Marble now the 4th leading scorer in the Big Ten

JerkyHerky said:
That statement isn't really incorrect, especially if the data set is confined to integers only. The term growth would imply something getting larger, and double would imply a factor of 2. The first integer squared doesn't create growth (1^2=1). The next integer, 2, doubles when it is squared. So, in that sense, the statement you criticized is absolutely correct. It's the lowest integer that grows under an exponent (minimum) and it doubles.

Carry on. :)
Click to expand...
Why are you limiting to integers only? When you look at a player's historical scoring average the data is usually not rounded to the nearest integer. Let's say a player's scoring averages by year are the following:
1 - 10 ppg
2 - 14 ppg
3 - 19.6 ppg
4 - 27.4 ppg

That's exponential growth, and it's not at a minimum double.
 
Everything is pointing up for Marble, the only stats that are worse from last year are assists and turnovers per game. If he keeps improving like this perhaps an NBA team does take a chance on him after next season. But where would he play? Does he have the potential to play the 3 at the next level?
 
Crap. I was just making a joke based on a well-known line from a classic movie. - _ -

My fault for not leaving it at that. Carry on.
 
ssckelley said:
Everything is pointing up for Marble, the only stats that are worse from last year are assists and turnovers per game. If he keeps improving like this perhaps an NBA team does take a chance on him after next season. But where would he play? Does he have the potential to play the 3 at the next level?
Click to expand...

Swing man off the bench. Has to keep working on the three and his D.
 
FCAS said:
Why are you limiting to integers only? When you look at a player's historical scoring average the data is usually not rounded to the nearest integer. Let's say a player's scoring averages by year are the following:
1 - 10 ppg
2 - 14 ppg
3 - 19.6 ppg
4 - 27.4 ppg

That's exponential growth, and it's not at a minimum double.
Click to expand...

No, it's really not. It's linear growth.
 
JonDMiller said:
CAAR, it means exactly what I think it means.



Marble's growth curve from freshman to sophomore was a steep curve to the good...this year so far, he is exceeding my growth estimates, so the curve is steeper than I thought it was.

Thanks for trying
Click to expand...

I think you made the right career choice Jon, one without any math involved in it.
 
4 data points doesn't show enough to make a definitive answer of linear or exponential or log or paraboli or any other type of growth. At best it is a scatter plot that you can try to fit some equation to so you can predict his senior season. But in the end it doesn't matter. His development is growing better than most people expected. And he has become the best weapon iowa has. Good for devyn and sad that we are arguing this.
 
hawkfan33 said:
No, it's really not. It's linear growth.
Click to expand...
Graph those 4 points in Excel and get back to me. It's exactly 40 PERCENT growth per year. When the % growth is constant (and not 0%) it cannot be linear growth.

Sorry for getting sidetracked in this thread, but some very poor math skills are showing up. IOWA2012, help me out.
 
Foval21 said:
4 data points doesn't show enough to make a definitive answer of linear or exponential or log or paraboli or any other type of growth. At best it is a scatter plot that you can try to fit some equation to so you can predict his senior season. But in the end it doesn't matter. His development is growing better than most people expected. And he has become the best weapon iowa has. Good for devyn and sad that we are arguing this.
Click to expand...
Your point about 4 points being too small of a sample size is generally correct. But it's not a scatter plot. A scatter plot is a comparison of TWO variables. My example is a time series of 1 variable. Maybe you were characterizing it as a random walk series.

I really need to get a hobby.

Anyway, regarding Marble, he has the ability to drive and shoot the mid-range pull-up jumper. This is somewhat of a lost art that would be looked upon favorably by NBA scouts. He still needs to stay all 4 years at Iowa, though.
 
FCAS said:
Graph those 4 points in Excel and get back to me. It's exactly 40 PERCENT growth per year. When the % growth is constant (and not 0%) it cannot be linear growth.

Sorry for getting sidetracked in this thread, but some very poor math skills are showing up. IOWA2012, help me out.
Click to expand...

You really have no idea what you're talking about. I guarantee if you graph those points in excel, the best line fit will be linear. If you would like to place a wager on this I will go ahead and actually plot them.
 
hawkfan33 said:
You really have no idea what you're talking about. I guarantee if you graph those points in excel, the best line fit will be linear. If you would like to place a wager on this I will go ahead and actually plot them.
Click to expand...
I will bet you any amount of money you have.
My exponential equation is 10(1.4)^x, where x is the integers 0,1,2,and 3. My equation fits EXACTLY to those 4 points. Show us your linear equation.
 
FCAS said:
Your point about 4 points being too small of a sample size is generally correct. But it's not a scatter plot. A scatter plot is a comparison of TWO variables. My example is a time series of 1 variable. Maybe you were characterizing it as a random walk series.

I really need to get a hobby.

Anyway, regarding Marble, he has the ability to drive and shoot the mid-range pull-up jumper. This is somewhat of a lost art that would be looked upon favorably by NBA scouts. He still needs to stay all 4 years at Iowa, though.
Click to expand...

You do have 2 variables in your system. Your input (his age based on college playing yr) and the output of scoring and how his age/experience causes growth. If it wasn't a two variable system you couldn't have an exponential or linear growth. Both need two variables (hence the x and y in the formula).
 
hawkfan33 said:
No, it's really not. It's linear growth.
Click to expand...

hawkfan33 said:
You really have no idea what you're talking about. I guarantee if you graph those points in excel, the best line fit will be linear. If you would like to place a wager on this I will go ahead and actually plot them.
Click to expand...

I just did. You lose. It's not linear, as any child can see (and my 7-yr-old just did). It curves up, with the slope steeper each year.

A linear equation is of the form y=mx+b. Here x is the year, y is scoring. If you set m=4 and b=10 you get:

YEAR SCORING
0...... 10
1...... 14
2...... 18
3...... 22

Or you can set m=5.8 and b=10 so Marble's endpoints of 10 and 27.4 match, but now your middle years are off.

But amazingly, there's a formula that PERFECTLY fits the data: 10(1.4)^x where x = 0,1,2,and 3.

Not linear. Exponential. Conclusion: Jon is king of both sports and math.

/thread
 
5.7 1st year to year 2 11.5 = 100.1% increase
so far in year 3 he as increased his scoring to 16.1 12 games in for a 40% increase to reach a 50% he needs to avg 17.25 ppg
 
Billso said:
I just did. You lose. It's not linear, as any child can see (and my 7-yr-old just did). It curves up, with the slope steeper each year.

A linear equation is of the form y=mx+b. Here x is the year, y is scoring. If you set m=4 and b=10 you get:

YEAR SCORING
0...... 10
1...... 14
2...... 18
3...... 22

Or you can set m=5.8 and b=10 so Marble's endpoints of 10 and 27.4 match, but now your middle years are off.

But amazingly, there's a formula that PERFECTLY fits the data: 10(1.4)^x where x = 0,1,2,and 3.

Not linear. Exponential. Conclusion: Jon is king of both sports and math.

/thread
Click to expand...

I think this might be my proudest day in at least weeks.
 
So when the thread title says Marble is fourth in scoring, does that mean there are three guys ahead of him? Since we're all brushing up on our math skills, I thought I'd double check and make sure I wasn't herping a derp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top