Mojo time! Hanging Nomination thread link

[CTBasketball]

Damn you beat me. I like 16 better. @Palatine is a sneaky 16 seed.

 

[August_West]

Y'all want scouting reports to take a vacay until November?

Oh you can post your scouting reports................... in numbers only.


Or maybe there needs to be a qualifier before any post a numbers not using numbers stating:

"I Know Im obsessed with the numbers and don't know what the term eye test means, but......." and then post your content.

The punishment is up to the judge Im just spitballing here.

 

[auror]

 

[CTBasketball]

@prankster

The bracket is set.

 

[navery12]

So after preliminary review, here are a list of names that routinely mention KenPom, NET, Sagarin, Torvik, etc. The list is long so we need to down select or we’ll run out of rope.

Ranked from high to low, highest on the list loves metrics. I can find proof later if need be:

1. @auror
2. @BFieldHusky
3. @tzznandrew
4. @DaveHuskiesFan
5. @Sportsman5
6. @Hey Adrien! (sorry pal)
7. @husky429
8. @JustbrewitMan
9. @ToolzieFan
10. @Mazhude
11. @firstnline
12. @HobokenHusky
13. @AD DB Burner
14. @Drfla
15. @HooperScooper
16. @Palatine
17. @87Xfer
18. @SoFla Steve

I submit these names for consideration.

 

[CTBasketball]

You were close.

 

[August_West]

I just adjusted it. You are a 3 seed

 

[kobebeanbryant]

I think all the math geeks should only be allowed to post in numbers for the duration of tournament.

I’d go in the opposite direction…

I think they should be forced to post only kneejerk opinions that are subjective and completely baseless. No data or rational analysis allowed.

If not emotional enough it gets deleted by a mod.

 

[CL82]

So after preliminary review, here are a list of names that routinely mention KenPom, NET, Sagarin, Torvik, etc. The list is long so we need to down select or we’ll run out of rope.

Ranked from high to low, highest on the list loves metrics. I can find proof later if need be:

1. @auror
2. @BFieldHusky
3. @tzznandrew
4. @DaveHuskiesFan
5. @Sportsman5
6. @Hey Adrien! (sorry pal)
7. @husky429
8. @JustbrewitMan
9. @ToolzieFan
10. @Mazhude
11. @firstnline
12. @HobokenHusky
13. @AD DB Burner
14. @Drfla
15. @HooperScooper
16. @Palatine
17. @87Xfer
18. @SoFla Steve

I submit these names for consideration.

@prankster

 

[CL82]

I’d go in the opposite direction…

I think they should be forced to post only kneejerk opinions that are subjective and completely baseless. No data or rational analysis allowed.

If not emotional enough it gets deleted by a mod.

I don’t know how I feel about hanging guys who take the time to give us decent info, but, if we are going to do it, I think you’re onto something. Maybe they should be forced to post things that go against metrics. For example “Whatever happened to the mid range shot? We need to be taking more of those rather than jacking up threes!”

Or perhaps “Sure playing Clingan and Sanogo together is a good start, but we need to add Samson as well. With that kind of height we’ill win every offensive board.”

 

[tzznandrew]

So after preliminary review, here are a list of names that routinely mention KenPom, NET, Sagarin, Torvik, etc. The list is long so we need to down select or we’ll run out of rope.

Ranked from high to low, highest on the list loves metrics. I can find proof later if need be:

1. @auror
2. @BFieldHusky
3. @tzznandrew
4. @DaveHuskiesFan
5. @Sportsman5
6. @Hey Adrien! (sorry pal)
7. @husky429
8. @JustbrewitMan
9. @ToolzieFan
10. @Mazhude
11. @firstnline
12. @HobokenHusky
13. @AD DB Burner
14. @Drfla
15. @HooperScooper
16. @Palatine
17. @87Xfer
18. @SoFla Steve

I submit these names for consideration.

About half this list—at least—have no juice.

 

[shizzle787]

A

About half this list—at least—have no juice.

Agree. Only four or five names have serious juice.

 

[CL82]

About half this list—at least—have no juice.

On the other hand, they will likely be eliminated in the early rounds. Not that I’m advocating this, just thinking it through.

 

[tzznandrew]

On the other hand, they will likely be eliminated in the early rounds. Not that I’m advocating this, just thinking it through.

Seems like delay. If it's a tournament or trial by combat, best to only put the names you want to win, lest you get a Boaty McBoatface ****ing it up for everyone.

 

[CL82]

Seems like delay. If it's a tournament or trial by combat, best to only put the names you want to win, lest you get a Boaty McBoatface ****ing it up for everyone.

Yeah, the timing for this doesn’t seem to work. Still, I appreciate the enthusiasm.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I confess you'd be a high seed for sure.

 

[SubbaBub]

So if I understand correctly, we are denigrating math types by holding an mathematically based, geometric elimination process in a forum that has historically run on sophomoric drinking, poor eating habits, pop culture memes and mildly offensive genitalia jokes.

UConn and the world are truly doomed.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

We went over this last year, most of my hanging nominations are all Twitter people. There’s just a few that strike me the wrong way, bad fans. You could say the same thing about a few on here, but we do a good job of smiting the idiots here. Don’t be fooled idiots, we know you’re here too. To summarize 95% of UConn fans are generally happy people, with good hearts. 5% are idiots (50% of the idiots reside on the BY and 50% of the idiots reside on Twitter). I’m not naming names.

Although on second thought, and to comment on @August_West ’s post, I second that we hang the math geeks. All of them. Mass murder. Mass hanging like in the Golden Age of Piracy. Your KenPom and NET trumpets got us a 4 seed. Yay. Thank god we were 7th in the country in effective FG% when the moon shines half bright v. Top 25 defenses who wear red uniforms.

I’ll generate a list.

If you take out the math, does UConn get credit for winning games when majority opinion was, "We're definitely better. We should have won that game," and what's our record, in or out of conference? Oh wait, majority is a numbers thing. This is hard.

 

[CTBasketball]

I don’t know how I feel about hanging guys who take the time to give us decent info, but, if we are going to do it, I think you’re onto something. Maybe they should be forced to post things that go against metrics. For example “Whatever happened to the mid range shot? We need to be taking more of those rather than jacking up threes!”

Or perhaps “Sure playing Clingan and Sanogo together is a good start, but we need to add Samson as well. With that kind of height we’ill win every offensive board.”

If you take out the math, does UConn get credit for winning games when majority opinion was, "We're definitely better. We should have won that game," and what's our record, in or out of conference? Oh wait, majority is a numbers thing. This is hard.

About half this list—at least—have no juice.

Yeah I agree - again this is a submittal. Will let @prankster decide.

 

[Fishy]

Do they get to come back with impunity and post against interest in perpetuity?

Must we abide?

Or is this the opportunity to leverage some anti-mojo mojo with arrogant & spoiled OG malcontents wandering like zombies, telling us we wouldn't even exist if not for them, eternally doomed to emphasize their personalities over eternal principles, confused as to whether they are the wave or the water, battling as ego in the midst of the WE season.

Perhaps they EACH wear a Cooley scrotum badge of dishonor. Let them be counted.

This team of Vader-like tragic figures is pitiable or powerful. Let's make it the latter.

It is a collective responsibility for 'the rest of us' to help them down from their rickety ladder and into a circle of support, doing our best to bring UConn a National Championship without the instantly identifiable alpha, but instead as the smashmouth machine that builds as a team the insurmountable lead, and then plays smart as the clock ticks toward victory.

We win with what and who we have, without whinging and whining and wishing beyond the bounds of reality.

When we say, "Let's go Huskies," it refers to US!
Let. Us. Do. It.
One
Game
At
A
Time


Phew

Hang this nitwit for being annoying.

 

[Sibeerian]

Y'all want scouting reports to take a vacay until November?

Hey Adrien could beat a nun to death with a baby panda and we'd still have to give him a pass.

 

[CL82]

Hang this nitwit for being annoying.

I don’t know, it kind of seems like that’s what he’s angling for.

But if we did, it would have to be a word count/post limitation sentence. Maybe something like he can only post once in any thread during the tournament, his post can’t be longer than three words, and he can’t use verbs.

 

[Giddyup5]

I don’t know, it kind of seems like that’s what he’s angling for.

But if we did, it would have to be a word count/post limitation sentence. Maybe something like he can only post once in any thread during the tournament, his post can’t be longer than three words, and he can’t use verbs.

It would be similar to Dogmania (spelling?)

The origin story of the Haiku.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Hang this nitwit for being annoying.

Having lacked the patience to see what develops, the bully cries, "Foul," thinking it's about him.

Who hangs a nitwit?
And for being annoying?

With a hat tip to you, "Jesus."
EDIT: Didn't know that ^ gets filtered. Okay by me; not my tribe anyway.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I don’t know, it kind of seems like that’s what he’s angling for.

But if we did, it would have to be a word count/post limitation sentence. Maybe something like he can only post once in any thread during the tournament, his post can’t be longer than three words, and he can’t use verbs.

No verbs? Hard