Mason NEEDS this, Pistons, after all you've put him through
- Member for
- 2 years 25 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|5 days 11 hours ago||2 or 3 out of 30?||
That's about how many you'd expect to show "significant" runs, at the .067-.100 level! (Sorry. Too geeky. But point is 2-3 of 30 is what you'd expect by chance at usual levels of "strength of evidence".)
|5 days 12 hours ago||Look at Robert Frank's work on this||
It'd make you doubt it. He designed studies well to eliminate those alternative hypotheses. As a statistical methodologist myself & also a player of sports (though not a good one!), I square those two sides feelings by concluding that when I'm on a chance run of 6 or 7 in a row or whatever, it feels like I'm on; or, conversely, whether I'm on or not is a random variable with realizations such that the runs I enjoy while hot average to my career (& I use the term extremely loosely!) percentage.
|5 days 12 hours ago||Been done||
As another huge sports fan who does statistical methodology for a living, I've always been interested in this sort of thing too. Guy named Robert Frank, mathematician-economist out of cornell did lots of studies on hot hand. Considered the microwave's career stats among many many other things. He was no more likely to make his next shot than his career average whether he'd hit the last one, two, three or four or whatever in a row. Sorry -- hot hand doesn't exist. Frank did much more on sports & stats. Contra the defense reacts hypothesis, he also tried with the cornell team (ok, ok...) at shoot around. Checking whether more likely to make the next after x in a row: nope. Also just asked them -- shoot and let me know when you feel you're hot. Nope: still not more likely to make the next after saying so than that player's average. And lots more cool studies like that. I'm just so jealous he got grant money to explore this stuff!!!
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Mac Bennet:||
Did he come back in, anyone notice, or was he still out end of period?
|8 weeks 6 days ago||CONGRATS! from the Arctic Edge...||
...to Meryl & Charlie, Scott & Tessa, and Maia & Alex! Our girls, along with all the kids & parents at the rink, were so proud of all of you! I hope they have some video from the watching parties at the Edge so you can see & hear all the kids screaming for all of you, & for Devidus too when he came on, chanting U S A and Meryl--Charlie, & just generally losing their minds in their excitement for all of you. Way to go, guys! You were amazing!! (and tremendous role models, too, for which: thanks from these parents)
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Whew! Thought I was to blame!||
I turned game on radio when got in car to drive family home from dinner. It was 2-0. Looked like 2-3 when pulled into driveway! Glad to hear that was someone else's fault!
|11 weeks 14 hours ago||I thought I was only one...||
...with my 3 little girls & a dog-crazy wife at home for whom puppy bowl is the Big Game!
|15 weeks 1 day ago||What is that?||
A reasonable voice? Who & where do you think you are?!
|15 weeks 2 days ago||Thanks,||
but still think it's a dumb move. Always hear that too early one. But think about it: adding 3's & 7's to each side, it's not many combos where 1 v 2 pt lead now makes a difference, but 3 pts would. Maybe that momentum-killer thing, but there too I'd rather go for it. Thanks tho--probably is what they're thinking
|15 weeks 2 days ago||Anyone understand why...||
...OSU would kick the PAT to go up 2, 22-20. I don't see many outcomes where 22-20 is better than 21-20, but 23-20 could be a difference maker. It makes no sense to me. Anyone see the logic?
|20 weeks 5 days ago||I don't know if there've been NO coaching errors...||
...but what I see does not seem too much on the coaches. The middle of the O line is badly outmanned & inexperienced this year, and the backs & TE's who might pick up a little for them are mostly less experienced & blocking adept at the moment than they are. (Fitz is only one with the experience who should be expected to be doing better.) Given that, there's not much you could call differently, seems to me. "Other teams start totally inexperienced lineman & manage..." Really? All 3 up the middle first-time starters? What other team? And do they also have inexperienced backs & TE's to back them up? Throw quick hitters -- could do more of that, in my view, but that wouldn't fix the core problem & would probably have allowed 3-4 more pick-6 by now. So: It gets a little better next year, but I wouldn't be expecting full turnaround. Brace yourselves. If this is a reasonable descript of bulk of their problems, it's not until 2015 that we're competing at top of this (weak!) conference. We're competing but not at top next year, is my bet. And that all seems realistic to me anyway.
|23 weeks 2 days ago||I only played FBI at very low levels...||
...but in our case, sometimes play action was only b/c that was the play that had the routes or the blocking schemes the coach wanted that play. That is, the plays in the book & as practiced with some certain route or other desired aspect had PA in them too. So you do the PA -- otherwise you have to try to run the play differently than you've studied & practiced it.
|23 weeks 6 days ago||Voices of reason? Seeing & speaking truth?||
Do we allow that sort of thing around here?!
|23 weeks 6 days ago||I agree with the guy from OSU||
Much as it pains me to say such a thing.
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Less flippantly||
Actually, from what I saw, Narduzzi did have to adapt. Thing is, he had much better cards -- if your middle O line is a glaring weakness, and their pressure D backed by good LB & DB play is their strength -- isn't much coordinator can do but try what he did on opening. Once they adjusted to take that away too, and our line's adrenaline stopped carrying them beyond themselves (there were actually holes & time first couple of series), we were done. Barring > 1 blown assignment or something by them
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Disagree||
Amazing how I typed it & you heard it even though I'm an armless mute!
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Thank you for this||
I was hoping someone would post (or repost: thanks to the below depth-chart repost also) what the specifics & numbers were on that O-line relative to the incoming classes they represent. Wow! It's worse than I thought/remembered from the last RR classes to first/transition Hoke class. For me: that's most of the story. Your offense is only going to manage the occasional fluke hit a quick pass & break one or somehow get a miracle hole to run through with that. They're not even worse, in fact OK overall numbers b/c of top talent in maybe 4 guys: Gardner, Lewan, Gallon, Funchess.
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Folks calling for new coaches, 1 thing first:||
Have you noticed how the last two searches went? Our first two choices "bowed out", declined interest, said no in each case. Les Miles does not want the job. Harbough did not want the job. Schiano did not want the job. I forget who the guy was / guys were the overtures or "rumor-tures" were buzzing about before him. Miles again, but I think was another before RR. So before we fire another coach -- let's consider _realistically_ who may be his replacement and what his first fully matured full cohorts may do in the year or two to come. Personally, I think RR was done -- his fault or no, the forecast had little upside. I see more positive in the forecast for Hoke (& staff). Reasonable people may differ about that, but let's learn from past that we're probably not going to get that huge name guy you want & think is going to make everything perfect by showing up
|24 weeks 1 day ago||So does mine||
Actually, come to think of it, I'm starting to hate them myself!!
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Range: 0-2 wins||
Fairly symmetric distribution. 1 most likely. 0 a bit more likely than 2 I'm afraid. As follows:
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Bingo||
Too bad there's no prize but the knowledge of being right for, well, being right. Thanks for saying it anyway
|24 weeks 1 day ago||This is not on the coaches||
They're better again this year.
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Stick a fork in us, I guess||
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Needed get lucky from start||
& still could, but facts are facts: they're still better than us this year. Still hangover from 2 hard turnarounds philosophy
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Try not to think about it||
Let's just try to keep this one from getting ugly. If we can somehow get a score here, it's game back on
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Yeah. That's the "almost" part||
for me too!
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Well...||
...the huge loss was on snapper. Rest of sacks, he didn't do the big loop for either -20, or breaks loose for TD or TD throw, or fumble or INT. That's the gamble, & coaches pounded him not to take that gamble against this D
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Exactly||
Borges' plan has been brilliant. How did you actually expect to do if you thought of our middle 3 of O line v their D? I thought we would get absolutely CRUSHED. Borges' plan has made almost perfectly most that could be made given that.
|24 weeks 1 day ago||He's been told to take the loss||
Rather than try to be a hero & get the -20 sack or the INT he's been doing all year. It's obvious he's trying really hard to listen
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Right on.||
Just right on, man.