Will we beat Wisconsin next season?

[jmayer1]

You said MU would beat UW this year at MU (as did I and many others).  Why should we believe you now?

Buzz has never won a game at the Kohl and that can be said about a lot of good coaches.  Very difficult place to play.

Using that logic, why would should we believe you now, regardless of your prediction, since you were wrong last year as well?

Yep, in his many, many, many tries (1) Buzz has yet to win at the Kohl Center. It truly is a house of horrors for him!! Maybe you would like to phrase that a little differently as that wording, although true, sounds misleading, at least from my perspective.

[Pakuni]

I know we want to write it off to officiating, but that's not really the case.

I don't know think it's all officiating, but it certainly plays a part.
Henry Sugar did a nice breakdown several years back showing the huge foul disparity from which Bucky benefits when playing at Kohl versus away from Kohl.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=4694.msg38745#msg38745

Here's how things have broken down as far as foul disparity in the last eight MU-UW games:

'10 at BC: UW +2 (i.e. two more fouls called on UW)
'09 at Kohl: MU +9
'08 at BC: UW +10
'07 at Kohl: MU +4
'06 at BC: UW +4
'05 at Kohl: MU +12
'04 at BC: Even
'03 at Kohl: MU +11
'02 at BC: UW +2
'01 at Kohl: MU +9

So, in the last five games at UW, MU on average has been called for nine more fouls than Bucky. When playing at the BC, UW has been called for just 3.6 more fouls per game.
There's some truth to the argument that UW simply fouls less, but as Henry's analysis points out, even that doesn't fully account for the the foul disparity from which they benefit in home games.
So, the bottom line is that while I don't think officiating has cost MU games at UW, there's a provabale bias they (and any other team playing there) must overcome.

[GGGG]

But again, this analysis assumes that the disparity is due to referee bias, and not simply better performance by the home team....and/or worse performance by the road team.

[Henry Sugar]

I don't know think it's all officiating, but it certainly plays a part.
Henry Sugar did a nice breakdown several years back showing the huge foul disparity from which Bucky benefits when playing at Kohl versus away from Kohl.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=4694.msg38745#msg38745

Holy crap.  I forgot that I even wrote that. 

But again, this analysis assumes that the disparity is due to referee bias, and not simply better performance by the home team....and/or worse performance by the road team.

The disparity is due to referee bias.  The recently released book "Scorecasting" went through and looked at home court advantages.  Basically, home court advantage is about 59%, almost universally regardless of team or sport.  The primary reason is that referees make more judgement calls for the home team.  So... yeah, UW gets more home cooking.  But... Marquette benefits from the same type of advantage.

[whodem]

Valentyn and who?  Who was the second walk-on?

Smith

[bilsu]

Valentyn played in 24 games and scored 25pts
Wquentin Smith played in 26 games and scored 13pts
Brust played in 15 games and scored 10pts
Dukan played in 8 games and scored 2 pts.

[tower912]

Predicting ANY team to beat Bucky at the Kohl-hole is just plain sillly.    Ask Duke.  If the game were played on neutral site or at the BC, sure.   I think we will be a good team next year, but that place is cursed for OOC road teams, and not much better for B1? teams.     Thrilled if it happens, not betting any currency on it. 

[Lennys Tap]

Yep, in his many, many, many tries (1) Buzz has yet to win at the Kohl Center. It truly is a house of horrors for him!! Maybe you would like to phrase that a little differently as that wording, although true, sounds misleading, at least from my perspective.

Technically correct statements that nevertheless distort and give false impressions are an integral part of Chico's playbook.

[muguru]

Don't forget, UW also uses a different ball than all other teams when they play at home as well. Distinct advantage.

[SaintPaulWarrior]

Don't forget, UW also uses a different ball than all other teams when they play at home as well. Distinct advantage.

The smaller women's college basketball or the kicker's ball in the NFL?

[Aughnanure]

I don't know think it's all officiating, but it certainly plays a part.
Henry Sugar did a nice breakdown several years back showing the huge foul disparity from which Bucky benefits when playing at Kohl versus away from Kohl.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=4694.msg38745#msg38745

Here's how things have broken down as far as foul disparity in the last eight MU-UW games:

'10 at BC: UW +2 (i.e. two more fouls called on UW)
'09 at Kohl: MU +9
'08 at BC: UW +10
'07 at Kohl: MU +4
'06 at BC: UW +4
'05 at Kohl: MU +12
'04 at BC: Even
'03 at Kohl: MU +11
'02 at BC: UW +2
'01 at Kohl: MU +9

So, in the last five games at UW, MU on average has been called for nine more fouls than Bucky. When playing at the BC, UW has been called for just 3.6 more fouls per game.
There's some truth to the argument that UW simply fouls less, but as Henry's analysis points out, even that doesn't fully account for the the foul disparity from which they benefit in home games.
So, the bottom line is that while I don't think officiating has cost MU games at UW, there's a provabale bias they (and any other team playing there) must overcome.

This is a failed argument people constantly put out there when assessing if officiating had a role in the outcome of a game (nothing  against your analysis, you are in the majority that analyze it this way).

The problem with looking at it only through numbers is you never take into account when the foul was called and what was the outcome. Questions such as "Was there a change in possession," "Did it take a potential basket away," and of course "what fouls were NOT called." All too often, if you watch closely, fouls called for one side do not impact the game, change the possession or influence the momentum as much as the other. Numbers simply don't tell that story.

I am of the belief that there there is something wrong with a sport when a team can win 60+ straight by just playing at a certain venue (Kansas, Wisconsin). I dont care how great that crowd is, if that doesn't make you suspicious of the integrity of the officiating (especially in such an unpredictable sport) then nothing will.

[brewcity77]

The problem with looking at it only through numbers is you never take into account when the foul was called and what was the outcome. Questions such as "Was there a change in possession," "Did it take a potential basket away," and of course "what fouls were NOT called." All too often, if you watch closely, fouls called for one side do not impact the game, change the possession or influence the momentum as much as the other. Numbers simply don't tell that story.

Another key factor, when did the fouls happen? If a team is up by single digits, it's possible that they'll get sent to the line 5-6 times in the final two minutes, which could easily contribute heavily to such a foul discrepancy.

[Sir Lawrence]

No, yes you're nuts.

This.  Wish I could disagree, but I cannot.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Using that logic, why would should we believe you now, regardless of your prediction, since you were wrong last year as well?

Yep, in his many, many, many tries (1) Buzz has yet to win at the Kohl Center. It truly is a house of horrors for him!! Maybe you would like to phrase that a little differently as that wording, although true, sounds misleading, at least from my perspective.

Fair point....I guess the difference is that I'm not in a man relationship with Buzz like ners is (his words, not mine) so I try not to let the love emotional aspect creep into it.   

You are also correct that he's only had one go of it so far at the Kohl, but he is 1-2 against Wisconsin overall...TC wasn't great against them either.  We have not exactly come away with that many victories against Wisconsin regardless of who the coach is in the last decade +.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Holy crap.  I forgot that I even wrote that. 

The disparity is due to referee bias.  The recently released book "Scorecasting" went through and looked at home court advantages.  Basically, home court advantage is about 59%, almost universally regardless of team or sport.  The primary reason is that referees make more judgement calls for the home team.  So... yeah, UW gets more home cooking.  But... Marquette benefits from the same type of advantage.

Scorecasting....great read.  Recommend everyone grab a copy.  Well written, data centric...a real joy.

What sucks for us, however, is that we haven't been able to cash in on that same "bias" when Wisconsin comes to MU...at least not translated into wins.

I love how Scorecasting gets into NBA home court stuff....damn near makes you want to scream conspiracy.   

[GGGG]

Valentyn played in 24 games and scored 25pts
Wquentin Smith played in 26 games and scored 13pts

OK, I thought that Smith started as a walk-on but got a scholarship last year.  I might be wrong however.

[GGGG]

The disparity is due to referee bias.  The recently released book "Scorecasting" went through and looked at home court advantages.  Basically, home court advantage is about 59%, almost universally regardless of team or sport.  The primary reason is that referees make more judgement calls for the home team.  So... yeah, UW gets more home cooking.  But... Marquette benefits from the same type of advantage.

No, it proves that home teams get more calls.  That *could* be referree bias, but it could also be the difference in how a home team plays on its home court.  That study doesn't objectively point to any bias, but it could by hypotesized from the results.

[Henry Sugar]

No, it proves that home teams get more calls.  That *could* be referree bias, but it could also be the difference in how a home team plays on its home court.  That study doesn't objectively point to any bias, but it could by hypotesized from the results.

I went back to the book and looked through that chapter again.  To quote... "Long story short, referee bias could well be the main reason for home court advantage in basketball".

The primary areas where referee bias matters are in ambiguous calls.  Loose ball fouls.  Blocking vs charging calls.  Other fouls that cause a change in possession.  Palming / traveling.

So I went and looked at all of UW's available data (2003 - 2011), and then eliminated any team worse that Pomeroy 200.  (Note, typically I like to eliminate any team worse than 100, but then we'd cut out a bunch of UW's conference opponents.  ha.)

On offense
eFG% - UW shoots 52% (H), 49% (A), 47% (N)
TO% - 15.4% (H), 18% (A), 15.9% (N)
OR% - 33% (H), 33% (A), 30% (N)
FTR - 44% (H), 32% (A), 37% (N)

Noticeable difference on turnovers and FTR.  Some improvement on eFG%.  The area least subjected to referee impact (OR%) stays constant.  The turnovers and FTR are consistent with the theory of referee bias.  The eFG% are consistent with the theory that UW plays better at home.

On defense
eFG% - 47% (H), 49% (A), 48% (N)
TO% - 21% (H), 18.6% (A), 18.7% (N)
OR% - 27% (H), 31% (A), 29% (N)
FTR - 27% (H), 36% (A), 34% (N)

Again, there's a big difference in turnovers forced for home/away as well as FTR for home vs away.  There is some difference on eFG%, but it's closer.   There's also a difference in OR%.

====

Honestly, I now accept referee bias as a facet of human nature more than some conspiracy.  UW's fans do a good job influencing the refs.  Probably better than many schools.  The lesson for MU should be that we should boo vigorously anytime an ambiguous call goes against the team.  And cheer mightily when ambiguous calls go for MU.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Honestly, I now accept referee bias as a facet of human nature more than some conspiracy.  UW's fans do a good job influencing the refs.  Probably better than many schools.  The lesson for MU should be that we should boo vigorously anytime an ambiguous call goes against the team.  And cheer mightily when ambiguous calls go for MU.

Absolutely.  It's not a matter of purposely making calls as the book states.  It's more about getting caught up with the crowd, human nature, etc.  The blind studies they did when they put refs in front of the television and took all the sound away and the different it made was quite revealing.  They're humans, they get influenced subconsciously.

Great book

[GGGG]

Honestly, I now accept referee bias as a facet of human nature more than some conspiracy.  UW's fans do a good job influencing the refs.  Probably better than many schools.  The lesson for MU should be that we should boo vigorously anytime an ambiguous call goes against the team.  And cheer mightily when ambiguous calls go for MU.

OK thanks for this.  I am not saying that referee bias doesn't exist, but I don't think it exists to the extent that fans of road teams think it does.  Home teams do play better at home and that is a factor too.

[Henry Sugar]

OK thanks for this.  I am not saying that referee bias doesn't exist, but I don't think it exists to the extent that fans of road teams think it does.  Home teams do play better at home and that is a factor too.

I'd like to know how you would go about proving that statement.  The only data that seems to back that up is the offensive eFG%.  Meanwhile, I could make the case that every other discrepancy (including defensive eFG%) is a result of referee bias.

Marquette benefits from referee bias too. 

[Slim]

Henry, I missed you these last several weeks. Your quantitative analysis of college basketball is one of the reasons I log on to MUSCOOP. Thank you. There are many on this board that provide insight that I greatly appreciate. There are others I would like to take out to the back alley and beat the crap out of.

GTST ( except the ones I want to beat the crap out of)

[NersEllenson]

Fair point....I guess the difference is that I'm not in a man relationship with Buzz like ners is (his words, not mine) so I try not to let the love emotional aspect creep into it.   

You are also correct that he's only had one go of it so far at the Kohl, but he is 1-2 against Wisconsin overall...TC wasn't great against them either.  We have not exactly come away with that many victories against Wisconsin regardless of who the coach is in the last decade +.

Yes Chicos - I do have an absolute man crush on Buzz Williams - and have no shame in admitting it.  A lot better than being in the closet, as you continue to be about your immense love of Tom Crean.  Your continued skepticism and wait and see approach on Buzz is comical - its only going to be a matter of a few years to where the performance of MU under Buzz makes you look like an even bigger idiot than you already are.  Buzz is a man's man.  Tom Crean is a poser - which makes it no surprise that you would identify with him and be a fan of his.  A man doesn't let ESPN break the news to his team that he's leaving them behind - he man's up and tells them on his own.

[bilsu]

Of course I look at the game with an MU bias, but these are some of the things I have seen at games at UW.

Dwayne Wade getting called for three quick fouls in first half resulting in MU going down 21 points and first half. MU coming back to were they are one. Two plays in a row MU turns ball over and Harris turns it into fast break baskets. the first one was Henry's fault. The second one was no contact called on a shot right at the hoop.

Scott Merrit backing down Wilkenson(?) for the potential winning basket and getting called for traveling instead of Wilkenson getting the foul.

Hank Raymonds getting a technical at a crucial time.

I sure there are other times, but these are the ones that stick out in my memory.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Yes Chicos - I do have an absolute man crush on Buzz Williams - and have no shame in admitting it.  A lot better than being in the closet, as you continue to be about your immense love of Tom Crean.  Your continued skepticism and wait and see approach on Buzz is comical - its only going to be a matter of a few years to where the performance of MU under Buzz makes you look like an even bigger idiot than you already are.  Buzz is a man's man.  Tom Crean is a poser - which makes it no surprise that you would identify with him and be a fan of his.  A man doesn't let ESPN break the news to his team that he's leaving them behind - he man's up and tells them on his own.

Some people here have been banned recently for personal insults.  I'm trying to take the high road of late, but I don't always succeed.

I'll lay this out as clearly as I can.  I appreciate Crean for what he did, putting us into a spot that made it attractive for a Buzz Williams to quit his gig after one year and come work for MU.  Having a Dwyane Wade represent the university, now potentially playing for another NBA title, going to the Final Four, graduating nearly everyone, etc, etc.   Crean may be a poser, of course you consistently have said you had no issues with him but seems character is now revealed...finally.

I like Buzz, always have and probably always will.  Good guy, definitely not a poser.  I have been consistent from day one that I will wait to see what happens with his guys, that typically takes 4 or 5 years. So far so good.  I'll stick to it....you fall in love easier than I do....I like to kick the tires, take her for a few test drives before getting down on one knee.  I've seen way too many Bruiser Flints, Steve Lavin at UCLA, etc, etc to not be cautious. 

God Bless and have a wonderful Friday the 13th.