|
Post by vbsandman on Nov 5, 2006 10:49:20 GMT -5
Good Liberos make an incredible contribution to the success of their teams from consistent ball control passes to momentum changing digs but how are Liberos gauged against one another, when the playing fields are so uneven?
Blocks 1) Good blocking teams give their libero less attempts because the blockers are getting hands on more balls.
Scorer 1) Who keeps track and is it subjective? I have seen two teams scored 240 digs in a 3 game match and two other teams scored 54 in a competitive 3 game match. 2) What constitutes a dig? It seems as though some scorers give credit for pancake digs and/or block cover whereas other scorers do not. Some Liberos are uncanny at reading the dink, is that considered a dig?
Position 1) Some Liberos play middle back and receive credit for many loose ball digs while other liberos play the angle and line and although they don’t see as many digs, the digs they get are more sensational.
Serve Receive 1) Who keeps track of the quality of passes and the number of attempts?
|
|
|
Post by clonesvb on Nov 5, 2006 11:19:35 GMT -5
pancake digs should count according to the NCAA, but block cover digs should not. A lot of smaller conferences seem to count block cover, which makes NCAA dig statistics virtually irrelevent since it should not count. The bigger conferences do it right, the smaller simply do not.
Coaches often keep quality of serve receive, official stats do not.
|
|
|
Post by roy on Nov 5, 2006 13:31:13 GMT -5
Generally, the quality of the libero is hard to judge based solely off stats. In recent years, we have seen AA liberos simply due to hype. Gentil, Zartman, and Lee are all very good but received a lot of noteriety due to their reputation.
The AVCA says that there are generally 3 criteria to judge for an AA libero. Those are digs per game, reception errors, and service aces (now that the libero can serve). Reception errors is a quality stat. It is the one factor a player can completely control herself. A top libero can pass almost any serve decently and great liberos can pass it perfectly to the setter. However, I don't think they judge the quality of the pass which I am more in favor of.
Digs per game is a very misleading stat. Those numbers tend to be higher when 2 teams of similar talent play each other. A top team playing a no name team causes the digs per game stats of both teams to drop significantly. Likewise, teams like Nebraska see fewer digs as their block tends to score more points than a team that is not as heavily reliant on their block. Hence, a team like Nebraska could have a top libero but the digs per game stat might be low. That is where the "hype" comes in. A lot of it comes down to those intangibles of seeing a player and knowing they are a quality libero. Of course, this is true of almost any player you see for any position.
|
|
|
Post by romeo on Nov 5, 2006 14:04:21 GMT -5
While good blocking teams may take away a few dig attempts due to a successful block, they create many more dig opportunities because the back row can count on the blockers to take away agreed upon areas and line up accordingly. Poor blocking teams make it hell for the back row player to know where to defend. Blocks 1) Good blocking teams give their libero less attempts because the blockers are getting hands on more balls.
|
|
|
Post by scorpianraider on Nov 5, 2006 16:10:36 GMT -5
It is my understanding that the software all major schools use and prolly all schools use, that even if a stat person gives a dig on a block cover, no dig is recorded by the program. Really the only way for a scorer to miss the number of digs in a match (since it is not subjective) is to hand stat and fill out the box score post match. Even if the stat person credits a dig off a free ball, not dig is credited by the stat program.
as for the quality of pass, there is different stat software that this is able to be tracked with.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Nov 5, 2006 17:33:19 GMT -5
The scorekeeper handles the scoresheets, the statistician handles statistics they are separate people.
Digs stats can e very easily skewed by the statisticians opinion on whether the offensive player was simply attempting to keep the ball in play by sending it over the next or attempting to score a point.
When the offensive player is considered to be only trying to keep the ball in play it is not considered an attack.
When a serve receive attempt is sent back over the net it is not considered an attack (unless it manages to drop for a point - in which case there would be no potential dig anyhow.)
When a players attempts to pass the ball on a non-serve and it goes back over the net is it not considered an attack (unless it drops for a point - in which case there would be no potential dig anyhow.)
A blocked ball is not considered an attack.
Digs are supposed to only be recorded from attacked ball.
As fans, if all we're watching is the number of times a player passes a non-served ball and counting each of those as a dig our personal counts are very likely to be inaccurate since many of that player's passes likely did not happen on attacks by a player on the opposing team.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Nov 5, 2006 18:09:48 GMT -5
I do think there should be a separate category for block coverage for all players. That is an important part of the game and it should be recognized.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Nov 5, 2006 20:43:56 GMT -5
I think it would be interesting if they did keep dig attempts, dig errors, and serve receive attempts in addition to the stats already kept.
I don't see it happening anytime soon, however, it would be interesting information to know.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Nov 5, 2006 20:47:49 GMT -5
While good blocking teams may take away a few dig attempts due to a successful block, they create many more dig opportunities because the back row can count on the blockers to take away agreed upon areas and line up accordingly. Poor blocking teams make it hell for the back row player to know where to defend. Blocks 1) Good blocking teams give their libero less attempts because the blockers are getting hands on more balls. Good blocking teams also create extra chances by just touching the ball and keeping it in play on their side of the net. That was something the Wisconsin teams of the late 90s did very well. Often, when they didn't actually get a successful block they'd get a touch on the ball so that it would pop into the air and give the defensive players behind the block extra time to reach the the ball and get a dig.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2006 21:38:23 GMT -5
Dig attempts is a bad stat. But we've had this discussion before...
|
|
|
Post by jgrout on Nov 5, 2006 21:42:40 GMT -5
In the late 1990's, Kathy Gregory's UCSB teams were also "soft blocking" to feed their primary strengths: digging and transition offense. Unfortunately, their best year was 1999, which was northern California's best year of the last decade for top-of-the-bracket NCAA volleyball... Don Shaw's last Stanford team (he was on leave in 2000) and John Dunning's senior-laden Pacific Tigers team both made the Final Four, and I don't think UCSB could have beaten either one at home. The Gauchos were sent to Palo Alto and, despite their spectacular defense and Gregory avatar Brooke Rundle, Kerri Walsh was the proverbial irresistible force, complete with jump serves, in the regional final... and then we fans got to drive over to Stockton the next night and watch the Tigers. We may have been the last fans to get the chance to see two regional finals in person without a plane ride.
Coach Gregory's Gauchos have been to every NCAA tournament but have never made the Final Four... their last good chance was at the Pac-10 Invitational in 2004. She and the Gauchos deserve to make it someday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2006 21:46:14 GMT -5
One of the most frustrating matches I ever watched (on TV) was Minnesota getting soft-blocked to death by UCSB in the round of 16. When was that, 2000? In Hawai'i. This was back before the Gophers started playing some defense, too.
|
|
|
Post by jgrout on Nov 5, 2006 22:07:52 GMT -5
Yes, Ruffda, it was 2000 that UCSB beat Minnesota in the regional semis. They soft-blocked Nebraska to death in the 1999 regional semis at Maples (see my parallel post). I must say I try to forget that volleyball was played in the year 2000... at least at Stanford. Before I could move to Stockton, Coach Dunning came here to coach Stanford (and, to boot, Bret Almazan-Cezar came around the same time from Stockton to coach prep powerhouse Archbishop Mitty).
|
|
|
Post by clonesvb on Nov 6, 2006 0:04:17 GMT -5
I think it would be interesting if they did keep dig attempts, dig errors, and serve receive attempts in addition to the stats already kept. I don't see it happening anytime soon, however, it would be interesting information to know. Serve receive attempts are kept actually, just don't get put on the cumulative stats that most teams have on their websites. They are required for all-american consideration.
|
|
|
Post by vbobsessed on Nov 6, 2006 0:50:03 GMT -5
Likewise, teams like Nebraska see fewer digs as their block tends to score more points than a team that is not as heavily reliant on their block. Hence, a team like Nebraska could have a top libero but the digs per game stat might be low. Busboom leads the Big12 with 5.14 dpg
|
|