My 2016 Syracuse Basketball Orange Winning % Equations

[djcon57]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with...

99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team
33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team
0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with...

99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team
33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team
0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

Not bad, with contributions from Lydon, DC and Frankie as the icing in blow outs against ND, Wake and FSU. The Duke win was very much about TRob's epic glass eating game, but as I recall we had 2 good shooters that night, and TRob served to equalize Plumlee in the middle to allow that close win, so that is probably one of the 66% variety.

 

[mark79]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with... 99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team 85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team 75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team 66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team 50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team 33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team 0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

You may need to add into the equation how well the totally awkward foreign dude or little used 10th man does against us

 

[orangehomer]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with...

99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team
33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team
0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

I hate to be a jerk but, did you pull these numbers out of a hat? I mean come on. it might be the worst analysis of basketball I have ever seen.

 

[orangehomer]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with...

99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team
33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team
0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

so to begin with, I am only going to use your first "equation". first of all, "mal, cooney, and G shooting well" can't be one variable in the equation. it is three variables. Second, the "no inside scoring presence" is so vague that I would say it is impossible to assign a variable to it. then you pull a number out of nowhere, 99% we win if those things happen. What? you have to take into account opponent and location, not too mention what if cooney sucks but lydon blows up? your equations don't even have a variable for an opposing team that goes berserk from three. how is a person that is a good citizen and tries their best not to be a jerk supposed to take this post seriously?

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

how is a person that is a good citizen and tries their best not to be a jerk supposed to take this post seriously?

You'll never know.

 

[orangehomer]

You'll never know.

it's a fair response, I guess in some way you are saying that I am inherently a jerk, and therefore I would be unable, based on my own statement, to take the post seriously. having said that, the post 'youll never know' is ambiguous and in some ways combative, given that there are actually 3 points raised in my post that have gone unanswered. where did you come up with these percentages? how did you come up with these percentages? are you crazy? or maybe I'm a jerk.

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

it's a fair response, I guess in some way you are saying that I am inherently a jerk, and therefore I would be unable, based on my own statement, to take the post seriously. having said that, the post 'youll never know' is ambiguous and in some ways combative, given that there are actually 3 points raised in my post that have gone unanswered. where did you come up with these percentages? how did you come up with these percentages? are you crazy? or maybe I'm a jerk.

Relax dude, it's all in good fun. As a hypothesis, you could easily test the OP by assigning criteria to both Shooting well, and Inside scoring presence, and see if the results bear these percentages out. So there is a way to give this "analysis" the kind of scientific rigor you seem to be demanding be applied to all such conjecture. But I simply took the idea as a fan's noodling after a loss to help pass the time before the next game, and decided it's probably not something that needs to be thought about too deeply. To each his own...

 

[djcon57]

so to begin with, I am only going to use your first "equation". first of all, "mal, cooney, and G shooting well" can't be one variable in the equation. it is three variables. Second, the "no inside scoring presence" is so vague that I would say it is impossible to assign a variable to it. then you pull a number out of nowhere, 99% we win if those things happen. What? you have to take into account opponent and location, not too mention what if cooney sucks but lydon blows up? your equations don't even have a variable for an opposing team that goes berserk from three. how is a person that is a good citizen and tries their best not to be a jerk supposed to take this post seriously?

I like turtles.

 

[Digger]

I hate to be a jerk but, did you pull these numbers out of a hat? I mean come on. it might be the worst analysis of basketball I have ever seen.

What a truly bizarre response

 

[Dave85]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with...

99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team
33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team
0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

I love this post. But on any given night anything can happen. BC's Clifford had a very good game but I think Lydon just played really well against him. Louisville just spanked our zone with good passing through the paint. And St Johns had no inside presence no outside presence and we lost.

As long as we make the NCAA tournament, I think this team has the ability to will themselves to win and beat any team in the country on a neutral court with halfway descent referees calling the game the same way on both ends.

 

[MikeSU02]

so to begin with, I am only going to use your first "equation". first of all, "mal, cooney, and G shooting well" can't be one variable in the equation. it is three variables. Second, the "no inside scoring presence" is so vague that I would say it is impossible to assign a variable to it. then you pull a number out of nowhere, 99% we win if those things happen. What? you have to take into account opponent and location, not too mention what if cooney sucks but lydon blows up? your equations don't even have a variable for an opposing team that goes berserk from three. how is a person that is a good citizen and tries their best not to be a jerk supposed to take this post seriously?

 

[sugrad68]

I'm sure we could all find flaws with your hypotheses but I enjoyed it. I, and others, can find many flaws with Lunardi Bracketology. All in fun. Eliminating Coleman, Roberson an Lydon from your equations makes the equations somewhat suspect. Shooting from the main 3 SU players is certainly important but as we saw against Louisville, stopping the other team from scoring and rebounding are rather important too. I do agree with the importance you're putting on the other team's inside scoring. We've made All-Americans out of some players -- Plumlee, Artis, Hayes of Georgetown, etc.

 

[djcon57]

Yeah...just want to confirm as the majority understood.
Wasn't meant to be scientific.

Just what I've been feeling when watching the games..honestly it came mostly from watching the Louisville game and only Cooney was shooting/playing well and remembered, when I was in Atlantis, a drunken conversation about if all 3 were on that we'll beat anyone.

The takeaway I meant from the post was the following: If 2 out of 3 are on, we'll be a tough out in the tourney. If only one is on, then that will be the game we'll prob lose. And the random big guy going off is the other factor that's been showing up throughout the games. Of course, Robey going nuts on the boards or Lydon having 20/10 would throw it for a loop, but those have been rare

 

[orangehomer]

Yeah...just want to confirm as the majority understood.
Wasn't meant to be scientific.

Just what I've been feeling when watching the games..honestly it came mostly from watching the Louisville game and only Cooney was shooting/playing well and remembered, when I was in Atlantis, a drunken conversation about if all 3 were on that we'll beat anyone.

The takeaway I meant from the post was the following: If 2 out of 3 are on, we'll be a tough out in the tourney. If only one is on, then that will be the game we'll prob lose. And the random big guy going off is the other factor that's been showing up throughout the games. Of course, Robey going nuts on the boards or Lydon having 20/10 would throw it for a loop, but those have been rare

my apologies. I won't waste time with excuses, but sometimes I get too serious.

 

[br801]

I've said all along I think the seed or opponent doesn't really matter...but I think I've changed it a little. Here's what I came up with...

99% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
85% Win = Mal, Cooney, G shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
75% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + No inside scoring presence from other team
66% Win = 2 of 3 shooting well + Inside scoring presence from other team
50% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + No inside scoring presence from other team
33% Win = 1 of 3 shooing well + Inside scoring presence from other team
0% Win = 0 of 3 shooting well

I think we know how this turned out today.

 

[Brian Orange]

Need one's for:
Opponent banks in a 3 under 2 minutes to go
Opponent banks in a 3 with less than a second on shot clock
Opponent hits deep, deep 3 before halftime
Random guy doubles his previous career-high
Random guy triples his previous career-high

 

[SWC75]

I've always said, vs. a decent opponents:

1-2 guys play well, we lose.

3-4 guys play well, we win.

5-6 guys play well, we blow 'em out.

We have been in 1-2 mode these last two games.