Marble now the 4th leading scorer in the Big Ten

[JHHawk]

I love how Devyn is stroking the ball these last two games. We need him to keep that up if the Hawks want to make a serious move at a bid to the the tourny.

As for the NBA, I just do not think Devyn has the quicks to be a first rounder,at least not this year. Another year of physical development,maybe he gets drafted.

 

[FCAS]

Actually, not. Think about what Marble did last year subjectively and what he would have to do this year subjectively for it to at a minimum double his worth. He wasn't a slouch last year.

Exponential growth means "at a minimum double"? Now I think you do not know what the term means.

 

[FCAS]

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

By saying "my growth estimates", you're talking in subjective terms, like I was, which caused Caarhawk to have a hissy fit. If you look at Marble's actual stats, the growth is not exponential. Marble's PPG have gone from 6 to 12 to 16 (rounded to nearest point). That's actually less than linear growth. Exponential growth would be from 6 to 12 to 24.

But it's all much ado about nothing.

 

[kicker22]

Exponential growth means "at a minimum double"? Now I think you do not know what the term means.

We're seriously debating whether someone understands the meaning of "exponential growth" on a basketball message board? Not trying to call you out, but do we need to discuss the meaning of "lighten up we're in a basketball forum". Just saying. We all know what he meant who cares if it specifically fit the defitinition or not.

 

[JonDMiller]

By saying "my growth estimates", you're talking in subjective terms, like I was, which caused Caarhawk to have a hissy fit. If you look at Marble's actual stats, the growth is not exponential. Marble's PPG have gone from 6 to 12 to 16 (rounded to nearest point). That's actually less than linear growth. Exponential growth would be from 6 to 12 to 24.

But it's all much ado about nothing.

Right. It is about my own estimates and he making another huge jump in his college career and not a lot of guys make two of them

People get bent about the most mundane crap.

 

[Tmoney12]

So ya.. back on track RDMJR has been balln. Can't wait to see if he keeps it up in b1g play.

 

[tm3308]

If we're going to get technical, wouldn't exponential growth be like 6 ppg one year to 36 ppg the next? Exponents are like Y squared, not Yx2.

 

[redhawk55]

He would not be a lottery pick (top 15 pick) in the 2013 NBA draft.

I highly doubt he would be drafted that high in the 2014 draft either. Remember there will be probably a freshman or two that will play in 2013 that will be a lottery pick in 2014. He is currently rated the 50th best draft prospect out of all Juniors by NBA draft express. It would be quite a leap for him to be a lottery pick. Kind of a crazy statement.

I think he will be very good at Iowa but a lottery pick, wow.

that estimate was before the season began. thing change and Marble is still a year younger than his actual class is, in reality he should be a SO in college
his going from 5.7 ppg to 11.5 ppg and as of now 16.1 ppg that's quite the improvement.
other stats
FG % FR. 37.9% 66-174, SO 43.6% 139 319 to current JR. 45.5% 65-145
3PT% FR 26.8% 11-41, SO 39.3% 22-56 to current JR 42.6% 20-47
FT% FR 53.0% 35-66, SO 72.3% 102-141 lead the team in attempts, to current JR. 76.8% 43-56
that's a pretty good improvement each year, and those evaluation were made off what he did as a SO.
you are still suffering from a Lick hangover

 

[sportstalent]

Marble has been participating the last two games. This season up until UNI, Marble had been playing well, but he had shown flashes of playing much better.

Marble was assertive from the opening tip last night, he missed a couple shots early that he normally makes, in the past when he has done that, he backed off. Last night he continued to stay aggressive and had another big night.

Gatens at home against Purdue had a moment where he took control, he went up from there. Marble had his moment against UNI, hopefully he will continue to play at such a high level.

 

[tm3308]

that estimate was before the season began. thing change and Marble is still a year younger than his actual class is, in reality he should be a SO in college
his going from 5.7 ppg to 11.5 ppg and as of now 16.1 ppg that's quite the improvement.
other stats
FG % FR. 37.9% 66-174, SO 43.6% 139 319 to current JR. 45.5% 65-145
3PT% FR 26.8% 11-41, SO 39.3% 22-56 to current JR 42.6% 20-47
FT% FR 53.0% 35-66, SO 72.3% 102-141 lead the team in attempts, to current JR. 76.8% 43-56
that's a pretty good improvement each year, and those evaluation were made off what he did as a SO.
you are still suffering from a Lick hangover

While that's true, he's still nowhere near lottery status.

 

[JonDMiller]

There is no chance he would get drafted in the first round if the draft were held tomorrow b

 

[IOWA2012]

If we're going to get technical, wouldn't exponential growth be like 6 ppg one year to 36 ppg the next? Exponents are like Y squared, not Yx2.

Not necessarily. The general term for an exponential growth is a*b^x where a and b are positive real numbers and x is positive as well. The closest fit (exponentially) to Devyn would be

ppg = 3*2^x where x is the number of seasons.

when x=1 (ex: his freshman season) ppg = 6
when x=2 (Soph) ppg = 12
when x =3 (Junior) ppg would = 24 (not there)

The numbers are more of a logarithmic growth, but we don't have to get all mathematical up in here!

 

[woodyk1]

Not necessarily. The general term for an exponential growth is a*b^x where a and b are positive real numbers and x is positive as well. The closest fit (exponentially) to Devyn would be

ppg = 3*2^x where x is the number of seasons.

when x=1 (ex: his freshman season) ppg = 6
when x=2 (Soph) ppg = 12
when x =3 (Junior) ppg would = 24 (not there)

The numbers are more of a logarithmic growth, but we don't have to get all mathematical up in here!

 

[IOWA2012]

I am a math teacher, I can't help it!

 

[FCAS]

We're seriously debating whether someone understands the meaning of "exponential growth" on a basketball message board? Not trying to call you out, but do we need to discuss the meaning of "lighten up we're in a basketball forum". Just saying. We all know what he meant who cares if it specifically fit the defitinition or not.

Hey, I'm actually agreeing with Jon and you. No need to tell me to lighten up as my post said "much ado about nothing". Peace, friend.

 

[woodyk1]

I am a math teacher, I can't help it!

You are forgiven. Carry on.

 

[Cover3]

Olaseni's 1ppg is 16.1^0

That's a fact.

 

[cf84]

You should not extrapolate when discussing exponential values.

 

[Billso]

Right. It is about my own estimates and he making another huge jump in his college career and not a lot of guys make two of them

People get bent about the most mundane crap.

We're not bent at all. This is fun for us:

Dilbert - The Knack - YouTube

 

[JerkyHerky]

Exponential growth means "at a minimum double"? Now I think you do not know what the term means.

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.