- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Kentucky vs. Charlotte Bobcats
Posted on 4/2/12 at 2:55 am to Fun Bunch
Posted on 4/2/12 at 2:55 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
This is the dumbest question ever. Charlotte would level Kentucky. The depth, experience, and "man strength" would be overwhelming.
Put Biyombo and one other Charlotte Starter on Louisville and Louisville beats KY, let alone a full NBA team.
I just want to underscore who singularly retarded the "man strength" argument is. You never want to go full retard.
Here is some evidence that completely refutes the "man strength" argument.
quote:
Leading up to the 1984 Olympics, Team USA — consisting of college players Michael Jordan, Patrick Ewing, Sam Perkins and Chris Mullin, among others — played an exhibition against a crop of certified NBA stars that included Magic, Isiah, Alex English and Larry Nance. Led by Jordan’s 27-point outing, the college kids won by double-digits.
Here is video of that game.
1984 College Players Making "man strength" argument look ridiculous
3
Posted on 4/2/12 at 3:03 am to bobbyray21
Posted on 4/2/12 at 7:57 am to bobbyray21
This is the best msb meltdown I've seen in quite some time.
Bravo sir.
Bravo sir.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 8:25 am to Srbtiger06
i know one thing... UK ain't beating the Hornets 1 out of 100 times. we have too much frontcourt depth for them, and Jarrett Jack is better than anyone in their backcourt
This post was edited on 4/2/12 at 8:28 am
Posted on 4/2/12 at 8:32 am to chalmetteowl
the hornets are in a different level of team than the bobcats (or raptors...or wizards) with their defense
toronto is another good discussion of how much they'd beat UK by. they play no defense and have no big men of note
toronto is another good discussion of how much they'd beat UK by. they play no defense and have no big men of note
Posted on 4/2/12 at 8:34 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the hornets are in a different level of team than the bobcats (or raptors...or wizards) with their defense
Hornets would win 100/100 times. They'd have to play a while for Kentucky to win one.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 10:33 am to bobbyray21
there's only one way to settle this thread.
an officially sanctioned EA Sports simulation
make it happen, Bobby
an officially sanctioned EA Sports simulation
make it happen, Bobby
Posted on 4/2/12 at 10:36 am to gizmoflak
quote:
there's only one way to settle this thread.
an officially sanctioned EA Sports simulation
make it happen, Bobby
Problem: video games aren't really my thing. I don't even have a console.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 10:37 am to BayouBengals03
quote:
Hornets would win 100/100 times. They'd have to play a while for Kentucky to win one.
Yeah, I'm thinking at least 101 times.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 10:49 am to bobbyray21
Posted on 4/2/12 at 10:57 am to bobbyray21
You're talking about All-Star teams in the 80s. You're talking about a dream team that didn't give two shits about that game and dominated other countries when it mattered.
NFL All-Stars played College All-Stars/teams in the 70s and lost on occasion.
However, NOW, take a NFL Team or NBA Team and Play a College TEAM, with some kind of stakes on the line, and the college team will get crushed, every time.
There is such a thing as man strength. Sorry. Most college players increase dramatically in strength once in the NBA or NFL with those trainers.
NFL All-Stars played College All-Stars/teams in the 70s and lost on occasion.
However, NOW, take a NFL Team or NBA Team and Play a College TEAM, with some kind of stakes on the line, and the college team will get crushed, every time.
There is such a thing as man strength. Sorry. Most college players increase dramatically in strength once in the NBA or NFL with those trainers.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 12:52 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
You're talking about All-Star teams in the 80s. You're talking about a dream team that didn't give two shits about that game and dominated other countries when it mattered.
NFL All-Stars played College All-Stars/teams in the 70s and lost on occasion.
However, NOW, take a NFL Team or NBA Team and Play a College TEAM, with some kind of stakes on the line, and the college team will get crushed, every time.
There is such a thing as man strength. Sorry. Most college players increase dramatically in strength once in the NBA or NFL with those trainers.
Nobody is arguing NFL. Please try to pay attention.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:03 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
A simulation has been done.
quote:
Based on the Wildcats’ projected .024 Pythagorean winning percentage and the Bobcats’ actual .124 Pythagorean mark, the log5 method says Kentucky would win about one out of seven games head-to-head.
quote:
I didn’t penalize Kentucky at all for depth, which is the biggest obstacle to this entire question.
So this simulation is basically thrown out the window.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:09 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
So this simulation is basically thrown out the window.
It gives Kentucky a HUGE advantage and they still probably go 0-66.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:11 pm to tiggerthetooth
This simulation says they'd go 1-6 in 7 games against the Bobcats.
That right there shows you how fricking terrible Charlotte is.
Of course, taking depth into consideration, that number would go way up.
That right there shows you how fricking terrible Charlotte is.
Of course, taking depth into consideration, that number would go way up.
This post was edited on 4/2/12 at 1:13 pm
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:20 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
This simulation says they'd go 1-6 in 7 games against the Bobcats.
That right there shows you how fricking terrible Charlotte is.
Of course, taking depth into consideration, that number would go way up.
In my hypothetical, they are playing college rules. And so depth really isn't a huge consideration because UKs guys aren't prone to picking up fouls, and so they usually only go 7 deep. And he doesn't play for very long.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:22 pm to bobbyray21
And so I think the simulation is probably about right.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:24 pm to bobbyray21
Well you can go by what you want, but my original question was playing NBA rules.
Obviously college rules makes it a lot easier for a Kentucky or any other college team.
With NBA rules, it's harder for Davis to just stand in the middle of the lane too. If they can get him involved in ball screens (which he probably isn't great at defending at the pro level), they'd get a lot of easy shots. Plus, the defensive 3-second violation is in play.
The pro game is just so different.
Obviously college rules makes it a lot easier for a Kentucky or any other college team.
With NBA rules, it's harder for Davis to just stand in the middle of the lane too. If they can get him involved in ball screens (which he probably isn't great at defending at the pro level), they'd get a lot of easy shots. Plus, the defensive 3-second violation is in play.
The pro game is just so different.
This post was edited on 4/2/12 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:33 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
I didn’t penalize Kentucky at all for depth, which is the biggest obstacle to this entire question.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So this simulation is basically thrown out the window.
Yeah, how do you throw depth out the window, especially using a 66 game model where the games are more condensed and the scheduling plays a greater role than ever? Kentucky would get murdered on back-to-back road games.
They are basically assuming that Kentucky's 5-7 best players are playing all 48 minutes every night, which is just foolish.
Posted on 4/2/12 at 1:38 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
Well you can go by what you want, but my original question was playing NBA rules.
Obviously college rules makes it a lot easier for a Kentucky or any other college team.
With NBA rules, it's harder for Davis to just stand in the middle of the lane too. If they can get him involved in ball screens (which he probably isn't great at defending at the pro level), they'd get a lot of easy shots. Plus, the defensive 3-second violation is in play.
The pro game is just so different.
I've said from the get go that I had them playing college rules. Is part of the reason that I like that hypo because it shortens the games and therefore makes depth much much less of a factor? Well sure. I understand UK doesn't have 12 NBA guys. But 6 will do ya just fine in two 20 minute halves.
Page 12 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News