What are you excited about for next year?

[ShockerFever]

Ha. I forgot about that post. Good find! 11-7 was only a game off from reality, the Shox did once again come up empty in St. Louis, but the Shox avoided the bad loss in non-conf that I predicted and obviously I completely missed the strong post-season run. Glad they did better than I expected.

Still doesn't improve WSU's chances of going undefeated in MVC play next year. A very unlikely event.

You also left out the part of WSU getting bounced out early in the NIT and the part about Shockernet melting down over Marshall. So how disappointing of a season was it?

I think you should join the Club of KC and avoid prediction making in the future. You aren't very good at it.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I know what they were.

So tell me, what percent chance do you give us for running the table, given that chart of yours?

I'll go 75% average chance of winning each game. Now with Loyola added into the mix and an 18 game schedule, that makes for a 0.5% chance (1 out of 200) that the Shox go undefeated in MVC play next year.

[Zardoz]

The chance of the Shockers following JH4P's stat's are close to 0% as long as HC3G is coaching here. It's not all about statistics.

[kstarheel]

The defense is going to be INSANE next season. Looking forward to watching teams try and score against WSU.

[wufan]

The defense is going to be INSANE next season. Looking forward to watching teams try and score against WSU.

I'm actually a little concerned about our interior defense next year.

[Blackmag]

Im excited to see the new guys in action, Marshall is like a mad scientist, mixing and matching the new with the old and poof he comes up with anotheir team that will ...win

[Kung Wu]

I'll go 75% average chance of winning each game. Now with Loyola added into the mix and an 18 game schedule, that makes for a 0.5% chance (1 out of 200) that the Shox go undefeated in MVC play next year.

Interesting, you are predicting a 13 or 14 win season:

13-5, or
14-4

Here's my take with real data. Our record the past two years (those are the only two years where returning players played in the games):

2012/2013 12-6 -> actual win percentage: 67%
2011/2012 16-2 -> actual win percentage: 89%

Actual result over last two seasons: 78%
That would give us a 1.8% chance (1 in 55) if you take NOTHING other than actual results into account.

But ....

It would not be too hard to imagine that with Baker, Hall, and Wessel playing, we would have beat Evansville at their place where we lost by 4 points.
That would make us 13-5, with an actual win percentage of 72.2%, with an average of 80% over two years.
That would give us a 2% of running the table next year based on prior results.

With Baker and Wessel it's also not hard to image we would have easily beat SIU instead of losing by one possession.
That would make us 14-4, with an actual win percentage of 77.8%, with an average of 83.4% over two years.
That would give us a 3.8% of running the table next year based on prior results.

With Baker and Wessel it's also not farfetched to think we would have beat Evansville at home, instead of losing by one possession.
That would make us 15-3, with an actual win percentage of 83.3%, with an average of 86.2% over two years.
That would give us a 6.8% of running the table next year based on prior results.

And ....

Creighton's out and Loyola's in. I don't think a single person on this board thinks we will lose to Loyola next year. So pencil in that win and subtract out the one loss to Creighton.
That would make us 16-2, with an actual win percentage of 88.9%, with an average of 88.9% over two years.
That would give us a 12.0% of running the table next year based on prior results.

But wait ... one of the two losses from 2011/2012 was to Creighton too, so we have to adjust for that.
That would make us 17-1 (in 2011/2012), with an actual win percentage of 94.4%, with an average of 91.6% over two years.
That would give us a 20.8% of running the table next year based on prior results.

So from where I sit the likelihood of running the tables next year, using REAL data, is:

1.8% - if you don't take into account ANYTHING about what happened over the past two years
2% - if you adjust for only one single game based on Creighton leaving
3.8% - if you are willing to imagine that we can beat Loyola twice, based on Creighton leaving
6.8% - if you can believe that we can beat Loyola, and would have won one more game due to injuries
12.8% - if you can believe that we can beat Loyola, and would have won two more games due to injuries
20.8% - if you can believe that we can beat Loyola, and would have won three more games due to injuries

And it could be even higher if you are of the belief that our freshman and sophomores and recruits coming in are able to replace the effectiveness of the seniors leaving (for me that's always a stretch until I have seen otherwise).

Barring losing 2 or more starters again, I think it's easy and realistic to predict at least a 16-2 or 17-1 season. And not NEAR as unreasonable to predict an 18-0 season that you implied.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

The chance of the Shockers following JH4P's stat's are close to 0% as long as HC3G is coaching here. It's not all about statistics.

Argue against my 75% chance of winning each game if you'd like (that's why I originally listed 85%, 80%, 75%, and 70% as options), but the resulting chance of going undefeated once an original % is picked is indisputable. Marshall is a great coach, but he can't redefine mathematics. If he flips a coin, he will still get heads 50% of the time.

[SubGod22]

If he flips a coin, he will still get heads 50% of the time.

Not true. He has a 50% chance of getting heads every time. But there's nothing that says he will get heads 50% of the time.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Not true. He has a 50% chance of getting heads every time. But there's nothing that says he will get heads 50% of the time.

True SubGod, I could have been more precise with my words. Doesn't change the argument at all though. Are you just here to nitpick my word choice or do you actually want to adress my actual argument.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Kung Wu, I appreciate what you did there with your analysis, but it is statistically flawed on many levels. I'll address them later when I have more time.

[SubGod22]

I'm just here to nitpick. I'll let Kung Wu do the analysis. He's much better with all of this than I am.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Kung Wu (or anyone else for that matter)...

Is it fair to say that WSU is just as likely to get a top 4 seed next year as it is that they get a 9-12 seed? I'm looking to start at a point of agreement. Can we basically assume that WSU has an equal chance of any seed 1-12?

[shockerfan]

I'm actually a little concerned about our interior defense next year.

I am not too concerned yet. Should have some good shot blockers again. While there is more to defense than blocking shots I think having good shot blockers is a good start. I remember Marshall saying Kadeem Coleby gets off the floor quicker than Orukpe and may be an even better shot blocker. I believe he mentioned he was an all around good defender. Now our post depth on defense may be a concern until the new guys get in here and show us what they can do. But with Coleby and Early's shot blocking ability we look good with starters. Even Ron has shown some ability to get up and block some shots.

[Kung Wu]

Kung Wu, I appreciate what you did there with your analysis, but it is statistically flawed on many levels. I'll address them later when I have more time.

But arbitrarily picking an exponential out of thin air is statistically sound?