Coaches evaluating Officials

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Hartsy

This has been talked about before, I'm sure. I never thought too hard about it until I saw some reviews of my own. I just didn't know what to take away from it.

I had overall good scores, my worst overall evaluation was 'average', and that from a coach who saw fit to rate me 'average' in every category. What interests me is that I also received two overall perfect scores (out of 8 evaluations), but was rated by one coach as 'poor' on rules and mechanics, who commented that I "may not be able to make it" as an official.

My hunch is that coaches evaluting on mechanics and rules knowledge is not too valuable, but I could pay attention to how they rate my appearance/professionalism, court presence, hustle, etc.

Any thoughts?

While there are some that will do a reasonable job, coaches evaluating you, in general, is largely useless. The rating will tend to track win/loss. If you make calls they disagree with, your rules knowledge will be lacking. If you make calls they agree with, your rules knowledge will be high.

They don't have a clue where you should/shouldn't be regarding mechanics and they would rarely be watching you unless you blow the whistle....so how would they know 90% of the time.

Even the other non-game related categories will be swayed by emotion.

The best evaluations are done by fully independant parties who have nothing to gain/lose from the event.

Of course, if you're getting good evals from losing coaches, you can probably, at least, accept that they're trying to give an honest answer and not just ding you because they lost.