2018-19 Media Predictions

[Herman Cain]

Well, it was Bucky's first game without Trice and King.  Rowsey went for 24 points in 20 minutes with a 171 O-Rating.

My firm position is that I feel the "Team Wojo" crowd underestimate the value of Rowsey.

I agree with this analysis.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

TSmith

Why would you bookmark that? Do you think I would say it was not a success or do you think they will be much higher seed?

Both, but I'd bookmark it for the former.  I am not trying to take a shot at you, but I suspect you will not be satisfied with an 11 seed.

FWIW, I would be pretty disappointed with an 11 seed.

[Goose]

TSmith

You are incorrect. I would be fine with an 11 seed. To get an 11 seed, Wojo is going to have to coach is butt off between now and next March. IMO, that would be a first step in progress for the Wojo era. I am not joking on this.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

It wouldn't be the first time I am incorrect.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Is the offseason almost over yet?

[MU82]

You're right, facts are my friend. Sadly, they are not yours. Statistics are also not your friend when you don't know how to use them. Last night when I posted that, I considered adding this gif to the post...

Instead, I just bumped this thread from the preseason. In it, I posted how in the previous decade, over 60% of the players that shot 50% from three and returned for another season failed to even shoot 40% again. I repeated in there quite a few times that most likely, Markus was going to shoot under 40% from three. I also stated that if he maintained over 40% for his career, he would have to be considered an all-time great as only two of the shooters to ever hit 50% also never dropped below 40% for a season.

Now, to your misuse of statistics. If the barometer for Markus' three-point percentage was accurately placed at 40%, then it would have to be argued that he exceeded expectations. He is in the minority of players to follow up a season as successful as he had from beyond the arc in 2017 with one as successful as he had in 2018.

So we place the over/under on 3PFG% at 40%, which was the number Ellenson Family Reunion stated was the absolute minimum Markus would shoot and the baseline I gave for him being considered for all-time great status, and project it along with his 2017 2PFG% with the quantity of shots he took in 2018, we get the following:

40% of 275 3PFGs = 110/275
45.4% of 240 2PFGs = 109/240
Expected eFG% = ((110 x 1.5) + (109)) / 515

Doing the math, Markus' expected eFG% for 2018 would be 53.2%. However, his actual eFG% was 57.2%. Why? Because he exceeded expectations (albeit minimally) on three-poing shooting but moreso because he exceeded expectations massively (almost 9% better) on two-point shooting.

So the dips you point out in 3PFG% and eFG% were actually both cases where Markus exceeded expectations historically based on other similar players and personally based on his own 2017 tendencies. Again, it's not just looking at statistics and facts, it's understanding how to interpret them that matters.

The next consideration is one of role. In 2017, Markus played as our primary point guard. Looking at Pomeroy, Markus was playing PG for Marquette 68% of the time over our past 5 games with Rowsey playing the other 32%. Rowsey was our primary SG during that same period. In 2017, Markus was our point guard. His job was not only to score, but to distribute. His assist rate led the team because that was his job. In 2018, his job changed. Again, looking at those last 5 games, Rowsey played the point 92% of the time while Markus was only there 8%. Not surprisingly, Rowsey's assist rate improved significantly while Markus' own declined slightly. This was not because of some decline in his game, it was because of a change in his role. Wojo made him into our SG and his game adjusted accordingly.

His usage went up, his efficiency went down, which is what's expected for virtually any player. If you think a player's offensive rating should hold level regardless of usage, I suppose you advocate running the offense through Matt Heldt.

Markus improved obviously not just because of what we saw on the court but what we saw statistically. His 3PFG% dropped but his efficiency and eFG% did not drop as much as one would expect because of other improvements in his game. His assist rate dropped because Wojo changed his role and made him into more of a scorer than distributor. Further, he improved his rebounding and turnover percentages while fouling less on defense and drawing more fouls on offense. In absolutely no way did Markus take "a step back" as you foolishly said. Anyone who actually interprets statistics and doesn't just regurgitate them without context would understand that.

Man, I love seeing Ners-It-Alls get the smug slapped out of them. Great job, brew, and also by TAMU and mu03eng.

Most of us didn't even need these stats. The eye test also told us that Markus improved as a sophomore. For an "expert" like Ners, you'd think that's all he'd need. I mean, I hear he played high school ball.

[Floorslapper]

You're right, facts are my friend. Sadly, they are not yours. Statistics are also not your friend when you don't know how to use them. Last night when I posted that, I considered adding this gif to the post...

Instead, I just bumped this thread from the preseason. In it, I posted how in the previous decade, over 60% of the players that shot 50% from three and returned for another season failed to even shoot 40% again. I repeated in there quite a few times that most likely, Markus was going to shoot under 40% from three. I also stated that if he maintained over 40% for his career, he would have to be considered an all-time great as only two of the shooters to ever hit 50% also never dropped below 40% for a season.

Now, to your misuse of statistics. If the barometer for Markus' three-point percentage was accurately placed at 40%, then it would have to be argued that he exceeded expectations. He is in the minority of players to follow up a season as successful as he had from beyond the arc in 2017 with one as successful as he had in 2018.

So we place the over/under on 3PFG% at 40%, which was the number Ellenson Family Reunion stated was the absolute minimum Markus would shoot and the baseline I gave for him being considered for all-time great status, and project it along with his 2017 2PFG% with the quantity of shots he took in 2018, we get the following:

40% of 275 3PFGs = 110/275
45.4% of 240 2PFGs = 109/240
Expected eFG% = ((110 x 1.5) + (109)) / 515

Doing the math, Markus' expected eFG% for 2018 would be 53.2%. However, his actual eFG% was 57.2%. Why? Because he exceeded expectations (albeit minimally) on three-poing shooting but moreso because he exceeded expectations massively (almost 9% better) on two-point shooting.

So the dips you point out in 3PFG% and eFG% were actually both cases where Markus exceeded expectations historically based on other similar players and personally based on his own 2017 tendencies. Again, it's not just looking at statistics and facts, it's understanding how to interpret them that matters.

The next consideration is one of role. In 2017, Markus played as our primary point guard. Looking at Pomeroy, Markus was playing PG for Marquette 68% of the time over our past 5 games with Rowsey playing the other 32%. Rowsey was our primary SG during that same period. In 2017, Markus was our point guard. His job was not only to score, but to distribute. His assist rate led the team because that was his job. In 2018, his job changed. Again, looking at those last 5 games, Rowsey played the point 92% of the time while Markus was only there 8%. Not surprisingly, Rowsey's assist rate improved significantly while Markus' own declined slightly. This was not because of some decline in his game, it was because of a change in his role. Wojo made him into our SG and his game adjusted accordingly.

His usage went up, his efficiency went down, which is what's expected for virtually any player. If you think a player's offensive rating should hold level regardless of usage, I suppose you advocate running the offense through Matt Heldt.

Markus improved obviously not just because of what we saw on the court but what we saw statistically. His 3PFG% dropped but his efficiency and eFG% did not drop as much as one would expect because of other improvements in his game. His assist rate dropped because Wojo changed his role and made him into more of a scorer than distributor. Further, he improved his rebounding and turnover percentages while fouling less on defense and drawing more fouls on offense. In absolutely no way did Markus take "a step back" as you foolishly said. Anyone who actually interprets statistics and doesn't just regurgitate them without context would understand that.

So...it took all of this pretzel logic to rebut my below post?  Seems a little far fetched Brew. But, appreciate the effort.   

Markus Freshman:
118.6 O Rating.  65.8% eFG.  19.9 Assist Rate.  54.7% 3pt FG%  25.4% Usage.

Markus Sophomore:
114.5 O Rating.  57.2% eFG.  18.4% Assist Rate.  40.4% 3pt FG%.  28.8% Usage

The splits look even worse if you compare his Advanced Stats in conference play freshman/sophomore year.

Facts are your friend Brew.

[Floorslapper]

Man, I love seeing Ners-It-Alls get the smug slapped out of them. Great job, brew, and also by TAMU and mu03eng.

Most of us didn't even need these stats. The eye test also told us that Markus improved as a sophomore. For an "expert" like Ners, you'd think that's all he'd need. I mean, I hear he played high school ball.

You have some serious issues dude. 

[MuMark]

Somebody has serious issues......I have a feeling it isn't 82.....

[Floorslapper]

Somebody has serious issues......I have a feeling it isn't 82.....

LOL - 82 is obsessed with me.  But, nice to see you markedman, coming to the defense of one of your fellow pollyanna posters.  Know you are all in and bullish on Wojo.  4 years in, not 1 NCAA win.  Not exactly lighting the world on fire.  And, we have a major hole in the roster going into Year 5, with no depth at PG position.

But hey, just wait till next year! 

[brewcity77]

So...it took all of this pretzel logic to rebut my below post?  Seems a little far fetched Brew. But, appreciate the effort.   

Markus Freshman:
118.6 O Rating.  65.8% eFG.  19.9 Assist Rate.  54.7% 3pt FG%  25.4% Usage.

Markus Sophomore:
114.5 O Rating.  57.2% eFG.  18.4% Assist Rate.  40.4% 3pt FG%.  28.8% Usage

The splits look even worse if you compare his Advanced Stats in conference play freshman/sophomore year.

Facts are your friend Brew.

I can always on you to double down on your own stupidity. Quote the post that proves your inability to talk intelligently about a subject, then repeat the phrase that demonstrates your inability.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

U guys make my head hurt

[MU82]

LOL - 82 is obsessed with me.  But, nice to see you markedman, coming to the defense of one of your fellow pollyanna posters.  Know you are all in and bullish on Wojo.  4 years in, not 1 NCAA win.  Not exactly lighting the world on fire.  And, we have a major hole in the roster going into Year 5, with no depth at PG position.

But hey, just wait till next year!

You'll have been banned a couple more times by then.

Love,
Polly

[rocket surgeon]

This is an interesting point, and I don't mean this to argue against what you're saying, but rather raise IT for discussion.
I listened to an interview with Ed Cooley the other day, and he said Xs and Os really aren't an important part of his job. He said the most important parts of being a head coach are building relationships (with players, staff, administrators, recruiting contacts, etc.), and creating a culture.
That could all just be coachspeak, of course, but I think he has a point. Mike Deane could coach circles around Tom crean and Buzz Williams, but had a fraction of the success at Marquette because of his weakness in other areas.
Obviously you want a head coach who can coach and be a relationship guy.

And I agree, next season is a big one for Wojo. If he can't get a top 25-30 season out of this group, it's not a good sign.

i like this perspective.  ed has been around long enough to know what he is talking about.  being successful at what he is referencing plays directly into getting the most and/or more out of the players he has recruited.  if the player can relate to you, they will perform for you...don't ever forget-jimmy v.  trust and believe in the system.  there's just something about wojo that tells me he gets this.  i think(hope like hell) he is one tick away

[rocket surgeon]

You'll have been banned a couple more times by then.

Love,
Polly

  hey 82, seeing as how yogi(sniff-sniff) is no longer with us, i think ya just found your new yogi and boo-boo, ehyn'er? 

[dgies9156]

A couple of thoughts about next year that I have and feel fairly strongly about:

1) I know we will be better but I do not like the idea that people see us as a Top 25 team. We Scoopers and the True Believers put enough pressure on this team. I know we expect a Top 25 team, but not sure I like it in writing from so-called experts. I'd rather have us sneak up on people.

2) With Rowsey gone, we make the broad-based assumption that someone single-handedly has to make up his scoring. WRONG!!!! I'm confident that our offense should be more balanced, that our inside people will become more prolific scorers and that Matt Heldt/Ed Morrow et al will get more than 2.2 points per game. I'm high on Bailey and think that Greg Elliott could become a major asset to us as well, but I also think for us to break into the NCAA tournament and have an impact, we will have to be a balanced team. No more hero ball.

3) If we don't play defense, we will have a 50-year streak with the NIT. The point guard Wojo and Stan are scouring the country for needs to be found and needs to set the defensive tone.

4) I've said it before and I will say it again. If we don't make the NCAA, Wojo's seat will be 1000 degrees Kelvin and he will be shaking hands with Beelzebub. If we are a one-and-done team,  it will be a strong disappointment.

5) The best thing that ever happened to the NCAA was Loyola. It proves a hot team with heart and defense can go far. A little belief helps too. I expect us to be in that position a year from now --- but don't tell anyone!

6) Beat the Rodent!

[MU82]

  hey 82, seeing as how yogi(sniff-sniff) is no longer with us, i think ya just found your new yogi and boo-boo, ehyn'er?

Oh, you know chicos is still here.

I got no problem with you, rocket. You've got a good heart.

[GGGG]

A couple of thoughts about next year that I have and feel fairly strongly about:

1) I know we will be better but I do not like the idea that people see us as a Top 25 team. We Scoopers and the True Believers put enough pressure on this team. I know we expect a Top 25 team, but not sure I like it in writing from so-called experts. I'd rather have us sneak up on people.

2) With Rowsey gone, we make the broad-based assumption that someone single-handedly has to make up his scoring. WRONG!!!! I'm confident that our offense should be more balanced, that our inside people will become more prolific scorers and that Matt Heldt/Ed Morrow et al will get more than 2.2 points per game. I'm high on Bailey and think that Greg Elliott could become a major asset to us as well, but I also think for us to break into the NCAA tournament and have an impact, we will have to be a balanced team. No more hero ball.

3) If we don't play defense, we will have a 50-year streak with the NIT. The point guard Wojo and Stan are scouring the country for needs to be found and needs to set the defensive tone.

4) I've said it before and I will say it again. If we don't make the NCAA, Wojo's seat will be 1000 degrees Kelvin and he will be shaking hands with Beelzebub. If we are a one-and-done team,  it will be a strong disappointment.

5) The best thing that ever happened to the NCAA was Loyola. It proves a hot team with heart and defense can go far. A little belief helps too. I expect us to be in that position a year from now --- but don't tell anyone!

6) Beat the Rodent!

Loyola will be by and large remembered like VCU and George Mason before them. Nice story. That's about it.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

  hey 82, seeing as how yogi(sniff-sniff) is no longer with us, i think ya just found your new yogi and boo-boo, ehyn'er?

Wut?

[MU82]

Wut?

Don't try to translate rocket. It results in brain injuries.

[mu03eng]

Don't try to translate rocket. It is the results in of brain injuries.

FIFY

[cheese ball chaser]

Loyola will be by and large remembered like VCU and George Mason before them. Nice story. That's about it.

It's too early to tell. If they have sustained success and Moser builds a culture of winning, I could see them being a perennial contender out of the MVC.

[Pakuni]

Loyola will be by and large remembered like VCU and George Mason before them. Nice story. That's about it.

I think they'll be remembered much more fondly. The way they won most of those games, the Sister Jean factor and the plucky little urban Catholic school thing they had going for them, will make Loyola's run far more memorable than that of the other 11 seeds who've been to a Final Four.

[Lennys Tap]

I think they'll be remembered much more fondly. The way they won most of those games, the Sister Jean factor and the plucky little urban Catholic school thing they had going for them, will make Loyola's run far more memorable than that of the other 11 seeds who've been to a Final Four.

Absolutely.

[dgies9156]

I think they'll be remembered much more fondly. The way they won most of those games, the Sister Jean factor and the plucky little urban Catholic school thing they had going for them, will make Loyola's run far more memorable than that of the other 11 seeds who've been to a Final Four.

Ditto.