MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: andymartinelli2 on May 15, 2015, 12:24:21 PM
-
We decided to take a look at MU player performance through lineup efficiencies. We thought it was a different way of looking at things.
https://misix.com/in-search-of-marquettes-ideal-lineup (https://misix.com/in-search-of-marquettes-ideal-lineup)
-
Can't read the lineups represented by the charts due to a layout issue. "More like this" boxes on the right side of the page cover up the right side of the graphs where the lineups are listed.
-
We decided to take a look at MU player performance through lineup efficiencies. We thought it was a different way of looking at things.
https://misix.com/in-search-of-marquettes-ideal-lineup (https://misix.com/in-search-of-marquettes-ideal-lineup)
So, in other words, it's a Big Man's game.
-
No question, hey? By definition, since the rim is 10 ft. off the ground, ai na?
-
Huh? Why spend the time post-processing lineups that include guys that will never play for Marquette again?
-
Huh? Why spend the time post-processing lineups that include guys that will never play for Marquette again?
How is that STJ transfer going, a'ina?
-
How is that STJ transfer going, a'ina?
I heard he's a transfer, wasn't Wojo looking for a transfer?
-
Huh? Why spend the time post-processing lineups that include guys that will never play for Marquette again?
All chat boards are dominated by chat and rarely by facts. Basketball, along with all other sports, are now driven by facts and analysis. Data dominates, and the "eye test" does not. Much of what we might have learned playing high school ball still is important, but a bit less so.
Therefore, the data provided by Andy has a value that far exceeds what we all think we might "know." This probably explains why Andy, Bama, and others rarely get more than a few comments posted to their often insightful, if not dead accurate, analysis.
Rocky, if you cannot figure out the value 2014-15 team data even though it includes players who have moved on to other things you are excluding very useable information. For example, the "big picture" and combinations that might help all of us better understand the 2015-16 year ... as in, is it really a guards game, or do we really need a "big."
It is not the same game it was five years ago, and it will continue to change rapidly. It is best to follow facts and not opinions.
-
Rocky, if you cannot figure out the value 2014-15 team data even though it includes players who have moved on to other things you are excluding very useable information. For example, the "big picture" and combinations that might help all of us better understand the 2015-16 year ... as in, is it really a guards game, or do we really need a "big."
I love facts, and data. Fact is we only have 4 returning players (Jajuan, Luke, Duane, and Sandy). And unfortunately, you can't get much useful information trying to project that data which is less than 40 % of the 2015-16 team. Take HS data (or transfer data), and try to interpolate it. Great. But reading how much better Steve Taylor was as a 4 rather a 5, doesn't tell me much...other than we all knew that already.
-
Rocky, you're right. This really doesn't do much for projecting next year's performance or give very useful information.. We were just looking into a new way, for us at least, to look at the team going forward and needed to see what would work best before next season started.
-
Rocky, you're right. This really doesn't do much for projecting next year's performance or give very useful information.. We were just looking into a new way, for us at least, to look at the team going forward and needed to see what would work best before next season started.
Fair enough, and like I said, I would be interested in that data after the "new" team has played a few games together next year.
I do appreciate the work it takes to put these things together, the timing was just a bit odd (and I may have been a bit grumpy).
-
For those of us who like to nerd out with stats, I say keep these posts coming. It's summer. And a post like this is far more interesting to chew on a post like this than to wade through scooper p*ssing matches.
(with that being said, some of the p*ssing-match-turned-meme-tourney-entries made me laugh, no chortle, at my desk. balance = good)
-
For those of us who like to nerd out with stats, I say keep these posts coming. It's summer. And a post like this is far more interesting to chew on a post like this than to wade through scooper p*ssing matches.
(with that being said, some of the p*ssing-match-turned-meme-tourney-entries made me laugh, no chortle, at my desk. balance = good)
Balance may be good, but use of the word chortle is better. Well played ;)