Luck or Grit?

[1SE]

This has been nagging me for a while now. We have the highest luck ranking in Kenpom's top 50 (KP 29, L 27) - and by a decent margin - and in the top 100 only UMN (KP 55, Luck 19) and UNCG (KP 82, Luck 3)

So what does that mean? If I understand his model, basically "luck" is his error term - the size of the residual difference from the predicted fit. A few weeks back I looked and, at least over the population, there doesn't seem to be any correlation in the error term (at least with ranking). 

More qualitatively, I think a way to describe these residuals is when the predicted result (in terms of score differential) is close, but the predicted outcome is difference. I.e. you barely win games you should have barely lost (for positive luck), and vice-versa (for negative luck).

So - is Marquette just "lucky"? I wonder - I wonder if this residual is truly random.

Sure - maybe the first few games it's luck - but is there then not some kind of data generating process that has something to do with the fact that teams that wins close games are more likely to win future close games? I'd love to crunch the numbers and see if there is anything to that - but basically the idea that your "luck" reinforces. I'd guess almost surely there is some sort of effect there. In other words, your current luck influences your future luck (when really, if it is a random residual, it shouldn't - there should be a continual regression to the mean).

And I think there's a legit mechanism for this - players that have won in close situations before expect to win when they are in them again, and this has a qualitative influence on their play in those situations. Let's call it Grit. Even as a fan - last year every time MU was in a close game I thought (oh jeez, we're going to lose). This year, every close game I think (we've got this).

So is Marquette Gritty or Lucky?

[ATWizJr]

Yes.

[tower912]

'I'm a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it'     Thomas Jefferson   (although many others have variations of the same)

[Loose Cannon]

 I'ii go with the BB gods much simpler to comprehend.

[NickelDimer]

Luck’s where preparation and opportunity meet, eh?

[Pepe Sylvia]

MU has really good "luck" in close games because they excel at the situations end games usually come down to: FT shooting and 2pt defense. That's my takeaway, anyhow.

[Goose]

I think combination of the two. They definitely have shown more grit, but ball God has been pretty kind to the Warriors this season.

[GooooMarquette]

As long as we keep winning, I honestly don't think it matters.

[buckchuckler]

Have to agree that it has been both.  They've played hard, and played great and put themselves in position to win games, but the officials have had a big hand in helping out at least a couple of W's.

[Markusquette]

Feel like we've been on the short end of the stick from a luck standpoint for years, so I'll take any ounce of it. Think this team is very good end game.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Winners call it grit
Losers call it luck

[GooooMarquette]

Winners call it grit
Losers call it luck

True dat.

[Silent Verbal]

Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good.  The fact that we’ve been lucky a few times this year bodes well for the rest of the season.  That Creighton game absolutely should’ve been a loss, which is why the second St. John’s game didn’t bother me.  We owed one to the fates.

We’re not just lucky, though.  We’re good, and this year is starting to feel more and more like ‘03 to me.  We’ve got a legit superstar, great second and third scoring options, and a bunch of solid role players who are happy to do the dirty work and step up when needed.  I’m not saying we’ll make the Final Four, but that same type of magic is in the air. 

[brewcity77]

This has been nagging me for a while now.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2019/01/the-high-risk-game-of-luck.html?m=1

I wrote about this last month. Take from it what you will, but in general teams that are overseeded on luck don't fare well in March.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I find that gritty teams are the luckiest

[MU82]

Not the least bit concerned about our LGQ (Luck/Grit Quotient).

We can be lucky and gritty all the way to the Final Four.

[TVDirector]

“Luck is the residue of design”
-Me

[muwarrior69]

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2019/01/the-high-risk-game-of-luck.html?m=1

I wrote about this last month. Take from it what you will, but in general teams that are overseeded on luck don't fare well in March.

I think any team in the power 16 can be upset in the NCAA tourney.

[mug644]

I think that confidence plays a factor too, though maybe that’s close to grit. To go into tight endings with confidence that things will go right helps prevent the ‘yips’ that losing teams experience. The MU program is building that confidence. And it’s good.

[MarquetteDano]

We’re not just lucky, though.  We’re good, and this year is starting to feel more and more like ‘03 to me.  We’ve got a legit superstar, great second and third scoring options, and a bunch of solid role players who are happy to do the dirty work and step up when needed.  I’m not saying we’ll make the Final Four, but that same type of magic is in the air.

Speaking of the '03 team,  they finished #30 luck per Pomeroy that year.

[brewcity77]

I think any team in the power 16 can be upset in the NCAA tourney.

Sure. But any team can always be upset. It just seems to happen more frequently with teams that rate highly in luck & are disproportionately seeded.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

“Luck is the residue of design”
-Me

You're Branch Rickey? You look pretty good for a dead guy.

[buckchuckler]

Winners call it grit
Losers call it luck

Oh Poop!  I don't want sand-knit to think I am a loser!  Grit.  It is totally grit that made the refs miss the call at the end of the Creighton game.  That was gritty AF!!!!!

And yesterday, what grit it took to get than phantom foul call on what would have been a huge offensive rebound.

Even grittier of Markus to not get called for a foul after that TO.

They couldn't be grittier if they were being served at the Waffle House!

[TVDirector]

You're Branch Rickey? You look pretty good for a dead guy.

Well, okay, I guess there’s that!!
Reincarnation!!!!!

[brewcity77]

Grit is how Badger fans excuse Davison's cheating, dirty behavior. Get that $#!+ out of here.

[NorthernDancerColt]

'I'm a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it'     Thomas Jefferson   (although many others have variations of the same)

In golf alone, there are 5 or 6 linksters to whom this quote has been attributed to at one time or another. While Jerry Barber apparently coined it, I have heard it attributed to (or appropriated by) Gary Player, Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer, Lee Trevino etc.

When Ben Hogan kept getting hounded by reporters after his miraculous comeback from a horrific traffic accident, he was often asked, “What is your secret?”  This interrogative also alluded to his excitement after finding the cure to his brutal tee-ball hooks, a malady which often afflicts better players....reporters wanted him to spew technical info about the golf swing like “lateral pronation”, “supination”, “weakening” grip etc. Hogan stoically responded with his version of the work/luck maxim: “THE SECRET IS IN THE DIRT”

In many ways, I really believe Wojo’s Warriors grasp this concept. Hogan loved to practice and work at the game almost as much as he loved to play it. We all know that when you love something that much, it’s a joy to pursue it. This team shows they embrace the process of getting better.  Apologies to Dr. Bob Rotella, but basketball, like golf, “is not a game of perfect.”

[1SE]

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2019/01/the-high-risk-game-of-luck.html?m=1

I wrote about this last month. Take from it what you will, but in general teams that are overseeded on luck don't fare well in March.

That's really good - sorry I missed that.

I guess what's been bothering me is the way Kenpom sets it up, luck is the random error.

I'm not entirely sure it's random - if it was teams should be regressing to "mean luck". My sense is teams mostly stay "lucky" or "unlucky" throughout the season - which suggests it's not random.

I know that's certainly the case for MU (I think we've been about 25 in luck all season). It would be interesting if that's the case systematically.

If it is, it suggests Kenpom's model suffers from omitted variable bias (which is being picked up in the error term) - it also suggests that it would make sense to bet on the teams Kenpom suggests are "lucky".

[brewcity77]

If it is, it suggests Kenpom's model suffers from omitted variable bias (which is being picked up in the error term) - it also suggests that it would make sense to bet on the teams Kenpom suggests are "lucky".

I think March is when teams tend to track to the mean. It's when teams that are talented but unlucky overcome the bad breaks and make runs while teams that have lived on the edge all year fall off it. And at the end, it will usually be the teams that have just been good, consistently winning in convincing fashion, that tend to cut down nets.

[Lennys Tap]

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2019/01/the-high-risk-game-of-luck.html?m=1

I wrote about this last month. Take from it what you will, but in general teams that are overseeded on luck don't fare well in March.

Don't know if I missed this the first time around but this is good stuff Brew. There will always be head scratching upsets in the tournament but it's not a total crap shoot as some have suggested.

[cheebs09]

If it’s grit, can this guy be our mascot?

[Bocephys]

If it’s grit, can this guy be our mascot?

The natural sunlight of Georgia has really done wonders for Crean's skin.  I prefer his unnatural tanning bed glow kissed by the Wisconsin snow.

[HowardsWorld]

A team makes its own luck. If a team is getting blown out then obviously there is no chance close game or game decided by 5 points or less. If they are going to measure "Luck" it should be renamed to something more useful like closeouts or something. It's not luck that Marquette has only lost 1 game by 5 points or less they learned how to play that way and close out games.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

A team makes its own luck. If a team is getting blown out then obviously there is no chance close game or game decided by 5 points or less. If they are going to measure "Luck" it should be renamed to something more useful like closeouts or something. It's not luck that Marquette has only lost 1 game by 5 points or less they learned how to play that way and close out games.

Yep, luck is the wrong word.  It implies randomness.  I'd call it either "Wins Above Mean" or "Wins Above Probability."

Sure, luck may be involved.  Marquette was aided by a lot of luck in the Creighton game.  Both Theo's block at Georgetown wasn't luck. Late game execution isn't always "luck."

But, I understand the overall concept and application from a math sense.  The math is good, it's the English that is poor.

[UWW2MU]

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2019/01/the-high-risk-game-of-luck.html?m=1

I wrote about this last month. Take from it what you will, but in general teams that are overseeded on luck don't fare well in March.

I hadn't read this until now... but it closely aligns with what my intuition was telling me.  This is why I've held the belief that our resume may be top 10 quality but our game play, until we shore things up (which could definitely still happen before the tourney) has us playing more as a top 25.  I'm not disappointed with that, because that is where I expected them this year. 

So I have really been enjoying our season so far, as it is exceeding my expectations a little bit.  Come March, I'd be happy with a Sweet16 year.   Anything else is gravy there as well.

[UWW2MU]

Yep, luck is the wrong word.  It implies randomness.  I'd call it either "Wins Above Mean" or "Wins Above Probability."

Sure, luck may be involved.  Marquette was aided by a lot of luck in the Creighton game.  Both Theo's block at Georgetown wasn't luck. Late game execution isn't always "luck."

But, I understand the overall concept and application from a math sense.  The math is good, it's the English that is poor.

I've always thought of it as "Wins above/below expectations" based on the analytics. 

It is no coincidence that teams we can clearly see are over rated in Kenpom's system are very low on the "luck" scale (think: Wisconsin).  To me it demonstrates that the system favors the way they play and probably over values them.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

The Flyer's mascot was at Stephen Colbert's Super Bowl Party.

[Lighthouse 84]

Speaking of which, did the Pope get a TO or just voluntarily stop pontificating?

[Dr. Blackheart]

I said this in the preseason but Kpom switched from a multiplicative to additive model.  While this makes for an easier model to explain, I think he loses in-season predictability.

[MUBigDance]

Sure. But any team can always be upset. It just seems to happen more frequently with teams that rate highly in luck & are disproportionately seeded.

I'm concerned about this...I've "felt" like we have been lucky in a way. Louisville and Creighton for sure. We did show up in overtime with Louisville but they had 4 puppies to win and blew it.

My thought was originally "over-rated"...but thats not true. We did WIN those games. its on the court and it counts for us...and against them. They did blow it.

And "luck" is a weird word...but that "luck" calculation corresponding to upsets really makes sense to me. That's why we need a higher seed....a 5 would scare me...4 more comfortable...2,3 and I would feel good about the sweet-16.

[brewcity77]

I'm concerned about this...I've "felt" like we have been lucky in a way. Louisville and Creighton for sure. We did show up in overtime with Louisville but they had 4 puppies to win and blew it.

My thought was originally "over-rated"...but thats not true. We did WIN those games. its on the court and it counts for us...and against them. They did blow it.

And "luck" is a weird word...but that "luck" calculation corresponding to upsets really makes sense to me. That's why we need a higher seed....a 5 would scare me...4 more comfortable...2,3 and I would feel good about the sweet-16.

When considering rankings, it's important to consider what all of them are evaluating. Sites like Pomeroy and Torvik are looking at efficiency. So when it comes to efficiency, we are correctly not going to look as good because we have allowed inferior teams to play close to us and when we lose, more often than not we do so in trainwreck fashion. For what they evaluate, Pomeroy and Torvik are not wrong.

The polls, AP & Coaches, are looking mostly at results with an emphasis on recent results. We're what, 17-2 in our last 19 games? That is going to lead to a great ranking, no matter what the margins look like. So based on results, we are deservedly a top-10 team. For what they evaluate, the polls are not wrong.

Then you have the NET, and frankly, this is why I'm largely pleased with how the NET has worked out thus far. We're right around the middle, in the 18-21 range. As a hybrid of results and efficiency, I also don't think that's wrong. As UWW2MU noted, this team feels like a top-25ish team. The NET reflects that.

Either way, I'm riding the wave. We're winning, we're definitely better than we've been in years, and if we're a little lucky, maybe we can ride that to a conference banner of some sort. If we flame out early in March, it will suck, but that doesn't take away from how incredibly fun this season has been.

[MU82]

Folks might define "luck" in different ways.

I will say we were definitely lucky to win at Creighton. That was a freak, 1-in-10,000 (or more) occurrence. Every time I think about it, what goes through my mind is: "It was impossible for us to win that game."

I'd accept we were at least somewhat lucky to beat Louisville, too, thanks to the 3 that counted only as a 2 and the attempts LV had to beat us at the end of regulation.

Still, in both cases, we took advantage of the breaks and then played great in OT.

Otherwise, I don't think good luck has been a major factor for us at all.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Folks might define "luck" in different ways.

I will say we were definitely lucky to win at Creighton. That was a freak, 1-in-10,000 (or more) occurrence. Every time I think about it, what goes through my mind is: "It was impossible for us to win that game."

I'd accept we were at least somewhat lucky to beat Louisville, too, thanks to the 3 that counted only as a 2 and the attempts LV had to beat us at the end of regulation.

Still, in both cases, we took advantage of the breaks and then played great in OT.

Otherwise, I don't think good luck has been a major factor for us at all.

Is a nut punch considered lucky?

[MUBigDance]

When considering rankings, it's important to consider what all of them are evaluating. Sites like Pomeroy and Torvik are looking at efficiency. So when it comes to efficiency, we are correctly not going to look as good because we have allowed inferior teams to play close to us and when we lose, more often than not we do so in trainwreck fashion. For what they evaluate, Pomeroy and Torvik are not wrong.

The polls, AP & Coaches, are looking mostly at results with an emphasis on recent results. We're what, 17-2 in our last 19 games? That is going to lead to a great ranking, no matter what the margins look like. So based on results, we are deservedly a top-10 team. For what they evaluate, the polls are not wrong.

Then you have the NET, and frankly, this is why I'm largely pleased with how the NET has worked out thus far. We're right around the middle, in the 18-21 range. As a hybrid of results and efficiency, I also don't think that's wrong. As UWW2MU noted, this team feels like a top-25ish team. The NET reflects that.

Either way, I'm riding the wave. We're winning, we're definitely better than we've been in years, and if we're a little lucky, maybe we can ride that to a conference banner of some sort. If we flame out early in March, it will suck, but that doesn't take away from how incredibly fun this season has been.

Right with you. Thanks.

[buckchuckler]

Is a nut punch considered lucky?

I thought everyone knows it is lucky if you hit the left one, and the left one only. 

[MU82]

Is a nut punch considered lucky?

Depends on what floats the punchee's boat.