Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Apr 7, 2017 18:17:51 GMT -5
Analytics are important, but less so in college basketball where the season is so short. Baseball has a long season, so you get a robust set of data points. Also, you face the same opponent a number of times.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 7, 2017 18:47:12 GMT -5
Poor analogy. There is more than one way to do things. If there is a way that gives you a 50% of success and a way that gives you 70% of success, which would you use? Both can get you success but to me, it's clear that one way is better then the other. Clear is subjective.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Apr 7, 2017 20:32:51 GMT -5
I mean, let's run a break for layups and a secondary break for open threes. Let's get to the foul line like we just started to do this year. Lets not give up on offensive rebounds and maybe win turnover margin.
That's plenty to work on. Not sure how deep the analytics needs to go to improve upon what we were doing the last few years. Great if we can get to chapter 2 of the analytics book but we seem to be on chapter 1 page 3.
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Apr 7, 2017 20:43:37 GMT -5
It seems some of the best programs in the NBA and college are using advanced analytics. Pomeroy type per possession and per lineup statistics are quite helpful for evaluating individual players and combinations. The lineups that work the best can be compared to other lineups and matchups can be compared as well as defensive combinations. Perhaps our opponents knowing which lineups played best against our lineups explains why the last two seasons our teams played worse in each of the second games whether at home or on the road. While I believe in gestalt and that sometimes being completely immersed in a subject allows an expert to sense what is going on with great accuracy, I also believe at its best analytics can allow that expert to further identify and delineate nuance in those subjective perceptions.
|
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Apr 7, 2017 21:19:02 GMT -5
As someone who has been a critic of Ewing, I will say that there has been a lot to like in week one in terms of small changes. In the first week, Ewing has already done or told us about the following changes:
(1) Media Access: Ewing has been all over the media landscape, and he has drawn attention from outlets where Georgetown wouldn't often be a topic of discussion, like the Dan Patrick show and all of the ESPN programs that have featured him. It remains to be seen if this will continue, but it's a marked change from JTIII.
(2) Candid Assessments of the Program: Ewing hasn't really sugar-coated where we are with the team for next year. He has admitted that it will be a struggle, that we may not get any additional players for next season, and that other folks could transfer. His opening press conference was also pretty genuine -- he admitted some nerves, admitted a learning curve, and still committed to getting it right. JTIII, for all his strengths, was pretty tight-lipped on things like expectations. It's nice to see Ewing take a step forward in that respect.
(3) The System: Ewing has committed to implementing an NBA system at Georgetown, with more pick-n-roll, guard-centered offense, and tough defense. This system will hopefully make Georgetown basketball more interesting to watch and more appealing to recruits, particularly guards.
(4) Social Media/Engagement: It's hard to know how much of this is Ewing and how much is someone else (Chris Grosse, Mex Carey), his intro conference was streamed on Facebook and got a whole lot of hits. It's hard to imagine JTIII ever doing anything on Facebook live.
All of these are heartening signs. Going forward, I think we will see some more changes. For all my criticism of Ewing, he has been exposed for years in the NBA to the most modern technology, and I have no doubt he understands how all of it works. If analytics enhances his coaching, I think he will use the technology or hire an assistant who can break these things down for players.
The next big thing for me is getting some players on the recruiting front from the DMV out on the court for the Hoyas. When I try to think of ways to get people in the seats, I think that's the easiest way to do it. Getting some of the elite high school talent to stay home would likely get a lot more local fans into the stands for games, and we really need that interest. Right now, folks in DC just don't see going to a Georgetown game as a good weekend option in the way they see a Caps game, or a Nats game, or a whole lot of other events around town. If Ewing stays visible and brings in local talent, he can start to change that.
|
|
|
Post by staggerlee on Apr 8, 2017 0:08:57 GMT -5
If there is a way that gives you a 50% of success and a way that gives you 70% of success, which would you use? Both can get you success but to me, it's clear that one way is better then the other. Clear is subjective. Only when not objectively analyzed!
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,743
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 8, 2017 9:26:55 GMT -5
None of these changes seem necessary, by definition. Idk I definitely think embracing advanced stats and analytics is pretty necessary in today's sports landscape I think Ewing will bring some of this. And obviously, I'm a big analytics fan and think it can help the team get better. But you can still be a good team without it. It's just harder. But then again, I was mostly talking about stuff like the visibility, etc. I know everyone wants the program run exactly like they want it, but honestly, I just want us to win games and do it while playing by the rules.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Apr 8, 2017 12:57:10 GMT -5
Idk I definitely think embracing advanced stats and analytics is pretty necessary in today's sports landscape I think Ewing will bring some of this. And obviously, I'm a big analytics fan and think it can help the team get better. But you can still be a good team without it. It's just harder. But then again, I was mostly talking about stuff like the visibility, etc. I know everyone wants the program run exactly like they want it, but honestly, I just want us to win games and do it while playing by the rules. I agree. I could give a rats ass about all the other nonsense. But I do think in order to truly compete with the best of the best, you've gotta be embracing the way that analytics have become an important part of the sport. It helps in so many way - roster building, player development, recruiting, game planning, lineup/rotations. It just seems naive and frankly arrogant for any coach to think, with all the statistical resources available, that judging things solely by the "eye test" is sufficient. At the end of the day I just want to win too. I think embracing stats can help us do that. And if we re-build a winning tradition, no one will give a crap about all the rest of mumbojumbo being discussed here.
|
|