Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

gtmoBlue wrote:

Rushthecourt.net 2018-19 Early Big East Rankings
Justin Kundrat...
As always, take these with a grain of salt.

Villanova
Butler
Creighton (assuming Thomas returns)
Providence
Marquette
Xavier
Seton Hall
Georgetown
St. John’s
DePaul
Justin Kundrat (142 Posts)
Villanova grad, patiently waiting another 10 years for season tickets. Follow Justin on twitter @JustinKundrat or email him at justin.kundrat@gmail.com

stever20 wrote:

Bill Marsh wrote:

stever20 wrote:last year the average bracketologist got a score of 337.8. Lunardi had 344 and Palm 343. So that's above average.... Even with the rating, if you add in all the new people- Lunardi would be #92 of 187. Which would be even with that just above average. People here for some reason want to act like he's awful. But he's just not. The numbers just don't show that at all.

No statistician would call 344 and 343 “above average” when the mean is 337.8. Statisticians refer to “average” as a score that falls within a pre-defined middle range - typically +/- one standard deviation. Otherwise, only 1% (the 50th percentile) of any population would be considered “average” - which is obviously not what we’re talking about when we refer to someone as “average”. Average normally refers to the vast middle of any population. Someone who falls at the 55th percentile is as average as someone who falls at the 50th percentile, or the 45th percentile, etc. The numbers you quote for Linardi and Palm are as average as average can be, nowhere near “above average”. Being slightlyabove the mean or median (mid point) would never qualify as “above average”.

So much of sports analysis revolves around statistics. Unfortunately too many people who throw around stats - including some of the people who publish them - never took a statistics course in their life and don’t really understand statistics.

ok- but there again they aren't anywhere near close to being one of the worst. Definitely not what X-man was trying to say when he totally dismissed Lunardi as being one of the worst- he's no where close to that.

X-man wrote:How do you interpret the five year numbers then, stever? Looks pretty bottom of the barrel to me.

stever20 wrote:

X-man wrote:How do you interpret the five year numbers then, stever? Looks pretty bottom of the barrel to me.

No, he looks pretty average. Being #68 of 127 is right there in the middle for guys in for 3-5 years or 92-187 of all guys overall is right there in the middle. His Paymon score is better than the average of all bracketologists. You make it seem like he's #118 of 127 or something like that- and that's just not the case at all whatsoever. But you know that.

X-man wrote:

stever20 wrote:

X-man wrote:How do you interpret the five year numbers then, stever? Looks pretty bottom of the barrel to me.

No, he looks pretty average. Being #68 of 127 is right there in the middle for guys in for 3-5 years or 92-187 of all guys overall is right there in the middle. His Paymon score is better than the average of all bracketologists. You make it seem like he's #118 of 127 or something like that- and that's just not the case at all whatsoever. But you know that.

Nor are they "above average" as you stated earlier in this thread. But you know that.

MUBoxer wrote:Chartouney to Marquette!

We've got the lineup to kill it even if Wojo ends up being a Willard level coach I expect us to have a damn good next year (and following 2)

stever20 wrote:Lunardi is closer to being above average being 92/187 than he is being bottom of the barrel. You make it out like he's one of the worst 4 or 5 guys, and the numbers just totally refute that.