THE REFS - the 538 nerds weigh in

[msgkings322]

Good article, countering some of the usual myths about NBA refereeing

Busting 4 Major Myths About Referees In The NBA Playoffs

The NBA playoffs come with an intensified microscope on everyone, referees maybe most of all. Typically an afterthought (with some exceptions) during the regula…

fivethirtyeight.com

 

[DJ]

Nice.

Let's see what the usual complainers say.

 

[msgkings322]

Nice.

Let's see what the usual complainers say.

They pretty much quoted some of us before debunking...even brought up Scott Foster lol

 

[DJ]

They pretty much quoted some of us before debunking...even brought up Scott Foster lol

They are watching us!!!!

 

[trojanfan12]

They are watching us!!!!

 

[Mecca]

Nice.

Let's see what the usual complainers say.

* lurks *

 

[Mecca]

Good article, countering some of the usual myths about NBA refereeing

Busting 4 Major Myths About Referees In The NBA Playoffs

The NBA playoffs come with an intensified microscope on everyone, referees maybe most of all. Typically an afterthought (with some exceptions) during the regula…

fivethirtyeight.com

Myth 1- Nobody is perfect.

I would just like them to be BETTER.

Myth 2- This is where I come in.

I understand why it’s not.

But, I totally want it to be public.

Myth 3- LMFAO

I have heard this on Twitter and in person.

Arizonans are convinced he is cheating CP3.

Myth 4- this kinda applies to some in the NBA thread.

They don’t go full blown conspiracy theory.

But, it has been said that certain teams, with non star players *cough Reaves*, gets a generous whistle.

 

[ElPatron1]

Tim Donaghy is the ref tonight!​

 

[trojanfan12]

Myths 1-4: Pretty much exactly what @tlance and I have been saying all along.

So the rest of y'all can stfu now.

 

[wildturkey]

Myth #1 is a total strawman. Not one reasonable person is stating they have to be perfect all the time. But there has been a decline in quality if you watch the game. The piece mentions they don't release the raw accuracy (which would definitely show whether its true or not) but just says in recent years it hovers around 92 to 95%. Ok, yeah. But compared to what? Have they always been that way? What if they've been 97 to 98% say 8, 10, 15 years ago and now are at 92%? Doesn't even have to be that. What if its like they said and they've been 95% but have strung together 92% for a few seasons. That's still a decline that's noticeable. This has been my argument all along. Not that they aren't perfect. There will be misses. But that there's been a decline in quality. In the NBA specifically, they've had a lot of older officials retire over the last couple of years and brought in newer officials. They just aren't up to snuff (yet) of what it has been in the past. That can be expected given the situation, but its not crazy to point it out.The players, current and older, also mention how the newer officials don't communicate well like they older officials did too, which is affecting the game as well in regards to technical fouls and such. This isn't just a oh fans are mad thing, calls have always been missed situation that can be just handwaved away because reffing is hard. It's a real thing that you can see and players/coaches have picked up on and talked about. It's not awful or a crisis, but it is something.


Also, small tangent. Wtf is this quote? While baseball does have a theoretical strikezone, its always largely been subjective the the ump. Like everyone who has ever played knows each ump is slightly different calling balls and strikes. Not the best example to use there

High-level basketball is impossible to officiate perfectly. It’s a far more dynamic game than, say, baseball, where nearly every decision is black-and-white in nature — there’s more subjectivity and gray area than any other major sport.

 

[msgkings322]

Myths 1-4: Pretty much exactly what @tlance and I have been saying all along.

So the rest of y'all can stfu now.

I guess y'all are nerds too

 

[tlance]

Myth #1 is a total strawman. Not one reasonable person is stating they have to be perfect all the time. But there has been a decline in quality if you watch the game. The piece mentions they don't release the raw accuracy (which would definitely show whether its true or not) but just says in recent years it hovers around 92 to 95%. Ok, yeah. But compared to what? Have they always been that way? What if they've been 97 to 98% say 8, 10, 15 years ago and now are at 92%? Doesn't even have to be that. What if its like they said and they've been 95% but have strung together 92% for a few seasons. That's still a decline that's noticeable. This has been my argument all along. Not that they aren't perfect. There will be misses. But that there's been a decline in quality. In the NBA specifically, they've had a lot of older officials retire over the last couple of years and brought in newer officials. They just aren't up to snuff (yet) of what it has been in the past. That can be expected given the situation, but its not crazy to point it out.The players, current and older, also mention how the newer officials don't communicate well like they older officials did too, which is affecting the game as well in regards to technical fouls and such. This isn't just a oh fans are mad thing, calls have always been missed situation that can be just handwaved away because reffing is hard. It's a real thing that you can see and players/coaches have picked up on and talked about. It's not awful or a crisis, but it is something.


Also, small tangent. Wtf is this quote? While baseball does have a theoretical strikezone, its always largely been subjective the the ump. Like everyone who has ever played knows each ump is slightly different calling balls and strikes. Not the best example to use there

Myth one is not a straw man at all.

It is data that backs up exactly what I have been saying all along.

Officiating has not gotten worse. In fact, if anything it has gotten better.

There is just way more attention paid to missed calls due to social media. So the perception is that it is worse.

But it really isn’t.

Officials will always miss calls because the job is impossibly hard. You just didn’t see the slow no replay from 4 different angles posted with a meme about how terrible the ref is 25 years ago.

The communication part?

I don’t know. I doubt that it is worse today, but that claim could be legit.

 

[fightinfunbags]

This article debuts and Tony Brothers says, “Oh yeah? Watch this shit”.

 

[thunderc]

Refs that were working with Donaghy are still around. Not a myth.

 

[fightinfunbags]

Refs that were working with Donaghy are still around. Not a myth.

They’re all from my area. Delaware County PA outside of Philly. It’s crazy how many NBA officials have come out of there.

 

[thunderc]

They’re all from my area. Delaware County PA outside of Philly. It’s crazy how many NBA officials have come out of there.

Makes it easier to plan in the off season

 

[Mecca]

Myth #1 is a total strawman. Not one reasonable person is stating they have to be perfect all the time. But there has been a decline in quality if you watch the game. The piece mentions they don't release the raw accuracy (which would definitely show whether its true or not) but just says in recent years it hovers around 92 to 95%. Ok, yeah. But compared to what? Have they always been that way? What if they've been 97 to 98% say 8, 10, 15 years ago and now are at 92%? Doesn't even have to be that. What if its like they said and they've been 95% but have strung together 92% for a few seasons. That's still a decline that's noticeable. This has been my argument all along. Not that they aren't perfect. There will be misses. But that there's been a decline in quality. In the NBA specifically, they've had a lot of older officials retire over the last couple of years and brought in newer officials. They just aren't up to snuff (yet) of what it has been in the past. That can be expected given the situation, but its not crazy to point it out.The players, current and older, also mention how the newer officials don't communicate well like they older officials did too, which is affecting the game as well in regards to technical fouls and such. This isn't just a oh fans are mad thing, calls have always been missed situation that can be just handwaved away because reffing is hard. It's a real thing that you can see and players/coaches have picked up on and talked about. It's not awful or a crisis, but it is something.


Also, small tangent. Wtf is this quote? While baseball does have a theoretical strikezone, its always largely been subjective the the ump. Like everyone who has ever played knows each ump is slightly different calling balls and strikes. Not the best example to use there

Go watch the Clippers vs Suns last night.

Unsavory shit.

 

[ElPatron1]

I don't care what that article says, when i lose a bet it's 100% the refs fault lol

 

[wildturkey]

Myth one is not a straw man at all.

It is data that backs up exactly what I have been saying all along.

Officiating has not gotten worse. In fact, if anything it has gotten better.

There is just way more attention paid to missed calls due to social media. So the perception is that it is worse.

But it really isn’t.

Officials will always miss calls because the job is impossibly hard. You just didn’t see the slow no replay from 4 different angles posted with a meme about how terrible the ref is 25 years ago.

The communication part?

I don’t know. I doubt that it is worse today, but that claim could be legit.

It is a complete strawman because "The refs have to be perfect" isn't a position. It's absurd from the start. But its positioned as being legit, they set up that refs will always miss some calls (which of course they will), throw out a couple of percentages showing that the refs miss a few calls but get most right, and then claim victory over the refs have to be perfect myth. That is a strawman. It's taking the legitimate claim that the refs are missing calls, there could be a problem here, are they getting worse position and flipping it to the refs have to be perfect.

 

[msgkings322]

It is a complete strawman because "The refs have to be perfect" isn't a position. It's absurd from the start. But its positioned as being legit, they set up that refs will always miss some calls (which of course they will), throw out a couple of percentages showing that the refs miss a few calls but get most right, and then claim victory over the refs have to be perfect myth. That is a strawman. It's taking the legitimate claim that the refs are missing calls, there could be a problem here, are they getting worse position and flipping it to the refs have to be perfect.

What do you have backing up 'they are getting worse'?