T-4 weeks Starters Vote

[bayern7]

Paige - 10
Kaitlyn - 6
Ash - 8
KK - 6
Sarah - 3
Ice - 8
Jana - 9

 

[Vowelguy]

Paige-10
Ash-10

Chen-5
Ice-5
Jana-5
Sarah-5
KK-5
Katelyn-5

who is Katelyn?

Folks, as vote tabulator it's much easier for me if you use last names other than obvious ones (Paige and KK and Ice)

 

[Vowelguy]

Paige 10
Strong 9
Chen 9
Jana 9
Shade 8
kk 8
Ice 5

That's 58.

 

[yhun89]

who is Katelyn?

Folks, as vote tabulator it's much easier for me if you use last names other than obvious ones (Paige and KK and Ice)

"Katelyn" is Kaitlyn Chen.

 

[Vowelguy]

"Katelyn" is Kaitlyn Chen.

He already includes a line for "Chen."

 

[yhun89]

He already includes a line for "Chen."

Ah.

 

[Rb335]

Paige - 10
Jana - 10
Kk - 10
Shade - 10
Chen - 5
Ice - 5

 

[bmayuc]

Paige 10
Strong 10
Jana 10
KK - 10
Shade - 10

 

[ucbart]

He already includes a line for "Chen."

Oops-

I got ahead of myself. I'll go with Ziebell as a 5. LOL

 

[Skeets]

He already includes a line for "Chen."

But at least both received a "5". Got to like the consistency. It would have been weird otherwise.

 

[meyers7]

I am impressed with the poster's here knowledge of probability and statistics. Let's just say that the strategy to win the contest, and the strategy to maximize the expected value of your points are two different things, and i can tell that many understand the difference!

You are probably giving some posters, way too much credit.

 

[Vowelguy]

44 ballots in (+ 3 waiting for corrections)


PB 100% chance of starting according to BY
AS 84
JA 82
KK 65
KC 59
IB 53
SS 50
AP 3
AZ 3
QS 1

 

[Dugway]

So of those 44 who voted, did any pick: Bueckers, Shade, El Alfy, Arnold, and Chen as their starters? Assuming they are healthy, does anyone really believe that Geno would start Jana plus those four guards while leaving Brady and Strong both on the bench? Given the bigs on the team, we are not going to start any forwards?

I don’t believe that choosing the actual Starting 5 is necessarily the point of your exercise here; but if it were, it does not in my opinion produce a practical starting five, given the options available. Also, just my opinion, but Rank Choice Voting, in similar fashion when attempting to choose political candidates is a horrible idea for elections just the same.

 

[Bone Dog]

I don’t believe that choosing the actual Starting 5 is necessarily the point of your exercise here; but if it were, it does not in my opinion produce a practical starting five, given the options available.

I don’t agree. A practical starting five with three guards and two forwards fairly leaps out of the data. The highest confidence players are Paige Jana and Ash, and after them, people are divided between KK and Kaitlyn (presumably at PG), on the one hand, and Ice and Sarah (presumably at forward) on the other. This is the clear outline of a 5+2 lineup. Admittedly, confidence ratings for starters are not direct expressions of who the chief subs will be (the +2 in the 5+2), but the correlation seems likely. This is what the BY hive mind appears to think.

Also, it’s worth noting that the data give a slight edge to KK and Ice over Kaitlyn and Sarah, making the latter pair the first two off the bench. A less likely reading is that Geno will alternate these players game by game. I say less likely merely because past sentiment in the BY has been against churning the starting lineup absent an important reason. “We” seem to think that once Geno settles on a lineup, he’ll stick to it for awhile.

This suggests a quite resaonable starting five of

Paige​

Jana​

Ash​

KK​

Ice​

I say reasonable because “we” seem to have plumped for the players with the most experience from last season. This lineup also minimizes the role of untested freshmen, which is another common sentiment on the BY. They will surely get minutes at some point, but the hive mind appears to think they will not be as prominent as the returners from last season plus Paige.

 

[Vowelguy]

I don’t believe that choosing the actual Starting 5 is necessarily the point of your exercise here;

No it is not. It is merely to list what you think will be the starting 5 might be and express your confidence around that. Folks are free to pick however they like.

le. Also, just my opinion, but Rank Choice Voting, in similar fashion when attempting to choose political candidates is a horrible idea for elections just the same.

1) this is not a ranked choice vote per se. see item above.
2) And yet research has clearly shown that Ranked Choice is a superior way of voting and produces outcomes more in line with what voters actually want.

 

[Vowelguy]

A practical starting five with three guards and two forwards fairly leaps out of the data.

The top 5 right now is a 4-guard lineup, which seems unlikely to me.

 

[Dugway]

"This suggests a quite resaonable starting five of, Paige, Jana, Ash, KK, Ice" -Bone Dog

Absolutely agree with you Bone Dog, even would go so far as to say these are the probable starting five.

But you see what we did to get to this reasonable starting five? We elevated the #6 vote receiver up over the #5, in order to make it 'reasonable'. Without that change, no, it is not reasonable! Thank goodness we have a head coach who gets to make that reasonable alteration; Rank Choice doesn't allow for that in governmental voting.

"And yet research has clearly shown that Ranked Choice is a superior way of voting and produces outcomes more in line with what voters actually want." -Vowelguy

In countries where there are a dozen prominent political parties to choose from that produce a candidate pool of thirty which need to be reduced down in a primary, yes, I believe that Rank Choice may be the best. In the USA, with two prominent parties, and a very small minority of "Anything but these two!", it yields unreversible anomalies / outliers, similar to what we have in this poll.

"The top 5 right now is a 4-guard lineup, which seems unlikely to me." -Vowelguy

Yup.

 

[oldhusky]

People can pursue this whatever way they want, but clearly you increase the odds of being correct if you take into account who the other 4 starters are when picking the 5th one. It is not who is the 5th best player, but rather who fits best with the other 4. Geno will make his decision based on the perceived effectiveness of a 5 player unit.

If he believes 4 guards and 1 big is the best, he will use it, but I suspect the burden of proof would be in favor of two bigs.

 

[Rowdy831]

Paige 10
Jana 10
Sarah 10
KK 4
Ash 4
Chen 6
Ice 6

 

[Rowdy831]

People can pursue this whatever way they want, but clearly you increase the odds of being correct if you take into account who the other 4 starters are when picking the 5th one. It is not who is the 5th best player, but rather who fits best with the other 4. Geno will make his decision based on the perceived effectiveness of a 5 player unit.

If he believes 4 guards and 1 big is the best, he will use it, but I suspect the burden of proof would be in favor of two bigs.

To me a lot depends on how much the role players from last year improved in the off season. To win most of the games it won't matter who joins the top 3 but at some point they will need to compete with USC and the like and that will take players who have size.

 

[diggerfoot]

44 ballots in (+ 3 waiting for corrections)


PB 100% chance of starting according to BY
AS 84
JA 82
KK 65
KC 59
IB 53
SS 50
AP 3
AZ 3
QS 1

Your original poll plus this tabulation was great! I believe the poll demonstrates the “wisdom of crowds,” that aggregates individual biases and filters it. I’ll add to principles that have served me well in predicting starting line ups.

1. For “positionless” players Auriemma has a demonstrated preference for experienced competence over potential talent. Freshmen from Sales to Moore do not get the initial starts even when they get the most minutes.
2. Auriemma has made exceptions to the first principle with “position” players, ie, those he is grooming from the start to lead the offense or anchor the defense (Montgomery, Dolson).

The first principle explains why Shade scores so high from the collective wisdom of the BY. The second explains why JEA scores so high. The two principles together explains why Arnold scores significantly higher than Strong. With the benefit of seeing this wisdom from the BY and adding in my own bias I will say:

Bueckers = 10
JEA = 10
Shade = 10
Arnold = 6
Brady = 5
Chen = 5
Strong = 4

 

[Bone Dog]

But you see what we did to get to this reasonable starting five? We elevated the #6 vote receiver up over the #5, in order to make it 'reasonable'. Without that change, no, it is not reasonable!

I mainly agree with you. But I’m gonna fuss a little bit because… why not? Besides, I’m taking a break from staining my deck and need a diversion.

Data isn’t reasonable. It’s just brute facts, with no interpretation. Providing an interpretation or a reasoning makes it reasonable. In this case, I made it reasonable — and you concurred — by adding in one assumption: namely that the bottom four were really two pairs differentiated by position. As soon as you do this, you end up with a reasonable result.

Of course, I take @diggerfoot’s point that there’s a shift in modality with this interpretation, namely between position and positionless players. This is another way of looking at the question of reasonableness.

All in all, I’m very impressed by @Vowelguy’s little experiment here. It has been quite illuminating. Thanks.

 

[mattlow710]

Fisrt few game：
Paige
KK
ASH
Jana
Ice

My 24/25 starter
Paige
Azzi
Strong
Jana
Chen

 

[Zinethar]

I've really enjoyed this discussion! I can understand why people would like to see a traditional 5 position lineup and I'm sure we will see that a lot this year as well as Geno's 4 guard offense he has used often. The purpose was to do the starting lineup for a single first game. For that I still think Geno will start his most experienced 5 in his system although after the four obvious that leaves just one opening and given Azzi, Carolyn, and Aubrey are out injured and the freshmen (including Jana who has not yet played) have no game experience to me that leaves Q and Yanna. This lineup will likely, no matter who it actually includes. not be the starters in the national championship game

 

[Vowelguy]

47 ballots in
@Barkin Out @PJCLaw @Steelerone need to submit revised ballots