|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 4, 2014 0:37:49 GMT -5
I hate watching previous seasons like that. Reminds me of how much I miss the players who are gone, and that reminds me of how much I will miss the current players when they leave. Um, perhaps you should reread Sartre in such times of need. I can't. I would have to read him first, before rereading him. But OK, maybe I'll do that the next time I'm sitting around waiting for some friend of mine to show up.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Dec 4, 2014 0:39:07 GMT -5
I think regardless of service percentage, and I can't find any stats on it, but the key to whether or not someone is a good server i think depends on 2 factors, how many times you serve when you go to the line, and how well your serves get the other team out of system. So realistically, service percentage is good, but if you are just serving ducks and the other team sides out almost every time, you really aren't doing your team any favors. So does anyone have any stats on that for Strickland? Going to the huskie webiste doesn't list that Yeah, since the receiving team scores on average 60% of the time, just scoring once puts you above the average, even if the next one is out by ten feet. The vast majority of serves, of course, are neither aces nor errors. Strickland did struggle with her serve earlier in the season, when she was still adjusting to the libero position, but was much more consistent in conference: Strickland SA/SE WSU@UW: 2/4 UW@Cal: 1/2 USC@UW: 0/3 UCLA@UW: 1/3 UW@OSU: 5/4 UW@UO: 2/3 UW@ASU: 0/4 UW@UA: 1/4 UT@UW: 6/4 CU@UW: 3/4 UW@USC: 0/3 UW@UCLA: 3/3 UO@UW: 3/4 OSU@UW: 0/3 UW@CU: 2/4 UW@UT: 0/3 UA@UW: 1/3 ASU@UW: 0/2 Stan@UW: 4/4 UW@WSU: 1/1 Total: 35/65 / 72 sets = .49/.90 per set (.49 would put her at #7 in the nation, if it was for the whole season)
|
|
|
Post by Cruz'n on Dec 4, 2014 0:46:35 GMT -5
I think regardless of service percentage, and I can't find any stats on it, but the key to whether or not someone is a good server i think depends on 2 factors, how many times you serve when you go to the line, and how well your serves get the other team out of system. So realistically, service percentage is good, but if you are just serving ducks and the other team sides out almost every time, you really aren't doing your team any favors. So does anyone have any stats on that for Strickland? Going to the huskie webiste doesn't list that Yeah, since the receiving team scores on average 60% of the time, just scoring once puts you above the average, even if the next one is out by ten feet. The vast majority of serves, of course, are neither aces nor errors. Strickland did struggle with her serve earlier in the season, when she was still adjusting to the libero position, but was much more consistent in conference: Strickland SA/SE WSU@UW: 2/4 UW@Cal: 1/2 USC@UW: 0/3 UCLA@UW: 1/3 UW@OSU: 5/4 UW@UO: 2/3 UW@ASU: 0/4 UW@UA: 1/4 UT@UW: 6/4 CU@UW: 3/4 UW@USC: 0/3 UW@UCLA: 3/3 UO@UW: 3/4 OSU@UW: 0/3 UW@CU: 2/4 UW@UT: 0/3 UA@UW: 1/3 ASU@UW: 0/2 Stan@UW: 4/4 UW@WSU: 1/1 Total: 35/65 / 72 sets = .49/.90 per set (.49 would put her at #7 in the nation, if it was for the whole season) How is .49/.90 equal to .49? I get .54
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Dec 4, 2014 0:48:37 GMT -5
Come on now, when you have people posting that she's going to be the best libero the game as ever seen next year, how do you expect people to react? Comments like those are no less distracting as those who question her getting the award in the first place. I know you aren't a fan of hers and that's ok....It's just turned into a Strickland bashing thread. I'm just as surprised as anyone else that she rec'd the award but I'm not going to bash her for it. The coaches voted for her and she deserves to enjoy her award like anyone else. I'm tired of all this I don't like Strickland nonsense. I have ALWAYS treated Strickland with the same standards I've applied to everyone else. It's some of you other husky fans who continually made excuses for her substandard play. Just because I point out the truth, which was substandard backcourt play in the first half of the season, doesn't mean I'm "not a fan of hers". I love my players (unless they do something stupid), my team, my school....ask any long time volleytalker and I bet almost all would say that I bleed purple for my dawgs. However, fans, to me, aren't just about blind devotion. I've pointed out poor play BY EVERY SINGLE HUSKY PLAYER SINCE I GOT ON THIS BOARD. This year along I was among the first to point out Nelson's lack of production, and the incredibly inconsistent setting that we've been getting...doesn't mean I'm not a fan of Nelson or Beals or Tanner (though I was pulling for Finau to take that second setter spot). I've also given praise to great play when they have earned it. I've been among the first to single out Strickland's great play in the last month or so, just check the game threads. I'm not sure why you and others think that Strickland should get a pass from me and others simply because she's new to the libero role. I've never NOT understood her being new to the role or doubted her ability to get better. When Miyashiro had a bad match her freshmen year, I pointed it out, when Orlandini had a bad match her freshmen year (and even more her sophomore year), I pointed it out, why should Strickland be ANY different?
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Dec 4, 2014 0:49:52 GMT -5
Um, perhaps you should reread Sartre in such times of need. I can't. I would have to read him first, before rereading him. But OK, maybe I'll do that the next time I'm sitting around waiting for some friend of mine to show up. Nah, just read Beckett...
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 4, 2014 0:50:19 GMT -5
Yeah, since the receiving team scores on average 60% of the time, just scoring once puts you above the average, even if the next one is out by ten feet. The vast majority of serves, of course, are neither aces nor errors. Strickland did struggle with her serve earlier in the season, when she was still adjusting to the libero position, but was much more consistent in conference: Strickland SA/SE WSU@UW: 2/4 UW@Cal: 1/2 USC@UW: 0/3 UCLA@UW: 1/3 UW@OSU: 5/4 UW@UO: 2/3 UW@ASU: 0/4 UW@UA: 1/4 UT@UW: 6/4 CU@UW: 3/4 UW@USC: 0/3 UW@UCLA: 3/3 UO@UW: 3/4 OSU@UW: 0/3 UW@CU: 2/4 UW@UT: 0/3 UA@UW: 1/3 ASU@UW: 0/2 Stan@UW: 4/4 UW@WSU: 1/1 Total: 35/65 / 72 sets = .49/.90 per set (.49 would put her at #7 in the nation, if it was for the whole season) How is .49/.90 equal to .49? I get .54 I think that was supposed to be .49 SA/s, .90 SE/s.
|
|
|
Post by kukae on Dec 4, 2014 0:50:34 GMT -5
When looking at serve ace/error ratio, here is the way I see it. If the other team's side-out percentage is about 67%, that means an average service team would score 1 point for every 2 they lost. To me, it doesn't matter whether the lost point is from a side-out or from a service error. So if the ace/error ratio is better than 1/2, that server is doing well, and better than the average for when the serve gets passed. If the opposing team is even better and has a side-out ratio of 75%, then serving better than 1/3 is good. I may be wrong in my thinking about this, but it makes sense to me. Even Al Scates said that if the server was a tough server, he would gladly take a 1/2 ratio.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Dec 4, 2014 0:51:20 GMT -5
Here is my 1st team:
Inky Ajanaku MB1 Stanford Lianna Sybeldon MB2 UW Krista Vansant OH1 UW Samantha Bricio OH2 USC Karsta Lowe OPP UCLA Maddie Bugg S Stanford Kyle Gilbert L Stanford Amanda Benson DS
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 4, 2014 0:51:46 GMT -5
I was pulling for Finau to take that second setter spot My guess is that you are going to get your wish on that one.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 4, 2014 0:52:57 GMT -5
Here is my 1st team: Inky Ajanaku MB1 Stanford Lianna Sybeldon MB2 UW Krista Vansant OH1 UW Samantha Bricio OH2 USC Karsta Lowe OPP UCLA Maddie Bugg S Stanford Kyle Gilbert L Stanford Amanda Benson DS I would totally take Macy Gardner over Sam Bricio. And no need for a DS with that lineup. Better to have the backrow attack.
|
|
|
Post by Cruz'n on Dec 4, 2014 0:53:31 GMT -5
Yeah, since the receiving team scores on average 60% of the time, just scoring once puts you above the average, even if the next one is out by ten feet. The vast majority of serves, of course, are neither aces nor errors. Strickland did struggle with her serve earlier in the season, when she was still adjusting to the libero position, but was much more consistent in conference: Strickland SA/SE WSU@UW: 2/4 UW@Cal: 1/2 USC@UW: 0/3 UCLA@UW: 1/3 UW@OSU: 5/4 UW@UO: 2/3 UW@ASU: 0/4 UW@UA: 1/4 UT@UW: 6/4 CU@UW: 3/4 UW@USC: 0/3 UW@UCLA: 3/3 UO@UW: 3/4 OSU@UW: 0/3 UW@CU: 2/4 UW@UT: 0/3 UA@UW: 1/3 ASU@UW: 0/2 Stan@UW: 4/4 UW@WSU: 1/1 Total: 35/65 / 72 sets = .49/.90 per set (.49 would put her at #7 in the nation, if it was for the whole season) How is .49/.90 equal to .49? I get .54 I totally do not understand this stat you have here. It would seem to me that you would want to have more aces than errors to have a good number. She is #7 in nation? I clicked on Stanfords vb page just so I could get a reference, and I find that Jordan, Brittany, Madi, and Megan all have better ratios than Cassie. Heck, Jordan and Brittany have more aces than errors. And I imagine if I looked at other teams, I would find several players on each team with better Aces-to-errors ratios than Cassie. So please, can you please describe this stat a little more? I don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Dec 4, 2014 0:54:40 GMT -5
How is .49/.90 equal to .49? I get .54 35 aces / 72 sets = .49 aces/set, which would put her at #7 in the nation, if it was for the whole season.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 4, 2014 0:57:32 GMT -5
It would seem to me that you would want to have more aces than errors to have a good number. Not necessarily. Of course more aces is better than fewer aces, and fewer errors are better than more errors. But a high ratio of aces/serve can be worth accepting more errors than aces. That's because most non-ace, non-error serves end up being points for the receiving team anyway. But no ace serves ever end up being points for the receiving team.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Dec 4, 2014 1:06:26 GMT -5
When looking at serve ace/error ratio, here is the way I see it. If the other team's side-out percentage is about 67%, that means an average service team would score 1 point for every 2 they lost. To me, it doesn't matter whether the lost point is from a side-out or from a service error. So if the ace/error ratio is better than 1/2, that server is doing well, and better than the average for when the serve gets passed. If the opposing team is even better and has a side-out ratio of 75%, then serving better than 1/3 is good. I may be wrong in my thinking about this, but it makes sense to me. Even Al Scates said that if the server was a tough server, he would gladly take a 1/2 ratio. That makes perfect sense to me. Of course, when I first started following volleyball, I thought that every service error was a point thrown away... Another way of looking at it is that only one point can be scored each time a team is in serve-receive, but multiple points can be scored when a team is serving. Just winning the opportunity to win another point is worth taking risks for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2014 1:11:32 GMT -5
I know you aren't a fan of hers and that's ok....It's just turned into a Strickland bashing thread. I'm just as surprised as anyone else that she rec'd the award but I'm not going to bash her for it. The coaches voted for her and she deserves to enjoy her award like anyone else. I'm tired of all this I don't like Strickland nonsense. I have ALWAYS treated Strickland with the same standards I've applied to everyone else. It's some of you other husky fans who continually made excuses for her substandard play. Just because I point out the truth, which was substandard backcourt play in the first half of the season, doesn't mean I'm "not a fan of hers". I love my players (unless they do something stupid), my team, my school....ask any long time volleytalker and I bet almost all would say that I bleed purple for my dawgs. However, fans, to me, aren't just about blind devotion. I've pointed out poor play BY EVERY SINGLE HUSKY PLAYER SINCE I GOT ON THIS BOARD. This year along I was among the first to point out Nelson's lack of production, and the incredibly inconsistent setting that we've been getting...doesn't mean I'm not a fan of Nelson or Beals or Tanner (though I was pulling for Finau to take that second setter spot). I've also given praise to great play when they have earned it. I've been among the first to single out Strickland's great play in the last month or so, just check the game threads. I'm not sure why you and others think that Strickland should get a pass from me and others simply because she's new to the libero role. I've never NOT understood her being new to the role or doubted her ability to get better. When Miyashiro had a bad match her freshmen year, I pointed it out, when Orlandini had a bad match her freshmen year (and even more her sophomore year), I pointed it out, why should Strickland be ANY different? I'm not on here to fight with you or anyone else. I'm just a volleyball fan. Have a good night.
|
|