Take a Clue From Bucky

[Jay Bee]

How were we only 160 in 2012?

Because we played many more games than other teams. The Equalizer isn't good with numbers so he misuses them. It would be more appropriate to look at 3FGA/FGA%.

Beware of people who aren't good with numbers but try to use them. There are many of those types around and the number of them continues to grow.

My The Equalizer impression:
"Uhh,, duhh,... team A shoots 2 3-pointers a game and they played 5 games. team b shoots double the amount of 3's per game compared to team a (i.e., 4) but they only played 2 games. I can't even speak to pace of play cuz dat confuses me. but, obviously team a shoots more 3 pointers bcuz dey shot 10 3's and b only shotted 8! see, the numberz dont lie!!"

Awful.

[tower912]

The thing that most impresses me about Bo is that he gets freshmen to accept that they aren't playing big minutes during their first year unless they are exceptional.   Koenig and Hayes got sporadic minutes, but enough that they are looked on as heroic.   Last year, Dekker got pulled after every defensive breakdown.   There was no talk of him transferring.   Sure, some in their fanbase wanted him to have a longer leash.   But it was consistent.   Defensive breakdown, sit down. 

[brandx]

Why do STjr and Juan look so tentative on offense?  It is usually because they are left wide open and they don't know what to do.

Well.... our '3' next year definitely knows what to do when he gets the ball. Deonte will be the leading scorer next year. He will also take the most shots. With Todd and Deonte, we will have two guys who are aggressive and know what to do to score.

[NersEllenson]

The thing that most impresses me about Bo is that he gets freshmen to accept that they aren't playing big minutes during their first year unless they are exceptional.   Koenig and Hayes got sporadic minutes, but enough that they are looked on as heroic.   Last year, Dekker got pulled after every defensive breakdown.   There was no talk of him transferring.   Sure, some in their fanbase wanted him to have a longer leash.   But it was consistent.   Defensive breakdown, sit down. 

I see what you are trying to do here....but let's get real - here is a comparison between Dawson and Koenig...and we all know Koenig is playing back up to a HELL of a lot better PG in Traveon Jackson, than is Dawson to Derrick Wilson....yet Koenig got 2 times the amount of minutes than Dawson?  500 minutes to 245....or the equivalent of 6.375 FULL, 40 minute games more than Dawson got...and Koenig wasn't playing behind a total and complete stiff...

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=john-dawson&p1=bronson-koenig

Buzz deserves all the hell he's caught for his peculiar and mind boggling decision to play Derrick more minutes than any other player on the team...

[NersEllenson]

The thing that most impresses me about Bo is that he gets freshmen to accept that they aren't playing big minutes during their first year unless they are exceptional.   Koenig and Hayes got sporadic minutes, but enough that they are looked on as heroic.   Last year, Dekker got pulled after every defensive breakdown.   There was no talk of him transferring.   Sure, some in their fanbase wanted him to have a longer leash.   But it was consistent.   Defensive breakdown, sit down. 

Should have added Deonte to Hayes comparison...and Hayes playing behind a hell of a lot better player in Dekker/Kaminsky, than is Deonte in Juan...yet Hayes got 204 more minutes of PT than Burton...perhaps this is why Wisconsin players out of High School are developing better...as Bo does a good job of getting their feet wet as freshman with some legitimate PT..

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=2-deonte-burton&p1=bronson-koenig&p2=john-dawson&p3=nigel-hayes

[Jay Bee]

I see what you are trying to do here....but let's get real - here is a comparison between Dawson and Koenig...and we all know Koenig is playing back up to a HELL of a lot better PG in Traveon Jackson, than is Dawson to Derrick Wilson....yet Koenig got 2 times the amount of minutes than Dawson?  500 minutes to 245....or the equivalent of 6.375 FULL, 40 minute games more than Dawson got...and Koenig wasn't playing behind a total and complete stiff...

Haha, what a bizarre commentary. Koenig is very good and played well - that's why he played.
Koenig - 13% usage, 114 ORtg, sub-14% turnover rate
Dawson - 15% usage, 85 ORtg, 27%+ turnover rate

I believe that if Dawson had performed at Koenig's level he would have played more. I know that your commentary above is bizarre.

[NersEllenson]

Haha, what a bizarre commentary. Koenig is very good and played well - that's why he played.
Koenig - 13% usage, 114 ORtg, sub-14% turnover rate
Dawson - 15% usage, 85 ORtg, 27%+ turnover rate

I believe that if Dawson had performed at Koenig's level he would have played more. I know that your commentary above is bizarre.

You also fail to mention Dawson assists, rebounds, and gets to the FT line at a higher rate than Koenig..and shoots a better FT% as well.  And...I know you are a stat head...but getting 3 minutes a game, to a DNP, DNP, to 17 minutes, to 8, to 30, to 12....and playing with 9 different guys in a 3 minute stint as Dawson had the pleasure of doing...really makes a lot the the metrics very irrelevant due to such irregular usage and sample size consistency.  Ken Pomroy doesn't even include games where a player plays less than 10 minutes in a game in his ORating calculations - throws them out as he knows they aren't relevant sample size to be statistically relevant.  Dawson got exactly 4 games this season over 10 minutes....pretty damn limited sample size.  Just ironic that he sat and played 245 less minutes behind Derrick than Koenig did Traevon Jackson..

Why do you think Mayo played so much better the last 10 games of the year?  Think it had anything to do with him getting consistent stretches of run and not getting yanked out at first mistake?

[Jay Bee]

You also fail to mention Dawson assists, rebounds, and gets to the FT line at a higher rate than Koenig..and shoots a better FT% as well.  And...I know you are a stat head...but getting 3 minutes a game, to a DNP, DNP, to 17 minutes, to 8, to 30, to 12....and playing with 9 different guys in a 3 minute stint as Dawson had the pleasure of doing...really makes a lot the the metrics very irrelevant due to such irregular usage and sample size consistency.  Ken Pomroy doesn't even include games where a player plays less than 10 minutes in a game in his ORating calculations - throws them out as he knows they aren't relevant sample size to be statistically relevant.  Dawson got exactly 4 games this season over 10 minutes....pretty damn limited sample size.  Just ironic that he sat and played 245 less minutes behind Derrick than Koenig did Traevon Jackson..

Why do you think Mayo played so much better the last 10 games of the year?  Think it had anything to do with him getting consistent stretches of run and not getting yanked out at first mistake?

Ners, c'mon man. I can't even argue with you when you're this ignorant. Your claim on Pomroy (sic) is false with regard to throwing out less than 10 minute appearances. Completely false and nonsense. Shush. And all those stats you point to except for DR% are baked into ORtg. (PS-Koenig had better a blk% and stl% than Dawson as well... not in ORtg).

There is zero ironic about Dawson playing x number of minutes less than Koenig. Zero.

As for Mayo, that's a completely different topic. The problem people often run into (besides talking about that which they do not understand) is they try to expand one analysis into others. Sigh.

I have no problem in arguing that Buzz's lineup decisions were so sub-optimal that they hurt the team's performance. December 2013: Marquette's Shots Aren't Adding Up. However, that is wholly unrelated to Dawson vs. Koenig.

[NersEllenson]

Ners, c'mon man. I can't even argue with you when you're this ignorant. Your claim on Pomroy (sic) is false with regard to throwing out less than 10 minute appearances. Completely false and nonsense. Shush. And all those stats you point to except for DR% are baked into ORtg. (PS-Koenig had better a blk% and stl% than Dawson as well... not in ORtg).

There is zero ironic about Dawson playing x number of minutes less than Koenig. Zero.

As for Mayo, that's a completely different topic. The problem people often run into (besides talking about that which they do not understand) is they try to expand one analysis into others. Sigh.

I have no problem in arguing that Buzz's lineup decisions were so sub-optimal that they hurt the team's performance. December 2013: Marquette's Shots Aren't Adding Up. However, that is wholly unrelated to Dawson vs. Koenig.

Sorry JayBee...perhaps I interpret Pomroy wrong?...but take a look at the attachments for both Koenig and Dawson...notice there are games Dawson played less than 10 minutes, scored points..and still no ORating...as was the case in every game where he played less than 10...you'll notice Koenig's PT from the get go was A LOT more consistent than was Dawson....my biggest issue is that regardless if* Koenig is/was better....it is amazing Koenig can get minutes at Wisconsin, yet Buzz refused to give Dawson consistent run while backing up arguably the WORST starting PG on a Top 100 team...perhaps not ironic...but quite startling...

So...you still sure I'm ignorant and that the notion Pomroy doesn't assign an ORating to a player who plays less than 10 minutes..and that it is "completely false and nonesense?"  C'mon on man.   

[Jay Bee]

Sorry JayBee...perhaps I interpret Pomroy wrong?...but take a look at the attachments for both Koenig and Dawson...notice there are games Dawson played less than 10 minutes, scored points..and still no ORating...as was the case in every game where he played less than 10...you'll notice Koenig's PT from the get go was A LOT more consistent than was Dawson....my biggest issue is that regardless if* Koenig is/was better....it is amazing Koenig can get minutes at Wisconsin, yet Buzz refused to give Dawson consistent run while backing up arguably the WORST starting PG on a Top 100 team...perhaps not ironic...but quite startling...

So...you still sure I'm ignorant and that the notion Pomroy doesn't assign an ORating to a player who plays less than 10 minutes..and that it is "completely false and nonesense?"  C'mon on man.   

Ignorant may not be the right way to put it - stupid is probably better. I will bet you any sum of money you wish on this topic.

KenPom.com does not display an ORtg in individual box scores for those who played under 10 mins. However, their ORtg most certainly includes all such games.

You are simply wrong. "C'mon on man"... or just c'mon man... stop being an idiot.

[tower912]

So, the numbers may not show up for individual games, but are added into the cumulative totals.

[Jay Bee]

So, the numbers may not show up for individual games, but are added into the cumulative totals.

That is precisely correct.

[Class71]

Ignorant may not be the right way to put it - stupid is probably better. I will bet you any sum of money you wish on this topic.

KenPom.com does not display an ORtg in individual box scores for those who played under 10 mins. However, their ORtg most certainly includes all such games.

You are simply wrong. "C'mon on man"... or just c'mon man... stop being an idiot.

Hold on boys. The idea is to win basketball games my friends not to destroy each other.

[Tugg Speedman]

The difference is Bo righted his southbound ship into a 2 seed when the entire season could've made like the Titanic. Good coaches can do that.
Yo, haven't forgotten the debacle of years past doe, aka, Coach Crean.

Your first thread said "they don't beat themselves". Now you say "he righted his southbound ship."  Just stop, you keep making izzo's point ... You're basing your entire perception of the program and it's history because the beat a 15 seed in defacto home game.

FYI, before beating mighty American earlier today, Bucky was a loser of two of the last three, including giving away another loss to Nebraska (but hey, they were "righted" and don't "beat themselves")

[NersEllenson]

That is precisely correct.

Serious question - Why do you feel Pomroy doesn't assign or display an ORating for a player in the games where he plays less than 10 minutes...yet rolls all the data from those games up into a season ORating?  Seems incongruent, does it not?  Basically don't assign rating for a game where a guy plays less than 10....but then roll all of the data in those games under 10 and include into season ORating?

And by the way, you can make your points, without coming off like an arrogant dick.  How's your hoops game JayBee?  You any good?  If so, let's meet up for some one on one...I'm in the Twin Cities a lot...could be fun to square off for bragging rights....

[Jay Bee]

Serious question - Why do you feel Pomroy doesn't assign or display an ORating for a player in the games where he plays less than 10 minutes...yet rolls all the data from those games up into a season ORating?  Seems incongruent, does it not?  Basically don't assign rating for a game where a guy plays less than 10....but then roll all of the data in those games under 10 and include into season ORating?

And by the way, you can make your points, without coming off like an arrogant dick.  How's your hoops game JayBee?  You any good?  If so, let's meet up for some one on one...I'm in the Twin Cities a lot...could be fun to square off for bragging rights....

It's Pomeroy, not Pomroy. You're still doubting me? MAKE THE BET! I'll give you 10 to 1 odds. You can pay me when you're in the Twin Cities. We can have an NBA 3-point shooting contest for $20 as well. Name how much you can afford to give me on the "Pomroy" ORtg bet.

No, it doesn't seem incongruent. I'm not going to give you a full education on here because you do not deserve it, but understand many advanced stats are based on estimates. As Ken has explained, he doesn't list the Usage and ORtg in the game boxscores for less than 10 minutes played in a game because, "the assumptions used to estimate these figures have a greater potential of breaking down and leading to non-sensical numbers."

This may be difficult to reconcile for someone who struggles with mathematical calculations or an understanding of how possessions are estimated, but it makes complete sense for knowledgeable folks.

Please do bet me on this (minimum of $20 in order for me to also do the NBA 3-point shooting contest). You're mistaken. I am correct and you are wrong.

[avid1010]

Ya need shooters at all 5 positions, hey? Suckers come off the bench and knock it down. Yeah, beat a chitty team, but their defense is solid and consistent. Like the fact Bo has a system and recruits and teaches his system. They're not gonna beat themselves. One hell of a coach.

most over-rated part of bo's coaching is the way his teams play defense...not solid...and consistently very average.  buzz has more post season success per year in the ncaa d1.

[chapman]

The thing that most impresses me about Bo is that he gets freshmen to accept that they aren't playing big minutes during their first year unless they are exceptional.   

It's impressive to me because so many show great progression.  When I look at the year by year stats of Bo's upperclassmen I think "damn, that's some major development" for so many - Brust, Jackson, Kaminsky.  Then I look at our roster, and Gardner is the only one that would maybe show that kind of development.  

[tower912]

Yeah, but you can find just as many who didn't progress.  Butch, Evans, Bruiser.    The lack of progression of MU's seniors, IMO, is the reason for the poor showing.   Touched on by Buzz as far back as media day.   No leadership.   No one is sure they should talk.   Don't know who will listen.   Only two returning players who have really done anything.    I assumed that it would just happen.   It always had before.   I have to agree with what IWB said on the radio show, and have said so many times.    MU needed Jamil to be a star, a la Butler/Jae/Lazar/Vander.  He turned out to be a glue buy, a la Lockett.   Nothing wrong with that, great kid, no inner beast.   Davante progressed, but wasn't a leader.   Chris and Jake are great citizens and role models, but both were too limited to take over games on a regular basis.    Todd and Deonte showed progress late and I think they will be the building blocks for next year's team.   

[chapman]

buzz has more post season success per year in the ncaa d1.

Last year only.

2009: MU round of 32, UW round of 32
2010: MU round of 64, UW round of 32
2011: MU Sweet 16, UW Sweet 16
2012: MU Sweet 16, UW Sweet 16
2013: MU Elite Eight, UW round of 64
2014: MU no postseason, UW round of 32+

Buzz NCAA record: 7-5 (58.3%), average NCAA wins per season: 1.33   
Bo (entire tenure) NCAA record: 17-12 (58.6%) average NCAA wins per season: 1.42

[The Equalizer]

Because we played many more games than other teams. The Equalizer isn't good with numbers so he misuses them. It would be more appropriate to look at 3FGA/FGA%.

Beware of people who aren't good with numbers but try to use them. There are many of those types around and the number of them continues to grow.

My The Equalizer impression:
"Uhh,, duhh,... team A shoots 2 3-pointers a game and they played 5 games. team b shoots double the amount of 3's per game compared to team a (i.e., 4) but they only played 2 games. I can't even speak to pace of play cuz dat confuses me. but, obviously team a shoots more 3 pointers bcuz dey shot 10 3's and b only shotted 8! see, the numberz dont lie!!"

Awful.

Really?  A 5 to 2 ratio in number of games played? Suggesting that tempo explains the multi-year decline in MU's 3 point shooting?  Really? And you're trying to claim *I* don't know numbers?  You're awful.

At least I don't quote my own blog which in turn quoted my own consulting firm, then pretended that those posts were outside authority or proof for something I said here. 

I think you're full of crap on this one. The impact caused by any difference in number of games or tempo isn't enough to change my premise.   As far as the number are concerned, I can predict with great confidence that you'll never post anything showing that I was wrong.

You confuse signal and noise.  I presented the signal.  You're making a big deal over the noise.  Yes, there may be some small, marginal impact when it comes to adjusting for tempo or number of games played that I didn't account for.  But even taking them into accout, what I said was absolutely correct--there has been a multi-year decline in Marquette's 3 point shooting.  In other words--tempo and games-played are noise. 

But I tell you what--if you can prove that after adjusting for number of games played and game tempo that there has NOT been a decline in MU's 3 point shooting from 2009/10 to present--I'll graciously acknowledge that you were right and I was wrong.  But you have to show your work here on the site--no relying on your secret notepad or make believe friends at latenitehoops or plesant avenue advisors.

[NersEllenson]

It's Pomeroy, not Pomroy. You're still doubting me? MAKE THE BET! I'll give you 10 to 1 odds. You can pay me when you're in the Twin Cities. We can have an NBA 3-point shooting contest for $20 as well. Name how much you can afford to give me on the "Pomroy" ORtg bet.

No, it doesn't seem incongruent. I'm not going to give you a full education on here because you do not deserve it, but understand many advanced stats are based on estimates. As Ken has explained, he doesn't list the Usage and ORtg in the game boxscores for less than 10 minutes played in a game because, "the assumptions used to estimate these figures have a greater potential of breaking down and leading to non-sensical numbers."

This may be difficult to reconcile for someone who struggles with mathematical calculations or an understanding of how possessions are estimated, but it makes complete sense for knowledgeable folks.

Please do bet me on this (minimum of $20 in order for me to also do the NBA 3-point shooting contest). You're mistaken. I am correct and you are wrong.

I'll PM you and we can set up a 3 shooting contest...also will suggest we up the stakes on that, and a game of 1 on 1...even a relative stiff can shoot 3's.    

So PomEroy feels analyzing data from games a player plays less than 10 minutes can lead to nonsensical numbers while having a greater likelihood of breaking down??  Hmm..that's exactly my freaking point...the whole point all along is that you pumped Koenig as being so superior to Dawson - Koenig got a hell of a lot more consistent playing time, with 26 games over 10 minutes....while Dawson got a lot of scrap minutes and only 11 games all year out 32 where he played more than 10 minutes....therefore in 21 games the minutes he played "have a greater potential of breaking down and leading to non-sensical numbers."  I agree.  Can't judge a player's ability when the majority of time they get less than 10 minutes per game, particularly when it is often divided up into 3 different stints.  Could get skewed results...

So thanks for quoting Pomeroy and in the process, making yourself look like an idiot again.  In the meantime, start getting yourself in shape so you can compete in a game of 1 on 1.  I don't want it to be a complete humiliation for you...

[Jay Bee]

Equalizer - I replied to someone asking "how were we only 160 in 2012."

My answer was that we played more games than others and went on to say looking at 3fga/fga would make some sense, but your rankings were stupid.

No need to change the subject. Just admit it or shut it.

[Jay Bee]

I'll PM you and we can set up a 3 shooting contest...also will suggest we up the stakes on that, and a game of 1 on 1...even a relative stiff can shoot 3's.    

So PomEroy feels analyzing data from games a player plays less than 10 minutes can lead to nonsensical numbers while having a greater likelihood of breaking down??  Hmm..that's exactly my freaking point...the whole point all along is that you pumped Koenig as being so superior to Dawson - Koenig got a hell of a lot more consistent playing time, with 26 games over 10 minutes....while Dawson got a lot of scrap minutes and only 11 games all year out 32 where he played more than 10 minutes....therefore in 21 games the minutes he played "have a greater potential of breaking down and leading to non-sensical numbers."  I agree.  Can't judge a player's ability when the majority of time they get less than 10 minutes per game, particularly when it is often divided up into 3 different stints.  Could get skewed results...

So thanks for quoting Pomeroy and in the process, making yourself look like an idiot again.  In the meantime, start getting yourself in shape so you can compete in a game of 1 on 1.  I don't want it to be a complete humiliation for you...

You're still not understanding. Sad.

At any rate, you know the deal - NBA 3FG contest for $20 if you pay up on the minimum $20 on ORtg calculations (which I have already won - you were completely wrong, I am absolutely correct).

Go ahead and PM me; I want the $20 before we begin the NBA 3FG contest.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm not going to give you a full education on here because you do not deserve it