PDA

View Full Version : This is timely. One and done or stay for a 2nd year?



MDABE80
07-04-2017, 11:08 AM
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/news/sophomore-year-hasnt-been-jinx-for-pro-prospects-one-and-done-zach-collins-miles-bridges/143s19bsu463c1b4c99htquv1q

bartruff1
07-04-2017, 11:44 AM
Thank goodness the one star option is still available...;)

seacatfan
07-04-2017, 11:49 AM
beat that dead horse

willandi
07-04-2017, 12:34 PM
It is a good article and makes some salient points. Sophomores entering the NBA have fared better than Freshman, with a pretty good and even sample size.

That being said, I think I would have taken the guaranteed millions, knowing that, set for life, I could complete school or not, as I chose.

ZagNative
07-04-2017, 12:53 PM
Thank goodness the one star option is still available...;)Come on, Bart... That piece was written by Mike DeCourcy. He's always worth a read. I'm surprised at your Fourth of July crabbiness.

Must see if I can't boost the thread star rating.

seacatfan
07-04-2017, 01:14 PM
Some of those comparisons are statistically insignificant. This one especially--the soph group averaged 9.2 ppg in their 5th NBA season, the Fr. group averaged 9.1 ppg. That's supposed to be an argument for returning to school another year?

willandi
07-04-2017, 01:32 PM
Some of those comparisons are statistically insignificant. This one especially--the soph group averaged 9.2 ppg in their 5th NBA season, the Fr. group averaged 9.1 ppg. That's supposed to be an argument for returning to school another year?

No, it was the percentage that got a second contract and the overall amount they made during their time in the show. Not any one thing (cherry picked) but the overall set of statistics. Still, I would take the immediate millions.

seacatfan
07-04-2017, 02:03 PM
$3 mil more during the duration of a career when you're talking around $30 mil total is chump change at that point. The higher % signing a second contract is a factor, but that number wasn't all that high either. And for statisticians, I think the sample size is way too small to be considered data you can really determine anything from. I think it comes down to, either you'll make it in the NBA or you won't, and whether you leave after your Fr. or Soph year doesn't make that much difference.

maynard g krebs
07-04-2017, 02:13 PM
Get a broken back and 14 million goes byebye. Better have a big Lloyd's of London policy if you are a first round pick and come back.

willandi
07-04-2017, 02:37 PM
$3 mil more during the duration of a career when you're talking around $30 mil total is chump change at that point. The higher % signing a second contract is a factor, but that number wasn't all that high either. And for statisticians, I think the sample size is way too small to be considered data you can really determine anything from. I think it comes down to, either you'll make it in the NBA or you won't, and whether you leave after your Fr. or Soph year doesn't make that much difference.

Got it! Stats don't mean much. Still a good article.

seacatfan
07-04-2017, 02:42 PM
Got it! Stats don't mean much. Still a good article.

Do you understand the point about small sample size?

willandi
07-04-2017, 03:00 PM
Do you understand the point about small sample size?

Of course. He took the 44 freshman and 46 sophomores that were first round picks, excluding the top 5, for all the drafts since 2006, since HS students could not go directly to the NBA.

Do you not understand that they are the only ones available using those criteria?

seacatfan
07-04-2017, 03:52 PM
We could keep arguing about this all day, or we could find something better to do. Of course the author could only compile data from the drafts since the rules were changed. If you try to prove a point w/ statistics, and your sample size is too small, it doesn't really prove anything. Thus I'm taking the article w/ a grain of salt.


But this is all about some posters being bitter that Collins left after 1 year. It's a done deal. Doesn't matter how anyone feels about it, he's gone. Right now he has 14.7 million reasons that say he made a fairly good choice. He's literally set for life now, and he's not even 20 years old yet. One could do worse in life than that.

willandi
07-04-2017, 03:57 PM
We could keep arguing about this all day, or we could find something better to do. Of course the author could only compile data from the drafts since the rules were changed. If you try to prove a point w/ statistics, and your sample size is too small, it doesn't really prove anything. Thus I'm taking the article w/ a grain of salt.


But this is all about some posters being bitter that Collins left after 1 year. It's a done deal. Doesn't matter how anyone feels about it, he's gone. Right now he has 14.7 million reasons that say he made a fairly good choice. He's literally set for life now, and he's not even 20 years old yet. One could do worse in life than that.

Totally agree about Collins, and have said so. I would take the money every time, at least if it was over a million.

bartruff1
07-04-2017, 04:21 PM
Come on, Bart... That piece was written by Mike DeCourcy. He's always worth a read. I'm surprised at your Fourth of July crabbiness.

Must see if I can't boost the thread star rating.

Well I am a Engineer and not a researcher..... although I have a few publications that I collaborated on with real scientists....and in my opinion that article is not research by any definition...it is nonsense... and proves absolutely nothing...

remember, correlation is not causation ....

MDABE80
07-04-2017, 05:06 PM
We could keep arguing about this all day, or we could find something better to do. Of course the author could only compile data from the drafts since the rules were changed. If you try to prove a point w/ statistics, and your sample size is too small, it doesn't really prove anything. Thus I'm taking the article w/ a grain of salt.


But this is all about some posters being bitter that Collins left after 1 year. It's a done deal. Doesn't matter how anyone feels about it, he's gone. Right now he has 14.7 million reasons that say he made a fairly good choice. He's literally set for life now, and he's not even 20 years old yet. One could do worse in life than that.

No it isn't. It's an opportunity to learn something from a very good sports journalist. He's covering the empty spots in a discussion we've had on this board off and on. Only a closed mind who doesn't want opinions questioned or reviewed that thinks this article has no value or is brought to the board by a lingering idea that Collins chose wrong. It's a tussle to rethink this? no it isn't. It'll happen again. I thought the value of the article has significant value/ If you don't like the topic, don't read or stop the comments. What's done is done.

willandi
07-04-2017, 05:12 PM
No it isn't. It's an opportunity to learn something from a very good sports journalist. He's covering the empty spots in a discussion we've had on this board off and on. Only a closed mind who doesn't want opinions questioned or reviewed that thinks this article has no value or is brought to the board by a lingering idea that Collins chose wrong. It's a tussle to rethink this? no it isn't. It'll happen again. I thought the value of the article has significant value/ If you don't like the topic, don't read or stop the comments. What's done is done.

Hey Doc! I agree with you! How about that?

TZF is coming up later and said he wanted to get with you for a brew. I would love to tag along. Get to meet more board members. It's hard to be an a-hole when you know the people (speaking of me! LOL).

MDABE80
07-04-2017, 05:58 PM
I know! It's magic. Tex comes. He's got my number. David's Pizza moved to the old Hostess bakery. I owned it an it cost a fortune! That's kina center being across form the arena......I'll go anywhere though. Friends here. We flip the brown once in a while but it's never serious.

bartruff1
07-04-2017, 06:35 PM
No it isn't. It's an opportunity to learn something from a very good sports journalist. He's covering the empty spots in a discussion we've had on this board off and on. Only a closed mind who doesn't want opinions questioned or reviewed that thinks this article has no value or is brought to the board by a lingering idea that Collins chose wrong. It's a tussle to rethink this? no it isn't. It'll happen again. I thought the value of the article has significant value/ If you don't like the topic, don't read or stop the comments. What's done is done.

No...it is just math...any 7th Grade Algebra Student could tell you the sample size is too small to account for the coefficients of variation or uniformity...if only a handful of players were complete failures .....or hugely successful....way outside the averages.... the results would be sensitive to those variations ...and therefor meaningless .....DeCourcy may not be "nuts" but this doesn't prove it....

ZagDad84
07-04-2017, 06:52 PM
Yes it is a small sample size but that is all that is available since the rules changed.

Conclusion, on average, if you are drafted outside of the top 5, you will make a little more over your entire career as a sophomore than as a freshman. Makes sense to me. However, as any investment analyst will tell you, invest the majority of the first years earnings as a freshman and it will easily make up the small difference in income over your career. I know, fat chance, but for the smart ones, it can easily mean that you are set for life.

My beef is the insistence that they call these one and dones student athletes. Yes, they go to school, for less than 6 months and then drop out of the second semester as soon as the season is over. Watch the 30 in 30 special on Ben Simmons. School was a placeholder until the draft nothing more. Let the kids have options of the NBA, the "D" (or "G") league or Europe, but if you choose school, one and done does not cut it. Just MHO.

ZagDad

75Zag
07-04-2017, 07:53 PM
.....
My beef is the insistence that they call these one and dones student athletes.
.....
ZagDad

The other person who intensely dislikes the term "student-athletes" is John Calipari. He has said repeatedly that he refuses to use the term "student-athletes" to describe the kids who come to KY to play for a year on their way to the NBA. He has said that those kids need to create their own labels for themselves. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/colleges-conflicts-academics-athletics-money/

I suspect the label "kid who is forced to waste a year parked in Lexington KY instead of going straight to the NBA to earn major bank" is too long for most newspaper and web site headlines.

Congrats to Zach Collins. I might have to claim my firm's Blazer tickets more often in 2017 - 2018.

Go Bulldogs!

Lewey
07-04-2017, 08:04 PM
Speaking about the sample size, how about the sample size the NBA teams have to evaluate a player? Perhaps the slight advantage to sophomores was because the teams had two years to evaluate players rather than just one. It seems likely that with just one year of evaluation, there is more risk of a player not working out as expected. A sophomore had to prove they had the right stuff in two different seasons. A freshman who may have been drafted at the back end, may fall out of the draft if their second season is not as good. They couldn't maintain the same level, or other flaws in their game became more apparent. In other words the difference may not be because the player has more seasoning / learned more in his second season, it could be that the second season weeded out some players who weren't going to make it anyway.

MDABE80
07-04-2017, 09:01 PM
No...it is just math...any 7th Grade Algebra Student could tell you the sample size is too small to account for the coefficients of variation or uniformity...if only a handful of players were complete failures .....or hugely successful....way outside the averages.... the results would be sensitive to those variations ...and therefor meaningless .....DeCourcy may not be "nuts" but this doesn't prove it....

But Bart, his career body of work does.

Ekrub
07-04-2017, 10:32 PM
Speaking about the sample size, how about the sample size the NBA teams have to evaluate a player? Perhaps the slight advantage to sophomores was because the teams had two years to evaluate players rather than just one. It seems likely that with just one year of evaluation, there is more risk of a player not working out as expected. A sophomore had to prove they had the right stuff in two different seasons. A freshman who may have been drafted at the back end, may fall out of the draft if their second season is not as good. They couldn't maintain the same level, or other flaws in their game became more apparent. In other words the difference may not be because the player has more seasoning / learned more in his second season, it could be that the second season weeded out some players who weren't going to make it anyway.

Bingo - see Elias Harris

kitzbuel
07-05-2017, 01:55 AM
No...it is just math...any 7th Grade Algebra Student could tell you the sample size is too small to account for the coefficients of variation or uniformity...if only a handful of players were complete failures .....or hugely successful....way outside the averages.... the results would be sensitive to those variations ...and therefor meaningless .....DeCourcy may not be "nuts" but this doesn't prove it....
I believe it is the population that is small, not the sample size. The sample is pretty inclusive.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

WallaWallaZag
07-05-2017, 05:25 AM
the last paragraph caught my eye...

"I’m not claiming Collins made a mistake by choosing to enter the draft, only that there might have been more available to him by adding a year of learning to excel at the college level. Dominance is a skill, just like dribbling, shooting and playing with a high degree of effort. It’s the toughest one of all to polish at the game’s highest level."

this is why i don't have any issue with rui playing for japan...he has a chance to become a dominant player...he needs to learn how to dominate...easier done over summer than at zaga.

thebigsmoove
07-05-2017, 05:29 AM
I believe it is the population that is small, not the sample size. The sample is pretty inclusive.

Exactly. The statistics we have are in fact the only statistics that have ever existed since the NBA went to the 19 year old requirement. I think the NBA should go with the same rules as the MLB though, If you want to go pro out of high school, so be it, but if you go to school, you cannot exit until after your 3rd year.

willandi
07-05-2017, 05:55 AM
Exactly. The statistics we have are in fact the only statistics that have ever existed since the NBA went to the 19 year old requirement. I think the NBA should go with the same rules as the MLB though, If you want to go pro out of high school, so be it, but if you go to school, you cannot exit until after your 3rd year.

A serious question. If the NBA has a 19 years old requirement, how did Frank Ntilikina get drafted? He was born in July of 1998. Yes, he has been playing in the French professional league for a few years, but is 18 and will be for a year.

thebigsmoove
07-05-2017, 06:00 AM
A serious question. If the NBA has a 19 years old requirement, how did Frank Ntilikina get drafted? He was born in July of 1998. Yes, he has been playing in the French professional league for a few years, but is 18 and will be for a year.

I think your math is off, he will be 19 on July 28, not 18. As long as you are 19 by the time the season starts, i believe you qualify.

bartruff1
07-05-2017, 06:02 AM
I believe it is the population that is small, not the sample size. The sample is pretty inclusive.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Regardless of how inclusive it is, (he might have included all the players who played that were freshmen and sophs ?)... the sample size is still too small....are you just begging the issues or do you think the conclusions are accurate and significant ???

willandi
07-05-2017, 06:05 AM
I think your math is off, he will be 19 on July 28, not 18. As long as you are 19 by the time the season starts, i believe you qualify.

Yep. Too early to think this morning. Sorry.

kitzbuel
07-05-2017, 06:25 AM
Regardless of how inclusive it is, the sample size is still to small....are you just begging the issues or do you think the conclusions are accurate and significant ???

If you use the whole population, it is not a sample. So the question is about significance.

If I were an investor looking at long term performance, I think the conclusions would be enough to compel me to want to invest in the second year players. They trend to greater long term performance. Why? I can think of a couple of hypotheses.

I like Lewey's analysis, I call that the More Data hypothesis. GMs can get better reads on performance with more data and make decisions more heavily based on performance rather than potential.

Another hypothesis is the My Stock Won't be Higher hypothesis. Players and their advisers have a sense that there are weaknesses in the player's game that might become exposed with more playing time/data collection. This could negatively impact their draft position so being drafted on potential favors them and they are inclined to go early. The result of this is that the remaining pool of sophomore draftees have few potential weaknesses since some of those with weaknesses were weeded out as one and dones.

Of course the third hypothesis is a combination of the two.

These are just my hypotheses. No research behind them, but interesting to ponder.

thebigsmoove
07-05-2017, 06:33 AM
Yep. Too early to think this morning. Sorry.

No worries, i did the same thing with Ayayi when he committed. Euro players are always confusing.

willandi
07-05-2017, 06:35 AM
As long as you are 19 by the time the season starts, i believe you qualify.

I wonder if some parents will start holding a child back a year in school, maybe in grade school, to give their child the chance to go right out of HS. They also would be a year bigger than classmates, so would appear to be better than their peers.

Maybe the NBA will do what horse racing does, and set an arbitrary birth date, born before is eligible and born after isn't. JK

bartruff1
07-05-2017, 06:39 AM
It is also interesting to ponder those that might have played in the NBA after their freshman year, but for what ever reason never played after their sophomore year...

The whole analysis reminds me of the British Official that allegedly said.... in effect....the decision to go to war has been made and the facts will be made to support that decision....

TexasZagFan
07-05-2017, 07:16 AM
I wonder if some parents will start holding a child back a year in school, maybe in grade school, to give their child the chance to go right out of HS. They also would be a year bigger than classmates, so would appear to be better than their peers.

Maybe the NBA will do what horse racing does, and set an arbitrary birth date, born before is eligible and born after isn't. JK

There is at least one community in North Texas where kids are held back a year for athletic purposes. They destroy their opponents in football from peewee football through middle school. It's obvious when you see 7th graders playing other 7th graders that should be in 8th grade: there's a difference of several inches in height, and 30+ pounds in weight.

Oddly, they don't dominate in basketball, though.

My wife and I never imagined doing that for our kids. My two boys were both late bloomers, so it makes you wonder, "what if"?

My grandson's a September baby, so he had to wait a year to start kindergarten. He'll be one of the oldest kids in his class anyway.

thebigsmoove
07-05-2017, 07:32 AM
I wonder if some parents will start holding a child back a year in school, maybe in grade school, to give their child the chance to go right out of HS. They also would be a year bigger than classmates, so would appear to be better than their peers.

Maybe the NBA will do what horse racing does, and set an arbitrary birth date, born before is eligible and born after isn't. JK

Oddly enough a lot of kids had been held back for this very purpose in bigger cities. They go to prep schools or transfer around. Thats why you see some of this reclassifying stuff occur more often these days. I think the benefit is lost once you get to the upper echelon of recruiting and draft prospects.

mgadfly
07-05-2017, 09:00 AM
It is also interesting to ponder those that might have played in the NBA after their freshman year, but for what ever reason never played after their sophomore year...

The whole analysis reminds me of the British Official that allegedly said.... in effect....the decision to go to war has been made and the facts will be made to support that decision....


Three teenagers were hiking through the woods near Mount Rainier when they came across an abandoned railroad track. They followed it for a time and eventually came to a majestic old bridge perched several hundred feet above a rushing river. Halfway across they stopped and looked at the view below. The first teenager, Seacatfan, told his two buddies that he thought the updraft off the river would allow him to fly if he jumped and flapped his arms fast enough. His two friends looked at each other nervously and were about to tell him not to do it, when he jumped.

Seacatfan pumped his arms up and down and let out an enthusiastic "whooooooo!" Nevertheless, the updraft and the flapping failed to keep him from splattering on the river rocks below. Dr. Abe peered over the edge and said, "I guess that didn't work." But before he could get the words completely out, his friend Bartruff pushed by him saying, "That's not a statistically significant sample size to determine causation, only correlation." He jumped and flapped his arms.

I like to think Bartruff made it. However, the assumption that the only valid data is that which is provable by rigorous scientific research may have been flawed in this case.




I'm just joking!

thebigsmoove
07-05-2017, 09:12 AM
Three teenagers were hiking through the woods near Mount Rainier when they came across an abandoned railroad track. They followed it for a time and eventually came to a majestic old bridge perched several hundred feet above a rushing river. Halfway across they stopped and looked at the view below. The first teenager, Seacatfan, told his two buddies that he thought the updraft off the river would allow him to fly if he jumped and flapped his arms fast enough. His two friends looked at each other nervously and were about to tell him not to do it, when he jumped.

Seacatfan pumped his arms up and down and let out an enthusiastic "whooooooo!" Nevertheless, the updraft and the flapping failed to keep him from splattering on the river rocks below. Dr. Abe peered over the edge and said, "I guess that didn't work." But before he could get the words completely out, his friend Bartruff pushed by him saying, "That's not a statistically significant sample size to determine causation, only correlation." He jumped and flapped his arms.

I like to think Bartruff made it. However, the assumption that the only valid data is that which is provable by rigorous scientific research may have been flawed in this case.




I'm just joking!

http://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/c_fill,g_center,w_1200/fl_lossy,pg_1,q_auto/pnznkqgsrgw4tx0qdpxr.jpg

kitzbuel
07-05-2017, 10:24 AM
Three teenagers were hiking through the woods near Mount Rainier when they came across an abandoned railroad track. They followed it for a time and eventually came to a majestic old bridge perched several hundred feet above a rushing river. Halfway across they stopped and looked at the view below. The first teenager, Seacatfan, told his two buddies that he thought the updraft off the river would allow him to fly if he jumped and flapped his arms fast enough. His two friends looked at each other nervously and were about to tell him not to do it, when he jumped.

Seacatfan pumped his arms up and down and let out an enthusiastic "whooooooo!" Nevertheless, the updraft and the flapping failed to keep him from splattering on the river rocks below. Dr. Abe peered over the edge and said, "I guess that didn't work." But before he could get the words completely out, his friend Bartruff pushed by him saying, "That's not a statistically significant sample size to determine causation, only correlation." He jumped and flapped his arms.

I like to think Bartruff made it. However, the assumption that the only valid data is that which is provable by rigorous scientific research may have been flawed in this case.




I'm just joking!

I did not even know statistician jokes existed until now. :lmao:

seacatfan
07-05-2017, 10:37 AM
I'm flattered to be the butt end of a joke...I think.

seacatfan
07-05-2017, 04:27 PM
I want a do over. I think I can make it if I just flap my arms harder. I don't care what the statistics say.

DixieZag
07-05-2017, 06:04 PM
I want a do over. I think I can make it if I just flap my arms harder. I don't care what the statistics say.

Actually, the stats fully support that you didn't flap your arms hard enough, no issue there.


:)

mgadfly
07-06-2017, 08:18 AM
I'm flattered to be the butt end of a joke...I think.

I really should have had you saying "WooHoo!" in reference to another board member. It feels like a lost opportunity.

I didn't mean anything by including you in the joke, I'm glad you are taking it the right way.

seacatfan
07-06-2017, 06:21 PM
Well now we need Frances the goat to get involved. He would probably push everybody off the bridge.