The CardBoard
WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 (/thread-18941.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

RE: WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 - CompSci87 - 02-09-2020

Scott Rueck is upset about overly physical play in the Pac-12 too. Some blunt words at the press conference today.

https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2020/02/oregon-state-coach-scott-rueck-believes-physical-play-is-out-of-control-after-no-12-arizona-edges-no-9-beavers-65-58-in-overtime.html

RE: WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 - chimera - 02-09-2020

(02-09-2020, 09:42 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:  Scott Rueck is upset about overly physical play in the Pac-12 too. Some blunt words at the press conference today.

https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2020/02/oregon-state-coach-scott-rueck-believes-physical-play-is-out-of-control-after-no-12-arizona-edges-no-9-beavers-65-58-in-overtime.html

I agree with him, and think he said it well.  It hurts both the team that plays against opponents who use that style and also the teams that use that excessively physical style, because to compete with physical teams, opponents have to amp up their own physical play.  In the end both teams end up more beat up, more tired, and less able to play interesting, fun ball.

RE: WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 - 76lsjumb - 02-10-2020

(02-09-2020, 09:42 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:  Scott Rueck is upset about overly physical play in the Pac-12 too. Some blunt words at the press conference today.

https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2020/02/oregon-state-coach-scott-rueck-believes-physical-play-is-out-of-control-after-no-12-arizona-edges-no-9-beavers-65-58-in-overtime.html

Very interesting.  I caught the halftime TV interview of Kelly Graves at today's Oregon/ASU game and he was complaining -- while noting sarcastically that he wasn't really allowed to say anything -- about the game being overly physical.  When asked what he thought they needed to adjust for the second half, he said something like, "well, since those three people in stripes think it's a football game, I guess we'll have to discuss making some line changes."  [I think he mixed his sports metaphors here, but what he meant was perfectly clear.]

Of course, that's been Charli's/ASU's M.O. for years, but it's interesting that both Arizona schools are adopting the slugfest mentality now...

RE: WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 - M T - 02-10-2020

My subjective opinion has been that the officials have been calling fewer fouls this year.  That will lead to more aggressive play.

In one of the threads on MBB here, someone posted an article on bias in BB calls.  I recommend that all read it.   The article clearly shows a bias towards keeping the number of fouls called even.  It also indicated that there was a bias towards calls against the visiting team.

One of their opinions (not showable in the facts) is that the bias toward calling an approximately equal number of fouls on each team is to benefit play that should be called a foul.  (They termed this as "aggressive" play.)

I'd like to do something related to that.  Perhaps confirm their findings a decade later. 
  1. Has it gotten better or worse? 
  2. Similar results in men vs women? 
  3. Foul calls against stars vs role players?   Foul calls benefitting stars vs role players?
  4. Nth foul on a player? 
  5. Size of home crowd vs bias?    (This would be an interesting one to also look at individual refs.)
  6. Bias at different times (quarters) of the game? 
  7. Bias shown by individual refs?  (We don't have calls by each ref, so this is a bit muddy.)
  8. Conference difference in bias?
  9. NCAA tourney vs conference game bias?  
  10. Time of day of game effect on bias? 
  11. Distance traveled by visitor effect on bias? (specifically conf. opponent vs non-conf. opponent bias)   
  12. Ranking bias? (does ranking(a measure of skill) affect the bias)   
  13. Bias in last minute vs score difference? 
  14. Familiarity of official with team(s) effect on bias
  15. Technical fouls  (unfortunately, those cover a wide range of events
I expect others have good ideas of what would be interesting to investigate.  (Could height of player be a factor? One can imagine one official calling more calls for/ against, say, taller players, while  another official calls less.   Ditto for year (Fr ... Sr) of player)

I can only imagine doing this with play-by-play listings (which DO have significant errors sometime, esp. difference of who is on the game).  Since we can't document the ref that makes the call, I would have to use that an official is part of the team making the call.  There are other calls that don't show in the stats:  Fouls, tie balls, play reviews, out-of-bounds calls, etc.

I'd want to do, say, all conference games in the PAC-12 as this balances out many things (each team has the same number of home games, etc.)  And then expand to other conferences & tournaments.   One problem may be differences in information in the PxP for some schools.

Maybe a good summer project when there's less BB to watch?   If you'd be interested in helping out with it, let me know.  In particular, if someone with good experience in statistics would help, that would be beneficial.

RE: WBB: UCLA 79 Stanford 69 - crackpot - 02-10-2020

I was a bit surprised in yesterday's game when the ref tried to get Tara's attention during a timeout and said, "Tara?" instead of, say, "Coach?" 

I realize that all these refs/players/coaches become rather familiar over the years, but (during the game) it seemed a bit too familiar.