NCAA Women's Basketball Rule Changes

[mred]

Also, do you have men's team data? I'd love to see the men switch to quarters also.

ISU MBB (from 9 home conference games last season):

Assuming no shooting fouls, quarters would have 4.2 fewer FTA per game (both teams combined)
Assuming 30% shooting fouls, quarters would have 2.9 fewer FTA per game (both teams combined)

Fouls by quarter:
1: 5.9
2: 9.0
3: 8.6
4: 11.9 (includes OT, but there weren't any)

 

[CycloneRulzzz]

making the game less competitive than the men's game will do nothing for fan adoption

This. The sport already has a limited fan base and these changes do nothing to help it.

 

[VeloClone]

If you assume 30% of fouls are shooting fouls (a number I completely made up but seems reasonable):

The change in FTA in ISU home conference games decreases from 3.3 to 2.3
The change in FTA in OU home conference games decreases from 5.8 to 4.1

And one fouls would decrease the difference even more.

 

[mred]

And one fouls would decrease the difference even more.

I just assumed two shots per shooting foul. That never even occurred to me.

In the NBA (the only place I could find this stat) players made around 22% of the shots in which they drew a foul. That's 1.78 FTA per shooting foul, which we could nudge up to maybe 1.9 due to the occasional foul on a missed 3-pointer. That's not too far off from the 2.0 I had assumed.

I think the results are more sensitive to the accuracy of my 30% shooting fouls assumption.

 

[LindenCy]

Its 5 fouls per quarter, not 8 fouls per half.

Thanks for clarifying. I was wondering how they were going to handle it.

 

[LivntheCyLife]

Average fouls by quarter:
ISU Data:
1: 4.4
2: 7.3
3: 7.0
4: 10.9 (includes OT, and 1 out of the 9 games had 1 OT)

OU Data:
1: 7.7
2: 7.3
3: 8.4
4: 11.7 (includes OT, but there were no OT games)

I can throw together MBB shortly.

Thanks! I was expecting the 3rd quarter to be lower but I think the effect might still be there. I think it's only human nature that officials are more hesitant to call fouls early in a half when they know it puts a team in the bonus for the entire half. At least when I watch NBA games with quarters it feels to me like the officials are more willing to call fouls and set the tone early. Will be interesting to see what the actual numbers are next year.

 

[cydney]

Here's a quick and dirty analysis.

Notes:

...
Results:

Under the old system, the teams combined for an average of 5.33 fouls in the single bonus (one-and-one situation) and 2.78 fouls in the double bonus. Given an average of around 70% FT shooting (so 1.7 FTA per one-and-one), this leads to around 14.6 FTA per game combined for both teams (ignoring shooting fouls).

Under the new system, the teams combined for an average of 5.67 fouls in the bonus. This leads to around 11.3 FTA per game combined for both teams (again, ignoring shooting fouls)

So if there were no shooting fouls, there'd be 3.3 fewer total FTA per game (combined for both teams) under the new rules. I suspect shooting fouls would slightly lower that gap but not significantly.

Given ISU's propensity to not foul (especially at home), this gap is likely higher for other teams. I may find another team that uses the same stats provider and rerun the analysis.

Average fouls by quarter:
ISU Data:
1: 4.4
2: 7.3
3: 7.0
4: 10.9 (includes OT, and 1 out of the 9 games had 1 OT)

OU Data:
1: 7.7
2: 7.3
3: 8.4
4: 11.7 (includes OT, but there were no OT games)

I can throw together MBB shortly.

mred, in your first post, you listed a total of 5.33+2.78= 8.11 fouls. In your subsequent post, you list a total of 4.4+7.3+7+10.9 = 29.6 fouls.

Why are the totals different?

 

[Buster28]

This. The sport already has a limited fan base and these changes do nothing to help it.

Yup. They're changing rules just to change them. I've seen some coaches say they welcomed the new rules, but really question "why?" They are not improving any aspect of the game, that I can tell. None of it seems necessary. Ok, so WCBB is the last level of women's basketball to not use four quarters. So?!? Ooooh, look! Now there's even LESS unique about it than there was last year. Someone at the NCAA must have been bored and figured they'd just give up on trying to get decent officials and created a pet project to see what they could switch around to confuse people. Why not just go back to 6 on 6 and call it good, if they really want to do something pointless.

 

[theshadow]

The elimination of the 1-and-1 may help the awful FT shooting teams (and be no advantage to ISU). Missing the first FT will now always result in a second attempt. Could they miss the second? Sure, but before they wouldn't have had the opportunity to miss (or make) it. That's several automatic extra FTA per game compared to the old rules.

It reminds me a little of the old NBA "3-to-make-2" (and 2-to-make-1) rule.

 

[chuckd4735]

Like: 10 second rule
Dislike: 4 Qtrs and advancing ball to half court on time out.
Meh: All others

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball...basketball-adopts-new-rules-including-four-10

I'm not sure how the women's game used to do it, but this proposal also seems to have less timeouts available, which is awesome.

New rules would have 1 media timeout half way into each quarter, and obviously one at the end of each quarter. So if they used to have 4 media timeouts each half like the men, that is now reduced to 3. Also, teams only get 4 timeouts per game, and if that used to be 5 like the mens game, that is also reduced.

 

[mred]

mred, in your first post, you listed a total of 5.33+2.78= 8.11 fouls. In your subsequent post, you list a total of 4.4+7.3+7+10.9 = 29.6 fouls.

Why are the totals different?

The first number only contains fouls in the single/double bonus. The difference (around 21.5) is the average number of non-bonus fouls (fouls 1-6 each half).

 

[mred]

Here's a nice summary of the rule changes put together by Michigan: http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools.../2015-16/misc_non_event/ncaa-rule-changes.pdf