Nice graph of when teams start trying to miss FTs down 2:
1 Like
Call a TO in between FTs:
1 Like
Introduces an interesting challenge for deciding whether to call a timeout when your player is the one shooting free throws late-game. Is it worth taking the percentage hit to get the defense set up/make your fouling plan?
2 Likes
Eamonnās newsletter today had a conversation with Torvik. I thought this snippet, where Bart talks about his system, was nice to have all in one blurb:
Re: the general ratings, they are fairly similar to Kenpom, the NET, and BPI. Like Kenpom and the NET, the core of the ratings is based on adjusted offensive and defensive efficiency: points scored and allowed per possession, adjusted for strength of opponent and the location of the game. There are additional adjustments that give recent games more weight and give very little or no weight to blowouts in mismatches.
My ratings have two more unique aspects. First, for each game I use play-by-play data to determine a teamās average lead or deficit, and derive an alternate calculation of efficiency using that data, which I then average with the āpureā efficiency. This rewards what some call āgame controlā in football. In short, a team that gets up 15 points and maintains that lead will have a better rating than a team that played a close game and then stretched the lead to fifteen in the final minutes (even though the pure efficiency numbers will be identical).
Second, and relatedly, I disregard garbage time for purposes of calculating this āGameScript +/-ā stat. This further deemphasizes relatively meaningless fluctuations in the final score, and provides some disincentive to run up the score.
Wins Above Bubble is ultimately based on wins and losses only, but it uses the underlying power rating to give more credit for wins over better teams (and more punishment for losses to worse teams). Using any power rating, you can calculate how many wins a bubble-quality team would expect to win against any given teamās schedule. For example, under my system a bubble quality team would on average be expected to have won 19.1 games against Wisconsinās pre-tourney schedule last year. Since Wisconsin actually won 22 games against that schedule, they had a WAB of +2.9. If theyād won 17 games, theyād have had a WAB of -2.1.
6 Likes
That āgame controlā thing is interesting. I didnāt know he did that. It sounds like a good idea, but the one thing he didnāt say (in this snippet anyway) is whether heās in fact found it to be incrementally predictive. I assume he has, because why else do it (and how would you structure it if predictivity isnāt the target) and if so, youād think kenpom would follow suit on that, eventually. (Same question on garbage time. You can decide to disregard it for incentive reasons, but does disregarding it make your model worse? I feel like I maybe read a kenpom blog to that effect long ago.)
I need to read this whole article.
5 Likes
I missed this when it came out, but some interesting data-driven musings on roster construction from Mr. EvanMiya:
1 Like
Oh man, Kenās most controversial take ever! But more seriously, I always enjoy reading Ken because he doesnāt give a crap about the conventional wisdom. (And TV Teddy is still an ass 
)
3 Likes
Enjoyed that one, and yeah, Ken loves to poke at peopleās data-untethered assumptions. My hypothesis is that peopleās dislike of Teddy is a function of his longevity. Itās inevitable for refs to make a high-leverage call (or 12) that will go against a particular team, and the more you officiate, the more teams this will happen with, so the dislike spreads around fanbases. But then the better refs (on average) will continue to get the high profile assignments and then you get a divergence between how good the ref is seen by their org and how fans see them.
2 Likes
I donāt think of TV Teddy as TV Teddy because he calls the most fouls, I think of him as TV Teddy because he seems to always call them in the biggest moment and does his motions like heās participating in a workout class.
4 Likes
Yep. Heās actually one of the better referees. But he LOVES the spotlightā¦and that comes through in the theatrics when making a call and his tendency to seek out controversial calls in key moments.
Iād still rather him do a game than most.
5 Likes
Yeah, agree with aspects of what everyone is saying, including Ken:
- TV teddy is a good ref. I think heās particularly good at a place like Cameron because he has no compunction about pissing people off
- The human compunction to not piss people off unnecessarily is the reason that refs tend to give the homer whistle
- TV Teddy is TV teddy because he relishes the big moment / big call NOT because he calls a lot of fouls
Perfect example of how Ken is very good at data analysis but heās not always great at data interpretation
4 Likes
The big data takeaway is the GOAT Roger Ayers is #2. 
4 Likes
I also find it ironic that he is contextualizing a āgoodā ref by how few calls he makesā¦when a lot of the trend over the last few years was to enforce more foul calling (freedom of movement, hand checking, etc.) to create more offense.
Personally, I like my basketball to be a little more physical and despise the Buzz Williams-style of basketball where an offensive player goes heads down driving to force a whistle and a parade of free throws. So again, TV Teddy is good by me.
2 Likes
Luckie is the one that sends me into a blind rage more than most.
Also reminds me of this (decidedly qualitative) article from a few years ago that I think complements Kenās data nicely.
4 Likes
Yeah, I basically think there arenāt public stats which can tell us which refs are good / bad. Unless you rely on who gets the good games (which is basically what Ken does with his ref ratings). In order to know whoās good and bad, youād probably have to see Bryan Kerseyās database on this stuff. And I suspect he guards it pretty closely!
My beef with Kenās interpretation on this is that fans donāt dislike TV Teddy / nor have they given him that nickname because of the volume of fouls he calls. Thatās a silly leap of logic that Ken made that he never justifies.
On the first point, I think the fact that Tv teddy still gets good acc games suggests that Kersey thinks heās a good ref. But I make the opposite logical leap for the Big Ten: I think the reason he doesnāt get Big Ten games anymore is because he pissed someone off who he shouldnāt have pissed off, and he exhibited the same side of his personality that caused him to turn his back on Berry.
Also, according to this, Kersey is coordinator of officials for multiple leagues now, including A-10:
Whatās funny is that while I was still officiating D1 I went to an NCAA tournament game that Luckie officiated ā¦ I had a great view as I was in the 3rd row - 3 seats away from
Pat Riley.
That game Luckie had one terrible call where a player flopped and he fell for it. Outside of that he had what I thought was a perfect gameā¦that was back in 2009 or 2010. Since then heās only gotten worse as he ascended.
My memory tells me he has more bad games than good.
Valentine has a syndrome that affects a lot of officialsā¦. If he goes too long without a whistle, heāll tend to insert himself in a play he doesnāt belong in and get the call wrongā¦ and it may be at a crucial junctureā¦.sometimes with a 3 man crew the action and plays that need whistles just happen to be in your partnersā primary coverage area for long stretches. Itās a skill to stay focused and not be over officious in those scenariosā¦ a good thing to do is to talk to your team at a timeout and just say I havenāt had a whistle in a bitā¦ am I missing anything? Also in those scenarios if we had a double whistle on a play - let the guy who hasnāt had a call in a while take it to the table.
4 Likes
The thing Ken misses is that TV Teddy gets the rep not only or even mostly from fans on their couches. Itās from people courtside (fans, media, coaches) witnessing how he interacts with players and coaches, and that getting out to the world, validating the weird stuff about his games that fans notice.
Titus and Tate had a good story about him explicitly telling Ziaire Williams he called him for a foul because Williams looked incredulously at the ref earlier in the game. Basically, he wanted to put this freshman 5 star in his place.
Fans hear those stories, and can see some weird ass calls during games where it seems he makes calls to generate the most outrage. Then he gets the rep.
Like @haney said, thereās no metric for that brand of reffing. Itās driven not by a consistent lack of bad judgment, but rather selectively applied judgment, spikes in ego, etc. ā¦ all depending on particulars of the game.
I liken Teddyās approach to both sides media coverage thatās equally crappy to each side. He thinks heās being fair, but thatās not the outcome. The outcome is no one knows what to expect and you canāt calibrate your game based on the rules.
3 Likes
That whole segment was a great insight into Valentines reffing. Basically nonstop chatter with Williams all game (and nobody in the gym to make counter noise)
1 Like
Not to get political specificallyā¦ but more genericallyā¦ this is why term limits are so helpful. No matter how beloved or hated a politician isā¦ the longer they are in office, the more stuff people can throw dirt at them. Because there are so many āteddyā incidentsā¦ one builds a bias towards him. Iām glad there arenāt two referee āpartiesāā¦ would you want referees from the Ticky Tack Party or the Let it Ride Party? Who would you vote for? LOL!
- Ticky Tack Referee Party
- Let it Ride Referee Party
- Iām voting for the Independent Referee (essentially throwing your vote away)
0
voters