Jump to content

What The Numbers Say


5fouls

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

Yawn 🥱 

Is the yawn an indication that you don't care?  If so, just don't partake in the discussion.

Or, is it an indication you don't understand?  In a nutshell, the story I linked earlier and subsequently quoted, provided evidence that Big Ten teams that played a certain way were WINNING this season, while teams that played the opposite way were LOSING this season.  That theory proved itself once again with tonight's Big Ten results. 

I find it interesting that people are quick to dismiss a winning strategy just because it's based on something they are reluctant to embrace.     

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 5fouls said:

https://www.cnhinews.com/indiana/sports/college_sports/article_8ba25fca-7e86-56df-8b70-1c0d66f3c930.html

I believe this story was before last night's games.

Story on analytics across Big Ten Conference teams.

An excerpt from the article.

image.png.85824cb404a091a416ebc81c35d2abfc.png

 

It seems like he is focusing on offensive shot selection, in which case you’d basically just do an inverse of the % of shot attempts that are mid range. If that’s the case, here are the rankings with the % of FGA that haslametrics has classified as mid range:

1. Nebraska (24.54%)

2. Wisconsin (24.95%)

3. Illinois (25.31%)

4. Minnesota (26.03%)

5. Purdue (26.7%)

6. Michigan (27.17%)

7. Penn State (27.57%)

8. Maryland (28.01%)

9. Northwestern (29.04%)

10. Iowa (29.08%)

11. Rutgers (29.24%)

12. IU (31.18%)

13. Michigan State (33.86%)

14. Ohio State (34.69%)

 

Edited by Kdug
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Is the yawn an indication that you don't care?  If so, just don't partake in the discussion.

Or, is it an indication you don't understand?  In a nutshell, the story I linked earlier and subsequently quoted, provided evidence that Big Ten teams that played a certain way were WINNING this season, while teams that played the opposite way were LOSING this season.  That theory proved itself once again with tonight's Big Ten results. 

I find it interesting that people are quick to dismiss a winning strategy just because it's based on something they are reluctant to embrace.     

Or, yawn that this is a tired discussion.

Not that I don’t care, but more that it’s an over analyzed conversation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kdug said:

It seems like he is focusing on offensive shot selection, in which case you’d basically just do an inverse of the % of shot attempts that are mid range. If that’s the case, here are the rankings with the % of FGA that haslametrics has classified as mid range:

1. Nebraska (24.54%)

2. Wisconsin (24.95%)

3. Illinois (25.31%)

4. Minnesota (26.03%)

5. Purdue (26.7%)

6. Michigan (27.17%)

7. Penn State (27.57%)

8. Maryland (28.01%)

9. Northwestern (29.04%)

10. Iowa (29.08%)

11. Rutgers (29.24%)

12. IU (31.18%)

13. Michigan State (33.86%)

14. Ohio State (34.69%)

 

And, the numbers you provide support the theory by showing that the Top 5 on your list are all in the upper half of the league standings, while 4 of the 5 with the highest percentage of mid-range shots are in the bottom half of the league standings (with IU being the exception).

image.png.e7ac0990a86a537d338ed330ac08daf7.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

And, the numbers you provide support the theory by showing that the Top 5 on your list are all in the upper half of the league standings, while 4 of the 5 with the highest percentage of mid-range shots are in the bottom half of the league standings (with IU being the exception).

image.png.e7ac0990a86a537d338ed330ac08daf7.png

 

And we are likely the exception because we have only played one of the teams above us so far.  The next few games are going to make or break the season.  I am of the opinion that it is probably already over but there are still games to play for the eternal optimists.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 5fouls said:

And, the numbers you provide support the theory by showing that the Top 5 on your list are all in the upper half of the league standings, while 4 of the 5 with the highest percentage of mid-range shots are in the bottom half of the league standings (with IU being the exception).

image.png.e7ac0990a86a537d338ed330ac08daf7.png

 

Those dang badgers. Just when you think they are down here they are leading the league again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

Michigan State being ranked ahead of Kansas in KenPom doesn't pass the smell test.

image.png.883a6fed4ae0be34dac586bc392bdbd7.png

It makes sense if you look at the game by game results. MSU doesn’t have any close wins, and only two of their wins are less than a 20 point margin. Most of MSU’s losses are close games vs good teams as well.

Kansas has 7 single digit margin of victory wins. One of them being home vs EIU, who is a sub 300 team. Another at home vs a mediocre Missouri team. Ironically the other would be vs IU, since the metrics hate us.

MSU’s bad performances would be a close home loss vs JMU, thought JMU is better than what most thought at the time of the loss. A double digit home loss vs Wisconsin, and a double digit road loss vs Northwestern.

Edited by Kdug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The loss to PSU drops us to 99 on KenPom from 88.

We are now predicted to lose all of our remaining games, but with the averages are projected to finish 16-15. Our two best shots at a win per KenPom are Northwestern and Nebraska, both at home. 

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

The loss to PSU drops us to 99 on KenPom from 88.

We are now predicted to lose all of our remaining games, but with the averages are projected to finish 16-15. Our two best shots at a win per KenPom are Northwestern and Nebraska, both at home. 

Not likely to happen, we're going to probably go 500 over the remaining but still a big time off

Edited by IowaHoosierFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Not likely to happen, we're going to probably got 500 over the remaining but still a bit time off

I don’t think we are going .500 over the remaining. I don’t think we have any games left we can safely say we will win. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I don’t think we are going .500 over the remaining. I don’t think we have any games left we can safely say we will win. 

This team is bipolar.  We're going to win some we don't expect and lose other we should.  Been the same for about 9 years now.  Zero consistency!  Which is why i expect .500 over the remainder of the season.  Also wouldn't surprise me to lose every game or win every game until the B1G Tourney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

The loss to PSU drops us to 99 on KenPom from 88.

We are now predicted to lose all of our remaining games, but with the averages are projected to finish 16-15. Our two best shots at a win per KenPom are Northwestern and Nebraska, both at home. 

We are 101 now.  Worst Indiana team since Crean’s third year.  

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KoB2011 said:

Not that it really matters, but that team was 82. 

I didn’t want Woodson in the beginning because he was a bad NBA coach.  His offense and defense is just so bad to watch.  I don’t understand how anyone can think anything he does is a positive.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

I didn’t want Woodson in the beginning because he was a bad NBA coach.  His offense and defense is just so bad to watch.  I don’t understand how anyone can think anything he does is a positive.  

Yeah I wasn’t excited.

I did like some of the initial moves and held out hope that he was doing his best to optimize what he had the first couple years, but it’s pretty clear this is just how he wants to play. Just isn’t good enough IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Yeah I wasn’t excited.

I did like some of the initial moves and held out hope that he was doing his best to optimize what he had the first couple years, but it’s pretty clear this is just how he wants to play. Just isn’t good enough IMO. 

What guard would want to play for a team that doesn’t do much for them in relation to movement and is predominately running most things through the post.  The lack of movement in our offense is atrocious.  This has been the case even when we had TJD.  Offensive numbers scream bad.  I don’t see this getting fixed during the portal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IU_Realist said:

I didn’t want Woodson in the beginning because he was a bad NBA coach.  His offense and defense is just so bad to watch.  I don’t understand how anyone can think anything he does is a positive.  

i honestly didn't understand why anyone would be excited by a guy who had 0 college coaching experience and was pretty much a lifetime NBA assistant.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...