Exactly! If Self had one quick look at the 3 pt stats (or other long jump shots) and considering that he was of the opinion that he was being killed in the paint (he actually said so), taking away our game in the lane was a natural response.
Quit the whining please!
- Thread starter ukcatfaninsc
- Start date
Exactly! If Self had one quick look at the 3 pt stats (or other long jump shots) and considering that he was of the opinion that he was being killed in the paint (he actually said so), taking away our game in the lane was a natural response.
Especially when you factor in that our 3 point shooting isn't great at all, I think he did the right thing.
On another night maybe Hawkins hits that wide open 3 or Briscoe makes the free throws in OT.
The main takeaway I get from this is that our team, which struggled on the road up till this point, played at one of the toughest places in college basketball and took them to OT. We played good AT Arkansas and now this game. Light years better than how we were at UCLA or on the neutral court vs OSU
The main takeaway I get from this is that our team, which struggled on the road up till this point, played at one of the toughest places in college basketball and took them to OT. We played good AT Arkansas and now this game. Light years better than how we were at UCLA or on the neutral court vs OSU
Not exactly sure, but I know they ended up taking like a 4 point (or so) lead with about 3-4 minutes to go, so the zone did get them back in the game and gained them the lead.
But then UK was still able to battle back over the next couple minutes against that brilliant zone and regain a 2 point lead with a minute to go. That's when Seldon hit a three to give them a 1 point lead. Then Murray was able to score again against that vaunted zone to put UK up by one with under 30 seconds left. Then cane the Ellis free throw for the tie and Ulis turn over to end regulation.
That's reinforces my point. The zone didn't completely shut down UK. Cal and the team adjusted just fine, and we're still able to score and get good, open looks on the zone. They just missed a few wide open shots that they should have made and couldn't get stops on the defensive end because KU was being rewarded with free throws every trip.
I've said a lot??? Wow.
Didn't imply you didn't watch the game. Stated you are not correctly combining observation with the statistics. IE why ignore that stat but value the other stuff... why dispose of if - or assume we play poor D. It also completely ignores how KU played defense... and offense. Armbar Mason III for example. His asset - quickness - but if not allowed to armbar on offense and handcheck on defense - he is very average at best. Kinda average anyway. Poythress called for an offensive foul late in regulation on a clearly questionable call - whistle blew on his initial dribble - others have mentioned late whistles once a play didn't go the "correct way". Even with out those observations - the STATS bear out one sided calling. How is that even in debate?
Point is the refs DID make it that obvious - to many of us anyway. If you cannot see that - then that's on you. The fouls called and fta's bear that out.
The stats don't bear it out. All they say is one team went to the line more than another team. The majority think that's on refs. That's where we differ. The WHY part of this.
There's four factors that contribute to offensive or defensive efficiency. Shooting (effective FG%), Turnovers (Turnover %), Rebounding (Rebounding%) and getting to the line (Free Throw Rate).
Just as there are teams that shoot well, there are teams that don't foul or do a good job getting fouled and vice versa.
The main difference is people is how many people view it as a skill and how many view it as a product of refs.
South Carolina leads the NCAA is Free Throw Rate. Is it more believable they just do a better job at drawing fouls or that the refs just like them and decide to call more fouls for them? Not surprisingly they are a team that doesn't take many 3s (310th).
You keep pointing out specific instances in one game. The fact of the matter is what I'm talking about is a season wide issue.
This is where you lose me. I think you are a reasonable guy, but I honestly don't see how you can believe that we fouled that much more than they did. 24-9 in the second half is a joke. And only about 3 of those were intentional at the end.
I posted about this before, but again this is false. Ulis and Briscoe had two drives to the basket each in the 2nd half (not OT). Poythress had a dunk. Lee had 2 baskets in the lane. All in the second half. And if you watch it again, they were not doing that triangle and two as much as people think.
That doesn't really negate anything in his post though. Have they not had many many OTs games during those 600 games? They had a triple OT game just this year.
16 tho were in OT. By that time I believe Lee and Willis were out. Once we started to lack inside presence, the fouling accumulated.
Actually it goes even further. Willis fouled out at the 4:51 mark. KU had 24 of their 47 after that time.
Lee fouled out at the 1:21 mark.
It forced us to go with Skal who we already know has major issues with fouling.
Eitherway despite what I feel to be a big issue, we probably don't give up 47 free throws again. The fact we were even in this game giving up that many shows that we have a really good team that's only getting better IMO
I can't imagine. In the last 15 years I did a quick check and counted 24 OT games.
And I have to image that while 47 might have been a record, I'm sure they have had games in the 40s as we have in the past.
This game ends in regulation and it's 31 attempts which is perfectly normal in a 40 min game. I just think once Willis and Lee went to the bench we had big issues.
My last.... and it's not even an attempt to convince. Yes - I am pointing to specific instances about this one game - because THE THREAD IS ABOUT ONE GAME. You are convinced of your viewpoint and feel you can statistically back that up - good. I cannot convince you otherwise. You are right and we are all wrong.
For reference though FG % we won. TO's we had one more (on some questionable calls to some). Rebounding we lost and Free throws we greatly lost. I just don't get how that proves your point - but to you it does. To me - rebounding is a physical part of the game where fouls are (and were) called - often subjectively. and FTA's were greatly in their favor - you think that makes them more efficient in their offensive approach... you're entitled. Your approach ignores what can be observed in a game, and non-calls are not valued in your stats. Players fouling out is ignored in your stats, Coaching adjustments with personnel and strategy are ignored in your stats. A team gets 25 more free looks at scoring and takes out 4 players who are needed for defense and rebounding - and that is not noted as a clear advantage - one attributable to reffing? I get it's Kansas, etc... but it's still what it is. Several national commentators and opposing fan bases noted it as well... sadly they haven't been treated to your enlightened statistical analysis, and thus corrected.
At this point it's talking to a brick wall. I tried and I'm done. I did not complain about reffing vs OSU, UCLA or LSU. I can be objective.
For reference though FG % we won. TO's we had one more (on some questionable calls to some). Rebounding we lost and Free throws we greatly lost. I just don't get how that proves your point - but to you it does. To me - rebounding is a physical part of the game where fouls are (and were) called - often subjectively. and FTA's were greatly in their favor - you think that makes them more efficient in their offensive approach... you're entitled. Your approach ignores what can be observed in a game, and non-calls are not valued in your stats. Players fouling out is ignored in your stats, Coaching adjustments with personnel and strategy are ignored in your stats. A team gets 25 more free looks at scoring and takes out 4 players who are needed for defense and rebounding - and that is not noted as a clear advantage - one attributable to reffing? I get it's Kansas, etc... but it's still what it is. Several national commentators and opposing fan bases noted it as well... sadly they haven't been treated to your enlightened statistical analysis, and thus corrected.
At this point it's talking to a brick wall. I tried and I'm done. I did not complain about reffing vs OSU, UCLA or LSU. I can be objective.
This thread is about one game. But it illustrates an issue which we've had the entire season. We didn't just starting fouling in this game. It's been the norm.
I don't see how things are "ignored" in the stats. We've already talked about players fouling out and that having an effect on the game. We discussed strategy. We talked for pages among pages about Self changing his defense and that having an effect.
The entire thread can be summed up in his regard.
Free Throw Rate (ie the ability to get fouled and on defense the ability to not foul) is either viewed as skill or affected by the refs. No one argues that bad calls aren't made from time to time. No one argues the ref doesn't play some role. That's why when you point out specific instances in a game where 47 free throws were attempted well so what. You could go to any game UK has ever played and pick bad calls for UK just as well as you can do this for any team.
So to me there's groups here. Group 1 feels like this is 100% refs. I don't think many people fall into this category but those are the ones that completely look at the disparity and without any other thoughts immediately blame the refs for the difference. You'll see these threads. All they will do is point out the difference and immediately it's on the refs. But as I say I don't think many fall into this at all.
Then you have Group 2. This is where the majority fall into. This group realizes we have a fouling problem but still believe it's more the refs than actual skill. And that's fine to feel this way. None of these groups will be convinced to change positions. But people alot smarter than me came up with ways to measure efficiency of basketball teams. Free Throw rate is one of the major components. The skill is very real.
Then you have the minority group 3. These people realize that while the refs play some part, it's mostly a byproduct of a teams skill set. I fall into this category.
Ultimately it comes down to just how much stock you put into how much the ref affects the game. That's really all this is.
Why does that matter if I'm arguing against the majority. I know you have been on here during losses? Have u seen this board and how negative everyone gets? Some of the comments are the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Doesn't mean they are right tho.
I argued this point for these pages because the OP got blasted for having a different opinion than others.
I realize my position isn't the "popular" one but so what........it's my opinion.
so the board said an ignored poster just commented. Dont even know what he's saying but I know to say he's wrong.
As much as I root against Kentucky, yall got hosed. Should have been a no call on Perry-Ellis at the end too.
wow and I thought we had issues
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/is_washington_the_barry_bonds_of_disqualifications
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/is_washington_the_barry_bonds_of_disqualifications
Useless stats. How many of those fouls weren't really fouls. The officials call the fouls and we know they mess up a lot.
The point being, in this case, that the refs did affect the game. To deny that is to say, statistically most people in a mass shooting on a campus survive, based on the skill of self survival and escape, so statistically most people survive a mass shooting. But to the people inside the building where it's happening, their stats are far different and survival rate is less. Thus it is playing at Allen Field House... IN THAT BUILDING Normal overall STATS DO NOT APPLY. YOU ARE GOING TO GET JOBBED. ASK OKLAHOMA. ASKED THE BIG 12 in general. Watch the dang game and objectively evaluate the officiating. So to apply your generality to the specific is ignoring the specific of where the game was played and how it was called. You act like while officials are not perfect or robots, overall they are consistent. No way they could be wrong or it would be obvious. To many 47-22 and four rebounders fouled out IS OBVIOUS. Not to you - but to the normal person. You present false assumptions in categorizing people to have to fall into one of your groups, just no way the refs could have played a role. The ignored stat most blatant here are non-calls and poor calls, and their affect on the game DURING the game - not during a hindsight post game analysis. To have such an affection for Stats, you dismiss this fouls called and fta's.
In all of this - you have yet to address the way KU played defense and their lack of non calls. Statistically you are saying they play more than twice as clean foul free defense as UK. Really?
How is that useless? At what point does it become a trend for you? Or do you just feel that all refs are bias against UK?
I never said the refs were consistent. In fact, I think it's just the opposite. I think the refs are poor. I just think they are bad for both teams. I just think they are inconsistent for both teams. Of course you have to consider home field. And yeah I've said in many other posts the home team does get the benefit of the calls. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing the extent of that. Of course normal overall stats don't apply. You have to factor a home field advantage.
Home teams win 58% of the time this season. It's actually fairly low for college basketball compared to how it's been in the past. Usually the home field factor applied to ranking systems, vegas etc etc. is somewhere in the neighborhood of 3-4 points. Why do home teams have this advantage. Some of it is most certainly the more fouls called on opponents but it can be a ton of factors. Not having to travel, playing in a familiar arena etc etc.
I never said the refs play no role. I'm questioning the AMOUNT of role they play. I think it's overblown. And I'm not the only one that feels this way.
Let's take about the way KU played defense. The fouls were about even before they switched to the gimmick defense. Ulis was unable to get into the lane. No one was able to. Jump shooting teams get fouled less. I mean it's just a simple fact. Do fouls occur on jump shooters? Of course but not nearly as much as when you drive the ball in the lane. Do fouls occur on rebounds? Sure. But again not nearly as much.
We didn't get fouled because we lack aggression. Sure enough when OT hit Briscoe began to start driving the ball again and back to back possession he gets fouled.
It's not rocket science here. The more aggressive teams will get fouled.
There are a lot of naïve people in this world and it seems like UK has several.
It is useless because the officials call the fouls. Are you too naïve to realize this.
players commit fouls.
Not saying the refs don't make mistakes but the players foul or not.
So when a team fouls another team, you just believe it's the ref.......making up some call?
Why even play the game then. The outcome has already been pre determined by refs. If the refs want a specific team to win, they will just make sure to.
I can't believe that would be the case tho. Sure u might find a shady ref or two but refs change game by game. Yet the stats posted above give game by game issues where someone is in foul trouble. To me, it can't be that all refs are corrupt.
The officiating is bad. I mean I'm the same way you are most likely. I sit there and wonder how things can be called one game but not in another or even in the same game by the same officials. I don't want to blast them too much. I never reffed a basketball game. I did used to be a ref for soccer. I lasted one game lol. It's not easy to get everything correct.
Are there some refs that are corrupt.........perhaps. I mean you can make alot of money if u can control the outcome of a game. But when you play game after game and u have different refs and guys are still getting into foul trouble, at some point u have to think about what the team is doing defensively IMO
Lord You are exhausting... when you benefit being specific - you try to be specific - when it doesn't you go for generalities... lol. You said previously - refs were not perfect - but overall a non-factor - certainly not in this game. Correct? Second - I am not talking about a general home field advantage - it's Kansas where self is 200-9. So the extent is great. Their are no extenuating circumstances that give them an advantage there travel and crap... And again - the amount of a role the refs played in this game was a greater than 2 to 1 role in FTA's - again the extent is great. And the Briscoe argument... I sat and told my kids - we'll get a couple of make up calls here in the OT when it doesn't matter - and it will be on Briscoe who was struggling after his first 4 attempts. sooo... No - it's not rocket science to be sure. Kansas received 25 more free looks and our 4 bigs were fouled out. Those are stubborn facts, even supported statistically. Silly to throw those facts out to support hypothetical fairness. UK still had opportunities missed. Briscoe make FT's, 3's were not falling, Ulis fatigued at end, but to play 8 on 5 is tough for any team. To ignore that just discredits the point. No I do not at all think it's always that way... but in this instance... the facts are the facts. I'd love to see KU face those circumstances and come out in support of your hypothetical, pleased to shoot 25 less FT's and minus 4 bigs. LOL.
Show me another game where a team we have played shot 47 free throws? Also, that is what u call "Player speak" after a tough loss!
Did you see the stats for the Kansas guys? It shows they foul and foul out but they didn't on Saturday night? Numbers don't mean anything they can be twisted. Ref's are human and they do make mistakes but a one sided called game isn't a mistake.
Why was there such a wild difference from the first half to the second half. UK never changed the way they played defense ...
Good post and so true. How many players have come out and said anything negative about an official after a game.
they don't say anything about officiating unless they want repercussions. You don't go to mcdonalds and cuss out the drive thru workers unless you want a chance your food gets spit in.
Similar threads
