Southeastern Louisiana

[jacobkdoyle]

Who is we? The only thing I have said about it is that Jenifer has made a higher % of his shots this year. I am not using that stat to prop up anything. I don't suggest he has better form or will end up the year with a better %...JUST that so far this year he has made a higher % of shots and that Troy will need to get his % up (which I fully expect he will).

I have also suggested that Jenifer should get better at assist to TO (after usually drowning him in other compliments) so I don't know what the big objection to that is but some people took issue with it. All I heard was excuses about dropped passes and "he'll be fine". He might be fine...I just want his assist to turnover ratio to get better. ???

What in the world is going on here? You just threw a fit and said I was suggesting that you think Jenifer is a better shooter than Caupain...I took that to mean you think Caupain is a better shooter?

Point blank, do you think Caupain is a better shooter than Jenifer? Not up to this point, just in general. If so, you are also dismissing stats that disagree with certain held beliefs...and that's fine. It's a small sample size, let's give some of these things time to pan out.

I'm done with this convo. I don't even know what you're trying to argue at this point. Seems to me like we agree on pretty much everything.

 

[TheShoeFits]

Perhaps a "Caupain vs. Jennifer" or "Caupain/Jennifer Compare & Contrast" thread is in order.

 

[UCBearcats]

Stats are for nerds and sportswriters who never actually played a real sport but want to feel like they're a subject matter expect when talking about sports. Guys like C. Trent Rosecrans (I think the "C" stands for cunt) who wouldn't know their ass from a hole in the ground on an athletic field but still think it's important that they be heard.

Stats are great, stats have a place, but they are not an end all be all and stats never tell a whole story. I'll take what my eyes and previous experiences can tell me all day long over someone else's stats. Now when you blend the two together you can really be on to something.

 

[waterhead]

What in the world is going on here? You just threw a fit and said I was suggesting that you think Jenifer is a better shooter than Caupain...I took that to mean you think Caupain is a better shooter?

Point blank, do you think Caupain is a better shooter than Jenifer? Not up to this point, just in general. If so, you are also dismissing stats that disagree with certain held beliefs...and that's fine. It's a small sample size, let's give some of these things time to pan out.

I'm done with this convo. I don't even know what you're trying to argue at this point. Seems to me like we agree on pretty much everything.

What's going on is that people keep dragging in other subjective concepts that I am not arguing about.

Jenifer has made a higher % of shots. Great. That's it. Caupain has struggled a little...he needs to get it going. Great. That's it. I am not suggesting who is the better shooter or scorer or anything because it's not the point.

In terms of A:TO ratio. I said I would like to see Jenifer's numbers get better and that Caupain's have been amazing. That's it. Nothing more. I don't need to discuss the "eye test" about who looks better doing it.

 

[waterhead]

Stats are for nerds and sportswriters who never actually played a real sport but want to feel like they're a subject matter expect when talking about sports. Guys like C. Trent Rosecrans (I think the "C" stands for cunt) who wouldn't know their ass from a hole in the ground on an athletic field but still think it's important that they be heard.

Stats are great, stats have a place, but they are not an end all be all and stats never tell a whole story. I'll take what my eyes and previous experiences can tell me all day long over someone else's stats. Now when you blend the two together you can really be on to something.

"eye test" and "common sense" are often used by people who have little evidence to support their opinion.

 

[waterhead]

"eye test" and "common sense" are often used by people who have little evidence to support their opinion.

I think I remember people using that "eye test" a lot last year. But somehow the team managed to win enough games, make it to the tourney, and win one game and give a great KY team a run for their money. I would not have placed my money on any of it at various points in the season.

Results are going to be the deciding factor. The eye test didn't work

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I think I remember people using that "eye test" a lot last year. But somehow the team managed to win enough games, make it to the tourney, and win one game and give a great KY team a run for their money. I would not have placed my money on any of it at various points in the season.

Results are going to be the deciding factor. The eye test didn't work

^What?

I doubt anyone is all eye test and no stats, or vice versa. But even the biggest statheads have to admit that 5 cupcake games won't give us the best evidence, in terms of data. What's true today statistically may be something completely different 5 games from now. For example, Caupain was just 9th on the team in scoring before yesterday. Anyone who watches the games knows that doesn't mean a thing. And it will not hold true, despite what the stats say. Gotta find a mix of the 2. I love stats too, but basketball isn't that complicated. The "eye test" can definitely tell you things that a small sample size cannot. A little play here or there, or a shot rimming out, or being banked in can throw things out of whack until a much greater volume is established.

 

[L-T]

"eye test" and "common sense" are often used by people who have little evidence to support their opinion.

You left out his key word....experiences. Experience trumps all. UCBearcats said it best. The smart person uses it all to formulate his opinion. For someone to suggest that the "Stats" are the facts, that is just crazy.

It's exactly like Mick's rambling press conference the other day where he was arguing that polls are worthless (his subjective viewpoint). He cited Missouri being ranked in the Top 25 all last season, but got an 11 seed and we got a 6 seed. He said over and over that they are meaningless and worthless. Since his fellow coaches are the ones determining those polls, and our brilliant media types are voting on their own polls as well (and of course we know how those people are the absolute experts because of the hours and hours they spend watching basketball....lol), and the fact is that they are basing their votes on a lot of these same stupid stats, well I guess Mick, by stating that the polls are worthless, he's concurring that the stats are worthless as well. What he is saying is that more goes into this than a bunch of goofy stats.

The stats are a starting point and a helpful guide, but my eyes and my common sense and my experience say that the stats lie. My common sense also tells me that when Troy is dribbling past Evans and shovels a 5 foot pass over to him, and he makes a 25 foot shot to give Troy an assist, that's a fluke assist. And when Jenifer throws a ball inside to Deberry and he runs over a defender, or misses a layup, or he gets fouled, or a good pass to Ellis bounces off his hands out of bounds, those are great plays by Jenifer where he gets zero credit statistically, or he get credited with a turnover. I also know that Troy does make some nice passes, and Jenifer does make some poor passes.

Again UCBearcats was spot on. Yes, you can prove a point with stats, and you can prove nothing by arguing common sense, eye test, and experience, but I'll bet the best coaches use more of the final three items than they do the stats when making their decisions.....which is probably why Mick didn't bring Jenifer in last night to shoot us out of our problems.

 

[waterhead]

^What?

I doubt anyone is all eye test and no stats, or vice versa. But even the biggest statheads have to admit that 5 cupcake games won't give us the best evidence, in terms of data. What's true today statistically may be something completely different 5 games from now. For example, Caupain was just 9th on the team in scoring before yesterday. Anyone who watches the games knows that doesn't mean a thing. And it will not hold true, despite what the stats say. Gotta find a mix of the 2. I love stats too, but basketball isn't that complicated. The "eye test" can definitely tell you things that a small sample size cannot. A little play here or there, or a shot rimming out, or being banked in can throw things out of whack until a much greater volume is established.

I'm not suggesting that stats tell the whole story or are the only barometer. I was simply suggesting someone (in this case jenifer) get their stats up in a certain category. Then people started making excuses so I thought I would respond.

If you have a big man who is averaging 2 rebounds after 5 games...you ask that they get those numbers up. It doesn't mean you think they are a horrible rebounder or that you believe their numbers will stay at 2 for the season.

It's this problem people have about reading too much into things. If you wish Jenifer gets more minutes people start talking about "so you want to take Caupain's job from him or Cobb...why?" WTF?? I thought it would be nice if Jenifer improved his A:TO....then people think you want to take the keys from him and bring the offense to a hault. WTF??

If people would stop overreacting about simple suggestions or opinions the people who bring them up would not feel the need to defend them with stats.

 

[BCM]

We have potentially the best UC team in decades and everyone still can't get themselves off unless they're beating each other up. I guess it's true, you can't live in Cincy unless you're always pissed.

 

[L-T]

I'm not suggesting that stats tell the whole story or are the only barometer. I was simply suggesting someone (in this case jenifer) get their stats up in a certain category. Then people started making excuses so I thought I would respond.

If you have a big man who is averaging 2 rebounds after 5 games...you ask that they get those numbers up. It doesn't mean you think they are a horrible rebounder or that you believe their numbers will stay at 2 for the season.

It's this problem people have about reading too much into things. If you wish Jenifer gets more minutes people start talking about "so you want to take Caupain's job from him or Cobb...why?" WTF?? I thought it would be nice if Jenifer improved his A:TO....then people think you want to take the keys from him and bring the offense to a hault. WTF??

If people would stop overreacting about simple suggestions or opinions the people who bring them up would not feel the need to defend them with stats.

WH, below was your post on 2/19 of this year. You saw the light back then, but you're letting the "stats" cloud your vision now.

"We've been trying to rebuild this thing using "combo guards". They have been decent at ball handling but not great. We sure could use a true point (Jennifer) so we can move a guy like Caupain over. Putting Cobb out there with Caupain would be half the battle since they can play a little of both. KJ has been very one dimensional and he's not been great at that one dimension."

 

[waterhead]

You left out his key word....experiences. Experience trumps all. UCBearcats said it best. The smart person uses it all to formulate his opinion. For someone to suggest that the "Stats" are the facts, that is just crazy.

It's exactly like Mick's rambling press conference the other day where he was arguing that polls are worthless (his subjective viewpoint). He cited Missouri being ranked in the Top 25 all last season, but got an 11 seed and we got a 6 seed. He said over and over that they are meaningless and worthless. Since his fellow coaches are the ones determining those polls, and our brilliant media types are voting on their own polls as well (and of course we know how those people are the absolute experts because of the hours and hours they spend watching basketball....lol), and the fact is that they are basing their votes on a lot of these same stupid stats, well I guess Mick, by stating that the polls are worthless, he's concurring that the stats are worthless as well. What he is saying is that more goes into this than a bunch of goofy stats.

The stats are a starting point and a helpful guide, but my eyes and my common sense and my experience say that the stats lie. My common sense also tells me that when Troy is dribbling past Evans and shovels a 5 foot pass over to him, and he makes a 25 foot shot to give Troy an assist, that's a fluke assist. And when Jenifer throws a ball inside to Deberry and he runs over a defender, or misses a layup, or he gets fouled, or a good pass to Ellis bounces off his hands out of bounds, those are great plays by Jenifer where he gets zero credit statistically, or he get credited with a turnover. I also know that Troy does make some nice passes, and Jenifer does make some poor passes.

Again UCBearcats was spot on. Yes, you can prove a point with stats, and you can prove nothing by arguing common sense, eye test, and experience, but I'll bet the best coaches use more of the final three items than they do the stats when making their decisions.....which is probably why Mick didn't bring Jenifer in last night to shoot us out of our problems.

In this particular "eye test" we disagree. We both believe Jenifer is awesome. However, I think he's still a little wreckless and it's showing in his assists and turnovers. You don't...that's ok

 

[jds513]

Perhaps a "Caupain vs. Jennifer" or "Caupain/Jennifer Compare & Contrast" thread is in order.

My god, yes. Every thread is derailed by it someway somehow.

 

[waterhead]

WH, below was your post on 2/19 of this year. You saw the light back then, but you're letting the "stats" cloud your vision now.

"We've been trying to rebuild this thing using "combo guards". They have been decent at ball handling but not great. We sure could use a true point (Jennifer) so we can move a guy like Caupain over. Putting Cobb out there with Caupain would be half the battle since they can play a little of both. KJ has been very one dimensional and he's not been great at that one dimension."

Nice try. I do want a true PG but we can't give Jenifer the keys until he proves he's the better option. Come on man...you can do better than that.

Nor does it have anything to do with whether or not he needs to be a little more cautious RIGHT NOW

 

[L-T]

Nice try. I do want a true PG but we can't give Jenifer the keys until he proves he's the better option. Come on man...you can do better than that.

Nor does it have anything to do with whether or not he needs to be a little more cautious RIGHT NOW

How can I do better than citing your own actual quote. That's as good as I can do right there. Lol, that's an example of experience!

 

[#BearcatNation]

In this particular "eye test" we disagree. We both believe Jenifer is awesome. However, I think he's still a little wreckless and it's showing in his assists and turnovers. You don't...that's ok

I agree with this. Jenifer will start in a year or two. He's flashy and very skilled. But, there are times where he needs to slow it down. Defenders in high school are slow to get to the ball. Not the case in college. He'll catch on. I like him a lot. But he's not ready for over 20 minutes/game. Have to ease him in.

 

[L-T]

Nice try. I do want a true PG but we can't give Jenifer the keys until he proves he's the better option. Come on man...you can do better than that.

Nor does it have anything to do with whether or not he needs to be a little more cautious RIGHT NOW

He'll never get the keys by playing 7 minutes against a crap team when almost everyone else was sucking!

 

[L-T]

I agree with this. Jenifer will start in a year or two. He's flashy and very skilled. But, there are times where he needs to slow it down. Defenders in high school are slow to get to the ball. Not the case in college. He'll catch on. I like him a lot. But he's not ready for over 20 minutes/game. Have to ease him in.

Finally, a reasonable post that I agree with. I haven't argued for him starting, or getting 20 minutes, but I certainly believe he should get minutes somewhere in the teens, and if he continues improving, more down the road.

 

[Bearcatboy]

Finally, a reasonable post that I agree with. I haven't argued for him starting, or getting 20 minutes, but I certainly believe he should get minutes somewhere in the teens, and if he continues improving, more down the road.

I told all of the jenifer lovers in close games/ meat of schedule he would play less than 10 min.. No one listens.....

 

[TheLongHaul]

I know it is a hard concept to grasp for many on here...including you apparently. In the future, I'll try to dumb-down how I make these points so more can benefit from the enlightenment.

Better yet, just don't make them.