Scoring oddity in UConn - OSU game

[DobbsRover2]

A semi-funny play for UConn fans occurred tonight with a little under 2 1/2 minutes to play, and an even funnier scoring ruling seems to have occurred for it according to the box score and play-by-play. Chong misses a 3, and OSU player grabs the carom to the right of the basket by the base line but is falling out of bounds so she flings it back in, right to Ekmark camped out alone in the lane who quickly converts a layup. The scoring ruling is which of the following?

1. OSU player gets offensive rebound and a turnover, and Ekmark gets a steal and a FG.
2. OSU player gets an offensive rebound and an assist, and Ekmark gets a FG.
3. Ekmark gets an offensive rebound and a FG.

If you guessed #3, then apparently you are ready to fill in if the official scorekeeper takes sick during a game. The OSU player's actions on the play are completely voided and Ek just skyed for that rebound and put the ball in the hoop. Just weird.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Well the OSU player never had possession of the ball, therefore she can't get credit for the rebound, and if she never retains control of the ball long enough to secure the rebound, then you can't count it as a turnover. It seems odd, but I understand why it's scored that way, I think.

 

[UConnCat]

Another oddity:

Final score of UConn Men's first game on Friday night: 100-56

Final score of UConn Women's first game tonight: 100-56

 

[DobbsRover2]

Well the OSU player never had possession of the ball, therefore she can't get credit for the rebound, and if she never retains control of the ball long enough to secure the rebound, then you can't count it as a turnover. It seems odd, but I understand why it's scored that way, I think.

Maybe, but she certainly had control of the ball and made a pass, and that is controlling it. Rebounding has nothing to do with getting control "long enough," as you can tip a ball to a teammate and be credited with a rebound even if you never held it. A statistician is instructed if they have any doubts as maybe in this case to credit the player with a rebound. Seems like a pretty obvious call for a rebound and turnover, which is the way I have seen it called in the past.

As to the 100-56 double up, another oddity for the women was the remarkable consistency in the halves (50-50), and quarters (24-26-24-26). The Huskies gave new meaning to the term, "Going 50/50."

 

[HoopsFan21]

Maybe, but she certainly had control of the ball and made a pass, and that is controlling it. Rebounding has nothing to do with getting control "long enough," as you can tip a ball to a teammate and be credited with a rebound even if you never held it. A statistician is instructed if they have any doubts as maybe in this case to credit the player with a rebound. Seems like a pretty obvious call for a rebound and turnover, which is the way I have seen it called in the past.

As to the 100-56 double up, another oddity for the women was the remarkable consistency in the halves (50-50), and quarters (24-26-24-26). The Huskies gave new meaning to the term, "Going 50/50."

But wouldn't you have to score it a defensive rebound for the OSU player since she was rebounding the opponent's 3-point shot attempt?

 

[Kmoney]

A semi-funny play for UConn fans occurred tonight with a little under 2 1/2 minutes to play, and an even funnier scoring ruling seems to have occurred for it according to the box score and play-by-play. Chong misses a 3, and OSU player grabs the carom to the right of the basket by the base line but is falling out of bounds so she flings it back in, right to Ekmark camped out alone in the lane who quickly converts a layup. The scoring ruling is which of the following?

1. OSU player gets offensive rebound and a turnover, and Ekmark gets a steal and a FG.
2. OSU player gets an offensive rebound and an assist, and Ekmark gets a FG.
3. Ekmark gets an offensive rebound and a FG.

If you guessed #3, then apparently you are ready to fill in if the official scorekeeper takes sick during a game. The OSU player's actions on the play are completely voided and Ek just skyed for that rebound and put the ball in the hoop. Just weird.

Maybe there was free "pizza" when somebody scores 100.

 

[UcMiami]

Maybe, but she certainly had control of the ball and made a pass, and that is controlling it. Rebounding has nothing to do with getting control "long enough," as you can tip a ball to a teammate and be credited with a rebound even if you never held it. A statistician is instructed if they have any doubts as maybe in this case to credit the player with a rebound. Seems like a pretty obvious call for a rebound and turnover, which is the way I have seen it called in the past.

As to the 100-56 double up, another oddity for the women was the remarkable consistency in the halves (50-50), and quarters (24-26-24-26). The Huskies gave new meaning to the term, "Going 50/50."

In order for it to be considered a rebound, there is a need for the team to gain control (or score, for an offensive player tipping a rebound into the basket.) A player who tips the ball on a rebound intending it for a teammate, but 'intercepted' by an opponent or going directly out of bounds does not get credit for a rebound and a turnover just as a player who creates a steal opportunity and gains control of the ball but is unable to keep their momentum from carrying them out of bounds is not credited with both a steal and a turnover. If the defender had just continued to fall out of bounds with the ball rather than try to save it by throwing it back in bounds, the scorer would probably have just treated it as a team rebound for the other team similar to if they had just landed on the end line in the act of catching the rebound or tipped it out of bounds without ever controlling it. It is certainly up to the scorer to determine when 'control' begins on a play and therefore when the shot clock starts for a new possession.
And there is something close to this in how scorers determine who gets credit when a defender inadvertently tips a rebound into the basket - it is rewarded to the nearest offensive player typically as it cannot be awarded to the defender.

 

[DobbsRover2]

But wouldn't you have to score it a defensive rebound for the OSU player since she was rebounding the opponent's 3-point shot attempt?

Ah definitely. Got Ek's "offensive rebound" mixed around there, but the OSU player would get the defensive rebound.

UcM's explanation makes sense, though it still seems like very much a judgment call for the stats person as to the control part of it when near the base line is open to debate. Take the same play but this time instead throwing the ball to Ek the ball is lobbed way down court where players from both teams tip it around in the battle for ball before say Saniya manages to scoop it up under her own basket. So she gets an "offensive rebound?" That's just silly, but I guess in a world where Swin's wrong-basket jumper is awarded to the last opponent to touch the ball and the same in hockey when a defender flips the puck back to his goalie a little too hard, stats are often made to be silly. Back in the 1960s Dodger reliever Phil Regan put together a remarkable 14-1 record partly because of his ability to blow leads in games that his team came back to win, a talent that earned him the nickname The Vulture. But as he probably said, "A win is a win."

And as long as UConn does well in dead ball rebounds, I'm happy.

 

[JoePgh]

Somewhat lost in this arcane scoring discussion is that this play is another example of Courtney Ekmark being in the right place and making the right play. Say what you want about her limited physical ability, mentally she is "in the game" and doing what she is supposed to be doing. In two exhibition games, the open practice, and the Ohio State game, that has consistently been the case.

I think if the worst-case scenario had unfolded last night where both Moriah and Kia got in early foul trouble, Courtney would have been the first guard off the bench. She would have done fine (within the limits of her athletic skill), and UConn might only have won by 20 points.

I expect to see much the same from Bent and Irwin next year. It will be interesting to see if Geno can coach teams to a Final Four in future years even when he doesn't have the best athletic talent in the game. If UConn doesn't recruit a 5-star big soon, we might start seeing single-digit games against good teams, but I think UConn will win most of those if they play with the focus that they did last night.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Somewhat lost in this arcane scoring discussion is that this play is another example of Courtney Ekmark being in the right place and making the right play. Say what you want about her limited physical ability, mentally she is "in the game" and doing what she is supposed to be doing. In two exhibition games, the open practice, and the Ohio State game, that has consistently been the case.

I think if the worst-case scenario had unfolded last night where both Moriah and Kia got in early foul trouble, Courtney would have been the first guard off the bench. She would have done fine (within the limits of her athletic skill), and UConn might only have won by 20 points.

I expect to see much the same from Bent and Irwin next year. It will be interesting to see if Geno can coach teams to a Final Four in future years even when he doesn't have the best athletic talent in the game. If UConn doesn't recruit a 5-star big soon, we might start seeing single-digit games against good teams, but I think UConn will win most of those if they play with the focus that they did last night.

World of difference between the awkward player who came back mid season last year and tried to fight her way into form, an exercise that was really aimed at being ready for this year rather than having to contribute much last year. She looks very solid defensively and has a decent wingspan to pester the opponent's guards. She's turning into that hard-nosed player more in the Battle-Thomas-Doty-Faris mold that will be fun to watch for hopefully this year and the next two.

 

[willingtonfan]

So having been an official scorer in the past, this intrigued me, so I did a little research and came up with the following.

The NCAA's "Official Basketball Statistics Rules," see http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/Stats_Manuals/Basketball/2008 Bsk Stats Manual easy print.pdf, says, in Section 3 -- Rebounds:
Article 1. . . .
(a) An individual rebound (player rebound) is credited to a player who recovers a live ball that has missed scoring a goal (field goal or free throw). The recovery may be accomplished:
(1) By gaining control of the ball.
(3) By tipping or batting the ball to a teammate so that the teammate or another teammate is the first to gain control. (NB NCAA rules define "control" as holding a live ball or dribbling a live ball while inbounds.)
Philosophy. A player should be credited with a rebound only if the player earned that rebound before the ball was dead.

Article 2: Sometimes there is doubt about whether a player has gained control of the ball before a certain act takes place. In such cases, the statistician should use the following guidelines
(a) If the statistician feels there was a possibility of player control, then the play shall be treated as though there was player control.
(b) If the statistician feels there definitely was not a possibility of player control, then it shall be treated as though there was no player control.

So based on this, the official scorer & statistician could very reasonably have concluded:
1. The Ohio State player never had control of the ball while inbounds.
2. The first person to have control inbounds was Ms. Ekmark.

Therefore, she gets a defensive rebound and a putback.

The key in this is control. This, by the way, is why a player who is falling out of bounds with the ball can no longer call time out while doing so, since she is considered not to be in control of the ball while inbounds. (This recent rule change, I thought, made perfect sense.) If you think about the purpose of that rule change, it is consistent -- a team can only call time out while in control of the ball; a person falling out of bounds is not in control of the ball; thus the first person who WAS in control of the ball was Courtney Ekmark, since scoring a basket implies that she had control of the ball, if only for a split second before shooting it. Therefore, as the first player who was in control of the ball following the missed shot, she is the rebounder of that missed shot.

Hope this helps shed light on an admittedly unusual situation.

 

[stamfordhusky]

The key in this is control. This, by the way, is why a player who is falling out of bounds with the ball can no longer call time out while doing so, since she is considered not to be in control of the ball while inbounds. (This recent rule change, I thought, made perfect sense.) If you think about the purpose of that rule change, it is consistent -- a team can only call time out while in control of the ball; a person falling out of bounds is not in control of the ball;

Just to clarify, are you sure about a player falling out of bounds not being able to call timeout? I thought it was only if the player was airborne - and that's all I see in the rules:

"15-1 No timeouts shall be granted: . . . To a player or coach when the momentum of an airborne player in control of the ball is carrying him out of bounds or into the backcourt."


Note that the rule also says that an airborne player going out of bounds CAN be in control of the ball - which implies that a player falling out of bounds with her feet still in contact with the floor can also be in control of the ball.

Note that I am only talking in general terms here about the rule since I didn't see the play and don't know if her feet were touching the floor as she was falling out of bounds. In this case, I think the statistician simply didn't want to charge a player with a turnover when she really had no choice about getting rid of the ball - but if there was a rebound then there automatically had to be a turnover. Thus the statistician decided to simply say there was no control and thus no turnover and no rebound. Would a player prefer to see both a rebound and a turnover on her stats - or nothing in either category?

 

[Sonofabeach]

Another oddity:

Final score of UConn Men's first game on Friday night: 100-56

Final score of UConn Women's first game tonight: 100-56

Why is this odd? I mean come on they both won National Titles together twice!

 

[HoopsFan21]

Why would Ekmark be credited with a defensive rebound when she rebounded her own teammate's 3-point shot?

 

[DobbsRover2]

Why would Ekmark be credited with a defensive rebound when she rebounded her own teammate's 3-point shot?

That was a misstatement by willingtonfan. Ek was given an offensive rebound on the play on the theory I guess that it sort of just kind of bounced off Asia Doss and wound up magically in Ek's hands.

But this is all silly stats stuff, as Doss did have control of the ball and threw it back in toward a teammate, but Ek stepped in, stole the ball and put in the layup. It's just a stupid ruling on the play, and if the pass had gotten past Ek's fingers to the OSU teammate, Doss would have been credited with a defensive rebound and would not have become suddenly invisible in the alternate universe of nonsensical BB stats.