• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

How Many Wins Will 2018-19 Wake Forest Basketball Have on Selection Sunday?

How many wins for WF on Selection Sunday (excluding exhibition)?

  • 0-11

    Votes: 23 17.3%

  • 12

    Votes: 20 15.0%

  • 13

    Votes: 28 21.1%

  • 14

    Votes: 15 11.3%

  • 15

    Votes: 14 10.5%

  • 16

    Votes: 9 6.8%

  • 17

    Votes: 12 9.0%

  • 18

    Votes: 7 5.3%

  • 19

    Votes: 2 1.5%

  • 20 or more

    Votes: 3 2.3%
  • Total voters
    133
  • Poll closed .
Does Attenborough discuss what a proxy is? Because some people could use some education, there
 
birdman said:
Hey everyone, Manning sucks as evidenced by his over all win loss record, but he doesn't suck as much as [Redacted] did/does as evidenced by Manning's Kenpom rankings. The basketball program is still very disappointing because not sucking a badly as [Redacted] is an extremely low bar and we all want the program to be what it was ~25 years ago. It is pretty straight forward, so y'all don't have to argue about this anymore if you don't want to. I'm gonna go watch the David Attenborough Life of Birds series now.
Click to expand...

Not my favorite side out of bounds play but I’ll let it ride for now.
 
RChildress107 said:
You seem to think the data point is relevant and are using it as a comparison of the overall quality of the teams. Sure sounds like a proxy to me.
Click to expand...

I think W-L record against top teams is one of several important metrics to consider when comparing the accomplishments of two or more teams. Can you point me to where I say we should use this one statistic as a proxy for those relative values?

Also, remind me how Pomeroy accounts for wins and losses in his predictive model.
 
birdman said:
Hey everyone, Manning sucks as evidenced by his over all win loss record, but he doesn't suck as much as [Redacted] did/does as evidenced by Manning's Kenpom rankings. The basketball program is still very disappointing because not sucking a badly as [Redacted] is an extremely low bar and we all want the program to be what it was ~25 years ago. It is pretty straight forward, so y'all don't have to argue about this anymore if you don't want to. I'm gonna go watch the David Attenborough Life of Birds series now.
Click to expand...

The fact that any coach is not obviously better than BZ by any and all measures indicates that Wake currently has a bottom 5% coach.

You could be way better than BZ and still be an awful coach. Manning cannot even reach that bar on the ground. RCHill has to use the only measure that does not include win-loss in order to make Manning slightly palatable.

Manning is so bad in the last 5 minutes that he might break KenPom. Kenneth is going to have to reconfigure his metrics to allow for the "Manning effect". Are you just unlucky if your team finishes last in luck year after year?
 
Unlucky number 13 feels about right.

What's the O/U on the number of post-game quotes including things like "freshman mistakes", "young team", and the other built-in excuses for Manning's incompetence?
 
thatguy2016 said:
ok, moving on; so what we confirmed here is that in Danny's dream season he went 3-14 against the top 70*, and that you like to lie

*this of course casts into doubt the infamous "Top 40" proclamation ([Redacted] had a better record vs. the top 70 in 2013-14), but that's probably for another day
Click to expand...

thatguy2016 said:
I think W-L record against top teams is one of several important metrics to consider when comparing the accomplishments of two or more teams. Can you point me to where I say we should use this one statistic as a proxy for those relative values?

Also, remind me how Pomeroy accounts for wins and losses in his predictive model.
Click to expand...

Pomeroy doesn’t. It’s not relevant for his purposes (Identifying how good a team is in order to predict outcomes vs other teams). I do wish he would include a ranking that reflects the expected adjusted efficiency of a team that finishes with your record against your schedule.

If you finished 89 in Kenpom, but have the same record that the 140th team in KP would be expected to have against your schedule, that’s relevant information.
 
knowell said:
The fact that any coach is not obviously better than BZ by any and all measures indicates that Wake currently has a bottom 5% coach.

You could be way better than BZ and still be an awful coach. Manning cannot even reach that bar on the ground. RCHill has to use the only measure that does not include win-loss in order to make Manning slightly palatable.

Manning is so bad in the last 5 minutes that he might break KenPom. Kenneth is going to have to reconfigure his metrics to allow for the "Manning effect". Are you just unlucky if your team finishes last in luck year after year?
Click to expand...

Certainly not. The luck factor captures some bad/good luck, but it also certainly captures a team’s ability/inability to win close games. The only way Manning is comparable to [Redacted] is if all wins and losses are weighted equally and the overall quality of their teams is ignored.
 
RChildress107 said:
Certainly not. The luck factor captures some bad/good luck, but it also certainly captures a team’s ability/inability to win close games. The only way Manning is comparable to [Redacted] is if all wins and losses are weighted equally and the overall quality of their teams is ignored.
Click to expand...

So how much better have the teams that Manning played been than the teams BZ played. What is the difference in average RPI? I would think it may be a little bit better for Manning's opponents but surely not enough better to make him an appreciably better coach.

The one thing Manning has over BZ is the margin of defeat. BZ led the world in just plain getting his ass kicked. Manning keeps the game close until the inevitable last few minutes collapse.

So that is definitely in Manning's favor. Much less embarrassing losses which indicates a better team. But, damn, at some point losing by 3 or by 30 is still a loss.

With BZ, you lost hope shortly after the tip. With Manning, you can believe a win is possible for up to 36 or 37 minutes of the game. Baby steps, I guess.
 
knowell said:
So how much better have the teams that Manning played been than the teams BZ played. What is the difference in average RPI? I would think it may be a little bit better for Manning's opponents but surely not enough better to make him an appreciably better coach.

The one thing Manning has over BZ is the margin of defeat. BZ led the world in just plain getting his ass kicked. Manning keeps the game close until the inevitable last few minutes collapse.

So that is definitely in Manning's favor. Much less embarrassing losses which indicates a better team. But, damn, at some point losing by 3 or by 30 is still a loss.

With BZ, you lost hope shortly after the tip. With Manning, you can believe a win is possible for up to 36 or 37 minutes of the game. Baby steps, I guess.
Click to expand...

Sure. But if you are trying to determine whether a coach is capable of putting together a winning program or how good a team is likely to be next year or later in the season, there’s a huge difference between losing by 3 vs losing by 30, all else being equal.
 
Childress gets injured early and the season spirals out of control, 7 wins. Wellman uses injuries as an excuse to march us on for year 6 of Manning and the misery continues.
 
Yeah, if we have any significant injuries this year, it could get REALLY ugly.

Significant meaning Hoard, Sarr, Chill.

I know the response will be that it’s true for every other team, as well... But the drop-off for us is more severe, I think.

Smart probably can’t play more than 15-20mpg, so Sarr is essential. Wouldn’t trust anyone else to run the point for long stretches other than Chill. And I’m hoping a lot of what we do runs through Hoard.
 
Is there any other reason other than total desperation that people think a Buffalo transfer who averaged 3 points and never played more than 14min a game, is going to be a significant contributor on this team? Okeke should be better than Smart unless there is something lm missing.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Is there any other reason other than total desperation that people think a Buffalo transfer who averaged 3 points and never played more than 14min a game, is going to be a significant contributor on this team? Okeke should be better than Smart unless there is something lm missing.
Click to expand...

Unlimited potential until we actually see him play. Could be a massive upgrade over Moore. I'm thinking 16/8/4/2 in limited minutes.
 
knowell said:
Unlimited potential until we actually see him play. Could be a massive upgrade over Moore. I'm thinking 16/8/4/2 in limited minutes.
Click to expand...

So what your saying is we are looking at the second coming of Daniel Green.

Could we hang a grad transfer jersey? Might be time.
 
RChildress107 said:
Pomeroy doesn’t. It’s not relevant for his purposes (Identifying how good a team is in order to predict outcomes vs other teams). I do wish he would include a ranking that reflects the expected adjusted efficiency of a team that finishes with your record against your schedule.

If you finished 89 in Kenpom, but have the same record that the 140th team in KP would be expected to have against your schedule, that’s relevant information.
Click to expand...

yeah, that quote that you pulled up didn't prove your point Friday, and it still doesn't today

it is, however, good that we agree that Pomeroy doesn't account for wins and losses

strange, then, that one would use take those rankings as the definitive source regarding actual performance

unless, of course, one is more concerned with efficiency than actually winning games
 
thatguy2016 said:
yeah, that quote that you pulled up didn't prove your point Friday, and it still doesn't today

it is, however, good that we agree that Pomeroy doesn't account for wins and losses

strange, then, that one would use take those rankings as the definitive source regarding actual performance

unless, of course, one is more concerned with efficiency than actually winning games
Click to expand...

What rankings did you use to come up with your top 70 you referenced earlier?

Is Kenpom or win/loss percentage a more accurate measure of a team’s performance?
 
RChildress107 said:
What rankings did you use to come up with your top 70 you referenced earlier?

Is Kenpom or win/loss percentage a more accurate measure of a team’s performance?
Click to expand...

Wasn’t it great, when Kansas State was skull-fucking our “defense”, to realize that we were still efficient enough on offense to remain in the top 40 in KenPom?
 
Voted 15 because Danny seems like the kind of coach who will just enough games in the appropriate season to keep his job. 15-17 or 15-18 and maybe one Top 25 win is enough ammo for Wellman to keep the shitty coach around for another season. Next offseason 6-8 players will leave or be run off, and we'll be right back where we are today.
 
Bizz beat Duke and UNC which matters to me. DM will likely leave Wake without a win over either...sad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top