Jim Sparancle with another moronic comment

[STEVEHOLT]

yet it was only the second most moronic that I myself recall in a cuse game

Tonight he claimed that the odds were chukwu was likely to miss the second FT after he hit the first because he’s a 60 percent FT shooter .. umm this isn’t how percents work dude .. he has a 60 % chance at each attempt .. once he made the first .. he was still more likely to make than miss the 2nd .. he would have been correct had he stated he’s unlikely to make BOTH BEFORE the first shot

As for his most moronic moment .. that was when he was whining for a charge on Johnny Flynn when he humiliated Mike Rosario on a dunk

 

[HoustonCuse]

yet it was only the second most moronic that I myself recall in a cuse game

Tonight he claimed that the odds were chukwu was likely to miss the second FT after he hit the first because he’s a 60 percent FT shooter .. umm this isn’t how percents work dude .. he has a 60 % chance at each attempt .. once he made the first .. he was still more likely to make than miss the 2nd .. he would have been correct had he stated he’s unlikely to make BOTH BEFORE the first shot

As for his most moronic moment .. that was when he was whining for a charge on Johnny Flynn when he humiliated Mike Rosario on a dunk

Never mind that making the second on that sequence would have raised his total for the game to 4 for 7, or 57% which is almost exactly his season percentage.

 

[Toronto Cuse]

Was the 2nd guy calling the game Paul Biancardi? That’s who it sounded like but I couldn’t be sure. Had a very high school game feel with so much coaching advice for Boeheim. Puke.

 

[sutomcat]

yet it was only the second most moronic that I myself recall in a cuse game

Tonight he claimed that the odds were chukwu was likely to miss the second FT after he hit the first because he’s a 60 percent FT shooter .. umm this isn’t how percents work dude .. he has a 60 % chance at each attempt .. once he made the first .. he was still more likely to make than miss the 2nd .. he would have been correct had he stated he’s unlikely to make BOTH BEFORE the first shot

As for his most moronic moment .. that was when he was whining for a charge on Johnny Flynn when he humiliated Mike Rosario on a dunk

I dislike announcers who always side with the ref on calls, regardless of what actually happened on the court. I despise announcers who watch a slow motion replay that conclusively proves them to be wrong and continue to stick with their incorrect original assertion. Show some respect for your audience and yourself.

Spanarkel adds nothing to a broadcast. How does he get so many calls wrong? Does he need glasses? Is he really that ignorant?

 

[TinyManInside]

yet it was only the second most moronic that I myself recall in a cuse game

Tonight he claimed that the odds were chukwu was likely to miss the second FT after he hit the first because he’s a 60 percent FT shooter .. umm this isn’t how percents work dude .. he has a 60 % chance at each attempt .. once he made the first .. he was still more likely to make than miss the 2nd .. he would have been correct had he stated he’s unlikely to make BOTH BEFORE the first shot

As for his most moronic moment .. that was when he was whining for a charge on Johnny Flynn when he humiliated Mike Rosario on a dunk

Technically if you look at his overall season percentage and where he was at the time (1-4), he was actually due to MAKE both of the free throws to approach his season average of 63%.

 

[Halfmooncuse]

Technically if you look at his overall season percentage and where he was at the time (1-4), he was actually due to MAKE both of the free throws to approach his season average of 63%.

That’s like saying if you flip a coin 99 times and it all comes up as tails. Saying the next toss is certainly going to be a head is inane. Prior attempts have no effect on the next attempt. With flipping a coin it’s still 50/50

 

[BuffOrange]

I dislike announcers who always side with the ref on calls, regardless of what actually happened on the court. I despise announcers who watch a slow motion replay that conclusively proves them to be wrong and continue to stick with their incorrect original assertion. Show some respect for your audience and yourself.

Spanarkel adds nothing to a broadcast. How does he get so many calls wrong? Does he need glasses? Is he really that ignorant?

I guess I never noticed him being that bad before, but ya I was legit astonished he wouldn't back off the one horrid charge where the dude slid under Battle's legs & then flopped around the FT line. Vintage awful CBB reffing/announcing there.

I know there was some debate in the game thread on the 2nd one in the fastbreak. To me that goes in the 10% bucket that should actually be a charge; if the primary defender is waiting there for a couple sec's he shouldn't need to set his feet as long as he's not moving forward or undercutting.

 

[Frozen]

Sorry if this was already posted, but it's Eagle/Spanarkel/LaForce again in Detroit.

 

[Mano22]

yet it was only the second most moronic that I myself recall in a cuse game

Tonight he claimed that the odds were chukwu was likely to miss the second FT after he hit the first because he’s a 60 percent FT shooter .. umm this isn’t how percents work dude .. he has a 60 % chance at each attempt .. once he made the first .. he was still more likely to make than miss the 2nd .. he would have been correct had he stated he’s unlikely to make BOTH BEFORE the first shot

As for his most moronic moment .. that was when he was whining for a charge on Johnny Flynn when he humiliated Mike Rosario on a dunk

I don't get it. If you flip a coin and get 4 heads in a row, you have to be AT LEAST 75% to get tails on the next one? Prolly closer to 85% I would think.

Also I do not remember hearing a more biased announcer in a long time. Does he hate SU? Or just love ASU/Pac 12 or something? I never jump on the "oh the announcers/refs all hate us blah blah blah" bandwagons, as 90+% of the time it is just Cuse fans with huge blinders on, but it felt like he was truly rooting for ASU last night.

 

[OttoMets]

I dislike announcers who always side with the ref on calls, regardless of what actually happened on the court. I despise announcers who watch a slow motion replay that conclusively proves them to be wrong and continue to stick with their incorrect original assertion. Show some respect for your audience and yourself.

Spanarkel adds nothing to a broadcast. How does he get so many calls wrong? Does he need glasses? Is he really that ignorant?

We call this 'The Len Elmore' assertion.

And you're probably referring to that late foul call on Chukwu on a rebound attempt where the ASU player pinned his arm when Chukwu had position, then Spanarkel insisted while the replay rolled that Chukwu was in fact the one grabbing the other player's arm? That was ridiculous.

I will say, though, that it was fun hearing him call the game if only for the fact that I associate him with the voice of mid-week Big East broadcasts in the early and mid-'90s. He's far from the best in the business, but those are good hoops memories.

 

[HoustonCuse]

I don't get it. If you flip a coin and get 4 heads in a row, you have to be AT LEAST 75% to get tails on the next one? Prolly closer to 85% I would think.

That’s not really how statistics work, but I also agree that if a comment were to be made predicting that next shot, the correct prediction was make not miss.

Couple reasons:
1. He shoots 63% on the year so better chance of him making any given free throw than missing.
2. Remember this is not a complete random event, it is deterministic because it is based on player ability. So him being 3 for 6 at that point does make it slightly more likely than usual for him to make the next because on a long enough timeline we know he will converge to 63%.
3. Correspondingly, players can have issues causing misses (distraction, stress, etc), and get have hot streaks as well that can temporarily increase or decrease likelihood of making a shot. PC had hit 3 in a row at that point, meaning he was comfortable and locked in.

 

[CusefanATL]

well that wasnt even the dumbest comment of the day from jimmy.

Literally on possession 1 for ASU - they take and miss a deep 3: "You cant beat the zone by taking deep 3's"
Literally on possession 3 for ASU - they shoot and make a deep 3: "if you cant get it into the middle, just shoot over the zone"

Jim Sparnakle after about 5 Syracuse offensive possesions in which they all resulted in either to's or unassisted 3 point shots and I'm pretty sure we hadnt yet passed the ball inside the 3 pt line. Score is 5-3. 2 off of a athletic rebound and put back off of a 3 by Oshae and a 3 by Frank. "syracuse's offense is looking awfully comfortable so far"

Umm... what?!

 

[longislandcuse]

I don't mind Ian Eagle as long as we're blocking shots.

RE-JECTED

 

[OttoMets]

well that wasnt even the dumbest comment of the day from jimmy.

Literally on possession 1 for ASU - they take and miss a deep 3: "You cant beat the zone by taking deep 3's"
Literally on possession 3 for ASU - they shoot and make a deep 3: "if you cant get it into the middle, just shoot over the zone"

...

That looks like Syracuse's rationale for playing zone defense, followed by its rationale for executing a zone offense.

 

[MSOrange]

I don't get it. If you flip a coin and get 4 heads in a row, you have to be AT LEAST 75% to get tails on the next one? Prolly closer to 85% I would think.

Also I do not remember hearing a more biased announcer in a long time. Does he hate SU? Or just love ASU/Pac 12 or something? I never jump on the "oh the announcers/refs all hate us blah blah blah" bandwagons, as 90+% of the time it is just Cuse fans with huge blinders on, but it felt like he was truly rooting for ASU last night.

Guess I didn't notice it with Spanarkle but it did seem to me that Ian Eagle wasn't too disappointed in the closing moments when we sealed the deal.

 

[Mano22]

That’s not really how statistics work, but I also agree that if a comment were to be made predicting that next shot, the correct prediction was make not miss.

Couple reasons:
1. He shoots 63% on the year so better chance of him making any given free throw than missing.
2. Remember this is not a complete random event, it is deterministic because it is based on player ability. So him being 3 for 6 at that point does make it slightly more likely than usual for him to make the next because on a long enough timeline we know he will converge to 63%.
3. Correspondingly, players can have issues causing misses (distraction, stress, etc), and get have hot streaks as well that can temporarily increase or decrease likelihood of making a shot. PC had hit 3 in a row at that point, meaning he was comfortable and locked in.

Sarcasm fail In re-reading my comment I guess I was not that clear, so I will share the blame here.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I noticed that, but what frosted my biscuits was the post came, and the female studio commentator (Kara Lawson?) stated that on that falling down circus shot, it should have been an "And 1" for ASU.
A. Wrong on facts, wrong on the law. The guy fell down, on his own.
B. It should have been a travel. He established his pivot foot, then changed his pivot foot on his move the the basket. The guy covered at least 10' after having established his pivot foot.

 

[Frozen]

I noticed that, but what frosted my biscuits was the post came, and the female studio commentator (Kara Lawson?) stated that on that falling down circus shot, it should have been an "And 1" for ASU.
A. Wrong on facts, wrong on the law. The guy fell down, on his own.
B. It should have been a travel. He established his pivot foot, then changed his pivot foot on his move the the basket. The guy covered at least 10' after having established his pivot foot.

It was Candace Parker. She sucked.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

That’s not really how statistics work, but I also agree that if a comment were to be made predicting that next shot, the correct prediction was make not miss.

Couple reasons:
1. He shoots 63% on the year so better chance of him making any given free throw than missing.
2. Remember this is not a complete random event, it is deterministic because it is based on player ability. So him being 3 for 6 at that point does make it slightly more likely than usual for him to make the next because on a long enough timeline we know he will converge to 63%.
3. Correspondingly, players can have issues causing misses (distraction, stress, etc), and get have hot streaks as well that can temporarily increase or decrease likelihood of making a shot. PC had hit 3 in a row at that point, meaning he was comfortable and locked in.

Plus, the dude has a clutch factor. I would love to see his %s in the last few minutes of tight games. My sense of it is that he has been better than his overall percentage.

 

[pearl31]

well that wasnt even the dumbest comment of the day from jimmy.

Literally on possession 1 for ASU - they take and miss a deep 3: "You cant beat the zone by taking deep 3's"
Literally on possession 3 for ASU - they shoot and make a deep 3: "if you cant get it into the middle, just shoot over the zone"

Jim Sparnakle after about 5 Syracuse offensive possesions in which they all resulted in either to's or unassisted 3 point shots and I'm pretty sure we hadnt yet passed the ball inside the 3 pt line. Score is 5-3. 2 off of a athletic rebound and put back off of a 3 by Oshae and a 3 by Frank. "syracuse's offense is looking awfully comfortable so far"

Umm... what?!

yeah his "comfortable offense" comment brought my first hearty guffaw of the night

 

[kuethstheman]

I noticed that, but what frosted my biscuits was the post came, and the female studio commentator (Kara Lawson?) stated that on that falling down circus shot, it should have been an "And 1" for ASU.
A. Wrong on facts, wrong on the law. The guy fell down, on his own.
B. It should have been a travel. He established his pivot foot, then changed his pivot foot on his move the the basket. The guy covered at least 10' after having established his pivot foot.

Thought he got bumped as he started his move. I expected a whistle.

 

[Fly Rodder]

That’s like saying if you flip a coin 99 times and it all comes up as tails. Saying the next toss is certainly going to be a head is inane. Prior attempts have no effect on the next attempt. With flipping a coin it’s still 50/50

I'm slowly plowing through Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow" and there's a lot of regression to mean discussion in there. Regression to the mean is not the gambler's fallacy, though. If Chukwu has a 60% FT%, takes ten 2-shot FT attempts and in the first five sets of attempts, he's 1 for 10 then in the next five sets, he is more likely to be 6 for 10.

I'm not an expert on this stuff, but that was a dumb thing to say since Chukwu has ice water in his veins when it comes to FTs down the stretch.

 

[All4SU]

That’s not really how statistics work, but I also agree that if a comment were to be made predicting that next shot, the correct prediction was make not miss.

Couple reasons:
1. He shoots 63% on the year so better chance of him making any given free throw than missing.
2. Remember this is not a complete random event, it is deterministic because it is based on player ability. So him being 3 for 6 at that point does make it slightly more likely than usual for him to make the next because on a long enough timeline we know he will converge to 63%.
3. Correspondingly, players can have issues causing misses (distraction, stress, etc), and get have hot streaks as well that can temporarily increase or decrease likelihood of making a shot. PC had hit 3 in a row at that point, meaning he was comfortable and locked in.

Someone in the stands was sounding a buzzer whenever an SU player who get ready to release a FT.

 

[Consigliere]

You KNOW he was pulling for his Duke brethren coaching ASU.

 

[Townie72]

I don't get it. If you flip a coin and get 4 heads in a row, you have to be AT LEAST 75% to get tails on the next one? Prolly closer to 85% I would think.

Also I do not remember hearing a more biased announcer in a long time. Does he hate SU? Or just love ASU/Pac 12 or something? I never jump on the "oh the announcers/refs all hate us blah blah blah" bandwagons, as 90+% of the time it is just Cuse fans with huge blinders on, but it felt like he was truly rooting for ASU last night.

That's not the how Statistics work.

Each flip of a coin has a 50-50 chance.

In the very long run it will even out.

I know it's counter intuitive, but that's just how it works.