Zink

Thank ya

Something was definitely different than the Richmond game, but I would characterize it as "crispness" rather than intensity, particularly regarding defensive rotations. Too many times our helpside defense challenged shots that the primary defender already had covered (at least in the second half). This led to all of the second chance points, as the weakside defenders were out of position. And offensively we were almost too intense! Lots of big defensive plays were negated by bad passes/poor decisions on the ensuing possession.

Thanks for the reply - some friends and I managed to get tickets through LaSalle's website for just $15 apiece, so we will be cheering from enemy territory. We might decide to do the pre-game reception as well, depending on one member of our group's work schedule.

I totally agree. Any model needs constant updating to maintain accuracy. Statistics are useful for looking ahead as long as we maintain an appropriate context for the numbers that come out when making an interpretation.

The key to understanding and using cumulative probabilities is knowing what to compare them to. The 18% number would, in fact, be higher than the %age chance that we lose all three, while being lower than the chances of going 1-2. The most likely scenario would be us going 2-1. If you want to compare to rolls of dice, it would be more apt to compare specific sequences of wins and losses, and in that case no specific sequence is more probable than winning three in a row (the same 18% mentioned previously). Isn't math fun?!

He got up, just lost control of the ball at the end. He will give us some highlights before graduating. It was really impressive, much like Jett's lefty attempt last year.

Rough day shooting (4-12 FG, 4-10 FT) but played solid defense against a bigger guard who will be going to NC State, I believe. Also hit the boards really well, especially considering the relative size and athleticism of that Oak Hill team. Not sure how many he had, but at least 5 from what I saw including 2-3 offensive boards. Not overwhelmingly athletic, but has a lot of grit and intelligence. Beats his man to the spot defensively using a combination of savvy and quickness and makes fast, accurate decisions on offense (especially for a high schooler). He will be a fun player to watch develop over his career at SLU.

is there any sort of alumni ticket promo for the Philadelphia games? Hoping to swing down for the pair, and was wondering if anyone had found something useful...

WE ARE ALL BILLIKENS!!! Welcome to the community

Of note, we dominated the glass against a team for whom rebounding was a strength coming in. We managed 32 of the 38 available rebounds on the defensive end, and grabbed 13 offensive boards of a possible 39. Those are really good numbers regardless of opponent. Weird game for the Bills all around.

This game will be a barometer of Manning's progress. It will interesting to see him play against another seven footer, probably the first like-for-like match-up this season.

Shoe companies start knocking on the door when you have a really good player who will be televised frequently. St. Vincent-St. Mary's all of a sudden had an influx of Adidas $$ when LeBron showed up. I can't imagine it being too much different with Okafor...

He was only hitting 22% coming into this game...

Reggie played for a relatively long stretch of the second half at Vandy and looked good doing it.

His passing from the point has been our most consistent method for beating the zone this season

Well done!

Yeah, no problem! This is what forums are for, no?And this example makes perfect sense. I too think we have a shot at making a long run, as our conference schedule is a tad backloaded. Hopefully we are healthy, non-smoking 65 year olds by then

This is somewhat true, and is not what I took your prior post to mean. After each game becomes a 1 or a 0 (for win probability), of course we will have a better estimate of our final win total. Also, each team's rating will change over time as a result of their performance, changing each game's predicted outcome somewhat and hopefully becoming more accurate. But the model never actually predicted that we will win our next 13 and then lose the next however many, hence the confusion...If we were to win the next 12, winning the 13th game would simply be whatever the win probability for that specific game, yes. BUT the reason we calculate the cumulative probability is because it should give a better view towards expected performance without assuming knowledge of events that are being predicted by the model. Edit: The Wiz said this in a more straightforward way above - thanks! (Although you can't roll a 7 with a single die)

Woof. I am on my phone and can't multi-quote, but this is directed at GOSLU68 as well...Being favored does not mean that this predictor model expects us to actually win every game we are favored in. Each game is an independent event with a probabilistic outcome. Consider this illustration - we could be favored in all of our remaining games, with a 51% chance of winning each game individually. Despite being favored for each game, the model would NOT be predicting that we win out, rather it would result in an expected record of 9-9. In the same way, our predicted record builds in the probability of each game and calculates the likelihood across all possible outcomes, arriving at the most likely scenario given the current ratings. The way they estimate our final record as predicted by this model would basically be to add up each game's win probability (%/100) and add that sum to our current record. I hope this brief explanation clarifies the picture somewhat...

For our team he is average, but we as a team go to the line pretty infrequently. Last time I checked, our FT rate was around 300th in the country. It has probably gone up after the last two games, but we have not been getting to the line much this season.

No need to apologize - I am very grateful for your contributions, as are a number other posters I'm sure. Thanks, and please keep up the good work!

nope

The kid is averaging a monstrous 4.85 blocks/40min! I really like how he plays on defense, although (back to the thread's topic) he could be better on the glass. I felt bad for him when, in what might have been two straight possessions, he got absolutely mugged under the basket. His only two TOs of the game came on what looked to me like hack-jobs. Not to mention the fouls he gets called for when the other team jumps into his chest - contact can result in a no call, although refs have a hard time swallowing the whistle when a 6'0" guard hits the floor as a result of running into a JM-sized wall.

Skip - I wasn't trying to single you out. I honestly can't remember why I picked yours to respond to. It just seems like in every thread, someone ends up mentioning how bad we are at rebounding, and then all of a sudden there was an ENTIRE thread devoted to the subject! Many have complained about shot selection as well, and basically I posted in an attempt to show that any regression from years past was due to a change in that aspect of our team, not due to our "board game". I wish we were better on the boards too, I just don't think we NEED to be to reach the heights we aspire to. All teams have strengths and weaknesses, and I am fine if we are merely a top-90 rebounding team, especially when considering our emphasis on transition defense.

The only way I see us stopping Ronaldo is if we let Bedoya start the game and just tell him to partner up with Cameron (please dear god not Brad Evans) and stay back on our right flank. Even then he will get some chances, he is just that good. Our CB pairings' positioning will be key, as they need to be able to recover onto him when he inevitably gets by the first defender.