turned the game off?
-
its more than justifiable to be disappointed.
i don't think it is.
-
Was Shane responsible for one or two of those turnovers that occurred right before I turned the game off?
Kind of a Shane/Gip combo on the 3.
Sad to be down 1 with the ball and blow it that bad.
-
Shane has played significantly worse these past 4 games than all of our conference games before that. He's 4-23 on 3's and 12-38 from the field. Just glancing at the stats from those 4 games, his A/TO has got to have gotten worse. I think he's the key to getting back to winning.
-
its more than justifiable to be disappointed.
i don't think it is.
Depends on perspective I guess.
My frustration comes from the collective result of all 3 recent road losses and the way they happened. Part of that is fueled by perhaps unrealistic expectations of where this team is at and what they are capable of achieving though.
-
Bruceketball
-
Bruceketball
Yeah, oscar gonna oscar.
-
My frustration comes from the collective result of all 3 recent road losses and the way they happened. Part of that is fueled by perhaps unrealistic expectations of where this team is at and what they are capable of achieving though.
if you believed the stuff (guarded, qualified as it was) you were tentatively bringing up about winning the league back then, then yes that was unrealistic.
the way the road losses happened is that kstate was close enough at the end that they could have possibly won some of those games. that's good, not bad.
-
oscar is an infectious disease. eff him, he is slowly ruining anything good associated with Cat basketball.
-
0.84 PPP and missing 13 of final 17 shots to end a disappointing first half on offense
Gip and Westicles going 0-4 FTs on back to back poss..... then 3 TOs in 4 poss after we had the ball down 1. All of that in the final 5:15 of the game.
We were 15-20 FGs in the 2nd half..... and there was only 53 seconds left and we were down 7. We shot 75% and had taken 1 pt off of the halftime lead. :facepalm:
The Texas loss was a bummer, but this loss was just given away by so so many mistakes and breakdowns
-
its more than justifiable to be disappointed.
i don't think it is.
I agree FAN. See post above on why
-
My frustration comes from the collective result of all 3 recent road losses and the way they happened. Part of that is fueled by perhaps unrealistic expectations of where this team is at and what they are capable of achieving though.
if you believed the stuff (guarded, qualified as it was) you were tentatively bringing up about winning the league back then, then yes that was unrealistic.
the way the road losses happened is that kstate was close enough at the end that they could have possibly won some of those games. that's good, not bad.
I never really believed the win the league talk even though I participated. I did think this team would win one of the last three road games.
-
Prepare your sphincters because we are only winning two more games this year.
-
My frustration comes from the collective result of all 3 recent road losses and the way they happened. Part of that is fueled by perhaps unrealistic expectations of where this team is at and what they are capable of achieving though.
if you believed the stuff (guarded, qualified as it was) you were tentatively bringing up about winning the league back then, then yes that was unrealistic.
the way the road losses happened is that kstate was close enough at the end that they could have possibly won some of those games. that's good, not bad.
I think the term you are getting at is "close". That's a dangerous term. There is no value in it. It is not a future predictor of success.
-
Prepare your sphincters because we are only winning two more games this year.
If that hastens Weber's departure ... let's make it happen.
-
Meh. Just as some overreacted positivity I'm not surprised this string of games is causing the negative side to come out. This is still a .500ish league team on the bubble.
-
I did think this team would win one of the last three road games.
well, you were basically right. they could have.
-
west virginia (horribly awful team) has a better conference record than we do :frown:
Nope.
-
What a bunch of pussies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I think the term you are getting at is "close". That's a dangerous term. There is no value in it. It is not a future predictor of success.
that's not at all true. margin of victory (margin of loss) is a very good predictor of success (lack of success).
-
This loss was not oscar's fault. He can't help that his Seniors are so shitty and control touch fouls. This game has turned for the worse. eff defense!
-
I think the term you are getting at is "close". That's a dangerous term. There is no value in it. It is not a future predictor of success.
that's not at all true. margin of victory (margin of loss) is a very good predictor of success (lack of success).
margin of loss is not an indicator of future wins. and if it isn't an indicator of future success, then there is nothing good about losing close.
-
margin of loss is not an indicator of future wins. and if it isn't an indicator of future success, then there is nothing good about losing close.
it's the fundamental basis of every predictive system in sports.
-
margin of loss is not an indicator of future wins. and if it isn't an indicator of future success, then there is nothing good about losing close.
it's the fundamental basis of every predictive system in sports.
ksu consistently losing close games, some nasa computer is going to spit out "hey, they're due"? it won't say "ya know, there seems to be a pattern here."
what's predictive is that ksu will lose close games, not that they will win them. And when they actually do win them, it won't be because they are due, it will be because it was an exception, not the rule.
-
you can't have 40 data points all within a standard deviation and point to the one that is outside of it and say "see, predicted that one".
-
margin of loss is not an indicator of future wins. and if it isn't an indicator of future success, then there is nothing good about losing close.
it's the fundamental basis of every predictive system in sports.
ksu consistently losing close games, some nasa computer is going to spit out "hey, they're due"? it won't say "ya know, there seems to be a pattern here."
what's predictive is that ksu will lose close games, not that they will win them. And when they actually do win them, it won't be because they are due, it will be because it was an exception, not the rule.
zacker, any team that plays close games will win some and will lose some. that's the nature of close games. any team that loses by large margins will lose all of those games. any team that wins by large margins will win all of those games.
since how a team has played in the past is strongly correlated with how they will continue to play, mov is a good predictor.
you're normally more fun to argue with than this.
-
great. we're close. we're due. all these close games will eventually lead to a win. they just have to. have to.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.insideucr.ucr.edu%2Fimages%2Farticles%2F530.jpg&hash=bf4164aba401793d79a1122f01a30f34fc5e541e)
-
Meh. Just as some overreacted positivity I'm not surprised this string of games is causing the negative side to come out. This is still a .500ish league team on the bubble.
3 weeks ago, I said we really needed to go 4-2 over these past 3 wks. So I too thought we would get 1 of these road games and wasn't expecting it to be Isu. I wasn't mad for 2 seconds after we loss in Ames. I knew we let one slip away in Austin, but 10 minutes after the game was over, I had another game on TV. Today, I haven't been able to watch much of the KU/UT or OU/Isu games because I am frustrated how we did not pull this game out.
I mentioned how bad WV defense is and in the 3 home conf games, they were giving up 1.19 ppp. So to shoot almost 66% eFG the first 10 min of the 1st hf, then to only shoot under 24% eFG the 2nd 10 minutes was upsetting. Then the great FG shooting/poor FT shooting/careless TOs of the 2nd half has me ready for a drink :angry:
-
great. we're close. we're due. all these close games will eventually lead to a win. they just have to. have to.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.insideucr.ucr.edu%2Fimages%2Farticles%2F530.jpg&hash=bf4164aba401793d79a1122f01a30f34fc5e541e)
I forgot how ridiculous some of Wooly's teams were. His last year 5 of 6 Big 12 road losses were by 2, 4, 2, 3, and 1 points. Plus a 1 point loss at Washington St and an OT loss at N. Illinois.
-
Yet just two years ago we went 10-9 against Big 12 competition, including losing to ku, Iowa State, Baylor and OU at home, and getting absolutely smoked in the first game of the Big 12 tourney by Scott Drew, and the Frankites were all, "don't worry about it, we'll make the tourney".
Now the same dudes completely melt down.
Sad
-
'Zacker went into hiding and now he's back. HOW CONVENIENT!
-
Good thing is that we have a whole week off to realize how much we suck
-
great. we're close. we're due. all these close games will eventually lead to a win. they just have to. have to.
i think you're being obtuse (whether deliberately so or not). i started with the fact that kstate had lost those three games as a given. the comparison is not to an alternate reality where kstate won 2 of 3, it is to other ways that kstate might have lost the same three games. _fan said something to the effect that the way kstate lost was particularly disappointing. my response was concerned with this remark.
no one (me) is saying that losing three close games is good because it means kstate is "due". no one is stating that losing close games is better than winning. the only thing being said is that losing close is better than losing big.
-
Yet just two years ago we went 10-9 against Big 12 competition, including losing to ku, Iowa State, Baylor and OU at home, and getting absolutely smoked in the first game of the Big 12 tourney by Scott Drew, and the Frankites were all, "don't worry about it, we'll make the tourney".
Now the same dudes completely melt down.
Sad
The year we had 3 top 10 wins including 2 on the road? Crazy that I felt more confident about that year
-
I think we might have won today. I was just looking at our remaining schedule on the official site, and it says that we beat WVU 71-81 today. Nice.
-
Yet just two years ago we went 10-9 against Big 12 competition, including losing to ku, Iowa State, Baylor and OU at home, and getting absolutely smoked in the first game of the Big 12 tourney by Scott Drew, and the Frankites were all, "don't worry about it, we'll make the tourney".
Now the same dudes completely melt down.
Sad
The year we had 3 top 10 wins including 2 on the road? Crazy that I felt more confident about that year
We don't have any quality wins this year?
This is a tough league, as I type this Texas is beating ku by 14 in Austin, and ISU is probably going to beat OU in Ames.
K-State could have coasted into the NCAA tourney with a much higher seed two years ago, but Frank and company pissed down their leg regularly all year . . . AT HOME.
-
who gives a eff about Frank? jesus dax. you interject worthless rough ridin' bullshit into nearly every conversation. you rough ridin' make up stupid crap that never happened to prove some point that no one gave a eff about to begin with.
shouldn't you be arguing with some ku fan over where donations should be put on financial statements or something?
-
who gives a eff about Frank? jesus dax. you interject worthless rough ridin' bullshit into nearly every conversation. you rough ridin' make up stupid crap that never happened to prove some point that no one gave a eff about to begin with.
shouldn't you be arguing with some ku fan over where donations should be put on financial statements or something?
STFU, you show up out of the blue to rain on the parade like a little pussy . . . as always. Never happened? So we didn't lose 4 times at home two years ago, we didn't get run out of the Sprint Center by effing Scott Drew two years ago? You never have anything to add except your cry baby "I wish Frank was still here" bullshit . . . when you bother to to show up that is.
-
We are a decent team, not good and when they make so many dumb mistakes this should be expected
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I agree with Sys that being competitive in losing these 3 road games is a nice sign.... especially the losses in Ames and Austin. I was very impressed we battled back twice in the 2nd half in Ames down double digits. Even today, as mad as I am about the loss, we did not play very well at all IMO and it was a 1 pt game late vs a team that was 4-4 in the conf so far. In the past, we have had teams that didn't play well on the road and there was not much drama left with under 4 minutes to play.
It wont be easy but if this team can go 8-1 at home, we should be able to get 1 B12 road win and get double digit conf wins
-
I don't know what you are really arguing Dax. If you are trying to say this team will get in and be higher seed than two years ago, I completely disagree. Still enough games for the cats to do it though and I hope I'm wrong. This isn't a Frank/oscar thing, its comparing two vastly different resumes.
Losing close games can either be a sign that coaches/players aren't good down the stretch or that we are close. With this young of a team, I'm not terribly concerned. If it doesn't improve, Wooly comparisons will be apt.
-
This is oscar Weber. Enough talent to be respectable at home. Will not win on the road
-
Big 12 Pct Streak Overall Pct Streak
Kansas 7-1 1.000 W7 16-4 .800 W7
Texas 6-2 .714 W5 16-4 .800 W5
Oklahoma 6-3 .667 L1 17-5 .773 L1
Kansas State 5-4 .556 L1 15-7 .682 L1
West Virginia 5-4 .556 W2 13-9 .591 W2
Iowa State 4-4 .500 W1 16-4 .800 W1
Oklahoma State 4-4 .500 L2 16-5 .762 L2
Texas Tech 3-6 .333 W1 11-11 .500 W1
Baylor 2-6 .250 W1 14-7 .667 W1
TCU 0-8 .000 L8 9-11 .450 L8
Frustrating not to get at least one of those last 3 on the road. The players/coaches are the ones who should really be frustrated, and having a long week to stew over it should be a good thing. The extra time helped the football teams in a similar situation, we'll see how the basketball team responds.
It's like they've played "just bad enough" to lose these games on the road. They'll have sluggish, lazy stretches, play with intensity and focus to get back in it, but make mind-bogglingly bad mistakes in crunch time.
5-4? That's about right, but I agree with _FAN, you get the feeling that it could have easily been better.
-
Got a lot of good looks today. I wish we tried to run more often.
Also, this team is perfectly fine at close games. OSU and OU were very nice close wins.
-
Got a lot of good looks today. I wish we tried to run more often.
Also, this team is perfectly fine at close games. OSU and OU were very nice close wins.
True, it generally evens out.
-
Win close games at home, lose them on the road. Who wouldn't expect this. Seriously, the Cats talent doesn't separate from any team in the league except TCU.
-
This is oscar Weber. Enough talent to be respectable at home. Will not win on the road
the perfect post
-
This is oscar Weber. Enough talent to be respectable at home. Will not win on the road
the perfect post
:facepalm:
-
Got a lot of good looks today. I wish we tried to run more often.
Also, this team is perfectly fine at close games. OSU and OU were very nice close wins.
You don't get to be quantified as perfectly fine at close games if you can't win any of them on the road. Not saying the final script is written for this team but that's what it is right now.
-
Sys Wooldridge?
Jim Sysridge?
Jim Wooldsys?
-
This is oscar Weber. Enough talent to be respectable at home. Will not win on the road
the perfect post
:facepalm:
Kim (how are you by the way?) look I ran the #'s and its 'ficial it was the 'fect post. Go Cats
-
I think we might have won today. I was just looking at our remaining schedule on the official site, and it says that we beat WVU 71-81 today. Nice.
Doesn't anyone want to talk about this? Our official site says we won. Why keep arguing amongst ourselves?
-
Sys Wooldridge?
Jim Sysridge?
Jim Wooldsys?
believe in data, not in people.
-
Sys Wooldridge?
Jim Sysridge?
Jim Wooldsys?
believe in data, not in people.
did I miss the data presentation?
-
Sys Wooldridge?
Jim Sysridge?
Jim Wooldsys?
believe in data, not in people.
did I miss the data presentation?
what is going on here?
-
:D
-
Does this game even qualify as a close game? We lost by 10. I mean, I realize it was closer than the final score, but if I'm just looking at scores and putting stats together, I'm not sure I count this one as close.
-
Does this game even qualify as a close game? We lost by 10. I mean, I realize it was closer than the final score, but if I'm just looking at scores and putting stats together, I'm not sure I count this one as close.
I suppose it was close since we had a chance to tie or take the lead late but you do have a well made point that in this game and the ISU game we spent the entirety of the second halves down and down big at points.
that was a hell of a run-on
-
I suppose "close" is relative, but possessing the ball with less than 3 minutes to go and within 3 points seems like you are in a winnable game to me. Of course, I also agree with oscar that poor play in the first half is just as important to losing these games as individual plays after the under 4 timeout.
-
You don't get to be quantified as perfectly fine at close games if you can't win any of them on the road. Not saying the final script is written for this team but that's what it is right now.
"perfectly fine" and "not saying the final script is written" are really just two slightly different ways of saying the same thing.
-
I can't believe Frank lost some home games 2 years ago!!!!! Now the Frankites are upset at oscar? What the heck guys? #daxlogic
-
throw data out the window when you have a point guard in a tight game slugfest. they had one, we didn't. ours isn't ready for big time ballgames yet. we had shane dribbling and trying to create in crunch time. that doesn't work.
Frank had Denis and Pullen. We won the majority of games because of those two. Not necessarily Frank.
oscar's point (jevan) isn't ready yet. When he is, we'll start winning those games.
-
Angel wins that game. easily.
-
You don't get to be quantified as perfectly fine at close games if you can't win any of them on the road. Not saying the final script is written for this team but that's what it is right now.
"perfectly fine" and "not saying the final script is written" are really just two slightly different ways of saying the same thing.
wtf???
you said they are perfectly fine in close games, I politely said they blow in close games but have the opportunity to get better
-
You don't get to be quantified as perfectly fine at close games if you can't win any of them on the road. Not saying the final script is written for this team but that's what it is right now.
"perfectly fine" and "not saying the final script is written" are really just two slightly different ways of saying the same thing.
wtf???
you said they are perfectly fine in close games, I politely said they blow in close games but have the opportunity to get better
Today was the first time we crapped the bed down the stretch since N. Colorado. Losing at ISU and UT on a buzzer beater does not qualify as blowing. Today blew. We did play well vs both okie schools and Gonzaga though. Ok at close games is a fair assessment.
-
We're close to turning the corner on the road bros
-
We're close to turning the corner on the road bros
I like your optimism
-
The perimeter was locked down today. MC is dumb for saying we got lots of good looks today. They shutdown half of our offense from the perimeter (southwell, sprads, foster, etc.).
-
The perimeter was locked down today. MC is dumb for saying we got lots of good looks today. They shutdown half of our offense from the perimeter (southwell, sprads, foster, etc.).
Offense was not the issue today. We shoot over 50% from the field and score 80 if we hit our free throws. Dumb TO's down the stretch were huge but our help D on Staten and consistently going over screens 30 ft from the basket on a guy that made his 5th or 6th 3 of the season was our problem.
-
The perimeter was locked down today. MC is dumb for saying we got lots of good looks today. They shutdown half of our offense from the perimeter (southwell, sprads, foster, etc.).
Well.... they did prevent us from shooting open 3s. We were 2-8 until the final minute of the game.
On the flip side.... we were 10-16 FGs the first 10 minutes of the game. And we were 15-20 FGs the first 19 minutes of the 2nd half. We scored the ball from the field pretty well for a good portion of this game
The major difference was WV got to the line 19 times where they shot 2 FTS.... and made 28 of them (77.8%). That's 1.56 on those 19 poss
Ksu got to the line 9 times where we shot 2 FTs.... and made 7 ( 38.9%). That's .78 on those 9 poss
-
have the opportunity to get better
Like I said, perfectly fine.
-
to even take it one step farther. Both teams had 73 poss today
Kstate had 23 poss that did not end in a miss or made FG attempt
We had 14 TOs. We had 9 poss where we got 2 FT attempts.
We scored 7 pts in these 23 poss
WV had 28 poss that did not end in a miss or made FG attempt
10 TOs for them
18 poss where they attempted 2 FTs
They scored 28 pts on these 28 poss
Quite clear what the problem was!! :frown:
-
The perimeter was locked down today. MC is dumb for saying we got lots of good looks today. They shutdown half of our offense from the perimeter (southwell, sprads, foster, etc.).
Southwell and Sprads had some open looks that they passed up. Our team should never shoot as few threes as we did today. Not saying that they weren't playing good perimeter defense, because they were, but really good players find a way to get their shots up. Sprads and Shane are not really good players.
-
the botched 3-on-1 break was laughable..as was the freethrow shooting.
Someone please tell me J. Thomas is going to some summer camp or something to correct his horrendous FT shooting.
-
Meh. Just as some overreacted positivity I'm not surprised this string of games is causing the negative side to come out. This is still a .500ish league team on the bubble.
your going to want to cut this post because being able to paste it will save you a lot of time over the next five years.
-
Meh. Just as some overreacted positivity I'm not surprised this string of games is causing the negative side to come out. This is still a .500ish league team on the bubble.
your going to want to cut this post because being able to paste it will save you a lot of time over the next five years.
Ya, add it to your sig, Fan. Then just post "read my sig" (obviously you'll be able to abbreviate that to "RMS" to save time).
-
Meh. Just as some overreacted positivity I'm not surprised this string of games is causing the negative side to come out. This is still a .500ish league team on the bubble.
your going to want to cut this post because being able to paste it will save you a lot of time over the next five years.
:D
-
have the opportunity to get better
Like I said, perfectly fine.
So perfectly fine in your book means something not yet achieved? So according to rusty I'm perfectly fine at averaging sub five minute miles while running a marathon. America is perfectly fine at developing colonies on Jupiter. Sean Lowe was perfectly fine with premarital sex. Etc., etc., etc.
-
have the opportunity to get better
Like I said, perfectly fine.
So perfectly fine in your book means something not yet achieved?
I already told you this team has won close games this year. Why don't those games count?
-
have the opportunity to get better
Like I said, perfectly fine.
So perfectly fine in your book means something not yet achieved?
I already told you this team has won close games this year. Why don't those games count?
Its not that they don't count, they just count less and they will be lessened even more the more of these close losses stack up. If we don't win road games we'll be playing home games in the nit and that isn't the point of all of this.
-
have the opportunity to get better
Like I said, perfectly fine.
So perfectly fine in your book means something not yet achieved?
I already told you this team has won close games this year. Why don't those games count?
Its not that they don't count, they just count less and they will be lessened even more the more of these close losses stack up. If we don't win road games we'll be playing home games in the nit and that isn't the point of all of this.
What you typed does not point to a systematic failure in close games. Obviously losses are worse than wins.
-
have the opportunity to get better
Like I said, perfectly fine.
So perfectly fine in your book means something not yet achieved?
I already told you this team has won close games this year. Why don't those games count?
Its not that they don't count, they just count less and they will be lessened even more the more of these close losses stack up. If we don't win road games we'll be playing home games in the nit and that isn't the point of all of this.
What you typed does not point to a systematic failure in close games. Obviously losses are worse than wins.
This is a battle of semantics that we can keep going with if you want. I can now follow up with you attempting to frame my argument against the team as a systematic failure when I made no such claim. There is a large gulf between perfectly fine and systematic failure. I've never had the team on either side of that spectrum, there's no need to force me there because I think we fall short of perfectly fine.
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
-
the botched 3-on-1 break was laughable..as was the freethrow shooting.
Someone please tell me J. Thomas is going to some summer camp or something to correct his horrendous FT shooting.
almost forgot about that play. Shane thought Jevon was gonna throw an oop. I think when Shane jumped, Jevon may have hesitated and lost his concentration on the lay up. If Shane doesn't jump, he is in good position to get the rebound or maybe a tip in. Just another blown play and miscommunication where we wasted a possession. Add that one to the 3 TOs where Gip/Westicles then gip/Shane were not on the same page and we threw the ball out of bounds, and finally Shane just being lethargic and dribbles out of bounds late when WV came to pressure him beyond half court
-
What is wrong with Jevon? He's terrible at everything offensively except drawing contact and passing.
-
Meh. Just as some overreacted positivity I'm not surprised this string of games is causing the negative side to come out. This is still a .500ish league team on the bubble.
:don'tcare:
-
What is wrong with Jevon? He's terrible at everything offensively except drawing contact and passing.
unrealistic savior-like expectations on this blog
-
The highlight of the game was Shane's complete meltdown at a half hearted double team.
My first reaction was of course "go to the ball" but after replaying it several times, there's little doubt that his teammates were just as surprised as we were that the senior completely panicked.
-
Anyone care to look up and comparo bws away record at ill?
-
Anyone care to look up and comparo bws away record at ill?
44% overall. 32% if you take our the first 3 seasons.
-
What is wrong with Jevon? He's terrible at everything offensively except drawing contact and passing.
unrealistic savior-like expectations on this blog
I didnt expect him to be a savior, just somewhat average at offense, he's really, really bad at it. Good defense, speed, and passing helps make up, but he's pretty much useless offensively otherwise. the great speed is a lot less useful because he cant finish or hit FTs.
-
I think most thought Jevon would be a solid point with decent offense. His offensive numbers are just brutal, historically bad shooting.
-
So our starting point guard of the future sucks is basically another way of putting it. I could give a eff about his defense.
-
I thought Jevon would be worse at attacking the basket and creating offense, but I didn't expect him to be one of the worst shooters of all time. So I guess it kind of balances out.
-
he's not that great defensively. crazy aggressive, not crazy good. could be crazy good, down the road a bit (a lot of people could be, but thomas seems to really, really like defending, so it's much more likely that he will be).
i got some pushback from it when i mentioned it before, but i watched him again yesterday and it confirmed my opinion - njohnson is a very good onball defender for a freshman - at least out away from the basket. too small the closer you get.
-
I think (hope?) Jevon is a much better offensive player than he's shown. He wasn't terrible in high school and frankly the kid has been through a lot on his way to this point.
When it comes to suffering, Jevon Thomas has seen plenty. When Thomas was a year old, his father cut out. When he was 12, his mother was deported. At 13, his brother and stepfather were murdered. He was raised by a sister who wasn't much older than he was.
"It was tough," he said. "It just...I don't know how to explain it. Things just didn't seem too good."
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/high-school/jevon-thomas-lebrent-walker-support-tough-times-thriving-long-island-article-1.150159#ixzz2sCX1QNVx
http://nypost.com/2012/07/12/well-traveled-former-st-johns-recruit-thomas-matured-looking-for-new-home/
He put up decent numbers as a high school player., granted he played at 3 high schools.
http://www.rumbleinthegarden.com/2011/5/6/2155997/st-johns-2012-recruiting-tracker-jevon-thomas
-
Holy cow, how has this not been posted before? I love him so hard right now, you guys.
-
Holy cow, how has this not been posted before? I love him so hard right now, you guys.
Honestly, I never looked much into it, even after he committed. I had no idea he had been through so much crap. His situation is just pretty strange, not only sitting out this past year and not being able to practice until mid December, but that fact that he played HS in New York, then North Carolina, and finally Wisconsin. He's been everywhere after going through some pretty rough stuff growing up.
-
I think (hope?) Jevon is a much better offensive player than he's shown. He wasn't terrible in high school and frankly the kid has been through a lot on his way to this point.
When it comes to suffering, Jevon Thomas has seen plenty. When Thomas was a year old, his father cut out. When he was 12, his mother was deported. At 13, his brother and stepfather were murdered. He was raised by a sister who wasn't much older than he was.
"It was tough," he said. "It just...I don't know how to explain it. Things just didn't seem too good."
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/high-school/jevon-thomas-lebrent-walker-support-tough-times-thriving-long-island-article-1.150159#ixzz2sCX1QNVx
http://nypost.com/2012/07/12/well-traveled-former-st-johns-recruit-thomas-matured-looking-for-new-home/
He put up decent numbers as a high school player., granted he played at 3 high schools.
http://www.rumbleinthegarden.com/2011/5/6/2155997/st-johns-2012-recruiting-tracker-jevon-thomas
Oh man, that's awful.
-
Jevon Thomas is ahead of schedule according to my Chester Frazier history book.
Freshman Chester Frazier http://www.fightingillini.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/frazier_chester00.html
13.4 min/game 20.8% FG, 15.6% 3pt, 50% FT, 1.3 pts/game 1.7 rebounds per game
Freshman Jevon Thomas
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/2306/kansas-state-wildcats
23 min/game 25.9% FG, 18.2% 3pt, 31.3% FT, 3.8 pts/game 2.6 rebounds per game
Freshman Angel Rodriguez
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/2306/year/2012/kansas-state-wildcats
21.7 min/game 36% FG 31.7% 3 pt, 68.9% FT, 8.3 pts/game 2.5 rebounds per game
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
Nope. I'm not letting you tell me what I meant. I know what I said and think since being polite isn't working try this; your assessment of "perfectly fine" is stupid.
-
I was happy to see will's foul troubs lead to a bunch of nigel minutes. probably didn't help us win, but I felt like he played pretty well.
-
Jevon Thomas is ahead of schedule according to my Chester Frazier history book.
Freshman Chester Frazier http://www.fightingillini.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/frazier_chester00.html
13.4 min/game 20.8% FG, 15.6% 3pt, 50% FT, 1.3 pts/game 1.7 rebounds per game
Freshman Jevon Thomas
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/2306/kansas-state-wildcats
23 min/game 25.9% FG, 18.2% 3pt, 31.3% FT, 3.8 pts/game 2.6 rebounds per game
Freshman Angel Rodriguez
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/2306/year/2012/kansas-state-wildcats
21.7 min/game 36% FG 31.7% 3 pt, 68.9% FT, 8.3 pts/game 2.5 rebounds per game
You could all ways tell Jevon has some issues finishing/shooting when he was at prep school. But he is better then what the level he is currently performing at. The midseason transition and taking a year off is having a toll on Jevon. Lucky for us we didn't bring him in to be a scorer. He still is an elite level athlete with a good BBIQ. He has a very bright future, everyone should be really glad that we have him.
-
i'm scared he's never going to be decent at shooting the ball. he horrifyingly looks like a highschool wrestler attempting to "shoot hoops" on the court before practice on the mats. very unsmooth/unsteady looking shot that just seems rushed/scared. dunno.
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
Nope. I'm not letting you tell me what I meant. I know what I said and think since being polite isn't working try this; your assessment of "perfectly fine" is stupid.
What's stupid is thinking teams are "good" or "bad" at close games. Most teams are pretty close to .500 over time. Better teams generally have slightly better records in close games because their games are close due to their lead being shrunk, while bad teams are slightly worse due to coming from behind. We're 3-3 in close games this year (defined by statsheet), which tells me that there isn't a problem.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/coaches/compare?add=frank-martin&c1=bob-huggins&c2=oscar-weber&c3=mike-krzyzewski&i=1
-
flipping the coin a few more times will reveal how mentally tough the coin is.
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
Nope. I'm not letting you tell me what I meant. I know what I said and think since being polite isn't working try this; your assessment of "perfectly fine" is stupid.
What's stupid is thinking teams are "good" or "bad" at close games. Most teams are pretty close to .500 over time. Better teams generally have slightly better records in close games because their games are close due to their lead being shrunk, while bad teams are slightly worse due to coming from behind. We're 3-3 in close games this year (defined by statsheet), which tells me that there isn't a problem.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/coaches/compare?add=frank-martin&c1=bob-huggins&c2=oscar-weber&c3=mike-krzyzewski&i=1
What's a "good" road record?
\
This is more about home/road than close games.
Maybe better coaches play a lower % of close games?
Does oscar play a higher % of close games than someone like huggins? Or Frank?
-
Does oscar play a higher % of close games than someone like huggins? Or Frank?
using michigan's statsheet link (+ adding in wooldridge):
k = 20.4% close games
huggins = 21.8%
wooldridge = 24.3%
martin = 24.4%
weber = 26.7%
over a 33 game season, that translates to approximately seven close games for k, nine for weber.
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
Nope. I'm not letting you tell me what I meant. I know what I said and think since being polite isn't working try this; your assessment of "perfectly fine" is stupid.
What's stupid is thinking teams are "good" or "bad" at close games. Most teams are pretty close to .500 over time. Better teams generally have slightly better records in close games because their games are close due to their lead being shrunk, while bad teams are slightly worse due to coming from behind. We're 3-3 in close games this year (defined by statsheet), which tells me that there isn't a problem.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/coaches/compare?add=frank-martin&c1=bob-huggins&c2=oscar-weber&c3=mike-krzyzewski&i=1
What's a "good" road record?
\
This is more about home/road than close games.
Well, that's completely different. Our road record is poor, but we've played 5 road games and were underdogs in 4 of them. That says more about the overall quality of team than some sort of mythical mental hurdle on the road.
Does oscar play a higher % of close games than someone like huggins? Or Frank?
oscar plays 26.7% "close", Frank 24%, Huggins 22%, Wooldridge 24%, Self 22%.
-
my god, michigancat.
-
btw, the statsheet definition of close is under 6 pts. so, not tempo-free.
-
Interestingly, this is the first season we haven't played a road or "semi-road" game in OOC in at least 20 years. I got tired of looking after that.
-
Interestingly, this is the first season we haven't played a road or "semi-road" game in OOC in at least 20 years. I got tired of looking after that.
oscar talked about that on the #oscar show. He said with Angel having left, they didn't really want to take an L.
-
Interestingly, this is the first season we haven't played a road or "semi-road" game in OOC in at least 20 years. I got tired of looking after that.
oscar talked about that on the #oscar show. He said with Angel having left, they didn't really want to take an L.
yeah, I was just surprised it never happened under Wooly.
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
Nope. I'm not letting you tell me what I meant. I know what I said and think since being polite isn't working try this; your assessment of "perfectly fine" is stupid.
What's stupid is thinking teams are "good" or "bad" at close games. Most teams are pretty close to .500 over time. Better teams generally have slightly better records in close games because their games are close due to their lead being shrunk, while bad teams are slightly worse due to coming from behind. We're 3-3 in close games this year (defined by statsheet), which tells me that there isn't a problem.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/coaches/compare?add=frank-martin&c1=bob-huggins&c2=oscar-weber&c3=mike-krzyzewski&i=1
That's fair man, I was wrong. I will still maintain that the way these road games have been lost is troubling because they have seemed to fall outside of the purview of just missing a few shots on the road.
-
Dude I know it was a semantics argument from the start which is why I said we were basically saying the same thing from the start. Take a lap, mir.
Nope. I'm not letting you tell me what I meant. I know what I said and think since being polite isn't working try this; your assessment of "perfectly fine" is stupid.
What's stupid is thinking teams are "good" or "bad" at close games. Most teams are pretty close to .500 over time. Better teams generally have slightly better records in close games because their games are close due to their lead being shrunk, while bad teams are slightly worse due to coming from behind. We're 3-3 in close games this year (defined by statsheet), which tells me that there isn't a problem.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/coaches/compare?add=frank-martin&c1=bob-huggins&c2=oscar-weber&c3=mike-krzyzewski&i=1
That's fair man, I was wrong. I will still maintain that the way these road games have been lost is troubling because they have seemed to fall outside of the purview of just missing a few shots on the road.
Our inability to get a lead and build on it during road games is troubling.
-
I think our inability to take care of the ball at key times is hard to deal with given our other offensive challenges. If we just had trouble shooting or just had trouble handling the ball we'd be fine.
-
I think our inability to take care of the ball at key times is hard to deal with given our other offensive challenges. If we just had trouble shooting or just had trouble handling the ball we'd be fine.
Every possession is a "key" possession.
-
I think our inability to take care of the ball at key times is hard to deal with given our other offensive challenges. If we just had trouble shooting or just had trouble handling the ball we'd be fine.
Every possession is a "key" possession.
The way we've handled the late possessions in close and tied situations the last 3 road games would indicate that this team is, likely subconsciously, having trouble thinking like computerized data machines.
-
I think our inability to take care of the ball at key times is hard to deal with given our other offensive challenges. If we just had trouble shooting or just had trouble handling the ball we'd be fine.
Every possession is a "key" possession.
The way we've handled the late possessions in close and tied situations the last 3 road games would indicate that this team is, likely subconsciously, having trouble thinking like computerized data machines.
Yes. We all love numbers and advanced can tell us a lot, but they don't notice when a senior wets his pants at the site of a double-team and steps out of bounds, and plays like it.
The "eye-test" has its merits.
-
I think our inability to take care of the ball at key times is hard to deal with given our other offensive challenges. If we just had trouble shooting or just had trouble handling the ball we'd be fine.
Every possession is a "key" possession.
The way we've handled the late possessions in close and tied situations the last 3 road games would indicate that this team is, likely subconsciously, having trouble thinking like computerized data machines.
Yes. We all love numbers and advanced can tell us a lot, but they don't notice when a senior wets his pants at the site of a double-team and steps out of bounds, and plays like it.
The "eye-test" has its merits.
Advanced stats accurately noticed that possession was a turnover.
-
michigancat are you arguing a point here or just disagreeing with every point made? I'm confused by that rebuttal, nicname didn't say anything against the merits of advanced metrics.
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
-
This last page or so reminds me that this is such an 8th grade board with no in-depth discussion and too many pictures of bazongas
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
In the last three losses, our TO% was 18.9%, and our overall TO% is 18.3. But that's a pretty small sample size (only 37 possessions), so it doesn't really say a whole lot about whether or not this team is particularly worse in close games with less than 5 minutes remaining. It definitely confirms that you are selectively remembering turnovers and seeing what you want to see - there is no way those were our worst 5 minute segments.
I'll add in the wins - (OSU and OU) and see what happens!
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
For the last 5 minutes of UT, WVU, ISU, OU, and OSU, our TO rate was 16.1%. You're just remembering the turnovers more vividly, that's all. It's natural for humans to do that.
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
For the last 5 minutes of UT, WVU, ISU, OU, and OSU, our TO rate was 16.1%. You're just remembering the turnovers more vividly, that's all. It's natural for humans to do that.
hey did you guys know that the last few percentages of anything greatly influence your recollection of it? like this is really true. horrible date but the last ten minutes were good? GREAT DATE! bad vacation but the flight home was fun? GREAT VACATION! great day at work but the last hour was bad? guess what? THAT WAS A BAD DAY!
-
If you haven't noticed a pattern of increasingly frustrating plays towards the end of the last three road games then you must not be watching the games. Whether the team is actually performing worse in "crunch time" than in other, less noticed possessions, is something that I can't answer. Maybe those mistakes are just magnified by the time and place and they make them all game long, or maybe this team is playing worse at the end of these ballgames. '
It's probably a combination of both.
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
For the last 5 minutes of UT, WVU, ISU, OU, and OSU, our TO rate was 16.1%. You're just remembering the turnovers more vividly, that's all. It's natural for humans to do that.
hey did you guys know that the last few percentages of anything greatly influence your recollection of it? like this is really true. horrible date but the last ten minutes were good? GREAT DATE! bad vacation but the flight home was fun? GREAT VACATION! great day at work but the last hour was bad? guess what? THAT WAS A BAD DAY!
Yes! (I just read Thinking Fast and Slow)
If you haven't noticed a pattern of increasingly frustrating plays towards the end of the last three road games then you must not be watching the games. Whether the team is actually performing worse in "crunch time" than in other, less noticed possessions, is something that I can't answer. Maybe those mistakes are just magnified by the time and place and they make them all game long, or maybe this team is playing worse at the end of these ballgames. '
It's probably a combination of both.
Did you guys also know that humans think they find patterns that don't really exist? It's just how our brains work. (Read about it in the same book!)
Also, there is a way to check whether or not a team performs worse in "crunch time" than regular possessions, and we actually do better when it comes to turnovers. (I don't think it's statistically significant enough to say we're actually "better", but it's significant enough to prove nicname and MiR wrong).
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
This is intellectually dishonest.
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
For the last 5 minutes of UT, WVU, ISU, OU, and OSU, our TO rate was 16.1%. You're just remembering the turnovers more vividly, that's all. It's natural for humans to do that.
Since you don't watch the games, I'll help you out. Our meltdowns don't start until after the under four TO and only occur on the road. So throw out OU and OSU and the first 90 seconds of the five minute stretch you're "analyzing."
-
arguing anything based on a single possession is inherently arguing against the merits of advanced metrics.
I didn't take the single possession that he described literally. If we want to go back to my point, I'd bet that in these close games, even the ones we have won, our TOr the last 5 minutes of those games is if not the highest 5 minute segment, is very close. :lol: at every point in the game having equal meaning to the players playing the game.
For the last 5 minutes of UT, WVU, ISU, OU, and OSU, our TO rate was 16.1%. You're just remembering the turnovers more vividly, that's all. It's natural for humans to do that.
Since you don't watch the games, I'll help you out. Our meltdowns don't start until after the under four TO and only occur on the road. So throw out OU and OSU and the first 90 seconds of the five minute stretch you're "analyzing."
18.5% (our average is 18.3%).
-
So higher than average but not outlier high, fair enough.
-
Its simple; when you play poor defense on the road, you lose.
I went back and looked at the league road games for every season since Huggins was hired at K-State. The Cats are 32-31 (.508) on the road during that time.
The key defensive stat is holding opponents under 1.07 ppp on the road. When K-State does that, the Cats are 26-5 (.839).
However, when the Cats allow teams to score 1.07 ppp or more, they've only won 6 out of 32 games (.188). UT, ISU, and WVU all scored 1.07 or more. ISU and WVU scored 1.09 or better, and when that happens K-State is only 4-24 in league road games (.143).
Offensively, 1.07 is also the key breaking point. K-State won 20 games and only lost 3 (.870) on the road when scoring 1.07 ppp or more. When scoring fewer than 1.07 ppp the Cats are 12-28 (.300). In all 3 of those road losses the Cats scored 1.03 ppp or worse. The Cats are 7 and 24 (.226) when scoring that poorly on the road.
The biggest problem in all 3 of these "winnable" road losses has been awful play in the first half. The opponents have outscored K-State 1.19 ppp to .95 ppp over the course of those 3 games and it has been too much to overcome. K-State has had the advantage in the 2nd half 1.04 to 1.00 ppp, its just not enough.
-
Our PPP would be higher in road games if we didn't have so many TOs in the last 5 minutes of games, IMHO
I would guess FTR is markedly lower/ higher in roadies, contributing to PPP, which can only be explained by the atrocious officiating this conference arranges.
-
The first half defense has been awful.
FYI - Under five minutes in losses @UT, ISU and WVU
36 possessions, 8 turnovers, 8-27 field goals, 1-10 3FG, 8-15 FT, 8-18 on Oreb opps.
TO% - 22, FG% - 29, 3FG% - 10, FT% - 8-15, Oreb% - 44
To illustrate MIR's point.
3:10 Marcus Foster made Jumper. 67-68
3:01 West Virginia Timeout
3:01 Kansas St Timeout
2:43 67-68 Juwan Staten missed Layup.
2:43 67-68 Remi Dibo Offensive Rebound.
2:40 67-68 Remi Dibo missed Dunk.
2:40 Kansas St Defensive Rebound. 67-68
2:39 Official TV Timeout
2:23 Thomas Gipson Turnover. 67-68
2:09 67-71 Remi Dibo made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Devin Williams.
1:55 Foul on Thomas Gipson. 67-71
1:55 67-72 Terry Henderson made Free Throw.
1:55 67-73 Terry Henderson made Free Throw.
1:54 Marcus Foster Turnover. 67-73
1:52 67-73 Gary Browne Steal.
1:51 67-73 Foul on Devin Williams.
1:51 Marcus Foster missed Free Throw. 67-73
1:51 Kansas St Deadball Team Rebound. 67-73
1:51 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-73
1:20 68-73 Juwan Staten Turnover.
1:19 Shane Southwell Steal. 68-73
1:16 Shane Southwell Turnover. 68-73
-
Is anyone else not surprised michigancat lied to support his POV?
-
The first half defense has been awful.
FYI - Under five minutes in losses @UT, ISU and WVU
36 possessions, 8 turnovers, 8-27 field goals, 1-10 3FG, 8-15 FT, 8-18 on Oreb opps.
TO% - 22, FG% - 29, 3FG% - 10, FT% - 8-15, Oreb% - 44
To illustrate MIR's point.
3:10 Marcus Foster made Jumper. 67-68
3:01 West Virginia Timeout
3:01 Kansas St Timeout
2:43 67-68 Juwan Staten missed Layup.
2:43 67-68 Remi Dibo Offensive Rebound.
2:40 67-68 Remi Dibo missed Dunk.
2:40 Kansas St Defensive Rebound. 67-68
2:39 Official TV Timeout
2:23 Thomas Gipson Turnover. 67-68
2:09 67-71 Remi Dibo made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Devin Williams.
1:55 Foul on Thomas Gipson. 67-71
1:55 67-72 Terry Henderson made Free Throw.
1:55 67-73 Terry Henderson made Free Throw.
1:54 Marcus Foster Turnover. 67-73
1:52 67-73 Gary Browne Steal.
1:51 67-73 Foul on Devin Williams.
1:51 Marcus Foster missed Free Throw. 67-73
1:51 Kansas St Deadball Team Rebound. 67-73
1:51 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-73
1:20 68-73 Juwan Staten Turnover.
1:19 Shane Southwell Steal. 68-73
1:16 Shane Southwell Turnover. 68-73
That's atrocious, needless to say that is absolutely outlier performance or lack thereof
-
5:05 Will Spradling made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Jevon Thomas. 66-66
4:48 66-66 DeAndre Kane missed Dunk.
4:48 66-66 Melvin Ejim Offensive Rebound.
4:39 66-69 Georges Niang made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Melvin Ejim.
4:32 Nino Williams missed Jumper. 66-69
4:32 Nino Williams Offensive Rebound. 66-69
4:25 Kansas St Timeout
4:15 D.J. Johnson Turnover. 66-69
4:15 66-69 DeAndre Kane Steal.
4:03 66-71 DeAndre Kane made Jumper.
4:03 Foul on D.J. Johnson. 66-71
4:03 66-72 DeAndre Kane made Free Throw.
3:46 66-72 Foul on Georges Niang.
3:46 Official TV Timeout
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 67-72
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-72
3:43 68-72 Melvin Ejim missed Jumper.
3:43 Will Spradling Defensive Rebound. 68-72
3:34 Foul on Will Spradling. 68-72
3:34 68-73 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
3:34 Will Spradling Turnover. 68-72
3:34 68-74 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
-
5:05 Will Spradling made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Jevon Thomas. 66-66
4:48 66-66 DeAndre Kane missed Dunk.
4:48 66-66 Melvin Ejim Offensive Rebound.
4:39 66-69 Georges Niang made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Melvin Ejim.
4:32 Nino Williams missed Jumper. 66-69
4:32 Nino Williams Offensive Rebound. 66-69
4:25 Kansas St Timeout
4:15 D.J. Johnson Turnover. 66-69
4:15 66-69 DeAndre Kane Steal.
4:03 66-71 DeAndre Kane made Jumper.
4:03 Foul on D.J. Johnson. 66-71
4:03 66-72 DeAndre Kane made Free Throw.
3:46 66-72 Foul on Georges Niang.
3:46 Official TV Timeout
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 67-72
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-72
3:43 68-72 Melvin Ejim missed Jumper.
3:43 Will Spradling Defensive Rebound. 68-72
3:34 Foul on Will Spradling. 68-72
3:34 68-73 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
3:34 Will Spradling Turnover. 68-72
3:34 68-74 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
That Will Spradling "turnover" was not a turnover - it was the play that was reviewed where Ejim got a technical, but we retained the ball. 7 turnovers in 37 possessions = 18.5%.
-
So, in our 3 blown roadies we're turning the ball over at a 23% greater rate than average. :-o
-
5:05 Will Spradling made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Jevon Thomas. 66-66
4:48 66-66 DeAndre Kane missed Dunk.
4:48 66-66 Melvin Ejim Offensive Rebound.
4:39 66-69 Georges Niang made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Melvin Ejim.
4:32 Nino Williams missed Jumper. 66-69
4:32 Nino Williams Offensive Rebound. 66-69
4:25 Kansas St Timeout
4:15 D.J. Johnson Turnover. 66-69
4:15 66-69 DeAndre Kane Steal.
4:03 66-71 DeAndre Kane made Jumper.
4:03 Foul on D.J. Johnson. 66-71
4:03 66-72 DeAndre Kane made Free Throw.
3:46 66-72 Foul on Georges Niang.
3:46 Official TV Timeout
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 67-72
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-72
3:43 68-72 Melvin Ejim missed Jumper.
3:43 Will Spradling Defensive Rebound. 68-72
3:34 Foul on Will Spradling. 68-72
3:34 68-73 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
3:34 Will Spradling Turnover. 68-72
3:34 68-74 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
That Will Spradling "turnover" was not a turnover - it was the play that was reviewed where Ejim got a technical, but we retained the ball. 7 turnovers in 37 possessions = 18.5%.
We got the ball after they shot FTs. They called a foul on us on that play. And the loose ball was the result of careless play.
-
But keep lying about stuff and hope no one notices :thumbsup:
-
5:05 Will Spradling made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Jevon Thomas. 66-66
4:48 66-66 DeAndre Kane missed Dunk.
4:48 66-66 Melvin Ejim Offensive Rebound.
4:39 66-69 Georges Niang made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Melvin Ejim.
4:32 Nino Williams missed Jumper. 66-69
4:32 Nino Williams Offensive Rebound. 66-69
4:25 Kansas St Timeout
4:15 D.J. Johnson Turnover. 66-69
4:15 66-69 DeAndre Kane Steal.
4:03 66-71 DeAndre Kane made Jumper.
4:03 Foul on D.J. Johnson. 66-71
4:03 66-72 DeAndre Kane made Free Throw.
3:46 66-72 Foul on Georges Niang.
3:46 Official TV Timeout
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 67-72
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-72
3:43 68-72 Melvin Ejim missed Jumper.
3:43 Will Spradling Defensive Rebound. 68-72
3:34 Foul on Will Spradling. 68-72
3:34 68-73 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
3:34 Will Spradling Turnover. 68-72
3:34 68-74 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
That Will Spradling "turnover" was not a turnover - it was the play that was reviewed where Ejim got a technical, but we retained the ball. 7 turnovers in 37 possessions = 18.5%.
We got the ball after they shot FTs. They called a foul on us on that play. And the loose ball was the result of careless play.
It's not a turnover.
-
We lose possession, get called for a foul and they make 2 FTs, but its not a TO bc they got whistled for a T? Okay
-
5:05 Will Spradling made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Jevon Thomas. 66-66
4:48 66-66 DeAndre Kane missed Dunk.
4:48 66-66 Melvin Ejim Offensive Rebound.
4:39 66-69 Georges Niang made Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Melvin Ejim.
4:32 Nino Williams missed Jumper. 66-69
4:32 Nino Williams Offensive Rebound. 66-69
4:25 Kansas St Timeout
4:15 D.J. Johnson Turnover. 66-69
4:15 66-69 DeAndre Kane Steal.
4:03 66-71 DeAndre Kane made Jumper.
4:03 Foul on D.J. Johnson. 66-71
4:03 66-72 DeAndre Kane made Free Throw.
3:46 66-72 Foul on Georges Niang.
3:46 Official TV Timeout
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 67-72
3:46 Marcus Foster made Free Throw. 68-72
3:43 68-72 Melvin Ejim missed Jumper.
3:43 Will Spradling Defensive Rebound. 68-72
3:34 Foul on Will Spradling. 68-72
3:34 68-73 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
3:34 Will Spradling Turnover. 68-72
3:34 68-74 Melvin Ejim made Free Throw.
That Will Spradling "turnover" was not a turnover - it was the play that was reviewed where Ejim got a technical, but we retained the ball. 7 turnovers in 37 possessions = 18.5%.
We got the ball after they shot FTs. They called a foul on us on that play. And the loose ball was the result of careless play.
It's not a turnover.
Come on michigancat
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
-
Manbeck.
http://powercatgameday.com/k-states-late-game-execution-issue-road/
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
Except that they turn it over nearly 23% more than average, and shoot less than half their average from 2, 3 and FT.
But yeah, other than that stuff its about the same.
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
You are a master of changing what is being said to fit your narrative, nothing wrong with giving a little, I've done it twice.
The trend is the issue, nobody said a damn thing about January and the first day of February. So now tell us that trends don't matter either, your last 4 games bear the same relevance as the first four of the season.
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
You are a master of changing what is being said to fit your narrative, nothing wrong with giving a little, I've done it twice.
The trend is the issue, nobody said a damn thing about January and the first day of February. So now tell us that trends don't matter either, your last 4 games bear the same relevance as the first four of the season.
There isn't enough evidence to constitute a "trend". We're talking about 37 hand-picked possessions out of over 1400 played so far the season.
-
Not sure what our record is when both teams score under 1.07 or when both score 1.07+.........
but when you give up an ave of 1.19 and score .95 in a 3 game ave on the road......
tough hill to climb in the 2nd half getting either to that magical 1.07 target by games end
In the Isu and WV games, we were constantly chasing (playing from behind) for a big portion of the first 15 minutes of the 2nd half
Play better the first half and maybe we acutally have a 5-6 pt lead with 4:00 or 5:00 to play
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
You are a master of changing what is being said to fit your narrative, nothing wrong with giving a little, I've done it twice.
The trend is the issue, nobody said a damn thing about January and the first day of February. So now tell us that trends don't matter either, your last 4 games bear the same relevance as the first four of the season.
There isn't enough evidence to constitute a "trend". We're talking about 37 hand-picked possessions out of over 1400 played so far the season.
So you believe in trends but the last three road games aren't enough of a trend to measure our performance in road games? Got it, thanks!
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
You are a master of changing what is being said to fit your narrative, nothing wrong with giving a little, I've done it twice.
The trend is the issue, nobody said a damn thing about January and the first day of February. So now tell us that trends don't matter either, your last 4 games bear the same relevance as the first four of the season.
There isn't enough evidence to constitute a "trend". We're talking about 37 hand-picked possessions out of over 1400 played so far the season.
So you believe in trends but the last three road games aren't enough of a trend to measure our performance in road games? Got it, thanks!
I think the last three road games in their entirety (210 possessions) can tell us about our performance as a team overall, or at least fall with in the range of what one would expect based on the results of the entire season. I guess if you want to call it a trend, you can say we have are following a trend of losing to teams when we are underdogs.
What I disagree with is the idea that you can pull a trend from the 37 possessions at the end of games to determine that we lack some sort of mental toughness/heart/grit that plagues us only in close road games. IMO the results of those 37 possessions also fall into the range of what you would expect based on the performance of the entire season - the range of possibilities gets a lot wider when you have a smaller sample size.
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
You are a master of changing what is being said to fit your narrative, nothing wrong with giving a little, I've done it twice.
The trend is the issue, nobody said a damn thing about January and the first day of February. So now tell us that trends don't matter either, your last 4 games bear the same relevance as the first four of the season.
There isn't enough evidence to constitute a "trend". We're talking about 37 hand-picked possessions out of over 1400 played so far the season.
So you believe in trends but the last three road games aren't enough of a trend to measure our performance in road games? Got it, thanks!
I think the last three road games in their entirety (210 possessions) can tell us about our performance as a team overall, or at least fall with in the range of what one would expect based on the results of the entire season. I guess if you want to call it a trend, you can say we have are following a trend of losing to teams when we are underdogs.
What I disagree with is the idea that you can pull a trend from the 37 possessions at the end of games to determine that we lack some sort of mental toughness/heart/grit that plagues us only in close road games. IMO the results of those 37 possessions also fall into the range of what you would expect based on the performance of the entire season - the range of possibilities gets a lot wider when you have a smaller sample size.
You very well may not be talking to me but I think we don't lack any of those things, I do think we have a sense of panic in these situations and that panic is either exacerbated or the complete cause of the players on this roster who are being extended beyond their capabilities. The reason why the end of the game is relevant is because as the possessions lessen the pressure builds. Its a hell of a lot easier to be poised when there's 13 minutes left in the game as opposed to being tied with 92 seconds and 3 possessions left in the game.
-
We retained possession, but it's irrelevant.
Even if the TO% is 22%, I'm still right. Heck, even if it's 25%, I'm right - for such a small sample of possessions, a 25% TO rate isn't an outlier.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how this team plays the "last 5 minutes on close come-from-behind road games in January or the first day of February."
You are a master of changing what is being said to fit your narrative, nothing wrong with giving a little, I've done it twice.
The trend is the issue, nobody said a damn thing about January and the first day of February. So now tell us that trends don't matter either, your last 4 games bear the same relevance as the first four of the season.
There isn't enough evidence to constitute a "trend". We're talking about 37 hand-picked possessions out of over 1400 played so far the season.
So you believe in trends but the last three road games aren't enough of a trend to measure our performance in road games? Got it, thanks!
I think the last three road games in their entirety (210 possessions) can tell us about our performance as a team overall, or at least fall with in the range of what one would expect based on the results of the entire season. I guess if you want to call it a trend, you can say we have are following a trend of losing to teams when we are underdogs.
What I disagree with is the idea that you can pull a trend from the 37 possessions at the end of games to determine that we lack some sort of mental toughness/heart/grit that plagues us only in close road games. IMO the results of those 37 possessions also fall into the range of what you would expect based on the performance of the entire season - the range of possibilities gets a lot wider when you have a smaller sample size.
You very well may not be talking to me but I think we don't lack any of those things, I do think we have a sense of panic in these situations and that panic is either exacerbated or the complete cause of the players on this roster who are being extended beyond their capabilities. The reason why the end of the game is relevant is because as the possessions lessen the pressure builds. Its a hell of a lot easier to be poised when there's 13 minutes left in the game as opposed to being tied with 92 seconds and 3 possessions left in the game.
ok
-
Something I've seen that has been curious is late in games certain players abilities to just turn it on. Not only our games specifically, but Will will miss the majority of his threes all game and then in the last seconds throw up a running prayer three and nail it. I think it's an intangible we are lacking due to age. Yet I think it is not measurable with numbers. The commentators were giving Brown the game ball and he had paltry numbers. It is the hustle at the right moment, or the denial defense at the right moment that causes a momentum change. I am not sure how popular it is as an opinion, but I believe that oscar is a great coach. He is pushing our players to win and they are learning how to persevere. It is hard to see us struggle, but I don't ever doubt our passion and desire. Time will tell, but I think the development possibilities of oscar's recruits seem to have no ceiling.
-
More often than not, your "gut" tells you what you want to hear and the "eyeball" test will show you what you want to see.
-
Didn't realize there was this much resistance to stats.
:sdeek:
-
This is going back to an early conversation, but ever since I've seen kenpom's stuff I've have sys' mentality. It sucks that we lost at UT because that is an "L" on our record that we can't get back. But it's good to know that based out what I saw and what the stats show, we probably win that game 5 out of 10 times. I think sys shares this perspective, and that's why he didn't see that loss as a big deal. It gives me confidence in our team going forward.
The thing that stats can not take into account is how a bunch of 18-19 year olds react to 3 losses in the past 4 games. They may turn it off for the season and start preparing for the next season or just start trying to make it through practices for the rest of the year instead of getting better like they had been earlier this season. I don't think that's the case. My point is that even if michigancat and sys don't believe it or just don't want to believe it, emotion and things like "clutchness" are factors to some extent.
-
This is going back to an early conversation, but ever since I've seen kenpom's stuff I've have sys' mentality. It sucks that we lost at UT because that is an "L" on our record that we can't get back. But it's good to know that based out what I saw and what the stats show, we probably win that game 5 out of 10 times. I think sys shares this perspective, and that's why he didn't see that loss as a big deal. It gives me confidence in our team going forward.
The thing that stats can not take into account is how a bunch of 18-19 year olds react to 3 losses in the past 4 games. They may turn it off for the season and start preparing for the next season or just start trying to make it through practices for the rest of the year instead of getting better like they had been earlier this season. I don't think that's the case. My point is that even if michigancat and sys don't believe it or just don't want to believe it, emotion and things like "clutchness" are factors to some extent.
I would say they are only factors if they can be meaningfully measured. If "clutchness" doesn't result in an actual observable (such as more/better scoring [how ever you want to measure such a thing]) with a numerical value, then I personally doubt its an effective factor.
-
Can you measure in numbers why Will plays better at ISU? Or why a lot of players choke when they are closer to home? (Will in Lawrence) That emotional factor has a lot to do with confidence. To me confidence is what makes an effective player, and in Shane's case sometimes a detrimental one. I can see that confidence being shot after all those close losses without proper coaching. I think oscar knows how to keep our boys rolling.
-
Can you measure in numbers why Will plays better at ISU? Or why a lot of players choke when they are closer to home? (Will in Lawrence) That emotional factor has a lot to do with confidence. To me confidence is what makes an effective player, and in Shane's case sometimes a detrimental one. I can see that confidence being shot after all those close losses without proper coaching. I think oscar knows how to keep our boys rolling.
random variance
-
Texas was the game that we played the best defense and had the best shot to win. It was by far the most frustrating loss of the 3 because we gave ourselves the best chance to win down the stretch. The game was within 2 possessions either way the last 10 minutes of the game and Texas won on a last second shot.
The other 2 games we had major deficits; ISU led by 11 with 6:30 left and WVU led by 7 with 5:00 left. We were extremely fortunate in each to be inside of 1 possession after the under 4 TO and road teams simply don't win games often when they encounter late 2nd half deficits of those margins. We ended up allowing 1.10 and 1.11 points per possession to ISU and WVU, very few teams win on the road when allowing the home team to score like that. I think there is merit to discussing the time mistakes happen and whether or not your team is "clutch" or not, but too often those discussions discount 20 (or more) other possessions earlier in each game where K-State made equally brutal mistakes on offense and defense that led to the home team gaining significant leads that K-State had to overcome to even be in the game.
Occasionally you win games like Baylor last year on the road, but road team wins usually happen when a team pulls away by 3 or more possessions for a stretch in the last 6 or so minutes and that is the key to winning those games IMHO. Against Texas we had multiple opportunities to go up 4 (or more) in the last 6-7 minutes which were key moments, against ISU and WVU we were always playing from behind.
-
Can you measure in numbers why Will plays better at ISU? Or why a lot of players choke when they are closer to home? (Will in Lawrence) That emotional factor has a lot to do with confidence. To me confidence is what makes an effective player, and in Shane's case sometimes a detrimental one. I can see that confidence being shot after all those close losses without proper coaching. I think oscar knows how to keep our boys rolling.
numbers, in fact, would be the only way you could measure those hypothetical phenomena. you could try to describe them using words, as you just did, but it's much less convincing.
-
Didn't realize there was this much resistance to stats.
:sdeek:
There literally isn't a single post in this thread rejecting or resisting advanced metrics
-
This is going back to an early conversation, but ever since I've seen kenpom's stuff I've have sys' mentality. It sucks that we lost at UT because that is an "L" on our record that we can't get back. But it's good to know that based out what I saw and what the stats show, we probably win that game 5 out of 10 times. I think sys shares this perspective, and that's why he didn't see that loss as a big deal. It gives me confidence in our team going forward.
The thing that stats can not take into account is how a bunch of 18-19 year olds react to 3 losses in the past 4 games. They may turn it off for the season and start preparing for the next season or just start trying to make it through practices for the rest of the year instead of getting better like they had been earlier this season. I don't think that's the case. My point is that even if michigancat and sys don't believe it or just don't want to believe it, emotion and things like "clutchness" are factors to some extent.
I would say they are only factors if they can be meaningfully measured. If "clutchness" doesn't result in an actual observable (such as more/better scoring [how ever you want to measure such a thing]) with a numerical value, then I personally doubt its an effective factor.
I think there is a difference between being clutch and not being poised. I don't think clutch is measurable or even exists. I do think you can look to things like TOr in late and close situations to gauge whether or not a team has poise.
-
The distinction isn't numbers vs. words. Numbers can be expressed as words. It's just a matter of rigor, which some people screw up on even when they try to use stats.
-
This is going back to an early conversation, but ever since I've seen kenpom's stuff I've have sys' mentality. It sucks that we lost at UT because that is an "L" on our record that we can't get back. But it's good to know that based out what I saw and what the stats show, we probably win that game 5 out of 10 times. I think sys shares this perspective, and that's why he didn't see that loss as a big deal. It gives me confidence in our team going forward.
The thing that stats can not take into account is how a bunch of 18-19 year olds react to 3 losses in the past 4 games. They may turn it off for the season and start preparing for the next season or just start trying to make it through practices for the rest of the year instead of getting better like they had been earlier this season. I don't think that's the case. My point is that even if michigancat and sys don't believe it or just don't want to believe it, emotion and things like "clutchness" are factors to some extent.
I would say they are only factors if they can be meaningfully measured. If "clutchness" doesn't result in an actual observable (such as more/better scoring [how ever you want to measure such a thing]) with a numerical value, then I personally doubt its an effective factor.
I think there is a difference between being clutch and not being poised. I don't think clutch is measurable or even exists. I do think you can look to things like TOr in late and close situations to gauge whether or not a team has poise.
You could, but you'd need a far larger sample than what we're working with to discern anything out of the ordinary.
also, LOL at differentiating between "clutchness" and "poise". What on earth are you talking about, MiR.
-
The distinction isn't numbers vs. words. Numbers can be expressed as words. It's just a matter of rigor, which some people screw up on even when they try to use stats.
I would say it's measurable vs unmeasurable.
During a basketball game there are a large number of "objective" observables, if you claim "poise" is one of them, then I would expect a well-defined metric in which to measure this. Anyone in the crowd should be able to measure this, and all measurements should be essentially the same (after accounting for errors in measurement and systematic error). For example, the number of points scored in a game is something I would call an objective observable. Even if someone in the crowd is taking score and they miss a score (a measurement error) or the official makes a mistake (systematic error) this can eventually be accounted for because before the game started it was agreed upon what constitutes a score (by the rule book). So can other things like rebounds, FTR, etc. Something like jersey color is an objective observable as well so are number of vowels in a player's name. These last two can be measured, but the next step would be to show if/how they affect the other observables (especially observables that are generally considered important like wins, points, etc..).
Ok a lot of stuff and I will generally stop now before it gets too boring. If anyone wants to keep on this topic, however, I do like talking about it.
-
The distinction isn't numbers vs. words. Numbers can be expressed as words. It's just a matter of rigor, which some people screw up on even when they try to use stats.
a number expressed as a word is still a number.
-
i tried to think of something that could be measured that wasn't numerical for about five minutes before my original post, btw. i couldn't think of anything. if someone else can, i'd like to know what it is.
-
I think the standard concept of measurable includes numerical.
-
How much different, though, is saying "I want this team to play better than their average for the last few minutes of a game," from "I want this team to win the Big 12"? I realize this isn't what people were saying, but maybe it's in the ballpark, and perhaps it's not all that crazy. It seems much less crazy than saying, "I want this team to win all of its games by a margin of at least 60 points."
-
How much different, though, is saying "I want this team to play better than their average for the last few minutes of a game," from "I want this team to win the Big 12"?
"better play over the last few minutes of a game" will have a lot more variance/luck involved because it's a much smaller sample size. Winning the Big 12 is also much easier to define/measure.
-
Stats-what do I do with them? Are they predictive of future events? can they give me a statistically sound advantage over a bookie?
Do they just describe what happened in the game that I just watched? JMHO but if no significant future advantage can be gained
I'm gonna sit over here in camp Tubesock where I look at the after the fact stats and say to myself "yep thats pretty much what
I just saw on tv, but wow I didn't realize they went to the line THAT much more than we did" basically woopty-effing-doo.
-
Predictive: if we allow 1.10 ppp and play games at 70+ possessions we will not win another road game this year. We were fortunate against ISU and WVU that we can even talk about turnovers being a factor as poorly as we controlled pace and played defense.
-
How much different, though, is saying "I want this team to play better than their average for the last few minutes of a game," from "I want this team to win the Big 12"?
"better play over the last few minutes of a game" will have a lot more variance/luck involved because it's a much smaller sample size. Winning the Big 12 is also much easier to define/measure.
To expand, I don't think we should be concerned with late-close-road game mental toughness, we should be concerned with our inability to develop a meaningful lead in these games (or any lead at all in the case of WVU and ISU). If I were a coach, I wouldn't spend any time working on trying to correct the 37 late-game possessions we've talked about or develop mental toughness,- I'd spend time looking for trends in the other 150 or so possessions in those games and seeing what I can correct there. I think this is the heart of what this discussion is about.
-
Predictive: if we allow 1.10 ppp and play games at 70+ possessions we will not win another road game this year. We were fortunate against ISU and WVU that we can even talk about turnovers being a factor as poorly as we controlled pace and played defense.
will we or will we not? I don't think anyone has the answer to that right? Fan I know you love statistics and don't think it's
bad or anything, but I am curious how they can be useful to me as a fan.
-
How much different, though, is saying "I want this team to play better than their average for the last few minutes of a game," from "I want this team to win the Big 12"?
"better play over the last few minutes of a game" will have a lot more variance/luck involved because it's a much smaller sample size. Winning the Big 12 is also much easier to define/measure.
To expand, I don't think we should be concerned with late-close-road game mental toughness, we should be concerned with our inability to develop a meaningful lead in these games (or any lead at all in the case of WVU and ISU). If I were a coach, I wouldn't spend any time working on trying to correct the 37 late-game possessions we've talked about or develop mental toughness,- I'd spend time looking for trends in the other 150 or so possessions in those games and seeing what I can correct there. I think this is the heart of what this discussion is about.
This.
"It is Groundhog Day for us. We keep repeating the same mistakes on the road. We do not play very well in the first half, but are able to battle in the second half to give ourselves a chance."
-
How much different, though, is saying "I want this team to play better than their average for the last few minutes of a game," from "I want this team to win the Big 12"?
"better play over the last few minutes of a game" will have a lot more variance/luck involved because it's a much smaller sample size. Winning the Big 12 is also much easier to define/measure.
To expand, I don't think we should be concerned with late-close-road game mental toughness, we should be concerned with our inability to develop a meaningful lead in these games (or any lead at all in the case of WVU and ISU). If I were a coach, I wouldn't spend any time working on trying to correct the 37 late-game possessions we've talked about or develop mental toughness,- I'd spend time looking for trends in the other 150 or so possessions in those games and seeing what I can correct there. I think this is the heart of what this discussion is about.
You don't really think I was advocating that the coaches should be working on late game situations do you? I was simply explaining why IMO why we were/are garbage in such situations. Obviously all of these abstract intangibles we've talked about, if they exist, can't be fixed in practice. As a coach it would be more prudent to work on things that can be fixed like shooting, rebounding, ball handling, and rotational defensive covers. Although in February I really doubt that coaching can have measurable impact on any of those things either.
-
Predictive: if we allow 1.10 ppp and play games at 70+ possessions we will not win another road game this year. We were fortunate against ISU and WVU that we can even talk about turnovers being a factor as poorly as we controlled pace and played defense.
will we or will we not? I don't think anyone has the answer to that right? Fan I know you love statistics and don't think it's
bad or anything, but I am curious how they can be useful to me as a fan.
Many times my perception of what happens in a game is not what really happened and the numbers back that up. Now I generally track the stats as I watch, so that happens less. For me the numbers add to and help illuminate what I see on the court. That's just how I watch basketball now.
-
Predictive: if we allow 1.10 ppp and play games at 70+ possessions we will not win another road game this year. We were fortunate against ISU and WVU that we can even talk about turnovers being a factor as poorly as we controlled pace and played defense.
will we or will we not? I don't think anyone has the answer to that right? Fan I know you love statistics and don't think it's
bad or anything, but I am curious how they can be useful to me as a fan.
You can't say with any certainty, but you could say there is a decent chance of this happening at Baylor or OSU, based on our results and their results. (Actually there's a good chance we won't hit that pace against Baylor, but I don't think a fast pace hurts this team at all).
-
You don't really think I was advocating that the coaches should be working on late game situations do you? I was simply explaining why IMO why we were/are garbage in such situations.
I honestly have no idea what the eff have you been advocating. I think you just like to argue with me.
-
Man, I can tell it's offseason...
-
Stats-what do I do with them? Are they predictive of future events? can they give me a statistically sound advantage over a bookie?
if you don't use stats, the book has a significant advantage over you. actually the other side of the bet does, not the book.
-
The only person arguing against the stats in this thread is Michigancat
-
How much different, though, is saying "I want this team to play better than their average for the last few minutes of a game," from "I want this team to win the Big 12"?
"better play over the last few minutes of a game" will have a lot more variance/luck involved because it's a much smaller sample size. Winning the Big 12 is also much easier to define/measure.
To expand, I don't think we should be concerned with late-close-road game mental toughness, we should be concerned with our inability to develop a meaningful lead in these games (or any lead at all in the case of WVU and ISU). If I were a coach, I wouldn't spend any time working on trying to correct the 37 late-game possessions we've talked about or develop mental toughness,- I'd spend time looking for trends in the other 150 or so possessions in those games and seeing what I can correct there. I think this is the heart of what this discussion is about.
I think it's no less legitimate for people to have an aesthetic preference for what that they perceive to be less sloppy play at the end of a game. And what I was trying to say above is that I don't think this preference is relatively unrealistic.
-
Stats-what do I do with them? Are they predictive of future events? can they give me a statistically sound advantage over a bookie?
if you don't use stats, the book has a significant advantage over you. actually the other side of the bet does, not the book.
Really? Explain please
-
I think it's no less legitimate for people to have an aesthetic preference for what that they perceive to be less sloppy play at the end of a game.
Less legitimate than what?
And what I was trying to say above is that I don't think this preference is relatively unrealistic.
I think it's unrealistic to expect much control over the preference of less late-game sloppiness (without seeing significant changes overall). Yeah, I'd prefer we perform much better at the end of close games, but I can accept there's not much that can be done about it, and therefore not a cause for concern.
-
Stats-what do I do with them? Are they predictive of future events? can they give me a statistically sound advantage over a bookie?
if you don't use stats, the book has a significant advantage over you. actually the other side of the bet does, not the book.
Really? Explain please
a small number of bettors may have statistical models that are better than the statistical models used to set the lines. tons of betters have access to (and use) models that are only a little bit worse. to the extent that sophisticated bettors can overperform, it comes from bettors who underperform. that group will include both those general bettors that use inferior statistical models and those that don't make use of any statistical information.
-
Man, I can tell it's offseason...
no. these guys love this crap.
-
Man, I can tell it's offseason...
no. these guys love this crap.
Yes! :D
-
Stats-what do I do with them? Are they predictive of future events? can they give me a statistically sound advantage over a bookie?
if you don't use stats, the book has a significant advantage over you. actually the other side of the bet does, not the book.
Really? Explain please
a small number of bettors may have statistical models that are better than the statistical models used to set the lines. tons of betters have access to (and use) models that are only a little bit worse. to the extent that sophisticated bettors can overperform, it comes from bettors who underperform. that group will include both those general bettors that use inferior statistical models and those that don't make use of any statistical information.
Hypothetically lets say all sophistication levels of models are in agreement on the superbowl and everyone bets on the winning side, in this scenario that happens far more than you may realize, who loses these bets, the tooth fairy?
-
You don't really think I was advocating that the coaches should be working on late game situations do you? I was simply explaining why IMO why we were/are garbage in such situations.
I think you just like to argue with me.
lol, thats fantastic rusty
-
I think it's no less legitimate for people to have an aesthetic preference for what that they perceive to be less sloppy play at the end of a game.
Less legitimate than what?
Less legitimate than focusing on the best way to win a game.
And what I was trying to say above is that I don't think this preference is relatively unrealistic.
I think it's unrealistic to expect much control over the preference of less late-game sloppiness (without seeing significant changes overall). Yeah, I'd prefer we perform much better at the end of close games, but I can accept there's not much that can be done about it, and therefore not a cause for concern.
If your focus isn't on the best way to win a game, then control isn't a factor.
-
couldn't happen. the superbowl is too big of a single event, on something that big, the book tries to get even money on both sides. in the impossible hypothetical you propose where no matter what line they offered, they couldn't do that, they'd shut the book down.
-
couldn't happen. the superbowl is too big of a single event, on something that big, the book tries to get even money on both sides. in the impossible hypothetical you propose where no matter what line they offered, they couldn't do that, they'd shut the book down.
sports gambling is bettor vs. book period. The book has a 5% advantage with bets at the spread. The bettor has to win 52.chnge% of his even money
bets to break even. The best pro gamblers in the world run slightly above this with an extremely good year topping 60%.
In regard to lines, Pinnacle sports does the math and sets the lines for almost the entire industry. Pinny sends early lines to the pros, the pros look for soft lines and make their bets. Pinny adjusts from their professional player imput then attempts to forecast a line that will draw even action. In the
end books don't care as much about good or bad lines as much as they do even action. With that said and all their forecasting books routinely
have games with lopsided action, and don't really gaf because one game is pretty meaningless they win some and lose some and go on.
-
we have a local book in town that is heavily lopsided more than not. He could hedge if he wanted to but doesn't.
-
Between the advanced stats and the gambling talk, look for steve dave and I to be taking combofan pictures over here with this leprechaun. By the way, the new, probably not as fun O'Sheas is open!
-
couldn't happen. the superbowl is too big of a single event, on something that big, the book tries to get even money on both sides. in the impossible hypothetical you propose where no matter what line they offered, they couldn't do that, they'd shut the book down.
sports gambling is bettor vs. book period. The book has a 5% advantage with bets at the spread. The bettor has to win 52.chnge% of his even money
bets to break even. The best pro gamblers in the world run slightly above this with an extremely good year topping 60%.
In regard to lines, Pinnacle sports does the math and sets the lines for almost the entire industry. Pinny sends early lines to the pros, the pros look for soft lines and make their bets. Pinny adjusts from their professional player imput then attempts to forecast a line that will draw even action. In the
end books don't care as much about good or bad lines as much as they do even action. With that said and all their forecasting books routinely
have games with lopsided action, and don't really gaf because one game is pretty meaningless they win some and lose some and go on.
on an individual bet, it's better v book. in total, it's better v bettor with the book taking the vig.
on large numbers of small bets, like college bball, they don't try to attract even money, they try to get the line right, to protect themselves against professional money. not the same as one big event.
-
couldn't happen. the superbowl is too big of a single event, on something that big, the book tries to get even money on both sides. in the impossible hypothetical you propose where no matter what line they offered, they couldn't do that, they'd shut the book down.
sports gambling is bettor vs. book period. The book has a 5% advantage with bets at the spread. The bettor has to win 52.chnge% of his even money
bets to break even. The best pro gamblers in the world run slightly above this with an extremely good year topping 60%.
In regard to lines, Pinnacle sports does the math and sets the lines for almost the entire industry. Pinny sends early lines to the pros, the pros look for soft lines and make their bets. Pinny adjusts from their professional player imput then attempts to forecast a line that will draw even action. In the
end books don't care as much about good or bad lines as much as they do even action. With that said and all their forecasting books routinely
have games with lopsided action, and don't really gaf because one game is pretty meaningless they win some and lose some and go on.
on an individual bet, it's better v book. in total, it's better v bettor with the book taking the vig.
on large numbers of small bets, like college bball, they don't try to attract even money, they try to get the line right, to protect themselves against professional money. not the same as one big event.
I just shared with you how things really work from watching several annual conferences chaired
By industry market makers from all sides, but whatever.
-
Man, I can tell it's offseason...
no. these guys love this crap.
Oh, I can tell. Some of this has been fascinating, while some has been incoherent nonsense. I'm not sure which is which anymore.
-
I just shared with you how things really work from watching several annual conferences chaired
By industry market makers from all sides, but whatever.
lol.
-
I think it's no less legitimate for people to have an aesthetic preference for what that they perceive to be less sloppy play at the end of a game.
Less legitimate than what?
Less legitimate than focusing on the best way to win a game.
And what I was trying to say above is that I don't think this preference is relatively unrealistic.
I think it's unrealistic to expect much control over the preference of less late-game sloppiness (without seeing significant changes overall). Yeah, I'd prefer we perform much better at the end of close games, but I can accept there's not much that can be done about it, and therefore not a cause for concern.
If your focus isn't on the best way to win a game, then control isn't a factor.
I honestly don't follow
-
I think it's no less legitimate for people to have an aesthetic preference for what that they perceive to be less sloppy play at the end of a game.
Less legitimate than what?
Less legitimate than focusing on the best way to win a game.
And what I was trying to say above is that I don't think this preference is relatively unrealistic.
I think it's unrealistic to expect much control over the preference of less late-game sloppiness (without seeing significant changes overall). Yeah, I'd prefer we perform much better at the end of close games, but I can accept there's not much that can be done about it, and therefore not a cause for concern.
If your focus isn't on the best way to win a game, then control isn't a factor.
I honestly don't follow
Suppose someone likes to watch home runs. They wish their favorite baseball team had more home run hitters for this reason. (They may think that this will result in more wins. Or not. Doesn't matter.) Similarly, someone might prefer less sloppy play at the end of a basketball game solely because that's what they like to watch. That's all.
-
I don't like analogies.
-
I think it's no less legitimate for people to have an aesthetic preference for what that they perceive to be less sloppy play at the end of a game.
Less legitimate than what?
Less legitimate than focusing on the best way to win a game.
And what I was trying to say above is that I don't think this preference is relatively unrealistic.
I think it's unrealistic to expect much control over the preference of less late-game sloppiness (without seeing significant changes overall). Yeah, I'd prefer we perform much better at the end of close games, but I can accept there's not much that can be done about it, and therefore not a cause for concern.
If your focus isn't on the best way to win a game, then control isn't a factor.
I honestly don't follow
Suppose someone likes to watch home runs. They wish their favorite baseball team had more home run hitters for this reason. (They may think that this will result in more wins. Or not. Doesn't matter.) Similarly, someone might prefer less sloppy play at the end of a basketball game solely because that's what they like to watch. That's all.
and a better comparison would be to say "some fans prefer more home runs in the last two innings on the road". Maybe I still don't see what your point is.
-
Does this thread need revisiting?
-
Does this thread need revisiting?
Sure: 4 turnovers in the last 23 possessions (Last 5 minutes plus both overtimes - 3 of the TO's were in the final OT). Below our average, but definitely within an expected range.
-
Does this thread need revisiting?
Sure: 4 turnovers in the last 23 possessions (Last 5 minutes plus both overtimes - 3 of the TO's were in the final OT). Below our average, but definitely within an expected range.
Our 1 point in final 6 poss of regulation is pretty poor. 5 possession we get 0 pts and then Foster hits 1-2 FTs. Had Foster hit both FTs, the 5 poss with no points may have been overlooked or deemed not harmful.
-
Face it, I think we choked.