Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-27-17 12:54 PM - Post#238078
In response to palestra38
colin, again, show me any quantitative analysis that backs up your claims. any at all. I'll wait.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32873
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-27-17 01:04 PM - Post#238079
In response to Jeff2sf
Your "analysis" is an explanation of things past, not forward. All it can do is make a prediction based on past performance, ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL. But all else is not equal. So what we have is you spending your time performing (or having others do it for you--I don't see much of your work product here) predictions which if wrong, you simply say were within the margin of error. Great.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32873
Reg: 11-21-04
|
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 01:05 PM - Post#238080
In response to Silver Maple
You know SM, where it starts is with giving equivalence to the person responding to nonstop attacks to the person making the attacks. That's how we ended up with Trump and how we tolerate an arrogant person like Jeff here.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-27-17 01:08 PM - Post#238081
In response to palestra38
yeah except that we made predictions going into the season. Foreman would continue to outproduce Woods. And... Foreman has continued to outproduce Woods. Foreman plays more than woods. So Steve "obviously" thinks he's better too. So as the future keeps playing out, Woods becomes the past.
and what's so frustrating about this is I'M FINE WITH ANTONIO WOODS!
I'm just not going to allow you to poop on Darnell using bad logic and no facts.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-27-17 01:11 PM - Post#238083
In response to Jeff2sf
looking, sports ref didn't update after monmouth, so maybe the ORAT has closed a bunch given Woods wasn't awful and Foreman was. But he still probably has the higher ORAT and again, I was told that now that it was apples to apples, Woods would be better.
It's so weird how the past sometimes predicts the future. Who knew?
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12533
Reg: 12-07-04
|
11-27-17 01:22 PM - Post#238086
In response to 10Q
Yes. That’s what the otb is for.
When the beliefs are archaic and dangerous, you better believe they will be attacked.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3589
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-27-17 01:40 PM - Post#238093
In response to Silver Maple
UNSUBSCRIBE
|
yoyo
Senior
Posts: 365
Reg: 03-25-09
|
11-27-17 02:06 PM - Post#238094
In response to Silver Maple
This is the kind of nonsense that ruins online communities.
Just saying.
agreed, take this stuff to Breitbart
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3781
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
11-27-17 02:12 PM - Post#238097
In response to PennFan10
UNSUBSCRIBE
You don't think this is getting a bit overheated?
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 02:33 PM - Post#238103
In response to Silver Maple
Yup.
And honestly, this argument doesn't matter. Both Woods and Foreman are going to start because there isn't a good alternative right now. It's hard to say whether Woods or Foreman is the better player or which of them should start if a better alternative emerges. I'll go on a very short limb and say Coach Donahue will continue to play the hot hand.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1903
Reg: 11-29-04
|
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 02:43 PM - Post#238105
In response to TheLine
Woods and Foreman has become the focus of a data vs. eye test debate. All I see are two guards who play hard for Penn, are accretive to the the alternatives, but who do not seem like top notch PG's. A top PG seems to be virtually a prerequisite to a team championship.
Yup.
And honestly, this argument doesn't matter. Both Woods and Foreman are going to start because there isn't a good alternative right now. It's hard to say whether Woods or Foreman is the better player or which of them should start if a better alternative emerges. I'll go on a very short limb and say Coach Donahue will continue to play the hot hand.
|
Cvonvorys
Postdoc
Posts: 4508
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
|
11-27-17 03:19 PM - Post#238109
In response to Jeff2sf
colin, again, show me any quantitative analysis that backs up your claims. any at all. I'll wait.
Can you leave me out of this. I'm Colin, not P38...
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 03:25 PM - Post#238110
In response to Penndemonium
Agree though I don't think the eye test or the data is conclusive either way.
Their numbers have been similar so far. I can post but they're kind of the same. Foreman has a slight edge but not enough to say that it matters.
I've seen 5 games so far either live or on feed. Listened to a couple of others. I don't see much of a difference in their play to be honest. I really like having both. If we had a trusty off-guard then you can split PG between the two, play the hot hand and probably come out of it with an above average player. We don't so you can throw both out there at the same time, get good defending and ball-handling out of the two of them while sacrificing scoring.
The bigger problem with this team is not whether Foreman or Woods is better, but Goodman's regression coupled with JD's lack of composure.
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3781
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
11-27-17 03:27 PM - Post#238111
In response to Cvonvorys
colin, again, show me any quantitative analysis that backs up your claims. any at all. I'll wait.
Can you leave me out of this. I'm Colin, not P38...
Do you have any data to support this claim?
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 03:30 PM - Post#238112
In response to TheLine
I'm willing to come down to Foreman neutral to slightly better. But there's no way I'm conceding Woods is a special, better player. And you know, theline, the data doesn't support that.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
11-27-17 03:33 PM - Post#238114
In response to Jeff2sf
Hey, I like Foreman a bit more but I'm not willing to put money on him being better than Woods. And my wife thinks Woods is the bees knees so there's that.
|
Old Bear
Postdoc
Posts: 4004
Reg: 11-23-04
|
11-27-17 05:10 PM - Post#238125
In response to Silver Maple
colin, again, show me any quantitative analysis that backs up your claims. any at all. I'll wait.
Can you leave me out of this. I'm Colin, not P38...
Do you have any data to support this claim?
Mapes, now you have me laughing out loud.
|
13otto
Masters Student
Posts: 779
Loc: Philadelphia, PA
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 05:58 PM - Post#238127
In response to TheLine
Yup.
And honestly, this argument doesn't matter. Both Woods and Foreman are going to start because there isn't a good alternative right now....
That's your opinion. I think we do have a better option. I'd play Eddie Scott at the 3, let him develop and gain confidence, and we might just have a solid Matt Howard replacement by the time the Ivy season rolls around. One who is only a freshman, with what appears to be a very good upside, who might become a much better Matt Howard-type player over the next four years. Or, we could continue to play Darnell and Antonio together and be similar to last year's team, a middle-of-the-pack Ivy team, without developing a talented freshman as quickly as we should.
|
Cvonvorys
Postdoc
Posts: 4508
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
|
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 06:10 PM - Post#238128
In response to 13otto
This from espn.com:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/bpi/_/...
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/bpi/_/...
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/bpi/_/...
After 8 games, it looks like we can compete for an Ivy League Championship this year.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 07:16 PM - Post#238134
In response to 13otto
Otto, I don't think there's anything to lose trying your lineup. Woods + Foreman together on the court for extended minutes isn't a winning hand.
My concern re: Scott is that we're basing a lot on a single game performance. It was a real good performance but he was also largely left alone, the Monmouth D was keying on other guys. Take out Saturday's performance and the D-3 game and it's harder to make an argument that Scott should be a starter.
I'd like to see Scott as the first reserve off the bench right now. If he performs that role well for a few games then I'm on the bandwagon.
|
