Moving Screen

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

This is not really a big man issue. It's the guard's responsibility to use the pick correctly. The defending big man is not always stepping up/hedging against our guards. Just watch and you will see our guards (Cook especially - I commented on this in a different thread) dribbling high over the pick and ending up with nothing - their defender barely have to fight over the pick if at all. If the defending big man hedges out very far, then it's up to our guards to read this and either split the defenders or look for his big man rolling to the hoop. Easier said than done, I know, but the pick and roll is as basic as it gets. First play I learned in JV basketball. We just don't execute it well - at all.

[feldspar]

If the refs called everything that technically is a foul games would take 5 hours. The "good no call" really translates to an official using good judgement. There is a human element to officiating.

This. Technically speaking, 85% of the screens Miles sets are illegal. He doesn't get set, he sets up way too wide and sometimes he pushes off on the opposing player he's screening.

But in today's game, that's just the way players screen. Most of the screens set in today's game are illegal. So are the officials going to call all of them? No. Are they going to even call most of them? No. Nobody (especially us this year!) wants the game to devolve into a free throw shooting contest. So they have to call the ones they feel like, in their judgment, affect the players the most. That's what you saw last night on the calls on Miles. I didn't record the game to go and look back at the end of the game regarding what -bdbd was talking about in the last part of the game. But from what I saw, Miles put himself in position to pick up those fouls on the illegal screens, no question.

The rule of thumb that Fred Barakat brought to the ACC in the early 80s -- and by Hank Nichols nationally -- is whether a technical violation gives one player an advantage or not.

The refs are taught not to call "technical" violations that have no impact on play.

John Adams, the current grand poobah of NCAA officiating, has been speaking out a lot lately about the philosophy of officiating. Actually, he's been speaking out about turning it from a "philosophy" to more of a "science." And, with that, turning away from the advantage/disadvantage principles that have been used so much over the last 15-20 years and going to the RSBQ principle -- calling fouls based on whether contact affected the Rhythm, Speed, Balance or Quickness of the opposing player. In essence, Adams would like more fouls called during the game. Statistically speaking, the number of fouls per game has gone down significantly in the last 15 years or so, because officials have been taught to judge a play largely on whether or not they felt a player was put at an advantage or disadvantage on the play. Adams wants to move away from this and move more toward the NBA's way of doing things (and, whether you believe it or not, the NBA refs are absolute pros at calling the game according to the NBA rule book). It's just a different way of looking at things out on the court, but it's going to take a while for it to really incorporate itself across college basketball as a whole, especially because a lot of the camps that officials go to in the summer are still teaching adv/disadv principles as if they were sacrosanct.

[wilko]

John Adams, the current grand poobah of NCAA officiating, has been speaking out a lot lately about the philosophy of officiating. Actually, he's been speaking out about turning it from a "philosophy" to more of a "science." And, with that, turning away from the advantage/disadvantage principles that have been used so much over the last 15-20 years and going to the RSBQ principle -- calling fouls based on whether contact affected the Rhythm, Speed, Balance or Quickness of the opposing player. In essence, Adams would like more fouls called during the game. Statistically speaking, the number of fouls per game has gone down significantly in the last 15 years or so, because officials have been taught to judge a play largely on whether or not they felt a player was put at an advantage or disadvantage on the play. Adams wants to move away from this and move more toward the NBA's way of doing things (and, whether you believe it or not, the NBA refs are absolute pros at calling the game according to the NBA rule book). It's just a different way of looking at things out on the court, but it's going to take a while for it to really incorporate itself across college basketball as a whole, especially because a lot of the camps that officials go to in the summer are still teaching adv/disadv principles as if they were sacrosanct.

Great!! I'd love to see THIS.
Advantage/disadvantage is a load of hooey. If a player advances the ball the ball across mid court uncontested and palms the ball - it should be a turn over! NOT making that call puts the the other team at a disadvantage for following the rule when they advance the ball.

Basketball has gotten away (nearly too far way for my tastes) from being a technicians game and more about physical toughness. If we had a Pete Maravich in the college game CURRENTLY, how long would it take us to notice with the amount of bumping that's allowed?

Prolly a bad example because a transcendent talent always gets noticed, but the point stands in so much as it would be harder for him to do what he did TODAY based on the current playground philosophy so prevalent in games.

[Reilly]

If RSBQ were the order of the day, how many fouls would've been called against Butler in the '10 champ game? It really seemed to me they take advantage of the "the refs cannot call everything" mentality ...

[Newton_14]

If RSBQ were the order of the day, how many fouls would've been called against Butler in the '10 champ game? It really seemed to me they take advantage of the "the refs cannot call everything" mentality ...

No more than would have been called against UVA last night. Andre, Austin, and Seth have to be really sore this morning given all the illegal screens they fought through last night. I sat is Section 7 up behind UVA's bench, so all the wing screens in the 2nd half were right in front of us. I was amazed at how many times it happened with no call. UVA ran it over and over again and the big screening them was "hipping them" to death. It was crazy. I try to never complain about ref's as most times they get it right, but last night was pretty bad. They were calling touch fouls on Mason and Miles, and letting the UVA bigs kill our guards screening them. UVA's inside defense was very physical as well. Mason got thrown to the floor on a rebound attempt right in front of the ref with no call. K was on the ref's much more last night than normal. Not sure how much of that was visible on the TV telecast, but he ripped the little short, balding ref the entire game and rightly so. The Harris kid benefited greatly from the curls off the wing screens which made it very tough for our guys to stay with him.

[devildeac]

No more than would have been called against UVA last night. Andre, Austin, and Seth have to be really sore this morning given all the illegal screens they fought through last night. I sat is Section 7 up behind UVA's bench, so all the wing screens in the 2nd half were right in front of us. I was amazed at how many times it happened with no call. UVA ran it over and over again and the big screening them was "hipping them" to death. It was crazy. I try to never complain about ref's as most times they get it right, but last night was pretty bad. They were calling touch fouls on Mason and Miles, and letting the UVA bigs kill our guards screening them. UVA's inside defense was very physical as well. Mason got thrown to the floor on a rebound attempt right in front of the ref with no call. K was on the ref's much more last night than normal. Not sure how much of that was visible on the TV telecast, but he ripped the little short, balding ref the entire game and rightly so. The Harris kid benefited greatly from the curls off the wing screens which made it very tough for our guys to stay with him.

I was really trying to keep quiet about this but glad you posted your thoughts. I thought the Plumlees and Ryan got called for several touch fouls on Scott last PM and Mason appeared to be mugged most of the times he set up in the low post and worked his way to the rim. I don't K was so much upset about this as he was the illegal screens the UVa bigs set, mostly with hip checks and extra wide stances. He appeared especially demonstrative after Miles 2nd illegal screen (and 5th PF, IIRC) that really appeared minimal. Even the one PF called on Scott (who really is a fine player) was changed to #32 instead so I believe he ended up with 0 fouls according to the CIS scoreboard. Yea, yea, I know we won but the crowd last PM was really peeved at some of the contact not called on UVa last PM, mostly in the 2nd half, as K was as Newton pointed out above already.

[Zeke]

No more than would have been called against UVA last night. Andre, Austin, and Seth have to be really sore this morning given all the illegal screens they fought through last night. I sat is Section 7 up behind UVA's bench, so all the wing screens in the 2nd half were right in front of us. I was amazed at how many times it happened with no call. UVA ran it over and over again and the big screening them was "hipping them" to death. It was crazy. I try to never complain about ref's as most times they get it right, but last night was pretty bad. They were calling touch fouls on Mason and Miles, and letting the UVA bigs kill our guards screening them. UVA's inside defense was very physical as well. Mason got thrown to the floor on a rebound attempt right in front of the ref with no call. K was on the ref's much more last night than normal. Not sure how much of that was visible on the TV telecast, but he ripped the little short, balding ref the entire game and rightly so. The Harris kid benefited greatly from the curls off the wing screens which made it very tough for our guys to stay with him.

This is why I think there is no such thing as a "good no call" - it's really a missed call. It shouldn't be up to the ref as to what rule to enforce. That's what leads to official corruption.as was in the NBA several years ago (and no one recognized it for years).

[feldspar]

This is why I think there is no such thing as a "good no call" - it's really a missed call. It shouldn't be up to the ref as to what rule to enforce. That's what leads to official corruption.as was in the NBA several years ago (and no one recognized it for years).

There are lots of great no calls. You're implying that all contact should be a foul. That's not the case. Contact that has a major impact on a player's RSBQ should be penalized, but contact that has no impact should be a no-call. With ten players running around in a finite space, there is going to be contact.

[gumbomoop]

If the refs called everything that technically is a foul games would take 5 hours.

Technically speaking, 85% of the screens Miles sets are illegal. He doesn't get set, he sets up way too wide and sometimes he pushes off on the opposing player he's screening.

But in today's game, that's just the way players screen. Most of the screens set in today's game are illegal.

Over on the UVa post-game thread, I suggested that UVa's guys were better at executing their screens, meaning closer to legal than Duke's. I was gently corrected by Newton_14, and so decided to review the tape.

Having done so, I can see I was [mostly] wrong, and definitely wrong in implying that Assane Sene set "well executed" screens. First, I was struck by how many screens were set by both teams. Looking only at the screens certainly provided a different viewing experience. On a scale of closest to legal down to clearly illegal, and referring only to that single game, I'd say Mike Scott "best executed" his picks, whereas Sene's and Miles's often were either illegal or borderline so. Too much movement by Mason, too. Ryan's were closest to legal among our guys. Joe Harris set a good, legal, screen on Mason to give Scott the open look from the corner at the end.

I was also struck by how many screens were "offered" but not utilized at all by the dribbler, and by how often the illegal movement derived from the screener's desire to roll before "finishing" the job of screening. Further, it seems to me that if 4 or 5 of us sat in a room and reviewed screens in a non-Duke game, we'd disagree a lot, and would have to rely on the NCAA rule-book and super slo-mo technology to settle all disputes, of which a small % would actually be settled.

[Newton_14]

Over on the UVa post-game thread, I suggested that UVa's guys were better at executing their screens, meaning closer to legal than Duke's. I was gently corrected by Newton_14, and so decided to review the tape.

Having done so, I can see I was [mostly] wrong, and definitely wrong in implying that Assane Sene set "well executed" screens. First, I was struck by how many screens were set by both teams. Looking only at the screens certainly provided a different viewing experience. On a scale of closest to legal down to clearly illegal, and referring only to that single game, I'd say Mike Scott "best executed" his picks, whereas Sene's and Miles's often were either illegal or borderline so. Too much movement by Mason, too. Ryan's were closest to legal among our guys. Joe Harris set a good, legal, screen on Mason to give Scott the open look from the corner at the end.

I was also struck by how many screens were "offered" but not utilized at all by the dribbler, and by how often the illegal movement derived from the screener's desire to roll before "finishing" the job of screening. Further, it seems to me that if 4 or 5 of us sat in a room and reviewed screens in a non-Duke game, we'd disagree a lot, and would have to rely on the NCAA rule-book and super slo-mo technology to settle all disputes, of which a small % would actually be settled.

Thanks for the review and report. I still have not seen the TV tape yet, but watching it in person, it seemed like UVA ran way more screens than a normal game would have. I guess it is just the style of their offense, but I was struck by the amount.

Agree on the last point too. We all see plays differently sometimes, which is fine. Just the nature of the beast for a game with so much going on at once.

[feldspar]

Further, it seems to me that if 4 or 5 of us sat in a room and reviewed screens in a non-Duke game, we'd disagree a lot, and would have to rely on the NCAA rule-book and super slo-mo technology to settle all disputes, of which a small % would actually be settled.

You've just peeled back one of the many layers of why basketball officiating is so hard and why no one is ever satisfied with the way the three officials perform out on the court.