Week of 11/6 Games Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#87      

NarrowJ

NarrowJ
NarrowJ
RayJ with 7 turnovers in the first half.
Click to expand...

Dave Chappelle Snl GIF by Saturday Night Live
 
#90      

jimbo72

J
jimbo72
Enjoyed my evening watching Hoosiers/loosiers not look good. Well coached, love coach Woodson.
Watched Baylor and Auburn. We got lucky in saving several hundred 💯 grand on RayJ.
I'll take Ty, TSjr, DGL, and Moretti all day. They are our guys!
Watching Pearl and 5 High school Americans on Auburn makes me nauseous! Talent all over the floor. Pearl is a freaking cartoon character and a evil non coaching one.
 
#92      

aaeismacgychel

A
aaeismacgychel
SkyysNotFalling said:
RayJ with 7 turnovers in the first half.
Click to expand...
So many months ago, when I looked at RayJ and tried finding closest statistical comparables who made the jump to P5 play, while small sample size, the data was not pretty and suggested a massive falloff in performance. It was criticized for being small sample size, because yeah, it was, there's just not a lot of data out there for players with stats like RayJ who made the leap, but people were just beyond high on the kool-aid at that point. Some very angry responses. This is only 1 game and it went far worse for him than anything would suggest, but just like I said then, people who thought he was going to come in and be a savior at PG, they probably were going to be disappointed as he was projected to be just ok.

Meanwhile, while not a PG, early statistical analysis to comparable were extremely favorable and complimentary to Marcus Domask and while he didn't have a good first game either, he has the look of someone who will be integral to our success this year.

Players play different than their statistical projections all the time, that's not really the point. But statistical analysis to comparables does sometimes suggest holes in their game that aren't necessarily seen based off of box scores. Certainly an interesting thing to keep an eye on with RayJ all season
 
#93      

CV Illini

C
CV Illini
aaeismacgychel said:
So many months ago, when I looked at RayJ and tried finding closest statistical comparables who made the jump to P5 play, while small sample size, the data was not pretty and suggested a massive falloff in performance. It was criticized for being small sample size, because yeah, it was, there's just not a lot of data out there for players with stats like RayJ who made the leap, but people were just beyond high on the kool-aid at that point. Some very angry responses. This is only 1 game and it went far worse for him than anything would suggest, but just like I said then, people who thought he was going to come in and be a savior at PG, they probably were going to be disappointed as he was projected to be just ok.

Meanwhile, while not a PG, early statistical analysis to comparable were extremely favorable and complimentary to Marcus Domask and while he didn't have a good first game either, he has the look of someone who will be integral to our success this year.

Players play different than their statistical projections all the time, that's not really the point. But statistical analysis to comparables does sometimes suggest holes in their game that aren't necessarily seen based off of box scores. Certainly an interesting thing to keep an eye on with RayJ all season
Click to expand...
He did finish with 15 points on 60% shooting. 1-1 from 3 and 2-2 from the line. 7 turnovers is brutal but it's not like his performance was a complete disaster. He would still look good in O and B.
 
#94      

Illini in Italy

Illini in Italy
Illini in Italy
aaeismacgychel said:
So many months ago, when I looked at RayJ and tried finding closest statistical comparables who made the jump to P5 play, while small sample size, the data was not pretty and suggested a massive falloff in performance. It was criticized for being small sample size, because yeah, it was, there's just not a lot of data out there for players with stats like RayJ who made the leap, but people were just beyond high on the kool-aid at that point. Some very angry responses. This is only 1 game and it went far worse for him than anything would suggest, but just like I said then, people who thought he was going to come in and be a savior at PG, they probably were going to be disappointed as he was projected to be just ok.

Meanwhile, while not a PG, early statistical analysis to comparable were extremely favorable and complimentary to Marcus Domask and while he didn't have a good first game either, he has the look of someone who will be integral to our success this year.

Players play different than their statistical projections all the time, that's not really the point. But statistical analysis to comparables does sometimes suggest holes in their game that aren't necessarily seen based off of box scores. Certainly an interesting thing to keep an eye on with RayJ all season
Click to expand...
I doubt anyone (beyond the folks here and other devoted basketball junkies) are going to look aghast at his line (29 min/4 rebounds/2ast/2stl/7to/4pf/15pts). They're going to focus on "he scored 7 of his 15 points in the last three minutes, including a 3 pointer to tie the game at 77-77".
 
#96      

ChiTown

ChiTown
ChiTown
EyeoftheIllini said:
Noticed RayJ scored 9 in second half with no TOs.
Click to expand...
I for one not satisfied with a PG with 1 assist per half for a total of 2 for the game playing 29 minutes,hopefully that was just a first game jitters.
 
Last edited:
#97      

aaeismacgychel

A
aaeismacgychel
CV Illini said:
He did finish with 15 points on 60% shooting. 1-1 from 3 and 2-2 from the line. 7 turnovers is brutal but it's not like his performance was a complete disaster. He would still look good in O and B.
Click to expand...
He wasn't projected to be a disaster, just decent. And yes, we certainly needed a PG, it's just that the advanced stats didn't suggest warranting the hype he was getting. He'll be a fine P5 player, but the transition likely won't be as easy on him as most think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.