goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Jerome Tang Coaches Kansas State Basketball => Topic started by: sys on March 10, 2018, 03:16:57 PM
-
kstate fans seem significantly happier with this team than last year's team, which was objectively better.
i'm curious why.
-
expectations
-
kstate fans seem significantly happier with this team than last year's team, which was objectively better.
i'm curious why.
They were worse, but they were more consistent. This year's team was clearly not good enough to beat other good teams, but they were good enough to beat the average to bad teams if they played consistently to their ceiling in those games.
-
kstate fans seem significantly happier with this team than last year's team, which was objectively better.
i'm curious why.
They were worse, but they were more consistent. This year's team was clearly not good enough to beat other good teams, but they were good enough to beat the average to bad teams if they played consistently to their ceiling in those games.
bruceology
-
Sorry but I was told this was oscar's second best team. Who should I believe?
-
because being oscar’s second best team is a badge of honor
-
Our most likeable players from last year are back this year. Plus finishing well in the top half of the Big 12 in a year when it has been more hyped than ever.
-
I don’t think that it’s about likable players- we should like our players regardless
-
I don’t agree with the premise
-
Well there’s a difference between likeable and most likeable.
-
I don’t agree with the premise
He's going by kenpom.
-
I’m going by tournament seeding (the true objective measure)
-
Sorry but I was told this was oscar's second best team. Who should I believe?
it depends on what you're interested in - relative achievement or absolute quality.
-
Our most likeable players from last year are back this year. Plus finishing well in the top half of the Big 12 in a year when it has been more hyped than ever.
i thought of that. it can't hurt that johnson is no longer in the picture.
-
I’m going by tournament seeding (the true objective measure)
that's a relative measure. it's objective, but relative. per kenpom, the average big 12 team is about 3 points worse this year than last.
-
I don’t agree with the premise
He's going by kenpom.
do you disagree with the rating?
-
I don’t agree with the premise
He's going by kenpom.
do you disagree with the rating?
The math is the math.
-
Oscar keeping his mouth shut this year about his hard chart. People like this team but don't love it. Not much excitement. No one is masturbating in Aggieville over this team. Hunch is popular though
-
I don’t agree with the premise
He's going by kenpom.
do you disagree with the rating?
The math is the math.
outliers exist
-
I don’t agree with the premise
He's going by kenpom.
do you disagree with the rating?
It's a blatant misapplication, but I'm sure you knew that. What an incredibly dumbass way to attempt to justify a flawed premise.
-
bait thread.
Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
-
bait thread.
Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
If he were actually interested in the conversation the answer is so obvious it'd be a three post thread.
-
I think the biggest similarity between last year's team and this year's team is that neither can hold the jock of an actually good team, let alone a great team. This year's team was probably a little more consistent against the mediocre/bad teams, and definitely better on the road.
What I'm trying to say is, I think this team has NIT championship potential at the same calibur potential of making the round of 32 and then getting curb stomped.
-
It's a blatant misapplication, but I'm sure you knew that. What an incredibly dumbass way to attempt to justify a flawed premise.
i don't think it is, in what way do you think it is?
If he were actually interested in the conversation the answer is so obvious it'd be a three post thread.
i wouldn't have posed the question if i wasn't interested in what people's thoughts were. i have various half-formed theories of my own, but i'm interested in what other people believe.
-
I think the biggest similarity between last year's team and this year's team is that neither can hold the jock of an actually good team, let alone a great team.
last year's team beat #7 wvu and beat #13 baylor twice.
-
I somewhat agree with last post
TCU is a good team. Went 2-1 vs them
Baylor OU UT OkSt ASU Ga are mediocre teams went 8-2 vs them.
We did go 0-6 vs Overall Top 16 in the NCAA (I'm not counting No Dean/Barry loss to a 1seed)
Big difference is this team closed out tight games better. Ga, Texas both games, Tcu at home and at Sprint.
Last year's team was 1 win away from being 10-11 seed and not in Dayton. This year's team is 1 win away from a 7 seed.
-
1st Claws quit being timid. 2nd, we have guys who can score 20+ in a game. 3rd, Diarra.
4th Coach Korn coaching up the bigs. 5th, Gruntley.
I like this team better than the other because it has grit and gumption. Most coming from Brown.
-
I liked last year’s better. More pak’n and kp30nt.
-
It's a blatant misapplication, but I'm sure you knew that. What an incredibly dumbass way to attempt to justify a flawed premise.
i don't think it is, in what way do you think it is?
If he were actually interested in the conversation the answer is so obvious it'd be a three post thread.
i wouldn't have posed the question if i wasn't interested in what people's thoughts were. i have various half-formed theories of my own, but i'm interested in what other people believe.
1. Kenpom is not designed to compare one year to the next. Each year is in its own vacuum, again I'm not telling you anything you don't know.
2. Let's for a second accept your flawed premise that last year's team was better than this one based on their kenpom rating. The reason why people would like this team more is because that team underachieved where as this one clearly didn't. If you're so hellbent on simply using kenpom to make conclusions on what should be, at least acknowledge that we lost one game all year he had us favored to win, but won several that we weren't supposed to.
Not withstanding any of the previously mentioned, this team won more and has a first team and second team all conference player, duh. I don't know if you still watch K-State games or why you watch them if you do, but 99% of sports fans watch their favorite team to win games and to be entertained.
-
1. Kenpom is not designed to compare one year to the next. Each year is in its own vacuum, again I'm not telling you anything you don't know.
2. Let's for a second accept your flawed premise that last year's team was better than this one based on their kenpom rating. The reason why people would like this team more is because that team underachieved where as this one clearly didn't. If you're so hellbent on simply using kenpom to make conclusions on what should be, at least acknowledge that we lost one game all year he had us favored to win, but won several that we weren't supposed to.
Not withstanding any of the previously mentioned, this team won more and has a first team and second team all conference player, duh. I don't know if you still watch K-State games or why you watch them if you do, but 99% of sports fans watch their favorite team to win games and to be entertained.
1. it's not designed to do so, but i think it's a pretty fair use. there's no reason to think the mean quality of college basketball teams is going to dramatically fluctuate from one year to the next. 350 teams is a robust sample size. you might get into problems if you're comparing across widely different eras, like a team from the 60s to a current team. but within the last 17 years i think it's pretty safe.
2a. last year's team didn't underachieve, they actually finished one spot higher in the big 12 than they "should" have. they just didn't overachieve (in terms of conference record) as much as this year's team did.
2b. you seem to have some weird preconception about what you think i'm arguing - i've never argued that this team didn't overachieve, nor have i argued that people shouldn't prefer this team to last year's team.
2c. i think i agree with you that having a couple of third year players that were genuinely among the best in the conference does have an influence. obviously, last year's team had good players too, but it was more a sum of parts effort.
btw, i've watched most of kstate's big 12 games, those that i haven't watched i listened to on the radio. i think i saw a couple of the non-con games, and probably listened to a couple more, but didn't follow closely until conference play started.
-
If I expect anything I'm afraid it's gonna turn out like 2017 football...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
-
2b. you seem to have some weird preconception about what you think i'm arguing - i've never argued that this team didn't overachieve, nor have i argued that people shouldn't prefer this team to last year's team.
If you don't feel this way I'm very confused as to why you're asking, the entire premise. You asked a question with an obvious answer then followed that up by suggesting that we should use the kenpom of last year's team to help with the decision, as if that's a normal or even remotely an acceptable thing to do. I mean the only way to answer 2017 is the way trim did.
-
Kenpom isn't the pope