[pefloresjr]

It is well known that one person’s eye test is not necessarily that of another.   This is why there is science and evidence-based medicine.  It is all too easy to suffer from confirmation bias even if your intentions are good and your expertise is high.

I felt that confirmation bias was definitely impacting people's view of the setter situation.  But other factors also contributed to the preference for Yu.  First, Yu often came in when Parks was having a bad game.  Whether that was because Parks was a freshman and showing inconsistency or having difficulty adjusting to the talent and pressure of the games against top teams.  Or it could have been any number of other reasons.  Regardless of the reason, when Yu replaced her, it often calmed the team down and the offense started flowing better.  I'm sure Yu's numbers were better in those few matches but Yu also started several matches and her overall numbers were not better than Parks' numbers.

During some of Yu's starts I specifically watched for sets that were off line or showed missed timing.  She had plenty of poor sets but they weren't as off as some of Parks' poor sets.  Nonetheless, Yu's poor sets still resulted in easy blocks by the opposition or a weak kill by Stanford resulting in a point opportunity for the other team.  Parks had wider variability in her setting and I think that frustrated many of us.  

However, Parks is a better blocker than Yu and that helped the team have more success when she was in the game.  After Parks came back from the injury and played on the road at Louisville, I felt really good.  She had 64 assists and Stanford hit .324 for the match.  That is the Parks with the high ceiling that Hambly, and I'm sure the rest of the team, sees in games and practices.  As fans, we want a solution to weaknesses on the team so we tend to imbue the backup (setter, quarterback, point guard) with qualities colored by our hopes but the actual results (the numbers) don't always turn out the way we want.  

I think that is exactly what happened with volleyball this season.  I was hoping we could make it to the Elite 8, but didn't think we had the consistency to make it past that point.  We could have beaten Wisconsin with a just a few different outcomes at key points in the match but it didn't turn out that way.  The primary reason for my thinking about our team's limits was that we were still unsettled at the setter position.  There is simply no replacement for time in getting setters and hitters in sync.  Parks' early inconsistency against top talent and injuries just made it difficult to get the team flowing the way needed to make it to the elite level.  I also think we didn't quite have the fire power from our outside hitters even though Rubin was extraordinary and Blyashov came on strong at the end.  Still it was a really good season for a very young team.  I have high hopes for the upcoming seasons.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

It is well known that one person’s eye test is not necessarily that of another.   This is why there is science and evidence-based medicine.  It is all too easy to suffer from confirmation bias even if your intentions are good and your expertise is high.

I felt that confirmation bias was definitely impacting people's view of the setter situation.  But other factors also contributed to the preference for Yu.  First, Yu often came in when Parks was having a bad game.  Whether that was because Parks was a freshman and showing inconsistency or having difficulty adjusting to the talent and pressure of the games against top teams.  Or it could have been any number of other reasons.  Regardless of the reason, when Yu replaced her, it often calmed the team down and the offense started flowing better.  I'm sure Yu's numbers were better in those few matches but Yu also started several matches and her overall numbers were not better than Parks' numbers.

During some of Yu's starts I specifically watched for sets that were off line or showed missed timing.  She had plenty of poor sets but they weren't as off as some of Parks' poor sets.  Nonetheless, Yu's poor sets still resulted in easy blocks by the opposition or a weak kill by Stanford resulting in a point opportunity for the other team.  Parks had wider variability in her setting and I think that frustrated many of us.  

However, Parks is a better blocker than Yu and that helped the team have more success when she was in the game.  After Parks came back from the injury and played on the road at Louisville, I felt really good.  She had 64 assists and Stanford hit .324 for the match.  That is the Parks with the high ceiling that Hambly, and I'm sure the rest of the team, sees in games and practices.  As fans, we want a solution to weaknesses on the team so we tend to imbue the backup (setter, quarterback, point guard) with qualities colored by our hopes but the actual results (the numbers) don't always turn out the way we want.  

I think that is exactly what happened with volleyball this season.  I was hoping we could make it to the Elite 8, but didn't think we had the consistency to make it past that point.  We could have beaten Wisconsin with a just a few different outcomes at key points in the match but it didn't turn out that way.  The primary reason for my thinking about our team's limits was that we were still unsettled at the setter position.  There is simply no replacement for time in getting setters and hitters in sync.  Parks' early inconsistency against top talent and injuries just made it difficult to get the team flowing the way needed to make it to the elite level.  I also think we didn't quite have the fire power from our outside hitters even though Rubin was extraordinary and Blyashov came on strong at the end.  Still it was a really good season for a very young team.  I have high hopes for the upcoming seasons.  

Cheers,
Pete F.