LaxPower Back-Up Stick

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 7:30 am This looks good...

And part 2

Itsallgood wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 10:08 am

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Mon Dec 26, 2022 8:20 am Are there different styles of Bully Covering, Uncle ONW? Indeed there are. This one is a Shark Attack Bully Cover. BC's Melanie Welch and Belle Smith cruise in on Loyola's Lily Osborne like a couple of sharks that smell blood in the water. The subsequent turnover is a direct result of this variation on the Bully Cover Technique.

BULLY COVER !!! Really ??? Loyola"s player was double teamed, don't understand the need to makeup new terms for things that have been done forever.

If everyone had the same philosophy, the inspiration to create would disappear. Thank goodness not everyone thinks that way.

njbill wrote: ↑Mon Dec 26, 2022 6:13 pm In a surprising development, Boston College announced that head coach Acacia Walker Weinstein has been fired and that ONW from the fanlax website has been hired as her replacement.

In the press conference announcing his hiring, 0NW said his first order of business will be to pick a name which he promises to use during his entire tenure as head coach, quoting the late Queen Elizabeth, “whether it be long or short.” He rejected criticism that his inability to do so over the past several years is a sign of schizophrenia.

ONW, a self proclaimed cutting edge strategist, also announced that since the draw is of no importance, henceforth Boston College will cede all draws to their opponents. He said this will give the defense more opportunities to practice taking the ball away from opponents, which will pay dividends come playoff time. A Boston College attacker who asked that her name not be used said “wait, wouldn’t we have more chances to score if we had the ball?”

this is hilarious!! perhaps only topped by the fact that in a grinch like effort to troll at 5:28 am Christmas morning (that deserves a lifetime ban in of itself), ONW only demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the game, apparent to everyone but himself...I think that is referred to as a "bully self-dunking"?

Last season's quarterfinal. Some of the contradictory examples are glaring. Syracuse won the draw battle but suffered the embarrassment of a running clock loss. Again--the numbers don't support the blanket statement. Maybe one day folks in the booth will adjust their comments on winning the draw being a guarantee of a win. We shall see.

Now I'm inspired to dig deeper. The last 3 games played in 2022 all defied the Win-the-Draw-Win-the-Game formula, if you will.

BC 14-13 draws--lost game 12-11 to UNC
NU 18-15 draws--lost game 15-14 to UNC
Maryland 23-14 draws--lost game 17-16 to BC

I'm making it a project to research every game in the NCAA Tournament to test the theory further.

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:19 am Now I'm inspired to dig deeper. The last 3 games played in 2022 all defied the Win-the-Draw-Win-the-Game formula, if you will.

BC 14-13 draws--lost game 12-11 to UNC
NU 18-15 draws--lost game 15-14 to UNC
Maryland 23-14 draws--lost game 17-16 to BC

I'm making it a project to research every game in the NCAA Tournament to test the theory further.

Those first two are probably outliers to your theory. BC could have won a draw with 5 seconds left in a half....I think you have to expand your study. Draws won + Turnovers + Shots on Goal %....that would likely give you a better understanding of what is predictive for success.

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:19 am Now I'm inspired to dig deeper. The last 3 games played in 2022 all defied the Win-the-Draw-Win-the-Game formula, if you will.

BC 14-13 draws--lost game 12-11 to UNC
NU 18-15 draws--lost game 15-14 to UNC
Maryland 23-14 draws--lost game 17-16 to BC

I'm making it a project to research every game in the NCAA Tournament to test the theory further.

It will be interesting to read the results of your research. I think a key stat will be what is the magic difference in draw controls that delivers the highest win percentage.

I was surprised when you mentioned 82% of games are won when teams when the draw battle. I didn't think winning 1-2 more draws would make that much difference, but if you win 82% of games with any draw advantage that’s a pretty convincing argument for winning draws.

I suspect in your research you will find a higher percentage of games with a draw difference of 1-2 that went either way. It’s easy to offset the extra possession or two with a turnover(s), poor shot selection where the other team takes possession but no turnover(s) is recorded, winning the 50/50 balls.

To offset larger draw control numbers I think you will find what we saw in the JHU/Gtown game. The goalie had a horrendous game. I think it takes extreme cases like this to offset teams who win a large percentage of draws in a game. Not likely to happen too often.

To me the number I will be interested in is what draw control difference correlates with the highest win percentage. Good luck with your research.

I've disproved the broad WTDWTG assertion with multiple and varied examples, (which is no big deal--it doesn't take much digging to find samples).

I think I've also (well) established that announcers should add the caveat.

The rest of the research will be to see what the fail rate percentage was for this past Tournament. If I add in all the other variables, it will become a tedious chore, so I'll just stick with refuting the basic formula.

RollTheCrease wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:53 am It will be interesting to read the results of your research. I think a key stat will be what is the magic difference in draw controls that delivers the highest win percentage.

I won't be tallying the games where draw controls equal wins.

RollTheCrease wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:53 am I was surprised when you mentioned 82% of games are won when teams when the draw battle. I didn't think winning 1-2 more draws would make that much difference, but if you win 82% of games with any draw advantage that’s a pretty convincing argument for winning draws.

After going back and checking--it does seem to be a specious number. https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=416553#p416553

Whether that number is close to being accurate or not--to make the blanket WTDWTG statement with no disclaimer is lazy.

RollTheCrease wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:53 am I suspect in your research you will find a higher percentage of games with a draw difference of 1-2 that went either way. It’s easy to offset the extra possession or two with a turnover(s), poor shot selection where the other team takes possession but no turnover(s) is recorded, winning the 50/50 balls.

To me the number I will be interested in is what draw control difference correlates with the highest win percentage.

Absolutely agree--though as I say, I'll just be looking for the contradictions.

RollTheCrease wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:53 am To offset larger draw control numbers I think you will find what we saw in the JHU/Gtown game. The goalie had a horrendous game. I think it takes extreme cases like this to offset teams who win a large percentage of draws in a game. Not likely to happen too often.

For the goalies-- Player Minutes GA Saves
DINARDO, Micheline 31:43 8 1
GAVEN, Emily 28:17 7 1

Not too insane. Remember--G'Town won the draws by a margin of 22.

Agreed--not likely to happen too often, but it does happen--which is, again, why I think announcers should say the few extra words to provide the disclaimer if they're going to parrot the WTDWTG cliche.

RollTheCrease wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:53 am Good luck with your research.

Thank you!

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 8:56 pm

I don't get coaches using profanity--F-bombs especially--to motivate their players. Whether Spallina or Tucker--The F-bombs are present. Just seems strange. I guess I'm from the Chuck Noll school:

“My job is to teach you how to play this game correctly. I will never give you a motivational speech. If I have to motivate you, I will fire (cut/release) you (from the team).”

Translated into college—that would equal no playing time on game day, or benching on game day if the player wasn't giving full effort.

How about providing some examples of sportscasters saying that winning draw control guarantees a win...Me, I don't recall any sportscaster making that claim, but there must be some examples for this to be an issue.

I do think it would be interesting to see the correlation between differential draw control (FO's for men) and win rate.
(I'd suggest differential as a percentage of all possessions, but that's likely a more difficult stat to find, so proxy simply being differential; draw that line and indeed we'd suspect that likelihood of win goes way up as differential increases).

Finding examples where the game was won with the lower draw control stat only leads to the question as to what other stats are most predictive of the reverse outcome. TO's, other GB's, SOG %, Saves %...

Sophisticated watchers understand the ways that teams can overcome a differential in draw control, but none of them would prefer to lose the draw...

Sportscasters try to simplify this (IMO overly so at times) but they know that the audience isn't just the sophisticated watcher of the game.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm How about providing some examples of sportscasters saying that winning draw control guarantees a win...Me, I don't recall any sportscaster making that claim, but there must be some examples for this to be an issue.

How about another member making the claim? https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=416523#p416523 Will that lend credibility?

For my part, as I continue to watch and rewatch games--I will record the moments when they happen and post the bit of game film when it occurs.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm I do think it would be interesting to see the correlation between differential draw control (FO's for men) and win rate.
(I'd suggest differential as a percentage of all possessions, but that's likely a more difficult stat to find, so proxy simply being differential; draw that line and indeed we'd suspect that likelihood of win goes way up as differential increases).

I'll be researching only games where draw controls do not equal wins.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm Finding examples where the game was won with the lower draw control stat only leads to the question as to what other stats are most predictive of the reverse outcome. TO's, other GB's, SOG %, Saves %...

This is precisely the point I am making. WTDWTG cannot be used as a blanket statement without mentioning some or all of these variables.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm Sophisticated watchers understand the ways that teams can overcome a differential in draw control, but none of them would prefer to lose the draw...

Of course not--to make such a comment would be asinine.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm Sportscasters try to simplify this (IMO overly so at times) but they know that the audience isn't just the sophisticated watcher of the game.

Translation: they're lazy

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:30 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm How about providing some examples of sportscasters saying that winning draw control guarantees a win...Me, I don't recall any sportscaster making that claim, but there must be some examples for this to be an issue.

How about another member making the claim? https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=416523#p416523 Will that lend credibility?

Unless I missed it (and I may have), I will ask again. Where does anyone say winning the draw “guarantees” winning the game?

28 total NCAA tournament games played in 2022. In 11 games the team that won the draws lost the game. That's way more than 18%, in fact it's more than double that at 39%. Thirty nine percent of the time you win the draws, you lose the game!

BC 14-13 draws--lost game 12-11 to UNC
NU 18-15 draws--lost game 15-14 to UNC
Maryland 23-14 draws--lost game 17-16 to BC
Loyola 24-12 draws—lost game 20-13 to BC
SU 12-7 draws—lost game 15-4 to NU
Rutgers 14-8 draws—lost game 11-7 to Stony Brook
Jacksonville 17-12 draws—lost game 15-10 to Florida
Notre Dame 18-14 draws—lost game 17-11 to Michigan
USC 14-13 draws—lost game 13-11 to Virginia
UConn 16-9 draws—lost game 14-7 to JMU
UMass 15-12 draws—lost game 15-9 to Princeton

So, henceforth and forever--Win the Draw Win the Game will draw this reaction at this address:

Justalaxdad wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:01 pm

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:30 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm How about providing some examples of sportscasters saying that winning draw control guarantees a win...Me, I don't recall any sportscaster making that claim, but there must be some examples for this to be an issue.

How about another member making the claim? https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=416523#p416523 Will that lend credibility?

Unless I missed it (and I may have), I will ask again. Where does anyone say winning the draw “guarantees” winning the game?

No, you didn’t miss anything. No one, poster or announcer, has said winning the draw guarantees the team will win the game. ONW is simply setting up a strawman.

Perhaps ONW as part of his research could post one of his precious little gifs showing an announcer saying that winning the draw guarantees winning the game, something he has claimed several times now that announcers have said. I won’t hold my breath.

njbill wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:31 pm

Justalaxdad wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:01 pm

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:30 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:14 pm How about providing some examples of sportscasters saying that winning draw control guarantees a win...Me, I don't recall any sportscaster making that claim, but there must be some examples for this to be an issue.

How about another member making the claim? https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=416523#p416523 Will that lend credibility?

Unless I missed it (and I may have), I will ask again. Where does anyone say winning the draw “guarantees” winning the game?

No, you didn’t miss anything. No one, poster or announcer, has said winning the draw guarantees the team will win the game. ONW is simply setting up a strawman.

Perhaps ONW as part of his research could post one of his precious little gifs showing an announcer saying that winning the draw guarantees winning the game, something he has claimed several times now that announcers have said. I won’t hold my breath.

me neither...why I asked.

Seems rather silly, but then, anything is possible.
But the notion that it's some sort of pattern is pure nonsense...I'm fine with being proven wrong.

And no, ONW, it's not lazy to not discuss every factor that could possibly determine the outcome of the game every time the importance of draw controls is mentioned. When a team dominates GB's, or dominates goaltending, I don't expect other factors to be mentioned in the color commentary unless directly relevant in the moment...as in, "despite a draw control advantage by team X, team Y has dominated possessions this half by having fewer TO's and more GB's." If it ain't directly relevant at that moment, I don't expect it to be mentioned.

Won't be ruling no kinda world on no 61%. Ain't that right, dawg...

Recently Boston College featured these 6 players on a 50 days left until the season starts! post on their Instagram. The six players (in order below) being Cassidy Weeks, Jenn Medjid, Mallory Hasselbeck, Mckenna Davis, Kit Arrix and Sophia Taglich. I wonder if players like Hasselbeck, Arrix and Taglich, who saw limited duty in '22, had great Fallball seasons and will see more time on the field when the new season starts. We shall see...

Can't help but chuckle at the Bow to the queen enjoiner.