Quote:
Originally Posted by charder30
Meh, you're a smart guy Galen... I didn't watch the game but WVU has finished in the top 2 Nationally in turnover % the past 4 years. Thats an insane stat... WVU fouls a lot, like a lot. I have a hard time with WVU fans that cry foul over too many foul calls against them b/c I have watched a lot of WVU games in the past and they play more aggressive and commit more fouls than any power conference team that I have ever seen.
Kenpom doesn't have a "fouls called per posession" stat, so I guess the closest proxy is FTA/FGA
Out of 351 d-1 teams, WVU ranks 332nd this year
Last year, 313th
The year before that, 351st (dead last)
The year before that, 351st (dead last again)
So, over the last four years it seems probable that in the entire 351-team division, WVU is the team with the single most fouls called on them.
Which makes sense - they have the most aggressive press and force the most turnovers.
Since they have the highest volume of fouls committed and fouls called, it seems pretty likely that among all teams in the NCAA they also lead in fouls committed that the refs fail to call. It also seems likely/obvious that they lead the NCAA in fouls called on them that are not actually fouls.
So the question is, is the accuracy rate of fouls called against them higher or lower than the average team?
One countervailing argument seems to be that "they literally foul so much that refs' elasticity of foul calling gets pushed to the extremes, and even though they call more fouls on WV than any other team in the country, they won't actually call a foul on every single play, so the ratio of fouls gotten away with to phantom fouls tips in WV's favor."
This seems somewhat plausible, but I'm skeptical. The thing you're essentially arguing is that a team with the single worst reputation for fouling actually gets a longer leash from refs.**
As a corollary, let's try to argue that NBA players with reputations for earning lots of technical fouls would be less likely to get a T than a player with a reputation for not earning lots of technical fouls. Obviously, if you've ever watched Boogie or Sheed, you know the opposite to be true.
Or, let's look at James Harden, who has a rep for drawing lots of fouls. If he goes to the bucket and draws contact vs some other guard who does the same thing, is he more or less likely to get a call? Obviously more.
Now, these obviously aren't perfect allegories (especially the T one, because the same caution against calling an absurd amount isn't there), but I think it's at least a reasonable counter argument.
Also, I think we can all easily agree that the thing I was joking about is true as well - if WV does get a longer leash, it's certainly not because of any of the reasons that Duke or UNC might get more calls than Gonzaga or Butler. The name on the jerseys isn't driving any eyeballs for the NCAA.
Mostly, I think that WV probably gets called for fouls at roughly the same rate as other teams, but because there are so many more missed calls in each direction than fans are used to, and because you obviously index higher to your own teams' missed calls than missed calls in your favor, watching WV games will give opposing fans the sense that they're being screwed more than normal, while giving WV fans probably have developed a higher baseline for missed calls.
Then, there's also the particular context of the fouls that are called, rather than the literal number. I've seen games where we absolutely mug teams and get away with murder, especially late in the game. This particular game felt like we ran bad on the calls, not because I have a view on the total number, but in particular because two of the four calls against Carter were pretty obviously bad calls (no opinion on whether there were missed calls against him as well), which hurt much more than normal bad calls, because he was so effective in shutting down Young.
**And, I'm not even convinced that if this phenomenon is true, it's a reasonable thing to complain about. It just seems like a part of the game that smart coaches will adapt to and dumb coaches will whine about. Like, if you think it's true that refs won't call a foul on a drive to the basket for a game winner, then obviously it's smarter to step back for a jump shot rather than drive to the bucket, get fouled and then complain when you miss and lose. You can complain about what should or should not be the case, but if you agree that something is the case, then you shouldn't complain about coaches altering their decisions based on referee bias