Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - eric17

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 57
1
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Rutgers IGT
« on: January 24, 2015, 05:38 PM »
Anyone know of a website that has a tempo-free stats calculator?

What stats are you looking for, exactly?

My question was loaded.  If there's no calculator out there then I want to make one.

Raise your hand if you track tempo-free stats on your own on Google Drive spreadsheet.

*raises hand*

(seriously, I know many of you do, it's not just me).

2
Penn State Basketball / Re: MSU- IGT
« on: January 23, 2015, 12:20 PM »
I think Ross Travis is one of our 4 best basketball players!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Maybe even top 3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think his PT should be reduced at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well then that's entirely the reason why we're 0-6 if he's one of our top 4 players. We just have way too many one-dimensional players in the frontcourt. I would like to see more mixing and matching on Pat's part because none of the frontcourt guys have shown the ability to consistently produce for more than 20 minutes a night.

To be clear, I'm not saying Ross shouldn't play or anything like that. Because the numbers still say our biggest issues are on defense. But our offense is sputtering in the last five minutes because DJ has to do it all.  Gotta help DJ out with more offense throughout the course of the game. The last two games he took over around the 10:00 minute mark thru the 5:00 minute mark before running out of gas. We need to make it to the 5:00 mark before DJ does DJ things.

3
Penn State Basketball / Re: MSU- IGT
« on: January 23, 2015, 11:27 AM »
But the effort and always being in the right place like Rodman was is not there.

Somehow he's managed to be in the right place often enough that he's going to end up as the most prolific rebounder we've had in the last 30 years and the third best in our whole history. 

He's doing something right.

Lar, I can respect your love for Ross' rebounding numbers and I realize most of the conversation in this thread has been just about his rebounding.

I'd be willing to bet Ross has the most career Big Ten minutes in the league right now of anyone, which makes the following evidence so damn frustrating. The love for his rebounding can only go so far any more. Everywhere else, he's a total liability. I feel for him to have such a nightmare of a senior year with the struggles from the foul line and everything. But he's as big of a hole in our lineup as anyone else right now.

KenPom finally has conference-only player stats that he released yesterday. I do not take pleasure in this criticism, but these numbers just don't lie. Ross' conference-only numbers through 33% of the Big Ten season:

68.2 - Min%
82.4 - ORtg
12.6 - Poss%
11.6 - Shot%
46.2 - eFG%
23.7 - TORate

How can a senior have such a poor ORTG on so few possessions while still being on the floor nearly 70% of the game! And these numbers include his great game at Indiana with 14 points on 8 shots for a ORTG of 166. We talk about the black hole that is the 5-spot in our offense, and that's for sure true. But that should be expected for this struggling program. Even then, there's still Jack. Donovon, in his limited minutes, at least gives much better production on offense - 124.3 ORTG/17.4% Poss% in Big Ten play.

I am just as frustrated as everyone else with Shep's and Brandon's shot selection. But Pat knows DJ needs help and those two are the only consistent guys willing to shoot, at least. They will forever have the green light. The big men are not ready to get more involved. But why we're still handcuffing ourselves with Ross' limited game, I don't know. There needs to be more Banks, Geno and Foster, because something's gotta give here at some point. We're not winning by rebounding, so what's Ross doing for us?

4
Penn State Basketball / Re: OT: Wisconsin Basketballs
« on: January 21, 2015, 06:18 PM »
Oh, I didn't realize it was just us talking about it here. For some reason I thought something legitimately happened in the media where we complained about it or something.

I don't know. Human memory! And I'm one of the younger ones around here  8)

5
Penn State Basketball / OT: Wisconsin Basketballs
« on: January 21, 2015, 05:04 PM »
This Twitter interaction came across my timeline that I thought some here would get a kick out of. It made me wonder what our beef with their Sterling balls was a few years back. Did one of our guys complain about it in the media? I can't remember.

6
Penn State Basketball / Re: Tracking the Commitments
« on: January 21, 2015, 01:46 PM »
I guess I've truly reached UncleLar status if I give the perception of being an insider or being connected to the program.

Still just a fan!

7
Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: January 21, 2015, 12:10 PM »

With those definitions out of the way, we can talk about limits.

In basketball, a staff is limited to 130 recruiting person days. Two coaches engaged in activities on the same day count as two recruiting person days. 

In basketball, a staff is limited to seven recruiting opportunities (contacts and evaluations) per prospective student athlete.  But multiple coaches participating in the same recruiting opportunity only count as one opportunity.   

In football, only two coaches can visit at a time.  There is no such restriction in basketball.


How many on the basketball staff can actually recruit?  This is unrelated to the initial question.  I'm just curious.  We have the Chambers, 3 assistants, a DBO, a video coordinator, Cappy, and 2 graduate managers that I can think of off the top of my head as coaching types.  Is it just the true coaches or is there a limit even there?

Only the head coach and three assistants can go out on the road and recruit.

Thanks for the prior synopsis, Lar.

8
Penn State Basketball / Re: Tracking the Commitments
« on: January 21, 2015, 12:04 PM »
He had to have some idea based on what he said. It just seems weird to say "about where he was" or "moves up like 10 places" when talking about recruits. They aren't undefinable numbers. Recruits either move up, down or stay the same.

I am sorry I am not a robot.

But to expand, they were both definitely in the 80s. If you want me to guess, I think Reaves was at 81 and Watkins at 89. That would be an improvement of 11 spots for Reaves - significant IMO - and an improvement of 3 for Watkins - insignificant IMO.

9
Penn State Basketball / Re: Michigan
« on: January 6, 2015, 10:11 AM »
http://www.umhoops.com/2015/01/05/whats-wrong-michigans-offense/

Not many better than Dylan out there. Nice primer to what they're dealing with.

10
Penn State Basketball / Re: PSU hoops articles, videos, etc.
« on: December 31, 2014, 11:02 AM »
Great article Eric!!  The only point I have with it is in the AWP where you say the only way to make up ground in conference is to win more games.  That is not entirely true, though this gets too in the weeds, I'm not sure the team has any control over it, and in the big picture it hurts them with the committee.

If we are just looking at RPI, it is in our best interest to win all home games and lose all road games.  The smaller number of adjusted conference games 5.4-5.4 gives greater weight to the non-conference AWP.  Using the 0.0136 RPI equals about 10 spots, winning all home games would have us about 7 spots higher than the 6 home, 3 road scenario you used and 15 spots higher than if we won all road games and lost all home games.

Of course we would only have two road wins in Bucknell and Marshall, so that would hurt us.  Probably enough that we shouldn't be rooting for 9 home wins/9 road losses.

Great point. I did not even think of that. I just had to limit myself before getting too carried away (if I didn't already). I wanted to illustrate how awful NJIT was with some kind of graph but I just ran out of time.

Thanks for everyone's kind feedback (and for actually taking the time to read 3500 words on the RPI).

11
Penn State Basketball / Re: PSU hoops articles, videos, etc.
« on: December 30, 2014, 11:43 PM »
I love that example. Look forward to following it throughout the season. And can't wait to play around with the wizard tool when all the results are in (and we can revisit Charlotte!)

12
*predictable Geno response*

I have been on this board for 10 years now. Perhaps I've just completely matured or begun a new phase of life or something, but man, I miss the old PennStateHoops. At least what it was to me. I've met many of you in real life, including some of this board's wildest personalities in kidcoyote and Rokk. But this just isn't even fun to argue any more. I'll go back to lurking. Y'all know where to find me.

13
That's a rather pointless article, in my opinion.  He starts off by mentioning how frustrating other systems are because they factor in cupcakes, then proceeds to say that his method instead just ignores teams that have only played cupcakes and we'll just wait and see on them. 

Well that's great, but then why not just wait until April and see who wins the title if you really want to sit around waiting all season?  How about telling us something we don't know.

And this is precisely why I don't post around here nearly as much as I have in the past.

Carry on, Happy Monday!

I read that same article a few days ago and didn't like it then either, fwiw.  I have no issues with Hanner but I think that's a pretty bad piece by him, personally.  Sorry about that?

I'm still waiting for an explanation for why data-driven models are so flawed.

It was a very poorly phrased post on my part, one that I would have tried to correct if you weren't such a whiner. But again, your insufferable tone and snide remarks make it not worth the effort to even try to rationally discuss anything on here any more. Are you really that dense to not know how absurd you sound on this forum?

I posted an article and just look at your responses. It's quite sad, really. Instead of offering any counterpoints, you literally just went out of your way to discredit the article with your usual schtick that offers no real substance. Good god homie, you straight up called the work "lazy"! He's an economist featured regularly in Sports Illustrated! Clearly the industry values his "lazy" work. 

14
That's a rather pointless article, in my opinion.  He starts off by mentioning how frustrating other systems are because they factor in cupcakes, then proceeds to say that his method instead just ignores teams that have only played cupcakes and we'll just wait and see on them. 

Well that's great, but then why not just wait until April and see who wins the title if you really want to sit around waiting all season?  How about telling us something we don't know.


And this is precisely why I don't post around here nearly as much as I have in the past.

Carry on, Happy Monday!


Don't let Geno stop you. Just push back a little and the bully will put you on ignore. And life here becomes so much more relaxing.


That is not the point of these forums. But anywho, for anyone actually interested in others' fine work, Dan Hanner collaborates with Luke Winn at SI quite often. They put together some awesome preview material back in October and I hope they team up again for more conference analysis as the season progresses. Winn is one of the few media entities with Synergy access these days.

15
That's a rather pointless article, in my opinion.  He starts off by mentioning how frustrating other systems are because they factor in cupcakes, then proceeds to say that his method instead just ignores teams that have only played cupcakes and we'll just wait and see on them. 

Well that's great, but then why not just wait until April and see who wins the title if you really want to sit around waiting all season?  How about telling us something we don't know.

And this is precisely why I don't post around here nearly as much as I have in the past.

Carry on, Happy Monday!

16
More people need to read Dan Hanner's work. Penn State is not mentioned here because we are barely out of KenPom's top-80, but I am relieved to see a numbers guy articulate what I have failed horribly to say before. Penn State, due to its schedule, should be firmly in his wait-and-see category.

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/236009/Performance-Against-Real-Competition

Edit:

Here's another interesting piece from him where he directly compares PSU and USC.

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/235964/Six-College-Basketball-Choices

And here was his preseason blurb about the Nittany Lions:

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/235099/College-Basketball-Preview-14-15-Big-Ten

17
Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: December 28, 2014, 01:53 PM »
Doesn't sound like Daly's kid will be an option unless he continues to blossom into a high-level recruit. Can't say I blame him if he wants to have a big impact in college, but boy, could we use his shooting.

http://cityofbasketballlove.com/2014/12/ryan-daly-steps-up-for-carroll-at-city-of-palms/

Quote
Perhaps one of his more intriguing attributes is his basketball IQ, which isnít surprising considering his father, Brian Daly, is an assistant at Penn State.

With Dalyís recruitment unlikely to skyrocket all the way up to the Big 10 level, donít expect him to sacrifice a D-I scholarship just to walk on and be a Nittany Lion, however.

ďIf I feel I could really play at that level and my recruitment really hit that level, then Iíd love to go play with my Dad, but right now Iím focused on the schools recruiting me and getting better so I can have an impact when I get to college,Ē said Daly.

 

I had to do some quick calculating to figure out if he would even be eligible to walk on.   Fortunately, he's a high school junior so he just makes it.  If a kid is getting a tuition break because his parent is employed by a school, he becomex a counter unless his parent has been employed for five years.  Brian Daly was hired in June of 2011 so his five year window would end in June of 2016, right when Ryan graduates.  So Ryan could walk on here and not be a counter.


Thanks for clarifying that. I also wondered if how that could work, but didn't feel like doing the research as it does not seem to be a realistic option right now.

18
Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: December 27, 2014, 10:52 PM »
Doesn't sound like Daly's kid will be an option unless he continues to blossom into a high-level recruit. Can't say I blame him if he wants to have a big impact in college, but boy, could we use his shooting.

http://cityofbasketballlove.com/2014/12/ryan-daly-steps-up-for-carroll-at-city-of-palms/

Quote
Perhaps one of his more intriguing attributes is his basketball IQ, which isnít surprising considering his father, Brian Daly, is an assistant at Penn State.

With Dalyís recruitment unlikely to skyrocket all the way up to the Big 10 level, donít expect him to sacrifice a D-I scholarship just to walk on and be a Nittany Lion, however.

ďIf I feel I could really play at that level and my recruitment really hit that level, then Iíd love to go play with my Dad, but right now Iím focused on the schools recruiting me and getting better so I can have an impact when I get to college,Ē said Daly.

19
For reference, here's where KenPom stood thru Dec. 28th last season. Not very accurate, as should be expected for a data-driven model. Just something to keep in mind when putting your value into all of these projections.


20
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Drexel IGT
« on: December 22, 2014, 03:44 PM »

I realize I'm apparently the only one that cares about this but Pat and Dave Jones had an interesting schedule dialogue after the game Saturday...Pat said something that caught my attention. He specifically mentioned looking at what Ohio State is doing with their schedule. Well, Thad shelled out close to $500,000 this year for Ohio State to host their own multi-team event at home in the Buckeye Classic instead of hitting the Bahamas or Maui, maybe because he doesn't have to worry about the RPI as much as us and he wanted some practice redoing their defense with the switch to the zone. I'm on my phone so I can't link it but our SB nation OSU affiliate had the details. ESPN events have already released their 2015 fields and we're not included in any of them. Makes me wonder if a Nittany Lion Classic is in the cards for next year and I'd be pleased if Sandy financially backed that project if Pat requested it.

Ohio State can probably make most if not all of that money back in ticket sales.   They drew 14,000+ for those games against Colgate and James Madison in the Buckeye Classic.  The final cost for Penn State to host that type of tournament will be MUCH, MUCH higher when you take into account that our ticket sales will be about 1/3 of the Ohio State totals.

Agreed. Which is why the AD allowing a not-so-great fiscal move to help support the coach's vision and his program would be an encouraging sign to me at least.

21
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Drexel IGT
« on: December 22, 2014, 01:45 PM »
Will never happen, but how about an all in-state tourney?

St Francis, Bucknell, Lehigh.. couple of Philly teams, get RoMo and Duquesne...

Would be really fun, imo.  But again, would never happen.

Why? In fact, I think you make a very fine suggestion for a potential field for the Nittany Lion Classic.

Chambers knows this region, he knows this state's coaches and programs pretty well. Villanova and Pittsburgh are off the table, but what's preventing Pat from drawing from this state's bountiful mid major programs in the A10 and Patriot leagues? Hell, with the Red Flash having a good year, maybe we can include our Loretto brethren too, without sacrificing the computer model.

More and more I think about it, I suspect this Nittany Lion Classic thing could be for real. We already have 3 road trips booked to Duquesne, George Washington and Drexel for next year. The ACC Challenge game will likely be on the road, too. Those are four quality road games, especially if the RPI counts it as a true home game at the Palestra for Drexel (which we never know, because the NCAA is inconsistent with how they label these games for the RPI).  There's no need to overdue it with another 2-3 neutral site games in one of the network-sponsored exempt tournaments, but missing the opportunity at two more games (to boost the RPI adjusted WP) is too much NOT to participate in a multi-team event.

A four team field of Bucknell (who should be free from the 2-for-1 agreement, although Pat seemed to think there were more games left earlier this year), St. Francis, Robert Morris and a Lafayette or Lehigh make perfect sense to me.

Or I could completely making this hypothetical possibility all up and Pat hasn't considered it for 2 seconds.

22
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Drexel IGT
« on: December 22, 2014, 01:30 PM »
I'm OK with the job that the staff did constructing the schedule.  It's the execution against that that i have a problem with - and that's only with one game.  It was probably the worst loss we could have taken (certainly from an RPI perspective it was).  We'd be better off losing to any other team on the schedule.

This is where we really disagree. The execution obviously is very important, and that's why 12-1 would be phenomenal (I'm not the only one who feels losing to Dartmouth is inevitable the way this discussion is unfolding, am I?).

But you're asking for perfection to maximize the formula. That's great that if everything in the world could go right, PSU could have a 30s RPI at 8-10 in the Big Ten. But that's very unlikely to happen in any given year ever. If PSU truly went 13-0 then 8-10, look at how few quality wins we would have. Even South Carolina and Miami potentially could fall out of the top-50, per the RPI, as KenPom doesn't apply here. The most likely scenario for conference play (which would have to be beating Purdue, Michigan, and Nebraska and all 3 vs NW/RUT, right?) at 8 wins could conceivably leave Penn State with just two Top-50 wins, per the RPI. Just TWO!!! When has that ever happened where a power school is so far ahead of the RPI curve without scalps? How can any school from the Big Ten potentially win 21+ more games, with just 2-3 coming against the T50? At that point, I would suspect the committee would say fool's gold and leave us out for sure. Hopefully that scenario would inspire the death of the RPI, which would certainly take the sting out of missing the tournament for me, I don't know your feelings on the RPI.

So the "little margin for error" folks in the scheduling philosophy discussion have a point, one that I overlooked when proclaiming 9-9 is a lock. You still need scalps and the Big Ten's struggles in the non-con are going to prevent some teams from becoming labelled as scalps, even if they are perceived as quality opponents (Nebraska and Michigan apply here). However, the good news (and just another sign of how this schedule is really coming together for us) is that we drew a very challenging Big Ten slate. We get Ohio State, Maryland and Wisconsin twice, the three toughest teams in the league, and Minnesota is not far behind. Those are 8 scalp-worthy games, ones that PSU will need to steal a few from if they're ever going to get to 9 wins anyway.

The Charlotte loss, at the time, was a big deal. But it was week 2 of the season and Cornell was coming off a 330+, 2-28 nightmare of a season and their best player from that team transferred. Common logic would indicate it is very unlikely the Big Red would win double digit games this year and their negative conference affiliation impact was going to be compounded with such a putrid WP% in the NC SOS. But the good news is Cornell is nowhere near as bad as last year and could improve in the win column by up to 10 or so games this year. Their impact is not as damaging as we first feared and was further minimized by the rest of the performance against the schedule.

You honestly think losing to Charlotte would be worse for Penn State's dancing chances than losing today to Dartmouth? The math isn't everything. RPI is just one of many factors when the NCAA Selection Committee is in session.

23
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Drexel IGT
« on: December 22, 2014, 11:58 AM »
Son of UncleLar-enstein! Love it!

Hey, at least this place has transformed from belittling KenPom to preaching it like its the all-knowing hoops bible. I guess that's progress but hopefully we can keep the pendulum at a standstill here soon.

24
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Drexel IGT
« on: December 22, 2014, 11:26 AM »
I hear where you're coming from Lar and it is not factually incorrect, but the perception of your posts has incited others to act like it's 2009 without realizing the safety nets that were in place all along. And these safety nets were already in place all the way back in December 2013. This is when I get a little annoyed at the 'avoid dogs' narrative. It absolutely is the general rule of thumb, but it's not a proven scientific theory. This schedule is proving that.

Also, the when and how these games are scheduled should be the topic of discussion when looking at how well the staff constructed the schedule. If Marshall was projected to plummet and fire their head coach back in 2012, we wouldn't have signed a home-and-home. Do we suddenly need to stop playing Bucknell because they might have a down year? That series was finalized back in like 2011! And yes, Cornell was a risk in the CC, but the 4 games PSU got out of that event alone are a huge net positive (and Pat needs more credit for getting the nonbracketed Akron game as the Zips have been a surefire RPI boost the last decade)

This year's schedule only has 3 guarantee games. The 2009 schedule had 7. You run a huge RPI-risk with guarantee games because preseason projections are completely unreliable and they usually draw from the low major leagues like the NEC or America East that could really sink the RPI rating. PSU's 3 guarantees this year are Morgan State, Fordham, and Dartmouth.

I'm curious if some of these low majors demand a higher payout because they know they can sell their RPI impact at the negotiating table. Like, would Penn State have been able to get a better opener than Morgan State or is that what they ended up with because of their budget? Nearly everyone played a guarantee game on Nov. 14, so that's one date where we're competing with the country to get a computer-friendly opponent. Not out of the question to believe those guys went for the highest price.

I realize I'm apparently the only one that cares about this but Pat and Dave Jones had an interesting schedule dialogue after the game Saturday...Pat said something that caught my attention. He specifically mentioned looking at what Ohio State is doing with their schedule. Well, Thad shelled out close to $500,000 this year for Ohio State to host their own multi-team event at home in the Buckeye Classic instead of hitting the Bahamas or Maui, maybe because he doesn't have to worry about the RPI as much as us and he wanted some practice redoing their defense with the switch to the zone. I'm on my phone so I can't link it but our SB nation OSU affiliate had the details. ESPN events have already released their 2015 fields and we're not included in any of them. Makes me wonder if a Nittany Lion Classic is in the cards for next year and I'd be pleased if Sandy financially backed that project if Pat requested it.

25
Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Drexel IGT
« on: December 22, 2014, 01:13 AM »
Can just agree on "too bad we didn't beat Charlotte" and move on? 

I understand that the team hurt its RPI by losing to Charlotte, because they lost the opportunity to dramatically improve their SOS for the next two games in the tourney, and a 15 point swing doesn't seem unrealistic.  At this point, either everyone on the board understands this, or some people never will.

I would agree to move on if it's true, but it's not. The only way to truly know the impact of the Charlotte loss is to use RPIForecast's tool when the regular season is over and all the results are final. We are using unreliable projections based off of Sagarin's outdated and far-too-simplistic predictor model, which only accounts final scores of games and the location of future contests. That's what RPIForecast uses when it simulates its Wizard tool. So each time you run it, while you get to select predetermined results for .005% of the college basketball season and one particular team's schedule, it simulates 100s of yet-to-be-determined conference games using Sagarin's predictor. If that is not unreliable data, I do not know what is. And it explains why I got vastly different results (only a 5-spot RPI difference and 20-spot difference in overall SOS) yesterday when I used similar scenarios as Lar (which is winning the 9 most likely Big Ten games).

Frankly, if I ran that site, I would offer the feature only after the regular season, because that's the only time it can truly be 100% credible against the complete RPI formula. It would be fun to recreate the 2009 schedule and see how much better Ed really could have done.

But I'm just tired of seeing this false narrative that Charlotte cost us 20 spots in the RPI. Yeah, maybe now and yeah, maybe if PSU finishes short at like 5-13 or 6-12 when the RPI doesn't mean jack. But I'm baffled that Lar keeps pushing this 20-spot narrative using a faulty RPIForecast tool. I do not question the fact that not only the loss hurt PSU's RPI, but the replacement of Cornell over South Carolina did, as well. This is most definitely true, but if we're going to obsess over the one bad break this schedule has, why hasn't anyone talked about all the positives of manipulating the adjusted RPI WP component that accounts for 25% of your RPI, and PSU's due diligence in avoiding dogs of really bad leagues that account for another 25% of your overall RPI? Why hasn't anyone realized PSU's expected RPI could be up to 30 or so spots better, with a worse record, than PSU's god awful 70 rating that gave them no chance in 2009 at 22-11? (There you go, a sneak peak of what will be on BSD later this week).

Lar, do you honestly believe hypothetically that if PSU was 12-1, 9-9 in March, their expected 40ish RPI really could be in the 20s if they would've defeated Charlotte? That is just nonsensical to me and the wrong understanding of the RPI. If there is one thing I'm surely looking forward to this season, it's sadly using that tool on Selection Sunday to report the real truth of how Charlotte impacted our rating. I wish ESPN just matched us up with Cornell originally so this stupid discussion would've never seen the light of day.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 57