Illini Basketball 2024-2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
#104      
altgeld88
Dan said:
1736186179093.png
Click to expand...

You know, that's all well and good but I'm keeping my powder dry until it's clear that the guy can coach inbounding. ;)
 
#107      
jamarvelous31
#109      
RollChief
Illinois has a good opportunity to go on a nice run here. 4 of the next 6 upcoming games are home games, and we're favored (per KenPom) in all 6 of them by 66% or more except for Michigan St in East Lansing, where our % chance of winning at 45%.

Per KP, we have a 12.8% chance of winning out the next 6 games. Wouldn't that be a dream.
 
#110      
Orangetool
IlliniFanTX said:
Podz might disagree :ROFLMAO: promise I'm only trying to get a rise, but seriously some guys are so individually talented, it is best for them to just go somewhere they can show that. MOST (99%+?) need development and we seem to be getting the most out of guys that need that.
Click to expand...


Coach has successfully crafted a reputation for Illinois as a development school. Of course we have Fletch.
The best great athletes want to get better and our recruiting benefits from this.

Put guys in the league and the players will come.
 
#118      
Brosky
Pomeroy rankings has us at #11, highest in the BIG. CBS has us at #8, also tops in the conference.
 
#119      
OrangeBlue98
mysterio2525 said:
I think he needs to learn how to share his screen and record audio at the same time. Come on, it's 2025. This was the equivalent of using an etch a sketch
Click to expand...

I kind of like the old-school feel of this! It was like when Tim Russert (RIP) brought out his small whiteboard and started scribbling on election night.

Of course, I still have a paper-based planner - not an old-style Franklin Covey planner, but definitely a paper-based planning notebook - so I may not be the most relevant person to comment on this item.
 
#120      
sacraig
OrangeBlue98 said:
I kind of like the old-school feel of this! It was like when Tim Russert (RIP) brought out his small whiteboard and started scribbling on election night.

Of course, I still have a paper-based planner - not an old-style Franklin Covey planner, but definitely a paper-based planning notebook - so I may not be the most relevant person to comment on this item.
Click to expand...
If I tried to plan my life using a paper planner, I'd spend more time planning than actually doing.
 
#121      
STL Illini
Chad Fleck said:
What do you all think of Sean Harrington's +/- standings concept?

It amuses me. It's so simple, yet I totally buy it.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1876412191966183459
Click to expand...
Back in the mid-late 80s, I remember subscribing to Dave Kaplan’s monthly Illini recruiting newsletter. The newsletter was typed and photocopied and mailed to me via USPS.
All things Illini were learned primarily from WDWS, the NG, and Turpin and Tate’s Saturday morning open line radio show.
(I recall the insane amount of time spent discussing the Deon Thomas/Iowa debacle, and waiting forever for the NCAA ruling.)
When fantasy football first came out in the late 80s we had to wait for the News Gazette to look up stats from other games throughout the country to see who scored and manually tally results. The commissioner filled out form and mailed results to all the members weekly.

My how the world has changed since my time in CU…..

Note of transparency…there may have been technology that I was unaware of back then, but not much. Case in point, i remember when AOL came out and I still have my AOL email address. 🤷‍♂️
 
#122      
the juiceman cometh
Chad Fleck said:
What do you all think of Sean Harrington's +/- standings concept?

It amuses me. It's so simple, yet I totally buy it.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1876412191966183459
Click to expand...
So, I didn't watch the video just saw the piece of paper, and outside the points for Big Ten championship and making tourney, isn't this just a more complicated way of calculating regular old standings? If a road win is +1 and a home loss is -1, then not matter what configuration you get them in, its just going to tell you how many games over or under .500 you are. For example, let's say you win all your home games and lose all your road games, end up 10-10 in conference. You're at 0 points - none gained, none lost. Let's say you win all your road games and lose all your home games. Still 0. +10 for all those road wins, -10 for all those home losses. 15-5 is always +5, no matter what configuration of wins and losses you use. Way to reinvent the wheel my guy.
 
#123      
NarrowJ
the juiceman cometh said:
So, I didn't watch the video just saw the piece of paper, and outside the points for Big Ten championship and making tourney, isn't this just a more complicated way of calculating regular old standings? If a road win is +1 and a home loss is -1, then not matter what configuration you get them in, its just going to tell you how many games over or under .500 you are. For example, let's say you win all your home games and lose all your road games, end up 10-10 in conference. You're at 0 points - none gained, none lost. Let's say you win all your road games and lose all your home games. Still 0. +10 for all those road wins, -10 for all those home losses. 15-5 is always +5, no matter what configuration of wins and losses you use. Way to reinvent the wheel my guy.
Click to expand...

I think he is giving weight to road wins and home losses with the +1 and -1 as he doesn't add or deduct anything for home wins or road losses?
 
#124      
the juiceman cometh
NarrowJ said:
I think he is giving weight to road wins and home losses with the +1 and -1 as he doesn't add or deduct anything for home wins or road losses?
Click to expand...
Still works out to the exact same as regular old standings. Pick any configuration of wins and losses and try it out. The + or - number will always correspond to how many games over or under .500 you are, so long as you've played an equal number of road and home games.
 
#125      
NarrowJ
the juiceman cometh said:
Still works out to the exact same as regular old standings. Pick any configuration of wins and losses and try it out. The + or - number will always correspond to how many games over or under .500 you are, so long as you've played an equal number of road and home games.
Click to expand...

20 games 10 home 10 road

3-7 in road games is +3
6-4 in home games is -4

Total is -1

Record is 9-11 for -2 without the weighting

Am I totally butchering some simple math again? Completely possible.

EDIT: I think I am wrong, but the weighting of road wins and home losses seems like it would make it different? Someone make sense of why the weighting is not doing anything lol
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back