A slightly different take on how the foul disparity affected the Purdue game

[eastbaycat99]

With the final FT disparity in yesterday’s game ending up 46-8, there has been a lot posted on this subject already. I think most of the emphasis has been on the 46, and too little on the 8.

First of all there should be a little clarification on how free throws did or did not help Purdue’s offense. Of the 46 free throws, I think you have to not consider the deliberate fouls and technicals at the end of the game. In the last 32 seconds, after taking a 2 score lead, Purdue made 9 of 10 free throws. The 4-4 technicals clearly were irrelevant to the outcome, and the 5-6 on the “we have to fouls” had nothing to do with how the game was called up to that point. Taking that into consideration, Purdue was 20-36 and NU 6-8 with 32 seconds to go in OT.

A really significant point is that the Purdue FT % at that point was 56. Their effective FG percentage was 66. For almost the entire game, Purdue lost points (about 2 total) by shooting free throws instead of field goals. NU, on the other hand, shot 75% from the line versus an effective FG percentage of 67%. They gained a little less than half a point on the possessions where they went to the line.

Purdue really did not gain by going to the line, but the Cats lost points by not going more. While the clear missed call on Berry in OT is the most obvious, just a few calls that would have sent Buie to the line could have changed the outcome. The real mystery is why NU did not get a few more trips either as and ones or on drives to the basket.

The other key point to consider is the effect of Nicholson fouling out. I haven’t gone back and looked at the specific calls on him. It is possible they were all correct. If they weren’t, his absence based on the +/- hurt the Cats.

The long and short of it is that the disparity of fouls whistled in Purdue’s favor is that PU did not go to the line too often and hence beat the Cats, but that NU probably went too little.

 

[SimpsonElmwood]

With the final FT disparity in yesterday’s game ending up 46-8, there has been a lot posted on this subject already. I think most of the emphasis has been on the 46, and too little on the 8.

First of all there should be a little clarification on how free throws did or did not help Purdue’s offense. Of the 46 free throws, I think you have to not consider the deliberate fouls and technicals at the end of the game. In the last 32 seconds, after taking a 2 score lead, Purdue made 9 of 10 free throws. The 4-4 technicals clearly were irrelevant to the outcome, and the 5-6 on the “we have to fouls” had nothing to do with how the game was called up to that point. Taking that into consideration, Purdue was 20-36 and NU 6-8 with 32 seconds to go in OT.

A really significant point is that the Purdue FT % at that point was 56. Their effective FG percentage was 66. For almost the entire game, Purdue lost points (about 2 total) by shooting free throws instead of field goals. NU, on the other hand, shot 75% from the line versus an effective FG percentage of 67%. They gained a little less than half a point on the possessions where they went to the line.

Purdue really did not gain by going to the line, but the Cats lost points by not going more. While the clear missed call on Berry in OT is the most obvious, just a few calls that would have sent Buie to the line could have changed the outcome. The real mystery is why NU did not get a few more trips either as and ones or on drives to the basket.

The other key point to consider is the effect of Nicholson fouling out. I haven’t gone back and looked at the specific calls on him. It is possible they were all correct. If they weren’t, his absence based on the +/- hurt the Cats.

The long and short of it is that the disparity of fouls whistled in Purdue’s favor is that PU did not go to the line too often and hence beat the Cats, but that NU probably went too little.

At least one of the fouls on Nicholson hardly involved contact, especially in the context of a physical game.

 

[rwhitney014]

It's not just fouls, though. This video has circulated all over to make the point that Edey locked up Hunger, bu Luke getting called for the foul. What no one's talking about is that it also shows one of the many times that Edey switched his pivot foot and traveled, quite obviously, through the lane.



He dribbles at 0:01 of the video, 6:43 on the game clock, then shuffles his feet three times before putting up the shot and getting the call. It's quick but that's how he hopscotches through the lane.

Made free throws, missed free throws, made foul calls, missed foul calls - the game went to OT. They got excess points on that possession. Butterfly effect and all that, but that was the margin in regulation. Officiating is more than calling fouls.

 

[SDakaGordie]

It's not just fouls, though. This video has circulated all over to make the point that Edey locked up Hunger, bu Luke getting called for the foul. What no one's talking about is that it also shows one of the many times that Edey switched his pivot foot and traveled, quite obviously, through the lane.

View embedded media

He dribbles at 0:01 of the video, 6:43 on the game clock, then shuffles his feet three times before putting up the shot and getting the call. It's quick but that's how he hopscotches through the lane.

Made free throws, missed free throws, made foul calls, missed foul calls - the game went to OT. They got excess points on that possession. Butterfly effect and all that, but that was the margin in regulation. Officiating is more than calling fouls.

Totally agree and I mentioned during the game - Eddy travels incessantly and it’s just ignored. His footwork is a mess for a POY. That’s what basketball has allowed.

 

[SimpsonElmwood]

Totally agree and I mentioned during the game - Eddy travels incessantly and it’s just ignored. His footwork is a mess for a POY. That’s what basketball has allowed.

I have different observation from this video. Edey appears to get hooked more than any other player I've ever seen by like, 5x. This is an example of his initiating the hooking.

 

[Hungry Jack]

With the final FT disparity in yesterday’s game ending up 46-8, there has been a lot posted on this subject already. I think most of the emphasis has been on the 46, and too little on the 8.

First of all there should be a little clarification on how free throws did or did not help Purdue’s offense. Of the 46 free throws, I think you have to not consider the deliberate fouls and technicals at the end of the game. In the last 32 seconds, after taking a 2 score lead, Purdue made 9 of 10 free throws. The 4-4 technicals clearly were irrelevant to the outcome, and the 5-6 on the “we have to fouls” had nothing to do with how the game was called up to that point. Taking that into consideration, Purdue was 20-36 and NU 6-8 with 32 seconds to go in OT.

A really significant point is that the Purdue FT % at that point was 56. Their effective FG percentage was 66. For almost the entire game, Purdue lost points (about 2 total) by shooting free throws instead of field goals. NU, on the other hand, shot 75% from the line versus an effective FG percentage of 67%. They gained a little less than half a point on the possessions where they went to the line.

Purdue really did not gain by going to the line, but the Cats lost points by not going more. While the clear missed call on Berry in OT is the most obvious, just a few calls that would have sent Buie to the line could have changed the outcome. The real mystery is why NU did not get a few more trips either as and ones or on drives to the basket.

The other key point to consider is the effect of Nicholson fouling out. I haven’t gone back and looked at the specific calls on him. It is possible they were all correct. If they weren’t, his absence based on the +/- hurt the Cats.

The long and short of it is that the disparity of fouls whistled in Purdue’s favor is that PU did not go to the line too often and hence beat the Cats, but that NU probably went too little.

That’s my main beef. The obvious foul on the Berry 3 (he hit the deck for f@@@‘s sake) and the Martinelli gaffe were critical fouls.

 

[eastbaycat99]

“

It's not just fouls, though. This video has circulated all over to make the point that Edey locked up Hunger, bu Luke getting called for the foul. What no one's talking about is that it also shows one of the many times that Edey switched his pivot foot and traveled, quite obviously, through the lane.

View embedded media

He dribbles at 0:01 of the video, 6:43 on the game clock, then shuffles his feet three times before putting up the shot and getting the call. It's quick but that's how he hopscotches through the lane.

Made free throws, missed free throws, made foul calls, missed foul calls - the game went to OT. They got excess points on that possession. Butterfly effect and all that, but that was the margin in regulation. Officiating is more than calling fouls.

I agree completely on the point that it wasn’t the volume of fouls, it was the absence of certain calls that influenced the outcome.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

With the final FT disparity in yesterday’s game ending up 46-8, there has been a lot posted on this subject already. I think most of the emphasis has been on the 46, and too little on the 8.

First of all there should be a little clarification on how free throws did or did not help Purdue’s offense. Of the 46 free throws, I think you have to not consider the deliberate fouls and technicals at the end of the game. In the last 32 seconds, after taking a 2 score lead, Purdue made 9 of 10 free throws. The 4-4 technicals clearly were irrelevant to the outcome, and the 5-6 on the “we have to fouls” had nothing to do with how the game was called up to that point. Taking that into consideration, Purdue was 20-36 and NU 6-8 with 32 seconds to go in OT.

A really significant point is that the Purdue FT % at that point was 56. Their effective FG percentage was 66. For almost the entire game, Purdue lost points (about 2 total) by shooting free throws instead of field goals. NU, on the other hand, shot 75% from the line versus an effective FG percentage of 67%. They gained a little less than half a point on the possessions where they went to the line.

Purdue really did not gain by going to the line, but the Cats lost points by not going more. While the clear missed call on Berry in OT is the most obvious, just a few calls that would have sent Buie to the line could have changed the outcome. The real mystery is why NU did not get a few more trips either as and ones or on drives to the basket.

The other key point to consider is the effect of Nicholson fouling out. I haven’t gone back and looked at the specific calls on him. It is possible they were all correct. If they weren’t, his absence based on the +/- hurt the Cats.

The long and short of it is that the disparity of fouls whistled in Purdue’s favor is that PU did not go to the line too often and hence beat the Cats, but that NU probably went too little.

What we can’t determine is how the tight calling of the game impacted our overall defense. It was clear in some instances that the NU player backed off over fear of getting a foul. That’s 2 easy points.

 

[Bruce1]

With the final FT disparity in yesterday’s game ending up 46-8, there has been a lot posted on this subject already. I think most of the emphasis has been on the 46, and too little on the 8.

First of all there should be a little clarification on how free throws did or did not help Purdue’s offense. Of the 46 free throws, I think you have to not consider the deliberate fouls and technicals at the end of the game. In the last 32 seconds, after taking a 2 score lead, Purdue made 9 of 10 free throws. The 4-4 technicals clearly were irrelevant to the outcome, and the 5-6 on the “we have to fouls” had nothing to do with how the game was called up to that point. Taking that into consideration, Purdue was 20-36 and NU 6-8 with 32 seconds to go in OT.

A really significant point is that the Purdue FT % at that point was 56. Their effective FG percentage was 66. For almost the entire game, Purdue lost points (about 2 total) by shooting free throws instead of field goals. NU, on the other hand, shot 75% from the line versus an effective FG percentage of 67%. They gained a little less than half a point on the possessions where they went to the line.

Purdue really did not gain by going to the line, but the Cats lost points by not going more. While the clear missed call on Berry in OT is the most obvious, just a few calls that would have sent Buie to the line could have changed the outcome. The real mystery is why NU did not get a few more trips either as and ones or on drives to the basket.

The other key point to consider is the effect of Nicholson fouling out. I haven’t gone back and looked at the specific calls on him. It is possible they were all correct. If they weren’t, his absence based on the +/- hurt the Cats.

The long and short of it is that the disparity of fouls whistled in Purdue’s favor is that PU did not go to the line too often and hence beat the Cats, but that NU probably went too little.

Problem was Collins went off and caused the thing. Hell, he said before the game he had three centers and was going to use 15 fouls on Zack. Mission accomplished, Collins played hack a Zack. Thats why the difference. As far as why NW didn't get more calls NW shot threes from long range and Purdue didn't have anyone within 5ft of Buie and Berry so..... Edey doesn't get too many fouls because if he's out of position he lets them score. There were the normal number of missed calls on both ends so.........

 

[GatoLouco]

Problem was Collins went off and caused the thing. Hell, he said before the game he had three centers and was going to use 15 fouls on Zack. Mission accomplished, Collins played hack a Zack. Thats why the difference. As far as why NW didn't get more calls NW shot threes from long range and Purdue didn't have anyone within 5ft of Buie and Berry so..... Edey doesn't get too many fouls because if he's out of position he lets them score. There were the normal number of missed calls on both ends so.........

Do you need to be fed?

 

[eastbaycat99]

Problem was Collins went off and caused the thing. Hell, he said before the game he had three centers and was going to use 15 fouls on Zack. Mission accomplished, Collins played hack a Zack. Thats why the difference. As far as why NW didn't get more calls NW shot threes from long range and Purdue didn't have anyone within 5ft of Buie and Berry so..... Edey doesn't get too many fouls because if he's out of position he lets them score. There were the normal number of missed calls on both ends so.........

No, Buie didn't drive the lane the whole game, lol. The four times I saw him go tumbing to the floor on the baseline after the drives that you think didn't happen because of contact on the (in your view non-existent) drives , but were all because he likes to take dives to the floor at full speed.
The self delusion is strong in this one.

 

[Just Gary]

Do you need to be fed?

Yes, I was going to take the bait but those Purdue posters just want their narrative. Not worth commenting. The game is over and time to move on to what’s next on our schedule. They need to worry about how they can actually win a game during March madness when non-B1G refs will call fouls on both teams.

 

[GatoLouco]

Yes, I was going to take the bait but those Purdue posters just want their narrative. Not worth commenting. The game is over and time to move on to what’s next on our schedule. They need to worry about how they can actually win a game during March madness when non-B1G refs will call fouls on both teams.

We need to be compassionate. Trolls need to be fed. But I'd argue breast milk is, given the level of maturity, usually more appropriate than logical reasoning.

 

[IGNORE2]

Yes, I was going to take the bait but those Purdue posters just want their narrative. Not worth commenting. The game is over and time to move on to what’s next on our schedule. They need to worry about how they can actually win a game during March madness when non-B1G refs will call fouls on both teams.

Yup - they won’t make the second weekend when the guys in black and gold stripes don’t show up to act as sixth, seventh and eighth man.

 

[SmellyCat]

There seem to be a lot of references to the "15 fouls" comment Collins made before the game (here and elsewhere) by Purdue fans, almost like they all saw one tweet on Thursday so that they could justify the narrative that the refs were not calling it even.

The thing is, that statement could be interpreted in a number of ways. Purdue fans interpret it as "Wildcats are thugs and will foul Edey on every play," and considering they already think he's fouled on every play, they have some serious confirmation bias going on.

It could also be just an offhand jokey comment.

It could also be an anti-ref comment of "well, we know they're going to call 15 fouls on our bigs, so let's make the best of it."

It could also be a way to work the refs beforehand.

It could also be a way of tipping his cap to Edey, knowing that they can't stop him any other way.

It could also be that he has a completely different strategy and is trying to throw Purdue off his scent.

My point is, he just said a thing before the game, like coaches have down thousands of times before. It doesn't mean "this is our locked-in strategy and there will be no deviation from this." They just asked him how he thought they'd stop Edey, and he said a thing.

 

[Just Gary]

The P U fans forget Edey admitted Purdue planned to get our tall guys in foul trouble so that nobody could stop him from scoring at the end of the game. The plan worked. Purdue only pulled away after our Bigs fouled out. Edey initiated contact every time to make the refs call the fouls, but NU fan are not trolling the P U board whining about that.

Also saying the Purdue guards were “letting” our guards take uncontested 3s the entire game is really laughable. Who just lets a team that is hitting more than 50% of their 3-pointers do so all game long without trying to guard them? Boo was not fouled once the whole game according to the refs. So either the P U guards were so bad that they could not guard him or extremely good that they could guard a Cousy award guard and probable All-American for 43 minutes without committing a single infraction. The third option is the refs allowing aggressive physical contact against our players but putting a “Do Not Touch” sign on Edey.

 

[FanatiCat]

The P U fans forget Edey admitted Purdue planned to get our tall guys in foul trouble so that nobody could stop him from scoring at the end of the game. The plan worked. Purdue only pulled away after our Bigs fouled out. Edey initiated contact every time to make the refs call the fouls, but NU fan are not trolling the P U board whining about that.

Also saying the Purdue guards were “letting” our guards take uncontested 3s the entire game is really laughable. Who just lets a team that is hitting more than 50% of their 3-pointers do so all game long without trying to guard them? Boo was not fouled once the whole game according to the refs. So either the P U guards were so bad that they could not guard him or extremely good that they could guard a Cousy award guard and probable All-American for 43 minutes without committing a single infraction. The third option is the refs allowing aggressive physical contact against our players but putting a “Do Not Touch” sign on Edey.

Buie not fouled once. What a joke. The refs should be forced to watch every one of Buie’s drives over and over in a dark film room with their eyes propped open.

 

[SmellyCat]

Buie not fouled once. What a joke. The refs should be forced to watch every one of Buie’s drives over and over in a dark film room with their eyes propped open.

Sounds pretty good, except for the eyes part.

 

[FanatiCat]

Problem was Collins went off and caused the thing. Hell, he said before the game he had three centers and was going to use 15 fouls on Zack. Mission accomplished, Collins played hack a Zack. Thats why the difference. As far as why NW didn't get more calls NW shot threes from long range and Purdue didn't have anyone within 5ft of Buie and Berry so..... Edey doesn't get too many fouls because if he's out of position he lets them score. There were the normal number of missed calls on both ends so.........

Maybe one reason Purdue has underachieved in the big dance is that they don’t benefit from the home cooking once they get out of B1G play and B1G refs.

 

[CappyNU]

Problem was Collins went off and caused the thing. Hell, he said before the game he had three centers and was going to use 15 fouls on Zack. Mission accomplished, Collins played hack a Zack. Thats why the difference. As far as why NW didn't get more calls NW shot threes from long range and Purdue didn't have anyone within 5ft of Buie and Berry so..... Edey doesn't get too many fouls because if he's out of position he lets them score. There were the normal number of missed calls on both ends so.........

And you know how to use copy and paste to put the same comment on two threads. Good for you Brucie!

 

[GatoLouco]

And you know how to use copy and paste to put the same comment on two threads. Good for you Brucie!

Bruce is like water my friend

 

[elgatoloco]

Ant Wright spent an inordinate amount of time dissecting the game to determine fouls. You can find it on Twitter. Both teams were underassessed fouls in his opinion.