MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: vogue65 on January 13, 2021, 12:49:43 PM
-
You can't beat home cooking.
You can't beat 8 days of practice, watching game film, one on one drills, running plays, good eating, home cooking, your home bed.
My takeaway from watching games this year is that the home audience does not matter.
I love going to games in person, rooting in person.
This year has been a test of teams, referees, the game itself without the distraction of the claims of home court advantage. Home court advantage is a myth. Home cooking is real, travel, and rest days are real.
On the subject of Providence, they are a good team and should not have been defeated by 10 points. The announcers said during the game that Duke was a half step slow???
The announcers mentioned that Providence had been on the road. Were they saying that home cooking matters.
-
Then why is homecourt advantage worth less in this season than any other in NCAA history?
-
You can't beat home cooking.
You can't beat 8 days of practice, watching game film, one on one drills, running plays, good eating, home cooking, your home bed.
My takeaway from watching games this year is that the home audience does not matter.
Your eyeballs are not reflecting reality. Home teams are losing games at a rate way higher than normal.
-
You can't beat home cooking.
You can't beat 8 days of practice, watching game film, one on one drills, running plays, good eating, home cooking, your home bed.
My takeaway from watching games this year is that the home audience does not matter.
I love going to games in person, rooting in person.
This year has been a test of teams, referees, the game itself without the distraction of the claims of home court advantage. Home court advantage is a myth. Home cooking is real, travel, and rest days are real.
On the subject of Providence, they are a good team and should not have been defeated by 10 points. The announcers said during the game that Duke was a half step slow???
The announcers mentioned that Providence had been on the road. Were they saying that home cooking matters.
Last night was our first home conference win. We have 4 home losses already this year.
Clearly, things are a little different.
-
Last night was our first home conference win. We have 4 home losses already this year.
Clearly, things are a little different.
Yep fans make a big difference..
-
Then why is homecourt advantage worth less in this season than any other in NCAA history?
That's the po8nt.
-
Your eyeballs are not reflecting reality. Home teams are losing games at a rate way higher than normal.
That's the point. Home teams are losing, why? Because it home court is a myth. It is a marketing ploy to sell tickets. Nevertheless, I would love going to a game in person. Would my presence make a difference in the outcome, no. If no, then what does? I suggest preperation time is a significant factor.
Using numbers can be very deceptive. For example, a home team may have just come home after a road trip while the visitor may have had a week to prepare.
-
That's the point. Home teams are losing, why? Because it home court is a myth. It is a marketing ploy to sell tickets. Nevertheless, I would love going to a game in person. Would my presence make a difference in the outcome, no. If no, then what does? I suggest preperation time is a significant factor.
Using numbers can be very deceptive. For example, a home team may have just come home after a road trip while the visitor may have had a week to prepare.
So it's a coincidence that home court advantage has gone down this year vs when crowds are there?
-
Last night was our first home conference win. We have 4 home losses already this year.
Clearly, things are a little different.
That's the point. Where is the home court advantage? Is it in the audience?
Where our home court losses a freshman team vs. a more experienced team?
The confusion is one situation Providence vs. M.U. vs. a larger sample.
The M.U. home losses is a larger, but still small sample.
Nationally we have a larger sample with many details we don't know.
-
That's the point. Home teams are losing, why? Because it home court is a myth. It is a marketing ploy to sell tickets. Nevertheless, I would love going to a game in person. Would my presence make a difference in the outcome, no. If no, then what does? I suggest preperation time is a significant factor.
Using numbers can be very deceptive. For example, a home team may have just come home after a road trip while the visitor may have had a week to prepare.
Home court is not a myth. Usually home teams win 60+% of their games and on average score 3+ more points than their opponents. Both are significant down this year.
-
Home court is not a myth. Usually home teams win 60+% of their games and on average score 3+ more points than their opponents. Both are significant down this year.
Why?
-
Why?
Well the only substantive thing to change is the lack of fans. Fans can energize the home team and distract the visitors.
-
Well the only substantive thing to change is the lack of fans. Fans can energize the home team and distract the visitors.
Oh boy.
Then why are home teams losing?
-
That's the point. Where is the home court advantage? Is it in the audience?
Where our home court losses a freshman team vs. a more experienced team?
The confusion is one situation Providence vs. M.U. vs. a larger sample.
The M.U. home losses is a larger, but still small sample.
Nationally we have a larger sample with many details we don't know.
This is not something to over think. Homecourt ,with fans provides, a real advantage that is proven statistically and with the eye test. Especially when your team is better than average.
I think this year with no fans, less experienced teams in road games, do not have to overcome the fans.
-
Oh boy.
Then why are home teams losing?
If you read the response you quoted, the answer to your question is in the response.
Well the only substantive thing to change is the lack of fans. Fans can energize the home team and distract the visitors.
I would add that fans can also sway the officials. Fouls are being called at a lower rate in favor of home teams this year.
-
Two thoughts:
1. How much of the reduced home-court advantage is a result of fewer buy games being played? If you're only looking at Big East teams, of course there is less of a home-court advantage, because most teams gave up 3 to 6 home wins by cancelling buy games.
2. Are there any statistics comparing conference games only? And if so, can you really draw any conclusions until the season has played out? For example, we played Villanova at home Georgetown on the road--results of those two games would indicate that the road team has a clear advantage. But when we play the two return games, I still expect we win both Georgetown games and lose both Villanova games.
-
Two thoughts:
1. How much of the reduced home-court advantage is a result of fewer buy games being played? If you're only looking at Big East teams, of course there is less of a home-court advantage, because most teams gave up 3 to 6 home wins by cancelling buy games.
2. Are there any statistics comparing conference games only? And if so, can you really draw any conclusions until the season has played out? For example, we played Villanova at home Georgetown on the road--results of those two games would indicate that the road team has a clear advantage. But when we play the two return games, I still expect we win both Georgetown games and lose both Villanova games.
In Pomeroy's article, he only looked at conference games. In general, teams win home conference games at about a 61% rate. This year it's around 56%, which would be a record low.
-
Two thoughts:
1. How much of the reduced home-court advantage is a result of fewer buy games being played? If you're only looking at Big East teams, of course there is less of a home-court advantage, because most teams gave up 3 to 6 home wins by cancelling buy games.
2. Are there any statistics comparing conference games only? And if so, can you really draw any conclusions until the season has played out? For example, we played Villanova at home Georgetown on the road--results of those two games would indicate that the road team has a clear advantage. But when we play the two return games, I still expect we win both Georgetown games and lose both Villanova games.
Well said.
I think my real gripe is with all the numbers used without in depth analysis.
Again, the Providence game is a good example of the advantage of 8 days of preperation.
Home cooking is just a headline.
I could have said TRAVEL IMPACT ON WON LOSS RECORDS.
-
Well said.
I think my real gripe is with all the numbers used without in depth analysis.
Again, the Providence game is a good example of the advantage of 8 days of preperation.
Home cooking is just a headline.
I could have said TRAVEL IMPACT ON WON LOSS RECORDS.
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/show-me-on-a2fc12e566.jpg)
-
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/show-me-on-a2fc12e566.jpg)
I don't understand what you are saying.
-
I don't understand what you are saying.
Your gripe is with numbers. Any time math comes up, you get all spun up into threads like this. I don't know what math did to you, but I'm sorry it's created this clear bias in you against numbers and analytics.
-
so next year when the betting lines give a greater impact on home-court advantage...take the away team on a modified line giving an extra point and you'll have a license to print money. 8-)
plenty of sql based on length of layoff...it's a factor as well.
-
Your gripe is with numbers. Any time math comes up, you get all spun up into threads like this. I don't know what math did to you, but I'm sorry it's created this clear bias in you against numbers and analytics.
My career was in actuarial science, I have seen and worked with more numbers than you can imagine. The old saying that "figures don't lie, but liers can figure" sometimes apply.
Simplistic use of limited data and drawing erroneous conclusions is my problem.
My question is, what are the facts benind the obvious numbers. W/L home and away record is only a starting point. What are the decrements behind the home court advantage argument?
Why was the line on the Providence game so far off?
Because the book was balancing the bets?
The so-called numbers people did not factor in home cooking?
I think the Covid season is an excellent opportunity to do some serious analysis. I would like to see more curves and what is behind the numbers.
Since you asked, my suspision of numbers based decision making started with the body counts during the Vietnam war.
-
My career was in actuarial science, I have seen and worked with more numbers than you can imagine. The old saying that "figures don't lie, but liers can figure" sometimes apply.
Simplistic use of limited data and drawing erroneous conclusions is my problem.
My question is, what are the facts benind the obvious numbers. W/L home and away record is only a starting point. What are the decrements behind the home court advantage argument?
Why was the line on the Providence game so far off?
Because the book was balancing the bets?
The so-called numbers people did not factor in home cooking?
I think the Covid season is an excellent opportunity to do some serious analysis. I would like to see more curves and what is behind the numbers.
Since you asked, my suspision of numbers based decision making started with the body counts during the Vietnam war.
In order...
Your past isn't really relevant. What's relevant is how you behave when numbers come out. You constantly question the numbers, but never bother doing the research to determine what the number presented to you actually mean. You complain about them without understanding their context. To me, that's just lazy. And when given explanations, you just spin away from it and try to fight the match harder. Seems like it's just trolling, but that you are now starting threads about it without bothering to read the research that's been done already, that's just lazy.
Why do you believe the PC line was far off? A three-point line is right between 1 & 2 possessions. In the final 18:03 of the game, it was a two-possession game for 13:16. So for 73.5% of the last 18 minutes, the line was pretty much right on. I guess the line was "so far off" because Marquette made 4 free throws in the final minute.
The book balancing the bets? No. The line wasn't off.
No. Again, the line wasn't off.
Sign up for kenpom and read all his blog posts. Sign up for The Athletic and read all the work they do on analytics. Research Torvik, Haslam, and all the various bracketologists. From a Marquette perspective, become familiar with Paint Touches, Anonymous Eagle, Cracked Sidewalks, and The Golden Breakdown. And if you "have seen and worked with more numbers" than I can imagine, why not do the research yourself? Create your own home court (or home cooking, if you'd rather) metric and go on a game-by-game basis through all 345 active programs and share your results.
Or just make do with what others here are happy to share.
-
Here's where I'm at.
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ScratchyHideousBoutu-max-1mb.gif)
-
Here's where I'm at.
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ScratchyHideousBoutu-max-1mb.gif)
https://youtu.be/w772GXG5LnE
-
In order...
Your past isn't really relevant. What's relevant is how you behave when numbers come out. You constantly question the numbers, but never bother doing the research to determine what the number presented to you actually mean. You complain about them without understanding their context. To me, that's just lazy. And when given explanations, you just spin away from it and try to fight the match harder. Seems like it's just trolling, but that you are now starting threads about it without bothering to read the research that's been done already, that's just lazy.
Why do you believe the PC line was far off? A three-point line is right between 1 & 2 possessions. In the final 18:03 of the game, it was a two-possession game for 13:16. So for 73.5% of the last 18 minutes, the line was pretty much right on. I guess the line was "so far off" because Marquette made 4 free throws in the final minute.
The book balancing the bets? No. The line wasn't off.
No. Again, the line wasn't off.
Sign up for kenpom and read all his blog posts. Sign up for The Athletic and read all the work they do on analytics. Research Torvik, Haslam, and all the various bracketologists. From a Marquette perspective, become familiar with Paint Touches, Anonymous Eagle, Cracked Sidewalks, and The Golden Breakdown. And if you "have seen and worked with more numbers" than I can imagine, why not do the research yourself? Create your own home court (or home cooking, if you'd rather) metric and go on a game-by-game basis through all 345 active programs and share your results.
Or just make do with what others here are happy to share.
You would be surprised how delusional people become using numbers for decision making.
In basketball, in particular, the numbers I see are ridiculous.
Entertaining, interesting, profitable, but foolish.
For example, is learning curve technology included in the so-called algorithms?
I have seen tremendous improvement in our freshmen, where well they be next week, or at game 20?
How much impact does travel, rest time, home cooking have on results? If they have impact, are they in the numbers? It is easy to bandy about numbers, even with a lot of number crunching, and still be far from reality.
-
So no actual substance. Par for the course.
-
That's the point. Where is the home court advantage? Is it in the audience?
Where our home court losses a freshman team vs. a more experienced team?
The confusion is one situation Providence vs. M.U. vs. a larger sample.
The M.U. home losses is a larger, but still small sample.
Nationally we have a larger sample with many details we don't know.
I feel after reading this you are really just arguing that the home court aka the floor itself doesn’t provide an advantage. If Marquette were to move away from a hard maple to an oak floor we could get a Home Court advantage because your other logic makes zero sense.
-
In order...
Your past isn't really relevant. What's relevant is how you behave when numbers come out. You constantly question the numbers, but never bother doing the research to determine what the number presented to you actually mean. You complain about them without understanding their context. To me, that's just lazy. And when given explanations, you just spin away from it and try to fight the match harder. Seems like it's just trolling, but that you are now starting threads about it without bothering to read the research that's been done already, that's just lazy.
Why do you believe the PC line was far off? A three-point line is right between 1 & 2 possessions. In the final 18:03 of the game, it was a two-possession game for 13:16. So for 73.5% of the last 18 minutes, the line was pretty much right on. I guess the line was "so far off" because Marquette made 4 free throws in the final minute.
The book balancing the bets? No. The line wasn't off.
No. Again, the line wasn't off.
Sign up for kenpom and read all his blog posts. Sign up for The Athletic and read all the work they do on analytics. Research Torvik, Haslam, and all the various bracketologists. From a Marquette perspective, become familiar with Paint Touches, Anonymous Eagle, Cracked Sidewalks, and The Golden Breakdown. And if you "have seen and worked with more numbers" than I can imagine, why not do the research yourself? Create your own home court (or home cooking, if you'd rather) metric and go on a game-by-game basis through all 345 active programs and share your results.
Or just make do with what others here are happy to share.
Because I'm retired and lazy.
Because I was asked about my personal relationship with numbers, analytics, modelling, mathematics, etc..
If you like reading reams of so-called statistics that's fine by me.
We have had discussions here about small sample size, that is fine by me as well.
No need to analyze 345 active programs.
Weighted averages and factors would come into play, but that is besides our point.
I would rather analyze one game at a time.
What I'm saying is that number crunching does not answer the question I'm asking.
61% vs. 56% of home court wins may be true, but so what.
Why the difference is the question.
Are there any assunptions in the numbers and if so what are they?
Probably none because we just have very raw data.
Is any consideration given to the number of days between games?
If not then we are dealing with true but rather meaningless numbers.
Well, not meaningless to those who subscribe to the service or use the numbers to write stories.
The numbers are just meaningless to old fools like me.
Using the past to forecast the future outcome of events is really a fools errand.
When I was in Milwaukee I knew guys who lost their entire tuition thinking they had a system.
Might have something to do with my attitude toward modeling.
I don't mean to be mean, but what others are willing to share by others who sell numbers is of no interest to me. To each his own, enjoy. You win, you and the rest of the MUScoop team can play with the numbers you have.
I'll just keep wondering what travel, prep. time, and home cooking have on outcomes vs. home vs. away results.
Love, V65
-
People are way overthinking this. It's obviously a combination of a bunch of factors, including travel, sleep, practice, and yes, fans.
Unless someone can point to another major difference between other years and this one that can account for a lesser winning % of home teams, then fans do make a difference, even if a small one. If anything, the fact that home teams still have an advantage this year validates the the other benefits of playing at home, instead of invalidating the advantage of fans.
Usually most obvious answer is the right one.
-
People are way overthinking this. It's obviously a combination of a bunch of factors, including travel, sleep, practice, and yes, fans.
Unless someone can point to another major difference between other years and this one that can account for a lesser winning % of home teams, then fans do make a difference, even if a small one. If anything, the fact that home teams still have an advantage this year validates the the other benefits of playing at home, instead of invalidating the advantage of fans.
Usually most obvious answer is the right one.
Very well said, and welcome aboard.
I agree with your view.
I don't think we overthink or over analyze, we over talk and tend to devolve into angry arguments.
Many people around here think that ratio analysis (percentages) is analytics and any mention of numbers is statistical rigor. They are also impressed with sample size. The data base rules while clear thing is lost. Just because something is on a spreadsheet does not make it right, relevant, or a true algorithm that solves problems.
The Providence game last week seemed to me an example, without the fans, of the travel factor in performance, what I call tired legs. However, I don't have numbers to support my observation. Therefore, many of my friends here discount my view out of hand. We simply don't have the correlation analysis to prove either side.
At the end of the day, I love it when you said, "usually most obvious answer is the right one". You sound like a medical doctor.
The last time I went to the track, probably 40 years ago, there were lots of tip sheets for sale. The tipsters had dates, ages, weights, won lost records, times, jockeys, tracks, lots of history. History, history, history and from that data they made predictions. My friends wife would go to the paddock and bet on the horse with the bigest ass because she thought that a big ass would be a good indicator of the stronger and therefore fastest horse. My friend analyzed his three or four tip sheets. I bet number 4, we all lost.
I put basketball numbercrunching services in the same category, to each his own.
-
Very well said, and welcome aboard.
I agree with your view.
I don't think we overthink or over analyze, we over talk and tend to devolve into angry arguments.
Many people around here think that ratio analysis (percentages) is analytics and any mention of numbers is statistical rigor. They are also impressed with sample size. The data base rules while clear thing is lost. Just because something is on a spreadsheet does not make it right, relevant, or a true algorithm that solves problems.
The Providence game last week seemed to me an example, without the fans, of the travel factor in performance, what I call tired legs. However, I don't have numbers to support my observation. Therefore, many of my friends here discount my view out of hand. We simply don't have the correlation analysis to prove either side.
At the end of the day, I love it when you said, "usually most obvious answer is the right one". You sound like a medical doctor.
The last time I went to the track, probably 40 years ago, there were lots of tip sheets for sale. The tipsters had dates, ages, weights, won lost records, times, jockeys, tracks, lots of history. History, history, history and from that data they made predictions. My friends wife would go to the paddock and bet on the horse with the bigest ass because she thought that a big ass would be a good indicator of the stronger and therefore fastest horse. My friend analyzed his three or four tip sheets. I bet number 4, we all lost.
I put basketball numbercrunching services in the same category, to each his own.
nm
-
Very well said, and welcome aboard.
I agree with your view.
I don't think we overthink or over analyze, we over talk and tend to devolve into angry arguments.
Many people around here think that ratio analysis (percentages) is analytics and any mention of numbers is statistical rigor. They are also impressed with sample size. The data base rules while clear thing is lost. Just because something is on a spreadsheet does not make it right, relevant, or a true algorithm that solves problems.
The Providence game last week seemed to me an example, without the fans, of the travel factor in performance, what I call tired legs. However, I don't have numbers to support my observation. Therefore, many of my friends here discount my view out of hand. We simply don't have the correlation analysis to prove either side.
This is very simple. You stated an absolute position - that fans in the stands don't matter. That the real advantage to the home team is the lack of travel.
My takeaway from watching games this year is that the home audience does not matter.
I love going to games in person, rooting in person.
This year has been a test of teams, referees, the game itself without the distraction of the claims of home court advantage. Home court advantage is a myth. Home cooking is real, travel, and rest days are real.
No one countered your argument by saying "home cooking and rest days aren't real." They countered it by showing that home court advantage means less this year, and the only factor that changed was that there was no fans in the stands.
I don't know if it "proves" anything, but it leads me to believe that fans in the stands are definitely a factor, and that your assertions that "the home audience does not matter" and "home court advantage is a myth" are inaccurate.
-
Very well said, and welcome aboard.
I agree with your view.
I don't think we overthink or over analyze, we over talk and tend to devolve into angry arguments.
Many people around here think that ratio analysis (percentages) is analytics and any mention of numbers is statistical rigor. They are also impressed with sample size. The data base rules while clear thing is lost. Just because something is on a spreadsheet does not make it right, relevant, or a true algorithm that solves problems.
The Providence game last week seemed to me an example, without the fans, of the travel factor in performance, what I call tired legs. However, I don't have numbers to support my observation. Therefore, many of my friends here discount my view out of hand. We simply don't have the correlation analysis to prove either side.
At the end of the day, I love it when you said, "usually most obvious answer is the right one". You sound like a medical doctor.
The last time I went to the track, probably 40 years ago, there were lots of tip sheets for sale. The tipsters had dates, ages, weights, won lost records, times, jockeys, tracks, lots of history. History, history, history and from that data they made predictions. My friends wife would go to the paddock and bet on the horse with the bigest ass because she thought that a big ass would be a good indicator of the stronger and therefore fastest horse. My friend analyzed his three or four tip sheets. I bet number 4, we all lost.
I put basketball numbercrunching services in the same category, to each his own.
Everyone know to bet on the horse that takes the last pre-race sh!t.
-
When I saw the title of this thread, I thought it was about the officiating in Providence and Newark.
Good points re: OP, Brew.
-
In the latest Inside Marquette Basketball show with Wojo, the host stated that home wins are down 5% this year compared to last year. The only difference is fans in the stands. Travel is the same, prep is the same, etc.
Depending on how the season ends, this could be a telling stat that fans impact 5% of home game which is approximately 1 game a year. You just don’t know which one it will be so show up and scream your head off.
-
What’s the old saying? Statistics charge, analytics indict and the tape convicts. Need everything.
Side note, brew do you actually use Haslem for anything?
-
So Vogue what's the deal? I was fully invested in your fresh legs theory
-
So Vogue what's the deal? I was fully invested in your fresh legs theory
Hey, chill, any criticism of Wojo and the team is purely rooted in impatience and wanderlust and immaturity. Marquette needs to look long term with a rising star like Wojo. Patience!
-
Hey, chill, any criticism of Wojo and the team is purely rooted in impatience and wanderlust and immaturity. Marquette needs to look long term with a rising star like Wojo. Patience!
Who could we possibly find to replace him. There is no one!
-
So Vogue what's the deal? I was fully invested in your fresh legs theory
Ever eat possum stew?
It's like eating crow cacciatore.
I was totally invested in the downside of intetstate bus travel.