ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Kopp

The +/- is an excellent metric, but no metric tells all. Statistics require interpretation:

- Which opponents are on floor when our guy is playing (first string vs. second string matchups; the way our coach / other coaches react to matchups; injuries)
- Free throws aren’t impacted by the clock
- Garbage time

There are likely others that can affect one player differently for a game (maybe day of week; games near finals; players have an off night / sick; school issues; family issues).

I think everyone wants PWB to keep these stats coming. Not all want to accept them as 100% explanatory.
 
The +/- is an excellent metric, but no metric tells all. Statistics require interpretation:

- Which opponents are on floor when our guy is playing (first string vs. second string matchups; the way our coach / other coaches react to matchups; injuries)
- Free throws aren’t impacted by the clock
- Garbage time

There are likely others that can affect one player differently for a game (maybe day of week; games near finals; players have an off night / sick; school issues; family issues).

I think everyone wants PWB to keep these stats coming. Not all want to accept them as 100% explanatory.
Gordie:

I agree 100% that the "+/-" is a reflection of how well the player performed as deployed by the coach. If a great player is constantly used with the teams 3 worst players, he's not going to look so good by this metric. Similarly, a mediocre player who always plays with the starters (lets assume they're the best 4 players) is going to look better than he really is, by this metric.

As others have pointed out, the "+/-" can identify player combinations that are "working" or "not working." That stuff is not immediately obvious because Collins substitutes rather frequently.

I try to mitigate garbage time effects by tossing results that don't truly indicate "normal basketball" like when somebody closes on a 7-0 run when down 20, or when somebody is down 10 and still fouling with 30 seconds left.

Admittedly there are no set rules for those corrections / adjustments.
 
The +/- is an excellent metric, but no metric tells all. Statistics require interpretation:

- Which opponents are on floor when our guy is playing (first string vs. second string matchups; the way our coach / other coaches react to matchups; injuries)
- Free throws aren’t impacted by the clock
- Garbage time

There are likely others that can affect one player differently for a game (maybe day of week; games near finals; players have an off night / sick; school issues; family issues).

I think everyone wants PWB to keep these stats coming. Not all want to accept them as 100% explanatory.
I fully agree with everything you wrote.

It's very tempting to fight the numbers when they do not match our perception. And, to some extent, we should, as often there are mistakes in the numbers, etc.

An example of something that stood out to me during the last game and might, down the road, make me change my mind:
  • We were playing with a lineup of Greer/Roper/Berry/Williams/Young - I thought that was a very funky lineup as other than Young none of those guys are used to carrying any load offensively. They are there to pick scraps and not to create. Seemed like for a few possessions we were just hoping Young would do something. One of those situations that would also skew Young's numbers by forcing him to take less than ideal shots
  • Audige came in for Berry. At least now we had 2 guys there that are used to creating. Audige manages to create a couple of baskets, Williams scores a 3 in transition and this lineup goes 7-0. I am not convinced this lineup is great. I have voiced an opinion of two starters, ideally 3 at all times. But reality is it did well. Perhaps it won't again and we'll see an, IMO, more predictable Audige forcing shots outcome. But maybe it will work again. If it does I will change my mind about that not being a great group of players to have out there at any time
 
You are correct it is natural to argue against the stats to fit a preconceived notion, even bias. The stats are a good way to get closer to establishing unbiased views. And it does take time/games to build a more credible sample, to Gato’s two lineup points above. Ultimately, for this endeavor, “we’ll never get to perfection, but we will achieve excellence along the way” (Lombardi).
 
I fully agree with everything you wrote.

It's very tempting to fight the numbers when they do not match our perception. And, to some extent, we should, as often there are mistakes in the numbers, etc.

An example of something that stood out to me during the last game and might, down the road, make me change my mind:
  • We were playing with a lineup of Greer/Roper/Berry/Williams/Young - I thought that was a very funky lineup as other than Young none of those guys are used to carrying any load offensively. They are there to pick scraps and not to create. Seemed like for a few possessions we were just hoping Young would do something. One of those situations that would also skew Young's numbers by forcing him to take less than ideal shots
  • Audige came in for Berry. At least now we had 2 guys there that are used to creating. Audige manages to create a couple of baskets, Williams scores a 3 in transition and this lineup goes 7-0. I am not convinced this lineup is great. I have voiced an opinion of two starters, ideally 3 at all times. But reality is it did well. Perhaps it won't again and we'll see an, IMO, more predictable Audige forcing shots outcome. But maybe it will work again. If it does I will change my mind about that not being a great group of players to have out there at any time
I recall that sequence pretty clearly. If I'm not mistaken, Young got a nice pass to a cutting Audige for an easy basket, something we don't see too often.

Here's the numbers so far (using the 4 Power 5 games only)...

Young with Williams and Greer and any 2 other guys... 54-35 in 29 minutes
with Roper and Berry 22-20 in 14 minutes
with Audige and Roper 7-0 in 2 minutes
with Roper and Buie 9-5 in 3 minutes
with Buie and Berry 14-3 in 5 minutes
with others 2-7 in 5 minutes
 
  • Like
Reactions: GatoLouco
I recall that sequence pretty clearly. If I'm not mistaken, Young got a nice pass to a cutting Audige for an easy basket, something we don't see too often.

Here's the numbers so far (using the 4 Power 5 games only)...

Young with Williams and Greer and any 2 other guys... 54-35 in 29 minutes
with Roper and Berry 22-20 in 14 minutes
with Audige and Roper 7-0 in 2 minutes
with Roper and Buie 9-5 in 3 minutes
with Buie and Berry 14-3 in 5 minutes
with others 2-7 in 5 minutes
So far that could also be rebuilt as:
Young with Williams and Greer and any 2 other guys... 54-35 in 29 minutes
with 1 or 2 bench players 38-25 in 19 minutes
with 2 starters 14-3 in 5 minutes
with others 2-7 in 5 minutes

Small sample, does not mean much. But one great thing for me is that the numbers give me more faith in our deeper bench players
 
  • Like
Reactions: PurpleWhiteBoy
It’s just basic principles of statistics. Regardless or opponents being factored in or not, a few data points mean nothing. A fair amount can’t be be ignored. To believe it can is to believe a player is just very lucky or very unlucky when he’s on the floor.

Statistics exist because human instincts suck. In other words that’s what the professors at Kellogg preach.
Twain-Lies-Damn-Lies-Statistics.png
 
So far that could also be rebuilt as:
Young with Williams and Greer and any 2 other guys... 54-35 in 29 minutes
with 1 or 2 bench players 38-25 in 19 minutes
with 2 starters 14-3 in 5 minutes
with others 2-7 in 5 minutes

Small sample, does not mean much. But one great thing for me is that the numbers give me more faith in our deeper bench players
There are many ways to look at it... I see those numbers and think "I wouldn't play Roper and Berry with Young, Williams and Greer" because nobody is really looking to score, but if you plug Buie or Audige in there in place of Roper or Berry, it has been quite effective in limited minutes! (your original point)

A reminder that Buie and Greer last season played very little together, but were very effective when they did. This year that combo has exploded into prominence, but the evidence was there last season.
 
Did not feed TJD for so long. Not to take anything away from WI but IU, more than anything else, just choked.
I thought the 7 footer Vogt simply shut down Jackson-Davis.
TJD did jack squat after Crowl went to the bench with 4 fouls.
I hope Coach Collins watched the game.
 
I thought the 7 footer Vogt simply shut down Jackson-Davis.
TJD did jack squat after Crowl went to the bench with 4 fouls.
I hope Coach Collins watched the game.
I felt if they fed him more Vogt would have fouled out in 5 minutes. But who knows. It was ugly all around, Xavier Johnson was constantly out of control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4IUSox2
Only 7 points for our boy Kopp. I'm not bitter about his departure after seeing our team this year.
 
29 minutes, 7 points, 1 rebound, 0 assists for Kopp last night as his team blew a 22 point lead. That’s … not good.
 
All his points were in the first 10 minutes. He was having a decent game. And then, poof.

Not the first game I see him seat on the bench to close the game. Which is a good indication coach trusts others more than him to close out the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: techtim72
My point (again) is that you put too much faith in just the numbers. If I did that in my job (as an actuary), I’d be out on the street.
If only underperforming folks around NU would be held to that standard. How about comparing your likelihood of being on the street if you posted PF or CCC results? I doubt PWB is paid anywhere near them nor you to post here.
 
The fact is that the +/- numbers are by far the best predictor of success or failure in any sport where two teams compete against each other and try to stop each other from scoring.

By Far.

They are quite useful in determining the relative contributions of one player relative to his teammates.

They also provide a great deal of insight into how well a coach manages or mismanages his roster.

Or you could look at points per game and think Chase Audige was one of our best players last year.
You could also just assume every coach gets the most out of their roster.

I prefer to know the truth.
 
The fact is that the +/- numbers are by far the best predictor of success or failure in any sport where two teams compete against each other and try to stop each other from scoring ...

... I prefer to know the truth.
Has there ever been more discussions out here about minutes? How single-minded ... how simple has our look at the Cats become?

I look forward to the day when you understand that your incredibly imperfect +/- numbers aren't the only strong measurement. Yes we get it. We've heard the beaten-to-death sermon that other very established stats and pretty obvious observations are not legitimate.

Want to see the advanced stats that say Greer was mediocre (at best!!) against Maryland, and there were much better options who had a higher usage percentage? Don't worry, I know you don't. It doesn't work with your latest theory, and of course your numbers provide all the answers. I've read it just a few times.

It's cute that you want to completely ignore far more established advanced metrics, so we can continue this game that there's only one answer to every question. Oh!! And just by chance, it allows you only to provide all the answers. Purely objective of course.

When you begin to understand that the beauty of sports is the imperfect human element, we can stop this charade of the "truth," and only you can provide the one, single answer - perfectly objective of course.

God love ya SdakaGordie for continuing the discussion that there is more than one answer to these questions. I don't have the patience for the stupidity that doesn't want to acknowledge the range of advanced metrics or opinions.
 
Send the National Guard to Woodson’s house.
I think they’ve accepted that the glory days are past. The only people who remember 87 are in their mid-50s. The only people who remember that Final Four team remember it was under Mike Davis.
 
The fact is that the +/- numbers are by far the best predictor of success or failure in any sport where two teams compete against each other and try to stop each other from scoring.

By Far.

They are quite useful in determining the relative contributions of one player relative to his teammates.

They also provide a great deal of insight into how well a coach manages or mismanages his roster.

Or you could look at points per game and think Chase Audige was one of our best players last year.
You could also just assume every coach gets the most out of their roster.

I prefer to know the truth.
Put your calculator down.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hungry Jack
Has there ever been more discussions out here about minutes? How single-minded ... how simple has our look at the Cats become?

I look forward to the day when you understand that your incredibly imperfect +/- numbers aren't the only strong measurement. Yes we get it. We've heard the beaten-to-death sermon that other very established stats and pretty obvious observations are not legitimate.

Want to see the advanced stats that say Greer was mediocre (at best!!) against Maryland, and there were much better options who had a higher usage percentage? Don't worry, I know you don't. It doesn't work with your latest theory, and of course your numbers provide all the answers. I've read it just a few times.

It's cute that you want to completely ignore far more established advanced metrics, so we can continue this game that there's only one answer to every question. Oh!! And just by chance, it allows you only to provide all the answers. Purely objective of course.

When you begin to understand that the beauty of sports is the imperfect human element, we can stop this charade of the "truth," and only you can provide the one, single answer - perfectly objective of course.

God love ya SdakaGordie for continuing the discussion that there is more than one answer to these questions. I don't have the patience for the stupidity that doesn't want to acknowledge the range of advanced metrics or opinions.
This attitude is so wrong that I feel sorry for the person who expressed it.
All I am doing is presenting the data.
Then I interpret it. Others are free to interpret it differently, but the argument has to be logical and usually thats the problem.
I have played a lot of team sports. I have watched a lot of NU basketball.
I understand the dynamics pretty well.

Any advanced statistics (as you describe them) that say Greer played poorly against Maryland are badly flawed. He was +15 in a game we won by 6.

But please, feel free to continue in your unwarranted arrogance.
 
Has there ever been more discussions out here about minutes? How single-minded ... how simple has our look at the Cats become?

I look forward to the day when you understand that your incredibly imperfect +/- numbers aren't the only strong measurement. Yes we get it. We've heard the beaten-to-death sermon that other very established stats and pretty obvious observations are not legitimate.

Want to see the advanced stats that say Greer was mediocre (at best!!) against Maryland, and there were much better options who had a higher usage percentage? Don't worry, I know you don't. It doesn't work with your latest theory, and of course your numbers provide all the answers. I've read it just a few times.

It's cute that you want to completely ignore far more established advanced metrics, so we can continue this game that there's only one answer to every question. Oh!! And just by chance, it allows you only to provide all the answers. Purely objective of course.

When you begin to understand that the beauty of sports is the imperfect human element, we can stop this charade of the "truth," and only you can provide the one, single answer - perfectly objective of course.

God love ya SdakaGordie for continuing the discussion that there is more than one answer to these questions. I don't have the patience for the stupidity that doesn't want to acknowledge the range of advanced metrics or opinions!!

Hallelujah!! Thank for such a great post.
 
I don’t understand these arguments other than folks being tired of seeing +/- stats.

Yes it’s imperfect.

But I have not seen one single argument based on stats against any of the conclusions taken from the +/-. I have seen a lot of attempts, based solely on thinly backed theories around fouls, defense, and other arguments that try to fit the narrative that we actually have a good in game coach.

Greer last game? I posted in some thread, against so many comments on how clutch he was for hitting 2 free throws, that I did not think he had an even decent game. But I agreed with his use when the alternatives are freshmen with likely shaky hands. Actually think CC is being smart with that one.

Here’s a challenge for all you PWB haters, make a case, backed by numbers, for the use of Beran and Young?
 
Hallelujah!! Thank for such a great post.
You should really retreat to high school type of comments behind the paywall. You’re good at those. The only reason you come out of the paywall, to post on anything men’s basketball related, is for this type of comment over and over again. Unless you are in high school, it’s pathetic.
 
I don’t understand these arguments other than folks being tired of seeing +/- stats.

Yes it’s imperfect.

But I have not seen one single argument based on stats against any of the conclusions taken from the +/-. I have seen a lot of attempts, based solely on thinly backed theories around fouls, defense, and other arguments that try to fit the narrative that we actually have a good in game coach.

Greer last game? I posted in some thread, against so many comments on how clutch he was for hitting 2 free throws, that I did not think he had an even decent game. But I agreed with his use when the alternatives are freshmen with likely shaky hands. Actually think CC is being smart with that one.

Here’s a challenge for all you PWB haters, make a case, backed by numbers, for the use of Beran and Young?
Numbers don’t accurately show defensive ability of a single player. Beran plays because he has upside offensively and is one of our better defenders. Collins values defense. So he starts Beran.

Young is an excellent smart offense player. He really struggles defensively. He’s extremely efficient in his limited time. It’s a different look for our team then when he’s not on the floor and that’s a big asset imo.

The issue is there aren’t really numbers that accurately show defense that I’m aware of. There’s a lot aspects in not just basketball but life that numbers can’t show a full picture. They make good arguments but they show you a glimpse of what is happening but it’s not everything. +\- doesn’t show accurately how good a defense player is.

I’m not saying I agree with Beran playing more than young or anything. It the most tiring argument since the Collins and Carmody days. This is just why I think Collins plays him more. It’s defense. Beran is good defensively. Young is not. Beran has the ability to be good offensively (doesn’t reach it very often). Young is very good offensively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: No Chores
I don’t understand these arguments other than folks being tired of seeing +/- stats.

Yes it’s imperfect.

But I have not seen one single argument based on stats against any of the conclusions taken from the +/-. I have seen a lot of attempts, based solely on thinly backed theories around fouls, defense, and other arguments that try to fit the narrative that we actually have a good in game coach.

Greer last game? I posted in some thread, against so many comments on how clutch he was for hitting 2 free throws, that I did not think he had an even decent game. But I agreed with his use when the alternatives are freshmen with likely shaky hands. Actually think CC is being smart with that one.

Here’s a challenge for all you PWB haters, make a case, backed by numbers, for the use of Beran and Young?
You played D1 basketball and semi Pro so I can respect you opinion by being in the arena. I never played high level basketball, but in the sports I played we could tell leaders and best players after 3 games and it wasn’t based on one statistic. In baseball, who could get the clutch hit or a pitcher that could get a clutch out. It is easy to get outs when you lead by 5 or RBI’ s when you lead by a dozen. Who was more valuable to the Yankee titles, Jeter or ARod? Check overall stats.

Hockey has +/-. Maybe most similar to basketball. I played with top players and I played on checking lines. I can tell you the top line isn’t the top line without the checking line stopping the other teams top line.

I played D1 just like you. I can tell you that unless the sport is something like swimming or tennis. The team dynamic and understanding roles is always an important component to winning. Always. Can I quote numbers? No. I don’t care to engage with a one trick pony. I will guarantee you that one trick pony will bitch and whine about the line up after a every loss. That’s the issue with PWB. He is relentless with his thoughts that his way is the only way and everyone else is a clown. He presents it as the end all be all, everyone uses biases and he is damn condescending to everyone. Of course, he denies this, but 2 days later he gives his veiled shots at the unbelievers. This is his argument and good for him.

So if you choose to support the +/- minute argument that is up to you. Doesn’t bother me either way. If his argument was fool proof, I would just hire a quant to Coach my team and save $3M a year because NU’s Coach can’t possibly know what he is doing according to this narrative. Damn easy to Coach from your computer. I will continue keep challenging his thoughts as long as I can take reading this board. Clearly, the people the had typically posted just left rather than deal with it.
 
You should really retreat to high school type of comments behind the paywall. You’re good at those. The only reason you come out of the paywall, to post on anything men’s basketball related, is for this type of comment over and over again. Unless you are in high school, it’s pathetic.
A brief and to the point endorsement of a post that garnered 6 likes ... and this is your response? WOW!

GOUNUII
 
PPD and TKFH, it’s not like I disagree with most of what you are saying. Numbers do not overrule every human perception. But to believe the human eye does not need checked is naive. If there’s one sport I understand decently other than basketball is soccer. It comes with growing up in Europe. It’s religion. And that’s a sport, compared to basketball or baseball that does not have a ton of statistics. And yet, the rise of analytics, in depth analysis, whatever you want to call it, revolutionized the game. Often such simple things as being able to measure how much a player runs throughout the game. Use more players that go above 10km and you have a better team. There are so many numbers we don’t see that probably some teams track internally. I often wonder about how much each player goes for an offensive rebound. I played with so many guys that did not, even when they were in situations where they were supposed to according to the coach’s guidelines. That just means 2 to 5 more or less possessions. It’s significant, it’s like committing it forcing 2-5 turnovers.

OK, rambled a bit. I understand the arguments about defense and needing a human eye. But, regardless of +/- actually, to some extent, capturing defense over the course of a significant data set, the human eye sees different things. I personally don’t see Beran as a good defender at all. A better defender than Young guarding a 4? Yes. Better than Nance guarding a 4? No. Young guards a 5 with Nance on the court. I actually think Young guards a 5 better than Nance. Unless it’s a stretch 5, which I am struggling to think of one in the B1G.

The game against Wake Forest exposed so much this idea of Beran being a good defender. And not because of the last play. He floated so much, with no need, to start the game he allowed two 3 pointers in quick succession. Later there’s a play where there’s a double team and Beran gets caught between closing out on a player or sticking to his man. The rule is always to close out and trust your team rotates. Always. You don’t cover the “what if the ball goes to my player”, you cover the immediate open shot. Beran makes a half assed attempt of stretching his arm towards the open player and goes back to The guy he’s guarding. Open shot, 3 pointer. For as critical as I am of CC I don’t believe that’s what he teaches. It’s just bad defensive instinct on the court.
 
A brief and to the point endorsement of a post that garnered 6 likes ... and this is your response? WOW!

GOUNUII
Yep. I can respect Gordie, PPD, TKFH, Sec112, for arguing against, regardless of agreeing or not. I can’t respect just being a mean girl over and over again without arguing anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PurpleWhiteBoy
PPD and TKFH, it’s not like I disagree with most of what you are saying. Numbers do not overrule every human perception. But to believe the human eye does not need checked is naive. If there’s one sport I understand decently other than basketball is soccer. It comes with growing up in Europe. It’s religion. And that’s a sport, compared to basketball or baseball that does not have a ton of statistics. And yet, the rise of analytics, in depth analysis, whatever you want to call it, revolutionized the game. Often such simple things as being able to measure how much a player runs throughout the game. Use more players that go above 10km and you have a better team. There are so many numbers we don’t see that probably some teams track internally. I often wonder about how much each player goes for an offensive rebound. I played with so many guys that did not, even when they were in situations where they were supposed to according to the coach’s guidelines. That just means 2 to 5 more or less possessions. It’s significant, it’s like committing it forcing 2-5 turnovers.

OK, rambled a bit. I understand the arguments about defense and needing a human eye. But, regardless of +/- actually, to some extent, capturing defense over the course of a significant data set, the human eye sees different things. I personally don’t see Beran as a good defender at all. A better defender than Young guarding a 4? Yes. Better than Nance guarding a 4? No. Young guards a 5 with Nance on the court. I actually think Young guards a 5 better than Nance. Unless it’s a stretch 5, which I am struggling to think of one in the B1G.

The game against Wake Forest exposed so much this idea of Beran being a good defender. And not because of the last play. He floated so much, with no need, to start the game he allowed two 3 pointers in quick succession. Later there’s a play where there’s a double team and Beran gets caught between closing out on a player or sticking to his man. The rule is always to close out and trust your team rotates. Always. You don’t cover the “what if the ball goes to my player”, you cover the immediate open shot. Beran makes a half assed attempt of stretching his arm towards the open player and goes back to The guy he’s guarding. Open shot, 3 pointer. For as critical as I am of CC I don’t believe that’s what he teaches. It’s just bad defensive instinct on the court.
That explanation about Beran's defense is a good example of how I determine whether somebody knows what they are talking about. I listen to people who know their stuff, like Gato. I'll take Steven Bardo's opinion or Robbie Hummel's opinion about our guys instead of nameless fans spouting their opinions.

The score of the game for various lineups tells you generally who is playing well and who isn't.

The stats tell you that, as deployed by the coach, Young is a better defender than Beran. Basketball is a team game, with outcomes dominated by intangibles. Young is a heady player, fundamentally sound. Beran is not. Beran is more gifted physically, but so what. We play better with Young on the court.

There are no good stats for defensive play, that is true. Other than the score of the game. Thats why I rely so heavily on the "+/-" to evaluate players and lineups. Defense is half of the game.

As for the childish comments, I have kids, I get it.

By the way, the NBA is tracking the "+/-" statistic.

Here are the Top 10 in "+/-" per minute played since 2010...

Kawhi Leonard, Manu Ginobili, Draymond Green, Steph Curry, Kevin Durant, Tim Duncan, Joel Embiid, Chris Paul, Klay Thompson, LeBron James
 
At the risk of not being on the PWB list of who knows his stuff - I still think most all of bringing Young off the bench is due to the desire to have a reliable scorer on the floor for the second team. However, he does get less playing time than deserved at times, in my opinion.

While I have said it’s great that PWB produces these and should continue, I would also recommend we all take a collective break from trying to draw definitive conclusions about the underperformance of our coach using these polarizing +/- figures until we are at least 6 games into the Big10 season. The key thing is that this stat needs time to gestate. Before then, for example, Greer might have just been mostly lucky to be on the floor last game when others had a good run.
 
At the risk of not being on the PWB list of who knows his stuff - I still think most all of bringing Young off the bench is due to the desire to have a reliable scorer on the floor for the second team. However, he does get less playing time than deserved at times, in my opinion.

While I have said it’s great that PWB produces these and should continue, I would also recommend we all take a collective break from trying to draw definitive conclusions about the underperformance of our coach using these polarizing +/- figures until we are at least 6 games into the Big10 season. The key thing is that this stat needs time to gestate. Before then, for example, Greer might have just been mostly lucky to be on the floor last game when others had a good run.

Opinions also evolve and there is no shame on changing them. I did not see Greer as anything but a conduit to resting Buie. Now, regardless of subpar numbers in games like against Maryland, mixed with better stat sheets, I see him as an important piece in our lineups. Until Berry shows he can be counted on to close out games, improves his free throws, Greer is very needed as a reliable, won’t screw up presence.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT