Pre-game thoughts: Wisconsin 12/28/10

[GVBadger]

It's almost two years later and you still have sand in your snapper over that one, eh VG? Days of trash talk leading up to that game only to get it slammed in your fat a$$. Hilarious.

Did convincing yourself that Wisky's choke job was Gopher luck make it feel any better? I did notice significantly less trash talk out of you prior to the next two "bad-luck" losses to the Gophers.

If only we could get that racist Myles to post prior to the game tonight...that would be sweet.

Last year the Gophers kicked the Badgers ass at the barn. Not real hard to see or acknowledge that. Congrats.

I gave the Gophers credit for pulling out the win at the Kohl Center two years ago, but anyone who has ever watched basketball knows that coming back from down 12 with 3 minutes left in a game is extremely rare and a team needs some luck to pull it off. The Gophers did it. Congrats again. Not to acknowledge the role luck plays in a comeback like that makes you look like a moron. Then again, making you look like a moron isn't that difficult, so I don't take any joy in it.

I'm not fat either, stop hurting my feelings.

I will make you a deal. Three minutes left tonight, Badgers up 12, lets start the game there. How do you like your chances?

 

[ParaBadger]

Or because the other team is just better. Hard to believe, right?

No, not at all. But that isn't very interesting. Why are they better? How did they win? You win games through shooting, foul shooting, turnovers, and rebounding--on offense and defense. Every game can be described using those 4 things and it will tell you how/why the game unfolded as it did. You can further try to guess why a team excelled at one of those areas, but far too often I see fans give reasons for winning or complain about why they lost when the numbers don't point to the conclusions that they drew from only watching the game.

 

[underground629]

Fair enough. There are tons of reasons why teams win or lose, but your other comment was kind of Tiger Woods/Serena Williams-ish. I felt it implied that the Badgers just beat themselves. Obviously they do sometimes, but they just aren't as good as a number of teams that they lose to.

No, not at all. But that isn't very interesting. Why are they better? How did they win? You win games through shooting, foul shooting, turnovers, and rebounding--on offense and defense. Every game can be described using those 4 things and it will tell you how/why the game unfolded as it did. You can further try to guess why a team excelled at one of those areas, but far too often I see fans give reasons for winning or complain about why they lost when the numbers don't point to the conclusions that they drew from only watching the game.

 

[GoGoGophers]

Not to acknowledge the role luck plays in a comeback like that makes you look like a moron.

And blindly claiming it was all luck makes you an idiot, and clearly demonstrates that all you've ever done is watched basketball. It was more panic/choke on the Badgers part than the Gophers getting lucky.

Then again, making you look like a moron isn't that difficult, so I don't take any joy in it.

Hey-ooooooooh. How do you find time to come up with such awesome rips between clarinet recitals?

 

[justthefacts]

For the record, Pomeroy had the game 69-59 in 61 possessions. Actual result was 68-60 in ~60 possessions.

 

[GVBadger]

For the record, Pomeroy had the game 69-59 in 61 possessions. Actual result was 68-60 in ~60 possessions.

See, that guy is an idiot. Efficiency does not matter. Just ask GoGo. He will tell you.

 

[GoGoGophers]

For the record, Pomeroy had the game 69-59 in 61 possessions. Actual result was 68-60 in ~60 possessions.

And here was mine:

For what it's worth, the match-up issues that UM presented UW the last two years are no longer strengths for the Gophers. DJ and Carter were huge in forcing UW into uncomfortable positions offensively. Rodney and Hollins are not there yet. I think UW wins this one by 10ish.

The only difference is that I based mine on actually understanding the matchup and watching the two teams play over the course of the season, and his is the output of an algorithm.

He also claimed the Gophers had only a 15% chance of winning. Laughable. Was he right on that? It was a 1 point game with under 1 to go...sounds about right.

What was his predicition on the UW-ND game? UW-UNLV? UM-UNC? UM-WVU? Feel free prepare a historical analysis of his prediction results. I'll wait here for the results.

 

[justthefacts]

And here was mine:

For what it's worth, the match-up issues that UM presented UW the last two years are no longer strengths for the Gophers. DJ and Carter were huge in forcing UW into uncomfortable positions offensively. Rodney and Hollins are not there yet. I think UW wins this one by 10ish.

The only difference is that I based mine on actually understanding the matchup and watching the two teams play over the course of the season, and his is the output of an algorithm.

He also claimed the Gophers had only a 15% chance of winning. Laughable. Was he right on that? It was a 1 point game with under 1 to go...sounds about right.

What was his predicition on the UW-ND game? UW-UNLV? UM-UNC? UM-WVU? Feel free prepare a historical analysis of his prediction results. I'll wait here for the results.

You're right, KenPom had UNLV beating UW 66-64 and instead they won 68-65. Why does he bother to get out of bed in the morning.

Is your point that someone is unable to predict 100% of all sporting events perfectly? That is a bold and outrageous statement and I call for you to be immediately banned from this site.

He would also tell you that since his predictions and ratings are based on data, they get better as the year progresses.

I'd also be curious to hear what matchup analysis you had for the Wyoming / Kennesaw St game, because KenPom had a prediction for that and it was pretty close.

 

[GoGoGophers]

You're right, KenPom had UNLV beating UW 66-64 and instead they won 68-65. Why does he bother to get out of bed in the morning.

Is your point that someone is unable to predict 100% of all sporting events perfectly? That is a bold and outrageous statement and I call for you to be immediately banned from this site.

He would also tell you that since his predictions and ratings are based on data, they get better as the year progresses.

I'd also be curious to hear what matchup analysis you had for the Wyoming / Kennesaw St game, because KenPom had a prediction for that and it was pretty close.

I obviously did not look up the predictions in question, just threw some out there. The point that I was trying to make was that his prediction for last night wasn't just the score, but that UM only had a 15% chance at winning. That was obviously off base. He currently has UM winning only 5 B10 games. I find that quite ludicrous as well.

I would never attempt to analyze a matchup like WY/Kennesaw St. because I don't know anything about the teams. But I certainly wouldn't take KenPom's predictions, run all over the internet and spout them off as gospel. UW fans are the worst at this, IMO. My expectation isn't that he be 100% correct, just that people understand that his efficiency stats should be used as historical data and not as determinants of future events.