fear of the facts

[Duck1]

Brian and Hawks have valid points, but I still think that they fall short.

“Duck - If we kept stats you know what would happen. Stud boy player A looks at the stats at the end of the year and sees that he had 11% more fouls called against him than anyone else in his league, conf. etc. Will he say, "oh, that must mean I hack too much" or " It's a conspiracy, the refs don't want to see succeed"?” – Brian

He already can. League already track how many fouls are called on players. If they want to use this excuse rather than facing their own problems, they already can.

“Also, I would hate to see the NBA using these stats to try to modify how an individual ref calls games. That’s what evaluators are for, let them do their jobs. It would tend to undermine the authority of the officials and perhaps make them more tentative if they had to think about how each call affects their overall stats. That kind of scenario would do nothing to improve the quality of refereeing or the basketball we see on the court. “ – Hawks

Well, aren’t players already evaluated by their coaches and general managers? But they have stats tracked on them for all of us to form our own opinions. They are just as hard to compare fairly if you ask me, by the way (e.g. “…but Sanders runs on astroturf while Payton had a miserable offensive line in front of him for his career.) Stats would no more be the bottom line on the evaluation of any ref than it would be on any player.

Bottom line, refs could no more be judged by stats than players, teams, or coaches. As it is now, pundits can make wild claims about refs with no cold facts to deny it. My guess is that if stats were compiled, it would more often refute claims of bias than it would create them. And, if there are any poor officials out there, it might help correct the problem.

Ammunition to quiet pundits and weeding out a few problem refs, what could be bad about that. Sure would make my job easier, and the game better for the players and fans.

- Duck