[Cracked Sidewalks] Oh-no-vertime!

[brewcity77]

I'm not here to talk about the decisions that were made, I'm here to talk about the ramifications of those decisions. How much did coaching choices that caused late leads to become overtime losses impact Marquette in terms of seeding? We break it down on Cracked Sidewalks.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2020/01/oh-no-vertime.html

[#UnleashSean]

Not a bad read.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

It was an excellent read.

[fjm]

As always, nicely done.

[Cheeks]

Of course if we made one more basket, one more free throw, etc...none of this happens.....it’s funny how much “coaching decisions” are the cause.  Koby misses a point blank layup, John the same, etc.


Players play...they determine by and large the outcomes of games.

[brewcity77]

Of course if we made one more basket, one more free throw, etc...none of this happens.....it’s funny how much “coaching decisions” are the cause.  Koby misses a point blank layup, John the same, etc.


Players play...they determine by and large the outcomes of games.

Knock it off. I specifically said in the article this is NOT to rehash the games. Push your agenda in one of the 20 other threads where it is being discussed. This is about the ramifications of the events, not the events themselves.

[Cheeks]

I can’t remember which coach said it, but basically on game day coaches have very little impact...10 to 15%.

MIT did an analysis recently where they tried to quantify coaches impact in 6 major sports on game days...if I remember college hoops was like 20 to 25% for some categories and lower for others (chance at victory).  The biggest reason is because ultimately PLAYERS have to make shots, get rebounds, defend, etc...when shots are missed, etc, it shrinks opportunities left for what the staff and players can do with the clock and the opponent.

No one seems to remember the missed bunny in the first half, the fumbled rebound out of bounds that gives the other team another possession, the missed free throws, etc....they all add up to the final score and outcome.  Instead fans love to blame ONE possession or two possessions rather than a body of work for 40 minutes as the culprit. 

[brewcity77]

Please stop. Please delete and stop.

[CountryRoads]

Nice read, thanks for posting.

[Shooter McGavin]

Cheeks no one is disputing players are the major reason teams win or lose.  Coaches can simply put players in better position or prepare players better to succeed.  If that 10-15% is better on one sideline than the other you are going to win more games.

[Shooter McGavin]

.Very good read.

[Cheeks]

Cheeks no one is disputing players are the major reason teams win or lose.  Coaches can simply put players in better position or prepare players better to succeed.  If that 10-15% is better on one sideline than the other you are going to win more games.

LOL...no one?  Uhm, you been on vacation this weekend?  Don’t you know...the verdict is in.

[panda]

No one respond to the troll. Excellent read Brew. Thanks for posting.

[Elonsmusk]

I can’t remember which coach said it, but basically on game day coaches have very little impact...10 to 15%.

You do realize this "little impact" of 10-15% would have been enough in both Providence and Butler games to push our win probabilities over 100%.  Butler and Providence games are exactly why it is critical that you have a strong in-game coach. 

Think virtually everyone can agree in-game coaching is Wojo's weakest attribute - he's a good recruiter and ambassador for the program.  Only question is, can he take it up a notch in-game? 

BTW - Good analysis and article, Brew. 

[#UnleashSean]

LOL...no one?  Uhm, you been on vacation this weekend?  Don’t you know...the verdict is in.

You've been asked by the god damn article writer to stfu. Do you have any respect to not derail a single thread?

[WhoaJoe2020]

Where would Marquette be if they were undefeated??

Where would they be if they lost to Villanova but won at Butler.

The premise the author bases his/her argument on is flawed from the start. 

The last five minutes of those games, particularly related to Wojos coaching decisions were not as significant as other events throughout the games.

I wish articles like this were still printed out,......

because I'm out of toilet paper.

[cheebs09]

Where would Marquette be if they were undefeated??

Where would they be if they lost to Villanova but won at Butler.

The premise the author bases his/her argument on is flawed from the start. 

The last five minutes of those games, particularly related to Wojos coaching decisions were not as significant as other events throughout the games.

I wish articles like this were still printed out,......

because I'm out of toilet paper.

We were at an 80% chance to be 2-0, and we won neither. That’s why these two games are relevant. It’s crazy to see the impact those two games could have on our seed.

[WhoaJoe2020]

We were at an 80% chance to be 2-0, and we won neither. That’s why these two games are relevant. It’s crazy to see the impact those two games could have on our seed.

As a piece of useless trivia, I guess it's passable. After reading the article I checked, and Marquettes ranking hasn't changed.

[brewcity77]

The premise the author bases his/her argument on is flawed from the start.

Because you misunderstand the premise. As I said ad nauseum, it's not too rehash what happened. It's to examine the ramifications of what did happen.

Against PC we didn't foul up three, against GT we did. Clear strategy change after a loss. Against Butler Wojo admitted his mistake.

The point is that you can take this however you want. If you want to argue in favor of Wojo, then we are two possessions, 80.4% odds, away from being the top 4-seed. That while this team is trending toward a 7-seed, their actual ability is on par with teams like Dayton, Villanova, and Maryland. That despite some erroneous decisions, this team is undervalued because on the whole, the vast majority of the time those events should go in their favor to bear out the top-15 team they would rightfully be if not for statistical improbabilities.

Conversely, it could be argued that we have the talent to be top-15, but coaching decisions prevent us from reaching those deserved heights.

The article is neither pro nor anti Wojo. I think most would say I've fallen in the pro camp more often than not. The premise of the article is to present where we are and where we are a razor's edge away from being. You're interpreting it as something it's not.

[WhoaJoe2020]

Because you misunderstand the premise. As I said ad nauseum, it's not too rehash what happened. It's to examine the ramifications of what did happen.

Against PC we didn't foul up three, against GT we did. Clear strategy change after a loss. Against Butler Wojo admitted his mistake.

The point is that you can take this however you want. If you want to argue in favor of Wojo, then we are two possessions, 80.4% odds, away from being the top 4-seed. That while this team is trending toward a 7-seed, their actual ability is on par with teams like Dayton, Villanova, and Maryland. That despite some erroneous decisions, this team is undervalued because on the whole, the vast majority of the time those events should go in their favor to bear out the top-15 team they would rightfully be if not for statistical improbabilities.

Conversely, it could be argued that we have the talent to be top-15, but coaching decisions prevent us from reaching those deserved heights.

The article is neither pro nor anti Wojo. I think most would say I've fallen in the pro camp more often than not. The premise of the article is to present where we are and where we are a razor's edge away from being. You're interpreting it as something it's not.

Nope, re-read it and my reading comprehension skills are as solid as ever. The premise was clearly stated in the first paragraph.

Just because the author qualifies it by saying the article isn't intended to rehash the losses doesn't mean that he/she hasn't set the premise.

The author rehashes the losses and suggests that poor coaching decisions could be supported mathematically as an explanation for those losses. Then the author asks the reader to ignore what he/she said and just look at the ramifications on the teams ranking if Marquette had won both games. Nice try.

It's a nice bit of useless trivia and what could've been.

It adds nothing to the conversation except another reason for people to retreat into their corners.

I wasn't enlightened by the article one bit.

[brewcity77]

If ever someone revealed their identity, that was it.

[WhoaJoe2020]

If ever someone revealed their identity, that was it.

Oh, was I supposed to just ignore the first paragraph of the article??

My bad.

[Cheeks]

I'm not here to talk about the decisions that were made, I'm here to talk about the ramifications of those decisions. How much did coaching choices that caused late leads to become overtime losses impact Marquette in terms of seeding? We break it down on Cracked Sidewalks.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2020/01/oh-no-vertime.html

Now do it again with coaching choices against Purdue, K Sate, etc that helped our seed because we won.

That’s my point, it’s like this board is attracted to only the negative.  Last I checked we won games we were trailing at halftime or in the road, etc where moves with subs, going zone, etc helped win a game. 

[brewcity77]

Now do it again with coaching choices against Purdue, K Sate, etc that helped our seed because we won.

You aren't really that thick, are you? I mean, you can read, right? Like...the article title?

[Silkk the Shaka]

Great read, hope we can win one or 2 more on the back end that we aren't "supposed" to win (@Nova or @SH)

This is the type of article that makes this site great, and makes brewcity77 an MVP-tier contributor to the fan experience

[Anti-Dentite]

If ever someone revealed their identity, that was it.

No kidding, whoacheeks gave himself up there.

[Its DJOver]

Interesting read, although I would like to see how the potential changes would differ if slightly different criteria were inserted rather than just whether or not the game went to OT.  By my count, we've played 7 what I'm calling "close games" (a game that was 2 possessions or less sometime within the last 4 minutes, excluding games that went from 9 to 6 on a last second garbage time 3 etc.).  We're 5-2 in those games, and excluding the Robert Morris game which never should have been that close to begin with, we're 4-2 in six games (wins against Purdue, Davidson, K-State, and Gtown, loses to PC and BU).  I have neither the time or the know-how to run all the various simulations, but where would we be if we'd gone 6-0, 3-3, 0-6, 4-2 but with the wins and losses rotated between different games?  Not necessarily trying to make an argument, but interested to know how much of a slide or jump would be possible had those "close games" gone differently.

[WhoaJoe2020]

No kidding, whoacheeks gave himself up there.

I'm not Cheeks.

The reason I got pissed is because I clicked on the article after the OP said it wouldn't rehash the two losses, and in the first paragraph all it did was rehash the two losses. Particularly the part Wojo played in those losses. Then it went on to show what could have been if only Marquette hadn't lost those two games. It was a bit of interesting but ultimately useless trivia that seemed designed to put into sharp relief the cost of losing those games. I felt the OP was misleading in the way they advertised the article and I wouldn't have bothered reading it if I knew its actual contents.

I don't like wasting my time on woulda coulda shoulda topics.

[Cheeks]

No kidding, whoacheeks gave himself up there.

LOL

Nope....but it makes me laugh my arse off how wrong you clowns are.  I don’t know Whoa but he has you all spinning like tops.  Makes me laugh.

[Cheeks]

I'm not Cheeks.

The reason I got pissed is because I clicked on the article after the OP said it wouldn't rehash the two losses, and in the first paragraph all it did was rehash the two losses. Particularly the part Wojo played in those losses. Then it went on to show what could have been if only Marquette hadn't lost those two games. It was a bit of interesting but ultimately useless trivia that seemed designed to put into sharp relief the cost of losing those games. I felt the OP was misleading in the way they advertised the article and I wouldn't have bothered reading it if I knew its actual contents.

I don't like wasting my time on woulda coulda shoulda topics.

Are you really this thick?

[WhoaJoe2020]

Are you really this thick?

Define thick in this instance.

[Cheeks]

Define thick in this instance.

However Brew used it

[WhoaJoe2020]

However Brew used it

Then I guess I am.

The article wasn't biased in one direction or the other so why would anybody have an issue with it??

Fair and balanced.

[rocket surgeon]

Cheeks and whoa gotta raise their rent

[Cheeks]

Then I guess I am.

The article wasn't biased in one direction or the other so why would anybody have an issue with it??

Fair and balanced.

The first paragraph is a mess on nonsense.  He talks about win probabilities and ignores the actual players plays (or lack thereof) as part of the reason for losing.  Later paragraph goes on to state coaching decisions caused 3 seed line change, provides zero evidence to support this and again acts as if this is a game in which coaches make decisions but players don’t shot, defend, rebound...it’s bizarre to put it mildly.

[WhoaJoe2020]

The first paragraph is a mess on nonsense.  He talks about win probabilities and ignores the actual players plays (or lack thereof) as part of the reason for losing.  Later paragraph goes on to state coaching decisions caused 3 seed line change, provides zero evidence to support this and again acts as if this is a game in which coaches make decisions but players don’t shot, defend, rebound...it’s bizarre to put it mildly.

The point I was trying to make is that the OP says they're not here to talk about the decisions made in the losses, then in the first paragraph of the article talks about the decisions made in the losses. The decision not to foul in the Providence game, and the intentional foul in the Butler game. The call in the Providence game was close and the call in the Butler game was inconsequential.

Of course the author of the article did an incomplete analysis, because accuracy was never their intention. They cherry picked two volatile examples and got the results that fit their narative.

The only purpose I saw in posting where Marquette would be ranked if they had won those two games was to piss people off.

It worked.