PC Stellar IU at Michigan State sims....a complete guess

[RaceToTheTop 23,571]

Have no idea who will be available, so had to go with a complete guess.  I guessed at Xavier Johnson and Tamar Bates being in the rotation, but not Durr, Lander, or Stewart since Durr and Stewart had already had basically two suspensions and it's obvious the staff is not in love with Lander.  I started the five that started last game but X, Bates, and Geronimo all getting good minutes off the bench.

Sims starting shockingly well....IU winning the first three somehow.  Lost the next six, won the last.  MSU won 6 of the 10 sims, average score Michigan State 67.7, Indiana 63.5.

Team stats:

IU:  247/585 from the field (42%), 39/135 from three (29%), 102/161 free throws (63%), 344 rebounds, 157 fouls, 130 assists, 111 turnovers, 44 blocks, 55 steals.

MSU:  254/572 from the field (44%), 58/170 from three (34%), 111/136 free throws (82%), 376 rebounds, 164 fouls, 137 assists, 131 turnovers, 41 blocks, 50 steals.

IU stats:

starters:

Galloway:  28 mpg, 33/60 from the field (55%), 6/12 from three (50%), 3/7 from the line (43%), 28 rebounds, 18 fouls, 16 assists, 19 turnovers, 3 blocks, 9 steals, 7.5 ppg

Leal:  19 mpg, 9/32 from the field (28%), 2/17 from three (12%), 4/4 from the line (100%), 15 rebounds, 17 fouls, 10 assists, 6 turnovers, 1 block, 7 steals, 2.4 ppg

Kopp:  32 mpg, 25/73 from the field (34%), 10/41 from three (24%), 4/4 from the line (100%), 30 rebounds, 9 fouls, 13 assists, 5 turnovers, 4 blocks, 4 steals, 6.4 ppg

Thompson:  32 mpg, 51/106 from the field (48%), 6/20 from three (30%), 11/19 from the line (58%), 84 rebounds, 24 fouls, 22 assists, 14 turnovers, 4 blocks, 11 steals, 11.9 ppg

JacksonDavis:  33 mpg, 56/122 from the field (46%), 27/54 from the line (50%), 84 rebounds, 26 fouls, 19 assists, 23 turnovers, 20 blocks, 11 steals, 13.9 ppg

Bench:

Johnson:  24 mpg, 33/83 from the field (40%), 4/18 from three (22%), 32/38 from the line (84%), 26 rebounds, 24 fouls, 37 assists, 23 turnovers, 20 blocks, 11 steals, 10.2 ppg

Geronimo:  18 mpg, 25/56 from the field (45%), 3/5 from three (60%), 7/20 from the line (35%), 64 rebounds, 24 fouls, 7 assists, 13 turnovers, 7 blocks, 1 steal, 6.0 ppg

Bates:  17 mpg, 15/49 from the field (31%), 8/22 from three (36%), 12/13 from the line (92%), 10 rebounds, 15 fouls, 6 assists, 6 turnovers, 1 block, 3 steals, 5.0 ppg

Duncomb:  2 games, 6 mpg, 0/4 from the field, 2/2 from the line (100%), 3 rebounds, 1 turnover, 1 block, 1 steal, 1.0 ppg

Childress:  2 games, 2 mpg, 1 turnover.

[RaceToTheTop 23,571]

With Woodson saying that the players would be available (but playing time basically not guaranteed), I resimmed.  I started the same five as last game -- Galloway, Leal, Kopp, Thompson, TJD -- but let the computer AI determine how much each player off the bench played.  I placed Johnson, Stewart, Bates, Geronimo, and Lander on the bench.  No Durr as the limit is ten in the program.

IU had...surprisingly good sim.  Won 6 of the 10 with an average score of IU 69.8, MSU 65.5.

Team stats:  

IU:  263/598 from the field (44%), 68/191 from three (36%), 104/164 from the line (63%), 138 fouls, 362 rebounds, 145 assists, 113 turnovers, 39 blocks, 64 steals.

MSU:  239/538 from the field (44%), 62/169 from three (37%), 115/139 from the line (83%), 162 fouls, 335 rebounds, 164 assists, 143 turnovers, 29 blocks, 69 steals.

IU individual stats:

starters:

Galloway:  24 mpg, 22/57 from the field (39%), 1/9 from three (11%), 7/9 from the line (78%), 21 rebounds, 13 fouls, 18 assists, 3 blocks, 13 steals, 5.2 ppg

Leal:  20 mpg, 14/41 from the field (34%), 10/28 from three (36%), 5/7 from the line (71%), 7 fouls, 12 rebounds, 12 assists, 14 turnovers, 1 block, 1 steal, 4.3 ppg

Kopp:  26 mpg, 29/66 from the field (44%), 10/26 from three (38%), 13/14 from the line (93%), 28 rebounds, 13 fouls, 12 assists, 7 turnovers, 1 steal, 8.1 ppg

Thompson:  30 mpg, 47/98 (48%), 1/24 from three (yikes), 18/33 from the line (55%), 97 rebounds, 20 fouls, 21 assists, 15 turnovers, 6 blocks, 13 steals, 11.3 ppg

TJD:  32 mpg, 57/113 from the field (50%), 42/69 from the line (61%), 96 rebounds, 28 fouls, 22 assists, 20 turnover,15 blocks, 6 steals, 15.6 ppg

bench

Johnson:  21 mpg, 30/70 from the field (43%), 4/16 from three (25%), 15/21 from the line (71%), 22 rebounds, 13 fouls, 38 assists, 14 turnovers, 1 block, 8 steals, 7.9 ppg

Stewart:  16 mpg, 37/77 from the field (43%), 33/63 from three (52%), no free throws, 17 rebounds, 24 fouls, 5 assists, 4 turnovers, 7 steals, 10.7 ppg

Geronimo:  19 mpg, 17/40 from the field (43%), 5/9 from three (56%), 1/7 from the line (14%), 64 rebounds, 7 fouls, 9 assists, 11 turnovers, 12 blocks, 11 steals, 4.0 ppg

Bates:  15 mpg, 10/36 from the field (28%), 4/16 from three (25%), 3/4 from the line (75%)m 5 rebunds, 13 fouls, 8 assists, 9 turnovers, 1 block, 4 steals, 2.7 ppg

Lander:  DNP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hoosierfan1901 5,795]

Which simulation program do you use? 

[RaceToTheTop 23,571]

9 hours ago, Hooserfan1901 said:

Which simulation program do you use? 

It's called PC Stellar.  Used to be available for free online some years ago, but is no longer available.  I kept a copy of it and make sure to transfer for every time I get a new laptop.  If anyone wants a copy, just PM me and I can send the zip file.

You have to input the teams in yourself (you enter the team's sagarin rating, average points/game, offensive and defensive field goal percentage, and then every player's individual stats).  Players get rated in like ten categories.  It does a decent job of simulating -- usually the average final score is in line with what sagarin would predict, but there are occasionally some matchups that prove to be better than others.  It hated the IU at Iowa matchup, for instance, but for some reason likes the IU at Michigan State one.  It also didn't mind the Purdue at IU matchup -- I think it gave IU like a 40% chance to win.  

I recreate the team after every game so the stats are up to date.  It does limit teams to ten players, so I do have to pick Duncomb and two scholarship players to exclude.  This time I excluded Phin (injury) and Durr (who was in the doghouse even before Northwestern).  I let the computer AI coach both teams so as to try to not influence it -- the exception would be the first set of sims I ran for Michigan State that assumed only X and Bates would be available and I their minutes I tried to limit to being in when either Galloway, Kopp, or Leal were under fatigue.  Basically the game will let players go around 20 to 30% more minutes than they actually played with fatigue not being a big issue (depending on their actual played minutes), although a player like Leal gets a little bit more leeway due to his actual minutes being really low.

[psychobat3 109]

Interesting.  How accurate has it been in its predictions throughout the season?

[RaceToTheTop 23,571]

3 hours ago, psychobat3 said:

Interesting.  How accurate has it been in its predictions throughout the season?

As accurate as anyone guessing at how IU will play, I guess. :)

Three games it missed the winner on were IU at Penn State (I believe it had IU 68, Penn State 61 on average), IU hosting Michigan (don't recall the prediction, think it had IU by 5) and the Purdue game (although it thought IU had a decent chance there, it had Purdue on average winning by 1).  I didn't run games prior to the January Big Ten games because there really wasn't enough data to get a good feel on.  It usually has IU's chances of winning in line with  what Pom is predicting.  The two exceptions were that it hated IU's chances at Iowa, while Pom had it as being a toss up pretty much and it likes IU's chances at Michigan State this Saturday.  Then again, the sim doesn't actually look at how players react to being in the doghouse, LOL.