My only concern about this team is Petro's eligibility. We need a mature point guard, one with exceptional speed and strong handles. Also a threat to launch from distance. With Stoyakovic at the #3 and Tomi healthy again that would be a truly balanced starting 5. Right now I'm penciling in Ben at the #4, with Mirkovic sharing the load.
Pregame: Illinois vs Jackson State, Monday, November 3rd, 7:30pm CT, BTN
- Status
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
Trying to predict who is starting our regular season opening game is an exercise in futility , especially after only one exhibition
game , with 3 prominent players not playing because of injuries or eligibility concerns............
This is a game this board plays every year without all the info known to make an intelligent guess.......
Will Petro be cleared ?
Will AS's injury be healed enough ?
Will Tomi's health and recovery from tonsillectomy be over ?
Just one of those scenarios being answered no and the house of cards falls down........If two of those are no , then the anxiety level rises for some to proclaim their doom and gloom predictions......If all three are a no-go then my advice is to steer clear of this board for a while to not be tainted by the zealous " sky is falling " crowd.........
I never predict whose is starting , but I have been known to give my opinion on who should NOT be starting.........And I try to give my opinion on who should not be starting based on actual stats after at least 5 games played......
But this board is a diverse group of fanatical Illini Nation human being's with an array of human being emotions that can change an opinion based on the most trivial info being passed along the internet.........
That's what I love about this board.....If you think you have heard it all , just wait 5 minutes and you will hear something that makes you smile and shake your head in disbelief......
Keep on keeping on Loyalty.........The best board to belong to and it's not even a close race..................JMHO...............
waking and baking my way through life and loving every moment................I really really do....................
game , with 3 prominent players not playing because of injuries or eligibility concerns............
This is a game this board plays every year without all the info known to make an intelligent guess.......
Will Petro be cleared ?
Will AS's injury be healed enough ?
Will Tomi's health and recovery from tonsillectomy be over ?
Just one of those scenarios being answered no and the house of cards falls down........If two of those are no , then the anxiety level rises for some to proclaim their doom and gloom predictions......If all three are a no-go then my advice is to steer clear of this board for a while to not be tainted by the zealous " sky is falling " crowd.........
I never predict whose is starting , but I have been known to give my opinion on who should NOT be starting.........And I try to give my opinion on who should not be starting based on actual stats after at least 5 games played......
But this board is a diverse group of fanatical Illini Nation human being's with an array of human being emotions that can change an opinion based on the most trivial info being passed along the internet.........
That's what I love about this board.....If you think you have heard it all , just wait 5 minutes and you will hear something that makes you smile and shake your head in disbelief......
Keep on keeping on Loyalty.........The best board to belong to and it's not even a close race..................JMHO...............
waking and baking my way through life and loving every moment................I really really do....................
The eight getting most time. IMO.
Center. T. And Z
3 and 4 - Andre, Ben and David
1 and 2- Kylan, Mihailo, and Keaton
The mix will depend on game to game matchups and who is hot. Starters will not necessarily be the best five but the best combination. For example I could see having either T or David on the court at all times to keep a BIG passer on the floor. Also could see guards determined by size of opponents. Much will depend on how good the newcomers are defensively. It may take some time to determine the combinations.
Center. T. And Z
3 and 4 - Andre, Ben and David
1 and 2- Kylan, Mihailo, and Keaton
The mix will depend on game to game matchups and who is hot. Starters will not necessarily be the best five but the best combination. For example I could see having either T or David on the court at all times to keep a BIG passer on the floor. Also could see guards determined by size of opponents. Much will depend on how good the newcomers are defensively. It may take some time to determine the combinations.
I was impressed with Wagler despite his stat line not jumping off the page against a team like Illinois State. The game never seemed too fast or too physical for him. I would think one thing coaches value is consistency, especially from those who handle the ball a lot, and my first impression is that Wagler will provide that even against B1G-level competition. Illinois practices hard and is a deep team. Apparently, he's done enough in practice to impress the coaching staff -- and a guy like Boswell, who's one of the toughest guard defenders in the league.
And one point forward. Unless you meant Mirk, but I figured you were referring to KB.
Last edited:
I was looking at the stats and that popped out at me. Especially since it seemed like there was a foul called every 10 seconds.
Yeah, isn’t that the sound a baby makes, wah, wah. That’s what I kept thinking whenever I heard the announcers say his name. On the other hand, it’s also a special effects pedal for a guitar, a wah-wah guitar.
Sorry for the three posts in a row, but just got home from gallbladder surgery and the first thing I did was check the IL posts.
Sorry for the three posts in a row, but just got home from gallbladder surgery and the first thing I did was check the IL posts.
My guess is you'd be adding a codependent variable, which sort of defeats the purpose of the exercise. My expectation would be if you made this chart for only the favored team, these win rates would increase, and for the underdog, they'd decrease. But that does not undermine the value of the analysis.The other thing this chart doesn’t take into account is who’s jumping out to the 6-0 lead. The chart tracks more than 13,000 games, but just 1,300 of them had a 6-0 lead. My question would be: how often is the team that’s favored the team that hits the 6-0 lead? My guess is the favorite jumps out to the early lead around 61.7% of the time
For an extreme example of this:
If we spotted ISU a 6-0 lead to start the game and played 100 games, how many of those games would ISU win? Would it be 61? Of course not. They’d likely win 0. Because we’re 30 points better than them.
If we spotted them a 6 point lead with a minute to go? They’d win quite a lot of those.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
The analysis you shared doesn’t hold up.
If a team jumps out to a 6-0 lead, they have a better chance of winning because they have a 6 point advantage, not because they were the first team to hit 6 points.
As your own data shows, a 6-0 lead is actually the least valuable 6-point lead in the game. If you’re up 6-0, you win about 61.7% of the time, but if you’re up 100-94 (near the end), you win about 94% of the time.
So if we started walk-ons and managers against Illinois State and they jumped out to an 11-0 lead, the chart says Illinois State would win 71% of the time. But would they? No because we’re 30 points better and there’s still 35 minutes left to catch up. We’d have taken the lead before halftime.
So if Mirk is worth +5 on the scoreboard (where this whole convo began, whether or not Mirk should start), he’s worth that same +5 whether he starts or comes in later, as long as he plays the same minutes either way.
Last edited:
The entire reason you shared this chart was to support the proposition that minutes from a good player provide more value at the start of the game than at any other point in the game. This chart simply doesn't do that. All this chart says is that two things correlate with winning: 1) at any given point in a game being ahead by a larger margin and 2) being ahead later in the game. You're taking this a step further and drawing conclusions that just aren't supported by these numbers. Interestingly, if you look at the far right you can see the overall percent for chance of victory for first team to get to a specific point number. The biggest single jump is happening between 80-90 points (first to 90 has 4.8% higher chance of winning than first to 80) and between 90-100 points (first to 100 has 4.7% higher chance of winning than first to 90) - well into the later stages of a game.
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
everybody needs to remember Mr. Lee in your minutes forecast..........Feliz 2.0 looked very impressive to me.....I will be looking forward to his progression these next few games to get an idea on if he will be included in the rotation going forward........I really really will..
Clearly this is a limitation of the data coming from the NBA where there's far less talent disparity because there's less teams. Maybe the better application would be between two power conference teams.
Bigtex
- DFW
I liked what I saw from Lee but not sure who you reduce minutes from to get him meaningful minutes. 200 minutes goes quickly when you have all conference type players.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
What that data shows is that there’s value in having the lead, not that there’s value in hitting a certain point total first.
You shared the chart to make the point that Mirk should start because an early lead gives you a better chance to win.
But in my opinion, the chart makes the opposite point. Instead it shows that an early lead is the least valuable lead a team can have.
As demonstrated by:
You have a better chance of winning the game with a 6 point lead up 20-14 than a 6 point lead up 6-0 and a better chance of winning the game if you’re up 50-44 than 20-14 and so on.
So if you’re going to give up a 6 point lead at any point in the game, it’s best to do it early.
And also "take some time" to evaluate players' defense. Sometimes on this forum people jump to conclusions about so and so's defense; we should all give a player time (like 5 or 6 games at least.}
Although, BU said he was going to give Jake more minutes this year. I think he averaged around 10 minutes last year so giving him some more (5 or so) would get him close to meaningful minutes.
My hope is that all 8 average 7PPG or more. This is still unquestionably one of the best offensive teams in the country.
I think not having Rodgers might unite this offense a little bit more. There's just a lot more spacing, shooting, playmaking which leads to so much fluidity.
I see what you're saying, but I think you're putting these lead changes in a vacuum. If the Illini are losing 6-0 to Average Talent Opponent Team, there's a 62% chance they will lose the game. Like you said, those odds are better than if they're losing 20-14 and so on, but a comeback isn't guaranteed.
In other words, if you save a good player on the bench because you look at this and say you'd rather be losing 6-0 than 20-14, you're assuming throwing in that good player will enable you to overcome the deficit, which 62% of the time doesn't happen.
What @lstewart53x3 pointed out that you’re failing to grasp, however, is that this 6 point disadvantage continues to be more and more damning the further along in the game you go. The best time to be down 6 is when it’s 6-0. The worst time to be down 6 is when it’s 90-84.
EDIT: Points become more and more important the farther along in the game you are. This graphic proves the opposite of what you think it does.
Last edited:
I get what you're saying, but again, you can't save a player for the purpose of erasing a deficit. These deficits aren't created in a vacuum. You can't start a game with a plan to choose if/when you'll be down by 6 points (or any margin). Clearly the preference is that if you're going to be losing, be losing early rather than later. But rather than implies a binary choice, that you are guaranteed to be losing at some point and winning at another point. That's not the point of the data, the point is to say that you don't want to be losing, and here's the predictive value at each threshold what losing looks like.
You're not saving a player for purpose of erasing a deficit. You are that one that provided that example, we simply used it to prove you wrong.
Coaches have 6th men for all sorts of reasons:
* Need for competent players on 2nd unit
* Exploit fatigue
* Change the momentum
* Stagger players of similar archetypes
* Players skills may be a better fit with another group
* Can help balance a team's needs (if 2nd unit lacks rebounding, for instance)
* Having closing players be less fatigued
There are far more reasons than that, its just what I came up with off of the top of my head
The one thing that is not arguable at all whatsoever, is that with regard to a contest that has a time limit, each passing minute is more important than the previous minute. The graphic you posted shows this very clearly.
See: TSJ for the timberwolves last night
- Status