I hate to be that guy... but...

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
I feel the need to help out Pitino a little bit. Here goes nothin'.

If one were to examine the number of points scored in the B1G by winning teams so far this year, a histogram like this would result:



The interquartile range for points score by winning teams is 69-82. The median is 76. The Gophers average in B1G play is 67.5. Only 4 games out of 24 have had a winning team scoring 67.5 points or fewer. (The Wisconsin game - where the Gophers scored 59 and won - represents the lowest point total for a winning team so far this year in B1G play). The Gophers simply do not score enough points.

Now, if we look at the correlation coefficient of minutes played by Isaiah Washington versus points scored since the start of B1G play, that figure turns out to be 0.73. For those of you who do not regularly wonk out to statistics:



As you can see, this represents a strong positive relationship. It's almost as if having a point guard on the floor results in improved offensive play!

We NEED IW on the floor. His play has improved and we score more points when he's out there. This is especially true when he is playing with starters. Get is a$$ out there immediately.

Rant over.
 

brucekaupa

**** Commander
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
24
Points
38
Scoring more points than the other team is the key
 

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
3,869
Reaction score
397
Points
83
Scoring more points than the other team is the key
And best achieved by stopping the other teams from scoring. Gophers score plenty of points to win but over 6 years are close to 5-40 when giving up over 75.
 

bizzle22

Active member
Joined
Apr 17, 2016
Messages
1,785
Reaction score
20
Points
38
I'd like to see more data before drawing a conclusion. 4 games isn't much.

What's IW's plus/minus? I don't doubt that he helps us score more points, but I wonder about how he impacts the other 50% of the game.
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
And best achieved by stopping the other teams from scoring. Gophers score plenty of points to win but over 6 years are close to 5-40 when giving up over 75.
Obviously we need more data than four B1G games... but... it is hard to win scoring in the 50's and 60's. You can see that, given the Gophers' average, they would be hoping to win while scoring a point total that accounts for only one out of every six victories logged in the B1G. That's making things unnecessarily hard on yourself. Their point totals are objectively low for sustained victory.

Moreover, during the Tubby years we saw the team regularly be at toward the top in blocked shots, rebounding and steals and still lose a lot. His problem? His teams could not shoot and they scored in the 50's and 60's a ton. It's just hard to win with that point total and the data displays this. You need to score in at a level that approaches the median. Say, 73 points on average. Then you could hope to make up for a small deficiency in scoring with defense.
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
I'd like to see more data before drawing a conclusion. 4 games isn't much.

What's IW's plus/minus? I don't doubt that he helps us score more points, but I wonder about how he impacts the other 50% of the game.
No doubt more data would be helpful. I'm going with what we have so far... I could repeat this analysis in a week or so?
 

ltf

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2018
Messages
770
Reaction score
52
Points
28
I feel the need to help out Pitino a little bit. Here goes nothin'.

If one were to examine the number of points scored in the B1G by winning teams so far this year, a histogram like this would result:



The interquartile range for points score by winning teams is 69-82. The median is 76. The Gophers average in B1G play is 67.5. Only 4 games out of 24 have had a winning team scoring 67.5 points or fewer. (The Wisconsin game - where the Gophers scored 59 and won - represents the lowest point total for a winning team so far this year in B1G play). The Gophers simply do not score enough points.

Now, if we look at the correlation coefficient of minutes played by Isaiah Washington versus points scored since the start of B1G play, that figure turns out to be 0.73. For those of you who do not regularly wonk out to statistics:



As you can see, this represents a strong positive relationship. It's almost as if having a point guard on the floor results in improved offensive play!

We NEED IW on the floor. His play has improved and we score more points when he's out there. This is especially true when he is playing with starters. Get is a$$ out there immediately.

Rant over.
Intetesting. I suppose the other side would be does he give up points to a degree that negates the offense. Do you happen to have a correlation coefficient for our other players?
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
Intetesting. I suppose the other side would be does he give up points to a degree that negates the offense. Do you happen to have a correlation coefficient for our other players?
I do not... and it took me about 30 minutes to dig up the data for IW. I could do it for some others too - maybe tomorrow morning. Who are you interested in?
 

ltf

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2018
Messages
770
Reaction score
52
Points
28
I do not... and it took me about 30 minutes to dig up the data for IW. I could do it for some others too - maybe tomorrow morning. Who are you interested in?
If I understand correctly, this coefficient measures points the team scores per minute the player plays? I would assume Coffey's would be the highest. Would be kind of interesting to see how his compares to IW's if you have time.
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
If I understand correctly, this coefficient measures points the team scores per minute the player plays? I would assume Coffey's would be the highest. Would be kind of interesting to see how his compares to IW's if you have time.
A correlation coefficient expresses how linear a relationship is between two variables. See below:



A 0.73 is telling you that there is a strong linear relationship between IW minutes played and total points scored by the Gophers since the start of B1G play.

I can run Coffey's. I suspect the correlation coefficient would not be high because (1) we always play him in games, and (2) we don't always score a lot of points. Therefore, there is unlikely to be a direct linear relationship between his minutes played and points scored. However, there is a fairly strong relationship with IW because when he is in and runs the offense (moves the ball around), it tends to generate scoring no matter who is having an up or down night shooting. He passes to players who are "on" and passes to players that are in good positions to score.
 

WorkingMyTailOff

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
5,390
Reaction score
65
Points
48
I'd like to see more data before drawing a conclusion. 4 games isn't much.

What's IW's plus/minus? I don't doubt that he helps us score more points, but I wonder about how he impacts the other 50% of the game.
Exactly. In last night’s game he was not efficient offensively or defensively.

That being said I know he needs more playing time to figure it out, but i don’t know if you can afford to play him much more when the stakes are so high for the team and coaching staff.
 

bc2211

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Messages
1,044
Reaction score
52
Points
48
Normalize by defensive efficiency and then we’ll talk.

That said, good fodder for discussion. I need to learn to be less negative. Awesome to see something substantive here even if I don’t agree with the methods :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

Otis

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
3,191
Reaction score
115
Points
63
As my middle school, 18 year old basketball coach said in 1979, "If we score 100 points in every game, we will win a lot of games. If we keep the other team from scoring, we will NEVER lose."

I saw that every day entering the locker room. And this is the same thing that keeps IW off the floor.

of course, we weren't perfect, just 53-2 for three years.
 
Last edited:

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
8,323
Reaction score
263
Points
83
Back in the 60's, the prevailing philosophy was - "If we score 80 pts, the other team has to score 81 to beat us."

Then we started getting more defensive-oriented coaches, and the philosophy changed to "If we hold the other team to 60 pts, we only need to score 61 to win."

Either approach can work if you have the right players to make it work. I like a more high-scoring game by nature, but I've seen coaches be very successful with a defensive emphasis.

Bottom line - have a philosophy, recruit players who fit that philosophy, and stick to it.
 

ltf

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2018
Messages
770
Reaction score
52
Points
28
A correlation coefficient expresses how linear a relationship is between two variables. See below:



A 0.73 is telling you that there is a strong linear relationship between IW minutes played and total points scored by the Gophers since the start of B1G play.

I can run Coffey's. I suspect the correlation coefficient would not be high because (1) we always play him in games, and (2) we don't always score a lot of points. Therefore, there is unlikely to be a direct linear relationship between his minutes played and points scored. However, there is a fairly strong relationship with IW because when he is in and runs the offense (moves the ball around), it tends to generate scoring no matter who is having an up or down night shooting. He passes to players who are "on" and passes to players that are in good positions to score.
Got it. Would be interesting to see Isaiah's number in a few weeks to see if his numbet holds. Thanks.
 

cjbfbp

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
4,847
Reaction score
122
Points
63
Normalize by defensive efficiency and then we’ll talk.

That said, good fodder for discussion. I need to learn to be less negative. Awesome to see something substantive here even if I don’t agree with the methods :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't know what's hard to understand.

Point 1

There isn't a lot of data used here, but the poster's point is that about 70+% of winning teams in the games examined scored more than 70 points with the modal share being a bit higher than 70 points. Yes, one can win with fewer points by being an especially good defensive team but that isn't playing the odds.

Point 2

Washington's minutes correlate positively with team scoring levels.
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
I don't know what's hard to understand.

Point 1

There isn't a lot of data used here, but the poster's point is that about 70+% of winning teams in the games examined scored more than 70 points with the modal share being a bit higher than 70 points. Yes, one can win with fewer points by being an especially good defensive team but that isn't playing the odds.

Point 2

Washington's minutes correlate positively with team scoring levels.
You've nailed it with far fewer words. Thank you. My wife is right - she says I'm too longwinded!
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
To describe in basketball terms (leaving the statistics aside for the moment) why I prefer IW at the point, consider the following:



Here, GK and AC are are out beyond the 3-point line, spreading out the defense. They are both capable shooters and no sane defense will leave them untended to out there. So Amir has value in spreading out the defense when he is without the ball. This creates room for IW who can penetrate and pass. When Amir is playing point, he has no value in spreading out the defense - the defense will move toward the man with the ball no matter who it is. The question is: can you make the defense adjust even when you don't have the ball? Amir and Gabe can do that. So we should have lineups with Amir, Gabe and IW.
 

bc2211

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Messages
1,044
Reaction score
52
Points
48
Touchdown what correlation factor did you use? I can’t replicate. I get a 0.003 for big ten only play using Pearson’s r, a 0.41 if I include all games since dec 2 (the start of big ten play).





If I normalize each game total by defensive efficiency (actually the inverse since smaller values correspond to better defense) of each opponent, the correlation drops to -0.03 for big 10 only and 0.21 for all since dec 2. Basically, IW’s numbers don’t look as good if you start to factor out how good each opponent is defensively.



Lastly, here is my data table


And here is my defensive data source:
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/defensive-efficiency

I took minutes out of espn boxscores.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

upnorthkid

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
4,637
Reaction score
128
Points
63
Can we get a points per possession with IW in vs not? We run a typically faster paced offense with Isaiah in so doesn’t shock me at all
 

Urbandale

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
1,304
Reaction score
77
Points
48
It was my understanding there would be no math.
 

NotAFanOfBecky

Active member
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
911
Reaction score
75
Points
28
To describe in basketball terms (leaving the statistics aside for the moment) why I prefer IW at the point, consider the following:



Here, GK and AC are are out beyond the 3-point line, spreading out the defense. They are both capable shooters and no sane defense will leave them untended to out there. So Amir has value in spreading out the defense when he is without the ball. This creates room for IW who can penetrate and pass. When Amir is playing point, he has no value in spreading out the defense - the defense will move toward the man with the ball no matter who it is. The question is: can you make the defense adjust even when you don't have the ball? Amir and Gabe can do that. So we should have lineups with Amir, Gabe and IW.
That's a fantastic play and that's what IW should do. But at least 7 or 8 out of 10 times he takes a terrible shot or commits a turnover. He has the potential to be so so good! He's gotta play smarter and he could be a stud, right now he's just not there. So you have to weigh that with his minutes. He's had a few games where he's been on but I find myself half covering my eyes at times.
 

gopherhoopsguy

Active member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,147
Reaction score
0
Points
36
IW clearly needs to play been saying this from day one and it’s so frustrating watching this offense when he is out of the game.
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
@bc2211 - I'm just back from a work/drinking event this evening. There was a bit more drinking than working! :) So I'm not in the proper mental "space" to return to my math, however simple. I should have time tomorrow and I'll go over the data set and explain.
 

touchdownvikings

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
355
Reaction score
41
Points
28
That's a fantastic play and that's what IW should do. But at least 7 or 8 out of 10 times he takes a terrible shot or commits a turnover. He has the potential to be so so good! He's gotta play smarter and he could be a stud, right now he's just not there. So you have to weigh that with his minutes. He's had a few games where he's been on but I find myself half covering my eyes at times.
I'd like to point out some things:

(1) Washington is in a zone there. Theoretically, a zone is kryptonite to the Gophers to listen to commentators and some on Gopherhole.

(2) The Gophers are able to attack it because of Amir and Gabe. They spread the defense without the ball. Zone doesn't become shade to the lane side of your zone because you don't believe your man is unable to shoot. So there's room.

(3) Now that there's room, IW takes care of the rest.

(4) This is repeatable provided we play IW with a lineup that spreads the defense - whether it's man or zone. Doesn't matter. Amir + Gabe beyond the arc will result in room.
 

Bordergopher

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
1,276
Reaction score
136
Points
63
Cool thread. Coach Pitino seems to like statistics. Can someone suggest to him he read this thread?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

builtbadgers

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
3,869
Reaction score
397
Points
83
Cool thread. Coach Pitino seems to like statistics. Can someone suggest to him he read this thread?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All sarcasm noted but he uses every metric for every player in every combination not only for games but practices. The question is does he have the magic when it comes to teaching and how to recruit to what you do well.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
9,477
Reaction score
102
Points
63
I'd like to point out some things:

(1) Washington is in a zone there. Theoretically, a zone is kryptonite to the Gophers to listen to commentators and some on Gopherhole.

(2) The Gophers are able to attack it because of Amir and Gabe. They spread the defense without the ball. Zone doesn't become shade to the lane side of your zone because you don't believe your man is unable to shoot. So there's room.

(3) Now that there's room, IW takes care of the rest.

(4) This is repeatable provided we play IW with a lineup that spreads the defense - whether it's man or zone. Doesn't matter. Amir + Gabe beyond the arc will result in room.
Well stated.
 
Top Bottom