Breakdown tn vs kentucky (merged)

#104
#104
hatvol96 said:
Auburn is a good defense in the same way Cici's is a good pizza restaurant.
Click to expand...

This is true on the whole, but they're effective at forcing turnovers. That practice leads them to suffer in other areas, but when we're just getting down to whether a team is good at forcing TOs, auburn is better than the majority.

I suppose a decent analogy would be our 2006 team, except through somewhat different means does auburn get their TOs. Actually I'm not sure 2009 Auburn is even as bad as 06 tennessee was, defensively.
 
#105
#105
emainvol said:
You mean they are a good defense if you are looking to hook up with a weight challenged welfare recipient with 6 kids?
Click to expand...
Correct. It is also a great place to eat for someone who is curious about how food poisoning feels.
 
#109
#109
and right on cue Auburn forces florida(a top 40 team in terms of protection) into 25% turnovers in the first half.
 
#110
#110
So florida, the nation's 15th best offense, just got held to their 2nd lowest total of the year, and turned the ball over 17 times to auburn.

Who's up for some CiCi's?
 
#113
#113
lidderer said:
So florida, the nation's 15th best offense, just got held to their 2nd lowest total of the year, and turned the ball over 17 times to auburn.

Who's up for some CiCi's?
Click to expand...
Yeah, look at the juggernaut schedule Florida has posted their numbers against. Very impressive loss by Auburn. In fact, I believe Ken Pomeroy's numbers count this as a win. The scoreboard is no match for a Dungeons and Dragons loving numbers dork's statistics.
 
#114
#114
hatvol96 said:
Yeah, look at the juggernaut schedule Florida has posted their numbers against. Very impressive loss by Auburn. In fact, I believe Ken Pomeroy's numbers count this as a win. The scoreboard is no match for a Dungeons and Dragons loving numbers dork's statistics.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand that the discussion you interjected on was about TOs, and nothing more. It's really not difficult to grasp.

But basic reading comprehension is no match for someone who takes a bipartisan view on stats vs viewing, instead of being intelligent and factoring in both.

It's also hilarious that people think these are 'ken pomeroy's numbers' in the sense that he, like, invented them. It's nothing new that couldn't have been tallied by anyone before his site came around, it just helps that he does the legwork for you for each game.

I'm just kind of stunned that people who choose to spend time on a board all about basketball would so willfully dismiss the very tools which help to define that game.
 
#115
#115
Tools that define the game? That's just silly. The tools that define the game aren't piled up in stacks on KenPoms site.

He's like the Pelz of hoops, but neither is the essence of the game. Statistical analysis has it's place, but I suspect Bob Knight would think you a clown trying to call that garbage the tools of the game.
 
Last edited:
#116
#116
I got in trouble as a kid because I could remember all kinds of statistics but didn't remember to turn my homework in... (I was bored with school, didn't really forget, just didn't care)
 
#117
#117
BigPapaVol said:
Exactly. There's easily a point where stats are overkill and no longer tell the story. KenPom disciples tend to live in that world.
Click to expand...


100% correct, people who just look at stats are silly and as awful as people who ignore them. They are not worth anyone's time. The true mark is determining which stats to pay attention to and which not to.

You can tell me all you want about timeouts used, and away fg%, but that's just clutter at the end of the day.

Alternately, you can tell me all you want about grit and hustle and chutzpah and motivation, as though such things can be measured consistently, and you're just as laughably wrong.

Thinking one is right and the other is wrong is the exact reason why there's a huge glut of dumb fans. Plus people just naturally fear numbers and instead like to go with their gut/belief, because you don't really have to do much thinking when you do that. Just post about it and be snide and baselessly dismissive.
 
#118
#118
lidderer said:
I don't think you understand that the discussion you interjected on was about TOs, and nothing more. It's really not difficult to grasp.

But basic reading comprehension is no match for someone who takes a bipartisan view on stats vs viewing, instead of being intelligent and factoring in both.

It's also hilarious that people think these are 'ken pomeroy's numbers' in the sense that he, like, invented them. It's nothing new that couldn't have been tallied by anyone before his site came around, it just helps that he does the legwork for you for each game.

I'm just kind of stunned that people who choose to spend time on a board all about basketball would so willfully dismiss the very tools which help to define that game.
Click to expand...
The scoreboard defines the game. What a bunch of dweebs who pleasure themselves to their dogeared copies of Moneyball do or don't think means nothing to anyone inside the game. The next time a D-I coach of any merit does anything other than laugh at guys like Pomeroy and Sagarin will be the first.
 
#121
#121
BigPapaVol said:
Tools that define the game? That's just silly. The tools that define the game aren't piled up in stacks on KenPoms site.
Click to expand...

Semantics really. But what I mean is that the stats shed light on how various particulars result in certain, well...results, and over a course of time.

It should be obviously assumed that the more foundational tools like schemes and basic matchups are the bread and butter, but to get at the larger expressions of those things you can use stats to help.
 
#122
#122
lidderer said:
100% correct, people who just look at stats are silly and as awful as people who ignore them. They are not worth anyone's time. The true mark is determining which stats to pay attention to and which not to.

You can tell me all you want about timeouts used, and away fg%, but that's just clutter at the end of the day.

Alternately, you can tell me all you want about grit and hustle and chutzpah and motivation, as though such things can be measured consistently, and you're just as laughably wrong.

Thinking one is right and the other is wrong is the exact reason why there's a huge glut of dumb fans. Plus people just naturally fear numbers and instead like to go with their gut/belief, because you don't really have to do much thinking when you do that. Just post about it and be snide and baselessly dismissive.
Click to expand...
No, the glut of dumb fans comes from math geeks who couldn't intelligently fill out a scouting report to save their lives, so they throw together a bunch of mundane numbers in a pathetic attempt to fool people into thinking they know the first damn thing about basketball.
 
#125
#125
lidderer said:
100% correct, people who just look at stats are silly and as awful as people who ignore them. They are not worth anyone's time. The true mark is determining which stats to pay attention to and which not to.

You can tell me all you want about timeouts used, and away fg%, but that's just clutter at the end of the day.

Alternately, you can tell me all you want about grit and hustle and chutzpah and motivation, as though such things can be measured consistently, and you're just as laughably wrong.

Thinking one is right and the other is wrong is the exact reason why there's a huge glut of dumb fans. Plus people just naturally fear numbers and instead like to go with their gut/belief, because you don't really have to do much thinking when you do that. Just post about it and be snide and baselessly dismissive.
Click to expand...

You are talking to the wrong guy about being afraid of numbers. Spoutig stupid offensive and defensive efficiency numbers or TO % without context is pure stupidity. Crap like Pomeroy gibberish is for people who want to sound like they can talk basketball. Keep it coming.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top