probably about welcome week. or fish. but probably welcome week.
Gulo Gulo Luscus
History
- Member for
- 2 years 22 weeks
- Blog
- View recent blog entries
Karma
- Current value
- 2
Recent Comments
| Date | Title | Body | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 week 4 days ago | you have a case |
sounds like you have a case of having too many hands |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 9 weeks 14 hours ago | take it to the limit |
over $20k since i posted a minute ago. just participated in my first "modbang." (banging the moderate button, not banging the moderators, although i like them too). |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 9 weeks 14 hours ago | over $19k total |
never done any beveled guilt, never had a copy of HTTV, but this seemed like a good chance to make a tiny contribution. thanks for keeping it free and loaded with content you just can't get anywhere else. way to go, MGoBloggers. much like brian et al, you never cease to impress. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 10 weeks 3 days ago | what don't you like about the potential temple matchup? |
nice wins over duke and wichita state early in the year, but is there some personnel/style element that makes you think its a bad matchup? consensus seems to be that we don't want to meet teams with a lot of size. temple has a couple big guys (6-11 michael eric, 6-10 jimmy mcdonnell) but doesn't look like either gets a lot of usage. anthony lee looks to be their prominent post presence, and he's only 6-9. after that it's all 6-5 and under. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 10 weeks 6 days ago | coming from his dudeness... |
lewbowski references always apply to the situation
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 weeks 1 day ago | double-stamp it |
no erasies |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 weeks 1 day ago | enjoy this year's team |
next year we will "supposed to be" this or "expect to do" that, despite the loss of stu/zack's box score contributions and tremendous leadership. with the way things are shaping up, perhaps we should expect nothing short of greatness and contention for titles year in and year out. that's just the price of the "michigan arrogance" that demands greatness from our sports programs, and i'm willing to pay the price of being disappointed by results that most schools would kill for. but 2011-2012 basketball? this one is a freeroll. obviously i would be massively disappointed to suffer a first round upset in the field of 64, but beyond that nothing could temper the joy this season has brought. feels great to be back in the conversation. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 weeks 5 days ago | fill me in |
what is zaching? spelling suggests it has nothing to do with zack novak, which is unfortunate.
ok i let myself google that for me, and see what's up. anything against cancer is good by me. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 weeks 5 days ago | Crackpot |
I have it on good authority that Craig Ross is a loony and a hack. You should read some of his insane attempts to define the "unified theory of NFL pick'em." If you're lucky you'll be able to soon, once he gets a pick'em blog up and running with a couple of other shmos who know nothing about football. Seriously though, Craig- I appreciate your keen reporting from the coaching clinics and glad to see you're finally commenting on the board.
SR |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 14 weeks 10 hours ago | hypothesis |
decided to do some extremely minimal statistical analysis to test one aspect of your comment. although i'd be interested to consider the effects of giving up third/fourth chances, all "second chance points" are a second chance on a previous miss, regardless of what happened earlier in the sequence. with that in mind, a simple ratio of second chance points per offensive rebound should be a loose metric for how badly one opponent (Illinois) versus another (OSU) punished us on the offensive glass. i'll call it the obvious: "points per second-chance opportunity" and abbreviate Pp2c. thanks to the handy box scores over at mgoblue, i have a single resource for making this comparison. (spoiler: i'm also throwing in both MSU games and it's ugly) obligatory chart? mandatory chart:
chart meet eyeballs. eyeballs, chart. b-nut's hypothesis/fear that we (obviously) shouldn't allow OSU to grab as many offensive rebounds as we did against Illinois is spelled out in a minute sample size. same number of rebounds, 7 more points (+.5pts per offensive rebound!) furthermore, eyeball loves chart regarding MSU being a monster around the offensive rim. they will make you pay and showed it in both of our matchups. although the OR totals are low, this may be a factor of efficiency in actual second chance opportunities (fewer "third/fourth chance" situations). what i'd like to do is compare this to the other side of the coin from brian's "subtle hint" in the game writeup. unfortunately i have no access to numbers for what ace calls "transition points directly following a defensive rebound". the obvious counterpoint he set up is "points per transition rebound" (PpTR), which was 9/9 (1.00 PpTR) for Michigan according to Ace. in brian's model, aggressive offensive rebounding opponents are a challenge, but it can be mitigated if PpTR is also high. makes it even easier when the opponent manages a mere .64 points every time they earn a second look. anyway this was my first attempt to add some analytical value to the blog. not much to offer but conceptually its relevant to the current squad and our rebound struggles. cheers to all for getting me thinking about hoops strategy. |
