Author Topic: EMAB Or EMAO? (Read 1916 times)

Cire · « **Reply #1 on:** March 22, 2012, 06:17:10 PM »

Do not think I can root for Wisky.

Stevesie60 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 22, 2012, 06:18:51 PM »

EMHABGDOTB

(every man hopes a bomb gets dropped on the building)

Cire · « **Reply #3 on:** March 22, 2012, 06:19:27 PM »

would take

michigancat · « **Reply #4 on:** March 22, 2012, 06:26:36 PM »

Emao, for sure.

That_Guy · « **Reply #5 on:** March 22, 2012, 06:52:09 PM »

Winters · « **Reply #6 on:** March 22, 2012, 07:11:15 PM »

Not even close, EMAO.

Cire · « **Reply #7 on:** March 22, 2012, 07:32:16 PM »

Really glad we lost to emao wisconsin would have destroyed us. Maybe kenpom gets the last laugh

BleedingPurple7 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 22, 2012, 07:49:30 PM »

13 for 21 from 3 for emab...gtfo

AppleJack · « **Reply #9 on:** March 22, 2012, 07:50:03 PM »

my god i hate wisconsin.

Stevesie60 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 22, 2012, 07:55:31 PM »

6 straight 3's in 6 possessions for Wisconsin.

AppleJack · « **Reply #11 on:** March 22, 2012, 08:15:24 PM »

Winters · « **Reply #12 on:** March 22, 2012, 08:16:11 PM »

Cire · « **Reply #13 on:** March 22, 2012, 08:16:40 PM »

Pete · « **Reply #14 on:** March 22, 2012, 08:16:51 PM »

I rough ridin' hate Syracuse. I hate every last mother rough ridin' thing about that school.

EMAWzified · « **Reply #15 on:** March 22, 2012, 09:52:51 PM »

I don't think mothers are the family members they're rough ridin', fuckers

kso_FAN · « **Reply #16 on:** March 23, 2012, 02:31:15 PM »

This game was the perfect example of the stupidity of using tempo based stats. I heard several times about Syracuse being on pace to surpass Wisconsin's "nation leading 53 points per game defense".

The score "only" ended up being 64-63.

Yet the offensive efficiencies were a ridiculous 1.22 ppp to 1.20 ppp because the game was only 52 possessions. There were hard shots made, but also not great defense for much of the game.

Cire · « **Reply #17 on:** March 23, 2012, 03:00:19 PM »

Both teams made a lot of jumpers it seemed. or at least a high percentage.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #18 on:** March 23, 2012, 03:03:49 PM »

Quote from: ksu_FAN on March 23, 2012, 02:31:15 PM

This game was the perfect example of the stupidity of using tempo based stats. I heard several times about Syracuse being on pace to surpass Wisconsin's "nation leading 53 points per game defense".

The score "only" ended up being 64-63.

Yet the offensive efficiencies were a ridiculous 1.22 ppp to 1.20 ppp because the game was only 52 possessions. There were hard shots made, but also not great defense for much of the game.

Wisconsin had a lot of good looks for 3 and they made every rough ridin' one for about a 4 minute stretch. You could probably find a 5-10 minute segment of that game where Wisky was 2+ ppp

Skipper44 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 23, 2012, 03:50:36 PM »

Quote from: ChiCat on March 23, 2012, 03:03:49 PM

Quote from: ksu_FAN on March 23, 2012, 02:31:15 PM
This game was the perfect example of the stupidity of using tempo based stats. I heard several times about Syracuse being on pace to surpass Wisconsin's "nation leading 53 points per game defense".

The score "only" ended up being 64-63.

Yet the offensive efficiencies were a ridiculous 1.22 ppp to 1.20 ppp because the game was only 52 possessions. There were hard shots made, but also not great defense for much of the game.

Wisconsin had a lot of good looks for 3 and they made every rough ridin' one for about a 4 minute stretch. You could probably find a 5-10 minute segment of that game where Wisky was 2+ ppp

didn't they hit 6 straight meaning they would have a PPP of 3?