• 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!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

Deacsfan27 said:
Would love to see some of those quotes directly comparing Codi to Chris Paul. "Everyone" sounds like a bit many for that comparison.

Should be some fun things to read once you pull them off the boards!
Click to expand...

I am late to this discussion, so maybe it haas already been delved into but I think what people are describing compared to what you are describing is a non-independent shooting success or play making probability. You've described that the probability of a good shooter making 10 shots in a row is pretty good when you look at 10000 successive shots. And you're right from a statistical stand point that it could very easily, from a random chance stand point when each shot is an independent Bernoulli trial. But others are arguing that there are Markovian properties to making shots (or making good plays), that is the probability of making a second successive shot is higher than the probability of making the first alone, and again the probability of making the third in a row is higher still. It sounds like some are even arguing that the success rate over the previous ~10 collective have an effect on the probability of making the next shot. There would have to be an upper limit on the cumulative probability. So it is merely a difference between a Binomial probability model vs. a Markovian probability model and the difference would be confidence, and the effect of confidence on shot success or team success probability. I would think that team play is more likely to have Markovian properties than an individuals shooting success. When teams are down near the end of a game they may as a group play more aggressively and that can affect the successive outcomes of a series of successive plays, leading to "momentum". It could go both ways though, aggressiveness could improve success or diminish it, depending on variables like officiating, and how does the other team respond, etc. There is also a shit-ton of residual stochasticities that affect whether or not "momentum" shifts, like the bounce of the ball, clock stoppage. That Duke - Maryland clip could have easily gone the other way if Williams stepped out of bounds or if the officials called a reaching foul on one or two of those steals. Seems like for every example of a momentum shift, you could present a few counter examples.
 
To add to that, using the concept that someone may take thousands of shots at once or over a year to justify not calling it a "hot hand" or "momentum". It's always going to be a small sample. Each game is totally independent of the next. Like he said anything from confidence to sniffles to a fight with a girlfriend or getting laid by twins or any one or several of other factors impact any specific night. There are many factors that can't be quantified.

How do you quantify the value of having a David Ross on a baseball team? How do you quantify the glue guy in bball who doesn't play much but keeps a team loose and can reach a player like Jack Haley did with Rodman? How about the guy who bizarrely and regularly scores way above his average against a certain team who has a great defender against him? Or a hitter who "owns" a certain star pitcher?

The reality taking numbers to extremes is silly.
 
birdman said:
I am late to this discussion, so maybe it haas already been delved into but I think what people are describing compared to what you are describing is a non-independent shooting success or play making probability. You've described that the probability of a good shooter making 10 shots in a row is pretty good when you look at 10000 successive shots. And you're right from a statistical stand point that it could very easily, from a random chance stand point when each shot is an independent Bernoulli trial. But others are arguing that there are Markovian properties to making shots (or making good plays), that is the probability of making a second successive shot is higher than the probability of making the first alone, and again the probability of making the third in a row is higher still. It sounds like some are even arguing that the success rate over the previous ~10 collective have an effect on the probability of making the next shot. There would have to be an upper limit on the cumulative probability. So it is merely a difference between a Binomial probability model vs. a Markovian probability model and the difference would be confidence, and the effect of confidence on shot success or team success probability. I would think that team play is more likely to have Markovian properties than an individuals shooting success. When teams are down near the end of a game they may as a group play more aggressively and that can affect the successive outcomes of a series of successive plays, leading to "momentum". It could go both ways though, aggressiveness could improve success or diminish it, depending on variables like officiating, and how does the other team respond, etc. There is also a shit-ton of residual stochasticities that affect whether or not "momentum" shifts, like the bounce of the ball, clock stoppage. That Duke - Maryland clip could have easily gone the other way if Williams stepped out of bounds or if the officials called a reaching foul on one or two of those steals. Seems like for every example of a momentum shift, you could present a few counter examples.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited:
just saw that we won by 3 over the mighty Spartans of UNCG. does this increase danny's credibility?
 
cheeseheads12 said:
just saw that we won by 3 over the mighty Spartans of UNCG. does this increase danny's credibility?
Click to expand...

We were projected to win by 5 and we won by 3. I'm sure there will be a ton of comments like the above, but that was the reality before the game, and that's the reality after.

There are definitely things that need to be corrected with in-game coaching. We tighten up every single damn game and stop going through Collins. 6 shots is way too low for a guy like Collins.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
We were projected to win by 5 and we won by 3. I'm sure there will be a ton of comments like the above, but that was the reality before the game, and that's the reality after.

There are definitely things that need to be corrected with in-game coaching. We tighten up every single damn game and stop going through Collins. 6 shots is way too low for a guy like Collins.
Click to expand...

UVA beat this team by 25. And UVA doesn't seem to be all that special this year
 
Deacsfan27 said:
You're free to think whatever you want, but they were a 15-18 point favorite over UNC-G according to KP.

UVA is a lot better than we are.
Click to expand...

I'm not buying that at all. Are they a little better? Sure, but there is no way their overall talent is that much or any better than ours. We just utilize our talent very very poorly.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
You're free to think whatever you want, but they were a 15-18 point favorite over UNC-G according to KP.

UVA is a lot better than we are.
Click to expand...

So UVA over performed by ALL MIGHTY KenPom by 40% and we under performed KenPom by 40%.


Damn. That sucks.
 
Manning was out coached in every facet of the game tonight. Very fortunate that superior talent won out at the end. This game should have been a comfortable 10-15 point win. Coaching matters and we have none. Manning lacks passion, leadership, and strategic thinking. He is an average recruiter and evaluator of talent. This combination will continue to fail in the ACC.
 
I'm very fortunate that you allow me to think for myself. Much appreciated :thumbsup:
 
cheeseheads12 said:
I'm not buying that at all. Are they a little better? Sure, but there is no way their overall talent is that much or any better than ours. We just utilize our talent very very poorly.
Click to expand...

UVA only added the 8th best recruiting class in the country this year. The worst player they added is 80 spots higher than the best player we added.
 
And we are seeing the evidence of how weak this class is. It's not much to ask freshmen to contribute.
 
Complacent Deac said:
Can defense be taught?
Click to expand...

Basic defense comes down to effort from the player, but positioning and situations can be taught by the coaches. Either way, it looks like we are struggling with both. We are very fortunate to win this game tonight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top