Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: I'd like to have an argument, please.        (Topic#20856)
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3386

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
12-19-17 04:30 PM - Post#240567    

Scene: Smokey Joe’s, shortly before the Ivy Basketball Tournament.

Palestra 38: You going to eat your burger?
Mike James: I don’t need to eat my burger. I already know it’s mediocre.
38: How could you possibly know that?
MJ: I’ve had a lot of burgers here over the years. Some have been good, some have been terrible. On average, they’ve been mediocre. So I know this one’s mediocre as well. Furthermore, I’ve developed an advanced efficiency index for restaurant kitchens. My metric accounts for food costs, inventory shrinkage, sanitary inspection grades, Yelp and Trip Advisor ratings, and rat feces parts per million in the ground beef. The average RKEI is 100, of course, and Smokes’ gets a 100.062. So that’s further evidence that this is burger is meh.
38: You’re insane, you know that?
MJ: (Slaps his head) You just don’t understand. Look at it sitting there on the plate, In all its stochastic mediocrity. If you’ll just stop talking for a minute and listen closely, you can actually hear it regressing to the mean. Anyway, how’s your burger?
38: Haven’t tasted it yet, but I just know it’s gonna be awesome.
MJ: Really? Have you ever had an ‘awesome’ burger at Smokes?
38: No, but I was watching the cook before, and his spatula technique was seriously impressive. It’s like that thing just floats over the griddle. He’s a kid they just recruited from the kitchen at the Simon Gratz High School cafeteria, and he’s a true Philly lunchroom legend.
MJ: You do understand that there’s no reason to believe that performance in a high school cafeteria kitchen is at all predictive of performance in a big time restaurant kitchen, right? At best, that burger will be average.
38: Mark my words—this burger is going to be great. (Takes a bite) Omigod—this is horrible.
MJ: No it’s not, it’s average.
38: What the hell is in this thing? Waiter—what’s this burger made out of? It’s disgusting.
Waiter: We make our burgers out of scrapple, sir.
38: Scrapple? Why the hell would anybody want a burger made of scrapple?
Waiter: Why wouldn’t you? Scrapple costs the same per pound as ground beef, so it’s just as good.
MJ: He’s right, of course. You just think you taste a difference, but you really don’t.
38: (Looks closely at the waiter) You look different from the guy who took our order. Who are you? (Rips off the waiter’s fake beard) Jeff! What are you doing here? And what have you done with our waiter?
Jeff: He’s out cold in the walk-in. He’ll wake up in a few hours with a nasty headache, if he doesn’t freeze to death first. Of course, if he does freeze to death, it’ll be ok—he’s about to be replaced by a robot anyway. But you don’t care about that, do you? You just care about your precious spatula-meister from Simon Gratz, who’s never even made burgers before—he only made meat loaf at the high school level!
MJ: And meat loaf is totally different from a burger.
38: How can you say that? It’s made out of ground beef, just like a burger!
Jeff: You really don’t understand advanced animal protein analysis, Colin!
CVonvorys: (From the next table) Hey! I’m Colin! Leave me out of this!
(Argument continues for several more hours.)


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-19-17 04:34 PM - Post#240568    
    In response to Silver Maple

Excellent.

But I like scrapple.

(and Antonio has really helped the team)

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-19-17 04:46 PM - Post#240570    
    In response to palestra38

congrats, his being the 5th or 6th best player on the team helped contribute to improving the team 15 or so spots on KenPom.

Matt Howard is a lot better than Antonio Woods. A lot better.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-19-17 04:48 PM - Post#240572    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Let's see---they lost Howard and the only regular new contributor is Antonio and they are better. Yeah, he sucks.

Go back to the freezer.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2002

Reg: 02-15-15
12-19-17 06:29 PM - Post#240578    
    In response to palestra38

Silver Maple--This is genius, pure genius. Love it.

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3467

Reg: 11-23-04
12-19-17 07:35 PM - Post#240581    
    In response to PennFan10

This is not an argument, yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is .......

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 12093

Reg: 12-02-04
12-19-17 07:36 PM - Post#240582    
    In response to PennFan10

Yeah, this was a hoot. You really nailed everyone to a T.

That, and business must be awfully slow this week.



 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3386

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
12-19-17 07:54 PM - Post#240590    
    In response to penn nation

Took most of a billable hour (you're welcome). And the best thing is, if you scroll a short distance up the page, they're still bickering. What could be more perfect?

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 12093

Reg: 12-02-04
12-19-17 08:20 PM - Post#240597    
    In response to Silver Maple

All you did was change the subject of debate from a nothing burger to a hamburger.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-19-17 08:26 PM - Post#240599    
    In response to palestra38

i did not say he sucks. antonio woods doesn't suck. but he is a clearly inferior player to matt howard. only an i d i ot would think differently.

You leave out the idea of others improving. along with antonio. if we got the antonio from two years ago, we would be worse. fortunately he's now average as opposed to below average.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 12093

Reg: 12-02-04
Re: I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-19-17 08:28 PM - Post#240601    
    In response to Jeff2sf

I say Silver Maple’s Jeff is more authentic than this doppelgänger.

 
sparman 
Masters Student
Posts: 892
sparman
Reg: 12-08-04
I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-20-17 08:42 AM - Post#240727    
    In response to PennFan10

  • PennFan10 Said:
Silver Maple--This is genius, pure genius. Love it.



  • penn nation Said:
All you did was change the subject of debate from a nothing burger to a hamburger.


Very well done.


 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 10:47 AM - Post#240753    
    In response to sparman

That was funny. Well done. Or rare. Not sure which. Maybe both?

Is it OK if I admit I like Antonio Woods? Even if he is no Matt Howard.


 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2002

Reg: 02-15-15
12-20-17 10:58 AM - Post#240757    
    In response to TheLine

What's great is not only do they continue to bicker, but they ignore the humor of all this as well as our conversations about them as if they are the only two on this board.....great entertainment.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 11:07 AM - Post#240759    
    In response to TheLine

Except that he gives them much more of what they need given that Betley is better than Howard and plays essentially the same position. With Betley at the 3, his rebounding is up and despite not shooting as well as he can so far, his scoring is up 3 a game. Rothschild 's scoring and rebounding is more than double last year's output and we now have 2 guards who don't turn over the ball.

Most of all, our defense is far better because we don't have players playing out of position nor do we have to play zone to cover for guys who can't play man.

We're just a better team this year.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 11:09 AM - Post#240761    
    In response to PennFan10

Hey, you can't say that ignore the humor--I commented on it immediately. It's really funny.

I can take it. Have been for years in here---you may not remember the Report Cards I used to do. I was mauled on a regular basis.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-20-17 11:18 AM - Post#240762    
    In response to palestra38

antonio woods is fine. totally fine. Not one of the 25 best players in the league, but sure.

Matt Howard played a different position than Betley. Stretch four. Ryan plays the three.

Matt's ORAT: 101.4, 104.9, 108, 113. On usage of 18/18/21/21

Compared to antonio's 101... in his junior year... with a 16% usage. I don't lol, but, i mean really.



 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 11:40 AM - Post#240764    
    In response to palestra38

Old Smokes hamburger = Howard
New Smokes meatloaf = Woods

Discuss.



 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 12:05 PM - Post#240769    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Why don't you try to respond to my argument that irrespective of ORAT, the team has a better fit because they have more rebounding and defense in the middle, better ballhandling and defense on the perimeter and freedom for Betley to get more possessions and both score and rebound more.

That would require, however, an understanding of the game.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-20-17 12:27 PM - Post#240772    
    In response to palestra38

I'm happy to argue the "merits" of your claim so long as you acknowledge Matt's the better player.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 12:42 PM - Post#240775    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Sure. I always did. What I said consistently was that we would be better with Antonio than with Matt because it allows us to do things (and Antonio does things) that we couldn't do last year.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2002

Reg: 02-15-15
12-20-17 12:50 PM - Post#240778    
    In response to palestra38

Looks to me like Matt was actually replaced with a combination of Antonio and Max. Those are the two additions to the lineup combined with reduced minutes and/or focused roles for some of the other guards (Jackson, Caleb, jones) to allocate Matt's minutes. The roles of Antonio/Max/et al combine to make us a better team in my view.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 01:10 PM - Post#240782    
    In response to PennFan10

Exactly

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 01:29 PM - Post#240787    
    In response to palestra38

While I agree, what does this have to do with the food at Smokes?

Have any of you spent the entire day at Smokes from opening to close? It's quite an experience but not for the faint of heart.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 01:34 PM - Post#240788    
    In response to TheLine

I drank with the hockey team all night after the announcement of the decision to cancel the program in '78. Something in pitchers they called "Black Squids". As Dr. Smith moaned, "Oh the pain, the pain..."

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 01:43 PM - Post#240792    
    In response to palestra38

The last time I was at Smokes - and it was awhile - the downstairs had been hermetically sealed off. Probably for good reason. Is that still the case?

I fondly remember the 2-for-1 pitcher promotion on Fridays. Good times.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 02:32 PM - Post#240801    
    In response to TheLine

I'm pretty sure that another business took the downstairs for a while, but I believe it is vacant now. Here's the street view.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/210+S+40th +St,+P...

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-20-17 02:35 PM - Post#240803    
    In response to TheLine

We are a better team. I'm not sure how much better and to what we're comparing. If we're comparing to last season's non-conf, we get to start Betley (our best player), Woods and Rothschild (our two worst starters).

Rothschild for Howard - a huge loss. Max is just mediocre, clogs up spacing, puts our 2nd best player out of position, turns over the ball too much.

Woods for Wood. Well even though 2017 Wood is better than 2017 Woods, 2017 Woods is better than 2016 Wood. So that's a win.

Betley for Macdonald. A ginormous gain. Not only in the ORat, but more importantly the usage and the gravity he provides to help spacing.

We're the 134th best team in the country. last year in our last 8 games we were 130 (though we finished more like a top 200 team). So I dunno, I predicted we'd be between 120 and 130 KenPom and so I guess we've underperformed. shrug.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2002

Reg: 02-15-15
12-20-17 02:48 PM - Post#240805    
    In response to Jeff2sf

I'm pretty sure that last year at this time we were KP 180-225 or so. Let's see where we end up over our last 8 games or so this year, which if we perform over the last 8 games this year like we did last year is likely to improve our current KP rating.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 02:52 PM - Post#240806    
    In response to Jeff2sf

We're a much better defensive team. Way better. Unless you have another explanation for why 3 point shooting against us is down 70 points this year. Other than luck...it isn't luck.

Where does that fit in your ORAT analysis?

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-20-17 03:06 PM - Post#240807    
    In response to palestra38

yeah listen, colin, if you don't understand variance and the idea that 3 point shooting % isn't controlled by the defense, LACK of 3 point attempts is, I don't know what to tell ya buddy.

I'm allowing that defense is better though. We'll have some shooting reversion, as we have already.

 
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. 
Masters Student
Posts: 858

Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
12-20-17 03:11 PM - Post#240809    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
I'm pretty sure that another business took the downstairs for a while, but I believe it is vacant now. Here's the street view.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/210+S+40th +St,+P...


I seem to recall the downstairs had been converted to some chicken wing place. No idea what's there now.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 03:16 PM - Post#240810    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Being serious for a moment, I do understand variance (which applies to all statistics, not just 3 point shooting), but it makes no sense to me that defense does not affect 3 point shooting. The difference between getting close enough to change a shot and not getting close enough is real. And closing time (not the bar kind) between the time a shooter receives a pass and the time you can get close enough to him to affect a shot is important. Indeed, logically, it would be more effective to play off a shooter if you have the quickness to close in and affect a shot than playing close and stopping him from taking it. Moreover, you are not as vulnerable to the drive.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-20-17 03:20 PM - Post#240811    
    In response to palestra38

I'm sorry it makes no sense to you. I concede some statistical empiricisms are tough to intuit. But just because Colin sees that we had a cold December so how can there be global warming, you need to rise above and acknowledge that WAY smarter people than you and I have studied this.

or you could ask Mike questions, in a respectful way and not the "i'm dripping with sarcasm" way some people on this board do. He explained this basic point to a Princeton guy on the Penn board a month or so ago.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
12-20-17 03:21 PM - Post#240812    
    In response to Jeff2sf

while i'm talking about difficult to intuit, the Monty Hall problem is my all time favorite.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 03:28 PM - Post#240814    
    In response to Jeff2sf

You mean taking the box instead of the curtain?

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 03:31 PM - Post#240815    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Mike can speak for himself if he chooses. Right now, I'm sure you can provide a layman's explanation, just as I was able to show Colin that there is no natural source of CO2 to explain the increased concentration in the atmosphere and that it is directly correlated to world temperature.

So explain what part of my basketball analysis is incorrect.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3834

Reg: 11-22-04
I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-20-17 03:31 PM - Post#240816    
    In response to palestra38

well i refuse to look it up but basically the idea of changing your mind when monty allows you to do so.

3 doors to find a car, you pick door 3, he opens door 1 to reveal a goat and says do you wanna change doors, you're supposed to say yes despite every fiber of my being saying it shouldn't matter.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3386

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
12-20-17 03:36 PM - Post#240818    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Bayes’ theorem in action.

 
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. 
Masters Student
Posts: 858

Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
12-20-17 03:49 PM - Post#240823    
    In response to Jeff2sf

  • Jeff2sf Said:
well i refuse to look it up but basically the idea of changing your mind when monty allows you to do so.

3 doors, you pick door 3, he says do you wanna change doors, you're supposed to say yes despite every fiber of my being saying it shouldn't matter.


It's actually a lot simpler than that, and comes down to a crucial, additional piece of information that Monty provides you. Your initial choice has a 1/3 shot at being correct. The chances of the car (or whatever) being behind EITHER OF THE TWO REMAINING DOORS are 2/3. Monty then TELLS YOU that the car is NOT behind one of those two remaining doors. Therefore the odds of the car being behind the third door are still 2/3.

So pick the other door.

I honestly never understood all the confusion. (Unless my grasp of the initial problem is incorrect, which is possible.)

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 03:54 PM - Post#240826    
    In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.

Of course, knowing this, Monty could only offer that choice to change when the item is actually behind the chosen door.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3386

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
12-20-17 03:57 PM - Post#240827    
    In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.

It’s a posterior probability problem. Like I said, Look to Reverend Bayes for guidance. He was Isaac Newton’s math tutor, so he probably knew what he was talking about.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2002

Reg: 02-15-15
12-20-17 04:23 PM - Post#240830    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
Of course, knowing this, Monty could only offer that choice to change when the item is actually behind the chosen door.



No, he could offer it all the time. He just has to reveal the door with no car. The information Monty reveals is "insider info", he is never going to show you the car and ask you to choose.

Love the Monty Hall dilemma and loved the show too...


 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 04:29 PM - Post#240832    
    In response to PennFan10

It's the same as the principal of restricted choice.

Your choices are A, B and C. You pick A.

If it is A you win by sticking to A.

If it is B, Monty shows you C. You win by switching.

If it is C, Monty shows you B. You win by switching.

Switching is right 2/3 of the time.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 04:34 PM - Post#240833    
    In response to PennFan10

Yes, if he offers it all the time, the switch wins. But did anyone ever actually review the tape to see if he offered it all the time? I seem to recall that sometimes he offered a box or an envelope in exchange for the curtain.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 04:42 PM - Post#240836    
    In response to palestra38

I think KenPom calculated Monty's BD3* numbers.


*Behind Door 3


 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2002

Reg: 02-15-15
12-20-17 04:49 PM - Post#240838    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
Yes, if he offers it all the time, the switch wins. But did anyone ever actually review the tape to see if he offered it all the time? I seem to recall that sometimes he offered a box or an envelope in exchange for the curtain.



Yes, I reviewed the tape. He always offers it. He sometimes offers an envelope or box in other games but usually only to grumpy, old empiricists who troll the show.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 20069

Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 04:55 PM - Post#240840    
    In response to PennFan10

I'm never grumpy. Nor bashful.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 05:20 PM - Post#240844    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
Right now, I'm sure you can provide a layman's explanation, just as I was able to show Colin that there is no natural source of CO2 to explain the increased concentration in the atmosphere and that it is directly correlated to world temperature.


And Colin understood?


 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 12093

Reg: 12-02-04
12-20-17 05:28 PM - Post#240845    
    In response to TheLine

  • TheLine Said:
  • palestra38 Said:
Right now, I'm sure you can provide a layman's explanation, just as I was able to show Colin that there is no natural source of CO2 to explain the increased concentration in the atmosphere and that it is directly correlated to world temperature.


And Colin understood?




Probably chalks it up to the seltzer machines running overtime in the Northeast.


 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 4030

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
12-20-17 05:34 PM - Post#240846    
    In response to penn nation

Anyone who says CO2 can't possibly have an impact because it's a trace element in the atmosphere should try seeing what digesting a trace amount of arsenic does.


 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5327

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
12-20-17 06:52 PM - Post#240851    
    In response to TheLine

It’s always creepy when this hobby and my actual work cross, but the Monty Hall problem is actually my preso open for a workshop session I’m leading next month. This whole thread is weird, but that’s creepy.

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3467

Reg: 11-23-04
I'd like to have an argument, please.
12-20-17 07:15 PM - Post#240854    
    In response to mrjames

Hall is the wrong Monty.

Flying Fox of the Yard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNkjDuSVXiE



 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3607

Reg: 02-04-06
12-20-17 09:03 PM - Post#240860    
    In response to Old Bear

Cmon, Mike embrace the synchronicity.

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

1585 Views




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.181 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 08:57 AM
Top