|
Post by Wiswell on Jan 3, 2020 10:26:48 GMT -5
I find that stat amusing, that Dodge was better than Barnes, given the grief some gave Dodge. I think when Dodge was off, she was off spectacularly - like a "1" (and for a sequence), and when Barnes was off, it was more "slight" and less obvious.
I do think sometimes people are better as liberos then DSs, because their roles are more defined. We will see if that's the case here.
I also think Ashburn's defense got better as the season progressed. I wouldn't be surprised to see her in more rotations, especially given her second ball capabilities.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 10:36:36 GMT -5
I find that stat amusing, that Dodge was better than Barnes, given the grief some gave Dodge. I think when Dodge was off, she was off spectacularly - like a "1" (and for a sequence), and when Barnes was off, it was more "slight" and less obvious. I do think sometimes people are better as liberos then DSs, because their roles are more defined. We will see if that's the case here. I also think Ashburn's defense got better as the season progressed. I wouldn't be surprised to see her in more rotations, especially given her second ball capabilities. You may well be right, regarding the consistency of their passing. I can actually verify that hunch for you later, when I get a chance. We track a stat called good pass percentage (Karch mistakenly called it perfect pass percentage in commentary during the championship match). It gives you a positive grade for pass that is within 3 steps of the setter. That shows relative consistency for a passer. Obviously it's better to have have 5 balls that are all 2.2 that 3 perfect passes and two shanks that score 1s. I'll dig them up in a bit. Edit: and regarding the opinions on Dodge/Barnes, lots of fans get ideas about certain players that aren't based in reality. It's why I share the data; to improve understanding and give a little more insight into the game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 11:01:45 GMT -5
Do you have what Clark's passing numbers were as a junior? It felt like she made a huge improvement in that area.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 12:49:28 GMT -5
Do you have what Clark's passing numbers were as a junior? It felt like she made a huge improvement in that area. That's interesting. I just checked and they actually fell; quite substantially. She passed a 2.34 in 2018 and a 2.36 in 2017. In general, if defensive players are going to improve significantly as passers it tends to occur between Fr. and So. years. After that, it's rare that they'll get much better. In terms of Clark getting worse though, it wasn't just her. Both Dodge (2.29 in 2018) and Haggerty (2.14 in 2018, 1.95 in 2019) had bigger slides. Part of that is due to playing next to Barnes - if your primary receiver (Barnes handled the most balls) is passing a 2.07 it makes it harder for everyone else, but there's also probably systematic issues - of which I'm sure the coaching staff are aware. You can't drop from passing 2.23 as a team to 2.10 and not have alarm bells ringing with the coaches. The silver-lining here is that it makes Hilley look even more fantastic. For her to produce the kind of performance she did, in far worse circumstances than she's faced before, is testament to how good she is. But next year things needs to be better - especially since Clark and Dodge are out of Madison.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 12:54:43 GMT -5
So bizarre. They all had matches where they were not passing well. But, I never once looked at any of them and felt that they weren't good passers. I rarely had any complaints about Barnes' passing, apart from the occasional rough match that they all had. The stats don't seem to reflect the observation test at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 12:59:27 GMT -5
So bizarre. They all had matches where they were not passing well. But, I never once looked at any of them and felt that they weren't good passers. I rarely had any complaints about Barnes' passing, apart from the occasional rough match that they all had. The stats don't seem to reflect the observation test at all. With all due respect, that just underlines how little most fans know about passing metrics in volleyball. And that isn't a slight - the commentary teams frequently say a team is passing well when they aren't or highlight one bad pass when a player is having a great match. Rest assured the coding on volleymetrics is done by a team of professionals (some of whom played at top programs) and used by coaches at the highest level. That's not to say it's perfect - but it's certainly better than any one person's observational skills when they are watching a match live and infinitely more reliable than that the memory of those events. It's also worth noting it isn't just a spreadsheet. I can pull up any match and watch every pass by any player, to actually see the numbers in action.
|
|
|
Post by jasonr on Jan 3, 2020 13:38:34 GMT -5
So bizarre. They all had matches where they were not passing well. But, I never once looked at any of them and felt that they weren't good passers. I rarely had any complaints about Barnes' passing, apart from the occasional rough match that they all had. The stats don't seem to reflect the observation test at all. With all due respect, that just underlines how little most fans know about passing metrics in volleyball. And that isn't a slight - the commentary teams frequently say a team is passing well when they aren't or highlight one bad pass when a player is having a great match. Rest assured the coding on volleymetrics is done by a team of professionals (some of whom played at top programs) and used by coaches at the highest level. That's not to say it's perfect - but it's certainly better than any one person's observational skills when they are watching a match live and infinitely more reliable than that the memory of those events. It's also worth noting it isn't just a spreadsheet. I can pull up any match and watch every pass by any player, to actually see the numbers in action. A major selection bias for most fans is conflating the actual pass with the result of the pass. If a team scores, even if the pass is terrible, it won't be remembered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 13:50:32 GMT -5
With all due respect, that just underlines how little most fans know about passing metrics in volleyball. And that isn't a slight - the commentary teams frequently say a team is passing well when they aren't or highlight one bad pass when a player is having a great match. Rest assured the coding on volleymetrics is done by a team of professionals (some of whom played at top programs) and used by coaches at the highest level. That's not to say it's perfect - but it's certainly better than any one person's observational skills when they are watching a match live and infinitely more reliable than that the memory of those events. It's also worth noting it isn't just a spreadsheet. I can pull up any match and watch every pass by any player, to actually see the numbers in action. A major selection bias for most fans is conflating the actual pass with the result of the pass. If a team scores, even if the pass is terrible, it won't be remembered. Haha this might be the most accurate post I've ever read on VT. It's also why people are quick to blame a setter or the hitters when a team isn't winning but most can't detect, for instance a drop in passing from 2.3 to 2.1. And in case anyone thinks I'm only referring to fans, I'm not. One Libero this year 'earned' an AVCA All American HM that, I can only assume, was due to the highlight plays her college posts on social media and due to the success of her team (combined with the fact that she was highly touted recruit). The truth is was objectively terrible this year, which is exemplified by the fact that she passed a 1.98 on the season! Think of the worst Libero you saw this year and I guarantee they passed better than a 1.98. That's the kind of number that gets you benched, not All American consideration. All of which is to say, "observational tests" aren't worth the paper on which they are printed!
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Jan 3, 2020 14:20:25 GMT -5
Okay, this is interesting. As I suspected, the biggest issue I would project for the Badgers is the back row play, and whomever plays the right probably needs to be able to hit off two feet effectively, because the numbers indicate they would need to have better passing than they would project from last year's numbers to make a three middle offense desirable.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jan 3, 2020 14:35:51 GMT -5
And in case anyone thinks I'm only referring to fans, I'm not. One Libero this year 'earned' an AVCA All American HM that, I can only assume, was due to the highlight plays her college posts on social media and due to the success of her team (combined with the fact that she was highly touted recruit). The truth is was objectively terrible this year, which is exemplified by the fact that she passed a 1.98 on the season! Think of the worst Libero you saw this year and I guarantee they passed better than a 1.98. That's the kind of number that gets you benched, not All American consideration. The good news for her is that she was still the best passer on the team.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 14:43:43 GMT -5
And in case anyone thinks I'm only referring to fans, I'm not. One Libero this year 'earned' an AVCA All American HM that, I can only assume, was due to the highlight plays her college posts on social media and due to the success of her team (combined with the fact that she was highly touted recruit). The truth is was objectively terrible this year, which is exemplified by the fact that she passed a 1.98 on the season! Think of the worst Libero you saw this year and I guarantee they passed better than a 1.98. That's the kind of number that gets you benched, not All American consideration. The good news for her is that she was still the best passer on the team. Well I guess if there's a requisite that they had to choose a player from that particular team, that makes sense... I just wasn't aware that was the criteria.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 3, 2020 14:50:21 GMT -5
As I said in another thread, a part of the problem with Barnes' passing is that she was trying to shield Haggerty to varying degrees depending on Haggerty's mood and success, and that caused confusion in SR. The seam between them was a target for other teams. I think her responsibilities will be greater but also a lot simpler next year - and she will have more reps. I think she will do fine.
Clark was good though at the end. She will be a miss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2020 14:55:02 GMT -5
As I said in another thread, a part of the problem with Barnes' passing is that she was trying to shield Haggerty to varying degrees depending on Haggerty's mood and success, and that caused confusion in SR. The seam between them was a target for other teams. I think her responsibilities will be greater but also a lot simpler next year - and she will have more reps. I think she will do fine. Clark was good though at the end. She will be a miss. Given how good Haggerty was in 2018 I'm not sure that's the issue. Also, bear in mind Barnes handled far more balls than Haggerty. Barnes passed more than anyone on the team.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 3, 2020 14:55:50 GMT -5
And as I've said before, Dodge was much better than people gave her credit for. She was often the most consistent passer, but was also prone to the odd overpass at key moments when she seemed to get nervous. It's those infrequent overpasses people remember when they critique her.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 3, 2020 14:57:53 GMT -5
As I said in another thread, a part of the problem with Barnes' passing is that she was trying to shield Haggerty to varying degrees depending on Haggerty's mood and success, and that caused confusion in SR. The seam between them was a target for other teams. I think her responsibilities will be greater but also a lot simpler next year - and she will have more reps. I think she will do fine. Clark was good though at the end. She will be a miss. Given how good Haggerty was in 2018 I'm not sure that's the issue. Also, bear in mind Barnes handled far more balls than Haggerty. Barnes passed more than anyone on the team. Haggerty was not good in 2019. Barnes often had to signal her off between passes, and the first half of the season they often got in each other's way. It was a major problem, and one of the main sources of runs against the badgers. A lot of that I put down to uncertainty re responsibilities. They were figuring it out on the fly, but the coaching staff obviously wanted Haggerty to take much fewer passes, and she had a hard time dealing with that new role initially.
|
|