Search results

Operation Tank originally called for a little less transparency, but the team seems to have embraced the "blatantly obvious" approach.

What? I was simply stating that I sometimes act as a fine companion to you in some of your research. Can you not handle a complement?

I complement you on your fine research.

He said "higher than 3", though. In other words, we're talking about a top 2 pick to guarantee a Wiggins or a Parker. Even if we execute the Tank to perfection, there's still a greater than a coin-flip chance (~53%) that we don't get top 2.

Solid summary

Agreed. We already tried the Utah-BYU thing this year. green is filling the SaltyDawg vacuum quite nicely

Did you pull this research from the movie?

Why would the SEC getting props for playing each other early, and why is that something that needs to be encouraged? It's beneficial to rankings (at least historically) to lose earlier rather than later.

You know that Wiggins can't wait to be a part of this

Well, at least there's that. So, looking at Trout's profile, seems like he's been absent for some time. Used to be very noticeable when he took even a day off. Now there is never a shortage of "Trout-age" on the boards.

Maybe use PPS (points per shot)? The problem is that you are adjusting the numerator, which gives 3-pointers a higher point value, but then you counter by adjusting the denominator which waters them back down and treats them the same as 2-pointers. Points/shot would get you near where you want...

I haven't found an original version in my search, but there is this version which appears to have been translated into Chinese, then translated back to English by Google. In its transformed glory, MLA/6 (or "violently Lei Apu") by tatermoog ("Reversal of Helen")...

Stop bumping 3-year-old threads.

Maybe this isn't a mathematical disagreement after all, and is merely a disagreement over how useful or interesting this metric is. It's a formula which clearly penalizes high-risk/high-reward (3-point) shooters, simply because they are leaving more potential points on the table, while...

Assuming zeroes on all other categories, which player would you value more? A player which goes 10/20 from the free throw line, 10/20 from 2, or 10/20 from 3? It seems the answer there is obvious, yet your formula scores them all at .500. Perhaps modeling similarly to eFG% would yield a more...

Potential nickname: "Grob-stopper"

Watching these games is starting to feel more like work than entertainment.

Jazz fast break: dribble downcourt until your options on the wings have run all the way past the baseline, then pass it to them.

Harpring: "This is something that won't show up in the stat sheet: he got fouled, and now he's going to get two shots"