DOCSLIB.ORG

2020-21 Pac-12 Women's Basketball Conference Statistics All Games

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020-21 Pac-12 Women's Basketball Conference Statistics All Games 2020-21 Pac-12 Women's Basketball Page 1/6 Conference Statistics as of Apr 05, 2021 All games Scoring Offense Scoring Defense Team G W-L Pts Avg/G Team G Pts Avg/G 1. Stanford 33 31-2 2565 77.73 1. Stanford 33 1773 53.73 2. UCLA 23 17-6 1642 71.39 2. Arizona 27 1492 55.26 3. Oregon St. 20 12-8 1426 71.30 3. Arizona St. 24 1361 56.71 4. Oregon 24 15-9 1701 70.88 4. UCLA 23 1340 58.26 5. Arizona 27 21-6 1791 66.33 5. Oregon 24 1430 59.58 6. Colorado 23 12-11 1487 64.65 6. Colorado 23 1407 61.17 7. Southern California 23 11-12 1463 63.61 7. Washington St. 24 1522 63.42 8. Washington St. 24 12-12 1517 63.21 8. Washington 21 1363 64.90 9. Utah 21 5-16 1264 60.19 9. Oregon St. 20 1362 68.10 10. Washington 21 7-14 1234 58.76 10. Southern California 23 1584 68.87 11. Arizona St. 24 12-12 1296 54.00 11. California 17 1180 69.41 12. California 17 1-16 846 49.76 12. Utah 21 1489 70.90 Scoring Margin Free Throw Percentage Team G Off Def Margin Team G FTM FTA Pct. 1. Stanford 33 77.73 53.73 +24.00 1. Southern California 23 236 319 .740 2. UCLA 23 71.39 58.26 +13.13 2. Washington St. 24 239 326 .733 3. Oregon 24 70.88 59.58 +11.29 3. UCLA 23 323 442 .731 4. Arizona 27 66.33 55.26 +11.07 4. Oregon St. 20 256 355 .721 5. Colorado 23 64.65 61.17 +3.48 5. Stanford 33 303 425 .713 6. Oregon St. 20 71.30 68.10 +3.20 6. Arizona St. 24 279 393 .710 7. Washington St. 24 63.21 63.42 -0.21 7. Oregon 24 203 288 .705 8. Arizona St. 24 54.00 56.71 -2.71 8. Utah 21 260 374 .695 9. Southern California 23 63.61 68.87 -5.26 9. Arizona 27 300 434 .691 10. Washington 21 58.76 64.90 -6.14 10. Washington 21 183 267 .685 11. Utah 21 60.19 70.90 -10.71 11. California 17 181 273 .663 12. California 17 49.76 69.41 -19.65 12. Colorado 23 270 413 .654 Field Goal Percentage Field Goal Percentage Defense Team G FGM FGA Pct. Team G FGM FGA Pct. 1. Stanford 33 986 2119 .465 1. Stanford 33 632 1922 .329 2. Oregon St. 20 507 1116 .454 2. Arizona 27 546 1478 .369 3. Oregon 24 664 1484 .447 3. Oregon St. 20 491 1328 .370 4. Southern California 23 540 1287 .420 4. Oregon 24 527 1408 .374 5. Colorado 23 543 1298 .418 5. UCLA 23 482 1230 .392 6. Arizona 27 661 1617 .409 6. Colorado 23 507 1278 .397 7. UCLA 23 583 1456 .400 7. Washington St. 24 550 1379 .399 8. Washington 21 459 1171 .392 8. Southern California 23 563 1382 .407 9. Washington St. 24 553 1437 .385 9. Arizona St. 24 491 1199 .410 10. Utah 21 431 1157 .373 10. Utah 21 535 1261 .424 11. California 17 306 880 .348 11. California 17 465 1088 .427 12. Arizona St. 24 446 1341 .333 12. Washington 21 496 1152 .431 2020-21 Pac-12 Women's Basketball Page 2/6 Conference Statistics as of Apr 05, 2021 All games 3-Point FG Percentage 3-Point FG Percentage Defense Team G 3FG FGA Pct. Team G 3FG FGA Pct. 1. Oregon St. 20 156 394 .396 1. Stanford 33 185 655 .282 2. Stanford 33 290 755 .384 2. Oregon 24 135 448 .301 3. Oregon 24 170 484 .351 3. UCLA 23 126 418 .301 4. Southern California 23 147 420 .350 4. Colorado 23 157 514 .305 5. UCLA 23 153 452 .338 5. Arizona 27 130 421 .309 6. Arizona 27 169 502 .337 6. Arizona St. 24 119 385 .309 7. Colorado 23 131 401 .327 7. Washington 21 148 452 .327 8. Washington St. 24 172 542 .317 8. Washington St. 24 141 426 .331 9. Washington 21 133 430 .309 9. California 17 124 359 .345 10. Utah 21 142 468 .303 10. Oregon St. 20 160 451 .355 11. Arizona St. 24 125 473 .264 11. Southern California 23 192 538 .357 12. California 17 53 251 .211 12. Utah 21 154 419 .368 Rebounding Offense Rebounding Defense Team G Rebounds Avg/G Team G Rebounds Avg/G 1. Stanford 33 1420 43.03 1. Stanford 33 1084 32.85 2. UCLA 23 913 39.70 2. UCLA 23 768 33.39 3. Oregon 24 937 39.04 3. Colorado 23 785 34.13 4. Oregon St. 20 762 38.10 4. Oregon 24 823 34.29 5. Washington St. 24 889 37.04 5. Washington 21 729 34.71 6. California 17 629 37.00 6. Arizona St. 24 842 35.08 7. Colorado 23 841 36.57 7. Oregon St. 20 739 36.95 8. Arizona 27 986 36.52 8. Washington St. 24 893 37.21 9. Arizona St. 24 869 36.21 9. California 17 633 37.24 10. Utah 21 746 35.52 10. Arizona 27 1006 37.26 11. Washington 21 674 32.10 11. Utah 21 784 37.33 12. Southern California 23 709 30.83 12. Southern California 23 906 39.39 Rebounding Margin Blocked Shots Team G Team Avg. Opp. Avg. Margin Team G No. Avg/G 1. Stanford 33 1420 43.03 1084 32.85 +10.18 1. Stanford 33 196 5.94 2. UCLA 23 913 39.70 768 33.39 +6.30 2. Oregon St. 20 106 5.30 3. Oregon 24 937 39.04 823 34.29 +4.75 3. California 17 82 4.82 4. Colorado 23 841 36.57 785 34.13 +2.43 4. Arizona 27 121 4.48 5. Oregon St. 20 762 38.10 739 36.95 +1.15 5. Oregon 24 104 4.33 6. Arizona St. 24 869 36.21 842 35.08 +1.13 6. Southern California 23 98 4.26 7. Washington St. 24 889 37.04 893 37.21 -0.17 7. Washington St. 24 97 4.04 8. California 17 629 37.00 633 37.24 -0.24 8. Utah 21 81 3.86 9. Arizona 27 986 36.52 1006 37.26 -0.74 9. Colorado 23 85 3.70 10. Utah 21 746 35.52 784 37.33 -1.81 10. UCLA 23 63 2.74 11. Washington 21 674 32.10 729 34.71 -2.62 11. Washington 21 45 2.14 12. Southern California 23 709 30.83 906 39.39 -8.57 12. Arizona St. 24 48 2.00 2020-21 Pac-12 Women's Basketball Page 3/6 Conference Statistics as of Apr 05, 2021 All games Assists Steals Team G No. Avg/G Team G No. Avg/G 1. Stanford 33 543 16.45 1. Arizona 27 286 10.59 2. Oregon St. 20 321 16.05 2. Washington 21 201 9.57 3. Oregon 24 371 15.46 3. UCLA 23 213 9.26 4. UCLA 23 332 14.43 4. Colorado 23 202 8.78 5. Washington St. 24 338 14.08 5. Arizona St. 24 203 8.46 6. Southern California 23 307 13.35 6. Stanford 33 272 8.24 7. Colorado 23 287 12.48 7. Oregon 24 194 8.08 8. Arizona St. 24 282 11.75 8. Washington St. 24 190 7.92 9. Washington 21 245 11.67 9. Utah 21 163 7.76 10. Arizona 27 310 11.48 10. Southern California 23 159 6.91 11. Utah 21 231 11.00 11. California 17 92 5.41 12. California 17 155 9.12 12. Oregon St. 20 95 4.75 Turnover Margin Assist/Turnover Ratio Team G Team Avg. Opp. Avg. Margin Team G Ast. Avg. T/O Avg. Ratio 1. Arizona 27 327 12.11 480 17.78 +5.67 1. Stanford 33 543 16.45 423 12.82 1.28 2. UCLA 23 273 11.87 397 17.26 +5.39 2. Oregon 24 371 15.46 303 12.63 1.22 3. Stanford 33 423 12.82 492 14.91 +2.09 3. UCLA 23 332 14.43 273 11.87 1.22 4. Oregon 24 303 12.63 344 14.33 +1.71 4. Oregon St. 20 321 16.05 279 13.95 1.15 5. Arizona St. 24 383 15.96 417 17.38 +1.42 5. Southern California 23 307 13.35 303 13.17 1.01 6. Colorado 23 360 15.65 383 16.65 +1.00 6. Washington St. 24 338 14.08 350 14.58 0.97 7. Southern California 23 303 13.17 321 13.96 +0.78 7. Arizona 27 310 11.48 327 12.11 0.95 8. Washington 21 356 16.95 361 17.19 +0.24 8. Colorado 23 287 12.48 360 15.65 0.80 9. Washington St. 24 350 14.58 350 14.58 0.00 9. Arizona St. 24 282 11.75 383 15.96 0.74 10. Utah 21 373 17.76 295 14.05 -3.71 10. Washington 21 245 11.67 356 16.95 0.69 11. Oregon St.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Play by Play JPN 87 Vs 71 FRA FIRST QUARTER
    Saitama Super Arena Basketball さいたまスーパーアリーナ バスケットボール / Basketball Super Arena de Saitama Women 女子 / Femmes FRI 6 AUG 2021 Semifinal Start Time: 20:00 準決勝 / Demi-finale Play by Play プレーバイプレー / Actions de jeux Game 48 JPN 87 vs 71 FRA (14-22, 27-12, 27-16, 19-21) Game Duration: 1:31 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Scoring by 5 min intervals: JPN 9 14 28 41 56 68 78 87 FRA 11 22 27 34 44 50 57 71 Quarter Starters: FIRST QUARTER JPN 8 TAKADA M 13 MACHIDA R 27 HAYASHI S 52 MIYAZAWA Y 88 AKAHO H FRA 5 MIYEM E 7 GRUDA S 10 MICHEL S 15 WILLIAMS G 39 DUCHET A Game JPN - Japan Score Diff. FRA - France Time 10:00 8 TAKADA M Jump ball lost 7 GRUDA S Jump ball won 15 WILLIAMS G 2PtsFG inside paint, Driving Layup made (2 9:41 0-2 2 Pts) 8 TAKADA M 2PtsFG inside paint, Layup made (2 Pts), 13 9:19 2-2 0 MACHIDA R Assist (1) 9:00 52 MIYAZAWA Y Defensive rebound (1) 10 MICHEL S 2PtsFG inside paint, Driving Layup missed 52 MIYAZAWA Y 2PtsFG inside paint, Layup made (2 Pts), 13 8:40 4-2 2 MACHIDA R Assist (2) 8:40 10 MICHEL S Personal foul, 1 free throw awarded (P1,T1) 8:40 52 MIYAZAWA Y Foul drawn 8:40 52 MIYAZAWA Y Free Throw made 1 of 1 (3 Pts) 5-2 3 8:28 52 MIYAZAWA Y Defensive rebound (2) 10 MICHEL S 2PtsFG inside paint, Driving Layup missed 8:11 52 MIYAZAWA Y 3PtsFG missed 15 WILLIAMS G Defensive rebound (1) 8:03 5-4 1 15 WILLIAMS G 2PtsFG fast break, Driving Layup made (4 Pts) 88 AKAHO H 2PtsFG inside paint, Layup made (2 Pts), 13 7:53 7-4 3 MACHIDA R Assist (3) 7:36 39 DUCHET A 2PtsFG outside paint, Pullup Jump Shot missed 7:34 Defensive Team rebound (1) 7:14 13 MACHIDA
    [Show full text]
  • Coaches Handbook
    City of Buckeye COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT -Recreation Division- COACHES HANDBOOK Important dates Opening day: Saturday, June 16th Picture day: Tuesday, June 19th and Thursday, June 21st Last day: Saturday, July 28th Peter Piper pizza party nights: TBD Community Services Department’s Vision and Mission Statement Our Vision “Buckeye Is An Active, Engaged and Vibrant Community.” Our Mission We are dedicated to enriching quality of life, managing natural resources and creating memorable experiences for all generations. .We do this by: Developing quality parks, diverse programs and sustainable practices. Promoting volunteerism and lifelong learning. Cultivating community events, tourism and economic development. Preserving cultural, natural and historic resources. Offering programs that inspire personal growth, healthy lifestyles and sense of community. Dear Coach: Thank you for volunteering to coach with the City of Buckeye Youth Sports Program. The role of a youth sports coach can be very rewarding, but can be challenging at times as well. We have included helpful information in this handbook to assist in making this an enjoyable season for you and your team. Our youth sports philosophy is to provide our youth with a positive athletic experience in a safe environment where fun, skill development, teamwork, and sportsmanship lay its foundation. In addition, our youth sports programs is designed to encourage maximum participation by all team members; their development is far more important than the outcome of the game. Please be sure to remember you are dealing with children, in a child’s game, where the best motivation of all is enthusiasm, positive reinforcement and team success. If the experience is fun for you, it will also be fun for the kids on your team as well as their parents.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unseen Play the Game to Win 03/22/2017
    The Unseen Play the Game to Win 03/22/2017 Play the Game to Win What Rick Barry and the Atlanta Falcons can teach us about risk management “Something about the crowd transforms the way you think” – Malcolm Gladwell - Revisionist History With 4:45 remaining in Super Bowl LI, Matt Ryan, the Atlanta Falcons quarterback, threw a pass to Julio Jones who made an amazing catch. The play did not stand out because of the way the ball was thrown or the agility that Jones employed to make the catch, but due to the fact that the catch eas- ily put the Falcons in field goal range very late in the game. That reception should have been the play of the game, but it was not. Instead, Tom Brady walked off the field with the MVP trophy and the Patriots celebrated yet another Super Bowl victory. NBA basketball hall of famer Rick Barry shot close to 90% from the free throw line. What made him memorable was not just his free throw percentage or his hard fought play, but the way he shot the ball underhanded, “granny-style”, when taking free throws. Every basketball player, coach and fan clearly understands that the goal of a basketball game is to score the most points and win. Rick Bar- ry, however, was one of the very few that understood it does not matter how you win but most im- portantly if you win. The Atlanta Falcons crucial mistake and Rick Barry’s “granny” shooting style offer stark illustrations about how human beings guard their egos and at times do imprudent things in order to be viewed favorably by their peers and the public.
    [Show full text]
  • FIBA Official Interpretations 2019, JAN 2019
    2020 OFFICIAL BASKETBALL RULES OBRI – OFFICIAL INTERPRETATIONS Valid as of 1st January 2021 1 January 2021 version 2.0 Official Basketball Rules 2020 Official Interpretations Valid as of 1st January 2021 The colours demonstrate the content that was updated. (Yellow version) Page 2 of 112 OFFICIAL BASKETBALL RULES INTERPRETATIONS 1 January 2021 version 2.0 In case you find any inconsistency or error, please report the problem to: [email protected] 1 January 2021 version 2.0 OFFICIAL BASKETBALL RULES INTERPRETATIONS Page 3 of 112 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . .......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Article 4 Teams ............................................................................................................................................... 6 Article 5 Players: Injury and assistance .................................................................................................... 7 Article 7 Head coach and first assistant coach: Duties and Powers ................................................. 10 Article 8 Playing time, tied score and overtime ...................................................................................... 12 Article 9 Beginning and end of a quarter, overtime or the game ........................................................ 14 Article 10 Status of the ball .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Official Basketball Statistics Rules Basic Interpretations
    Official Basketball Statistics Rules With Approved Rulings and Interpretations (Throughout this manual, Team A players have last names starting with “A” the shooter tries to control and shoot the ball in the and Team B players have last names starting with “B.”) same motion with not enough time to get into a nor- mal shooting position (squared up to the basket). Article 2. A field goal made (FGM) is credited to a play- Basic Interpretations er any time a FGA by the player results in the goal being (Indicated as “B.I.” references throughout manual.) counted or results in an awarded score of two (or three) points except when the field goal is the result of a defen- sive player tipping the ball in the offensive basket. 1. APPROVED RULING—Approved rulings (indicated as A.R.s) are designed to interpret the spirit of the applica- Related rules in the NCAA Men’s and Women’s Basketball tion of the Official Basketball Rules. A thorough under- Rules and Interpretations: standing of the rules is essential to understanding and (1) 4-33: Definition of “Goal” applying the statistics rules in this manual. (2) 4-49.2: Definition of “Penalty for Violation” (3) 4-69: Definition of “Try for Field Goal” and definition of 2. STATISTICIAN’S JOB—The statistician’s responsibility is “Act of Shooting” to judge only what has happened, not to speculate as (4) 4-73: Definition of “Violation” to what would have happened. The statistician should (5) 5-1: “Scoring” not decide who would have gotten the rebound if it had (6) 9-16: “Basket Interference and Goaltending” not been for the foul.
    [Show full text]
  • Ranking the Greatest NBA Players: an Analytics Analysis
    1 Ranking the Greatest NBA Players: An Analytics Analysis An Honors Thesis by Jeremy Mertz Thesis Advisor Dr. Lawrence Judge Ball State University Muncie, Indiana July 2015 Expected Date of Graduation May 2015 1-' ,II L II/du, t,- i II/em' /.. 2 ?t; q ·7t./ 2 (11 S Ranking the Greatest NBA Players: An Analytics Analysis . Iv/If 7 Abstract The purpose of this investigation was to present a statistical model to help rank top National Basketball Association (NBA) players of all time. As the sport of basketball evolves, the debate on who is the greatest player of all-time in the NBA never seems to reach consensus. This ongoing debate can sometimes become emotional and personal, leading to arguments and in extreme cases resulting in violence and subsequent arrest. Creating a statistical model to rank players may also help coaches determine important variables for player development and aid in future approaches to the game via key data-driven performance indicators. However, computing this type of model is extremely difficult due to the many individual player statistics and achievements to consider, as well as the impact of changes to the game over time on individual player performance analysis. This study used linear regression to create an accurate model for the top 150 player rankings. The variables computed included: points per game, rebounds per game, assists per game, win shares per 48 minutes, and number ofNBA championships won. The results revealed that points per game, rebounds per game, assists per game, and NBA championships were all necessary for an accurate model and win shares per 48 minutes were not significant.
    [Show full text]
  • YMCA Recreational Basketball Rules
    YMCA Recreational Basketball Rules All players must play at least half a game or receive equal playing time. Allowances may be made if practices are missed or for behavioral problems. Team rules should be in place by coaches and team members. Grades 2-4 Both Head Coaches will meet at mid-court socially distance prior to game with official(s) to discuss game procedure, special rules and odd/even number behind back for possession of ball (no center jump). Grades 5-8 Both Head Coaches will meet at mid-court socially distance prior to game to meet with official(s) to discuss game procedures. Tip off at center court to begin game. PLAYING RULES In general, the league will be governed by the Nebraska High School Basketball rules. 1. Bench Area Only the Head Coach can stand during game play (if bench/chairs present). Maximum of 2 coaches on bench. NO PARENTS IN BENCH AREA. 2. Time Limits Two 20 minute Halves. 3 minute break between halves. Grade 2 & 3: Score is not kept; clock will only stop on time-outs/injuries. Grades 4-8: Clock will only stop on time-outs/injuries and on all whistles in the final minute of the game, only if game is within 5 points. 3. Game Time Game may be started and played with 4 players (5th player, upon arrival, can sub in at dead ball). 4. Time-outs Each team is allowed one(1) full time-out and one(1) 30 second time-out per half. Time-outs DO NOT carry over to second half.
    [Show full text]
  • Floor Hockey Study Guide
    Floor Hockey Study Guide History Tom Harter, director of Civic Recreation in Battle Creek, Michigan, introduced the new game of floor hockey modified from the original game of ice hockey. Ice hockey began in Canada in the mid 1800’s. By 1900, it became the national sport of Canada. Since then, it has become more popular in many other countries, especially Russia, Sweden, and the United States. It is a fast paced game, and the only game allowing player substitutions during play. Now, over 1000 amateur players take part at the community, high school and college levels. Typically, hockey games are divided into 3-20 minute periods with 2 intermissions between them. The object is to score points by hitting the puck into the goal or net. Floor hockey is a modification of ice hockey with differences in rules and modifications and of course, no use of ice or skates. Balls can be used in replacement for pucks. Use of a ball makes stick handling easier and increases the pace of the game. Terms Assist ––– a pass from a teammate that leads to a goal. Blade ––– the curved end of the stick, front and back, used to hit the puck. Body or Shaft – the main part of the stick, used to hold and stickhandle. Butt or End – the end knob used for better grip, to keep the hand from sliding off the stick. Centering the puck ––– to pass to a spot (the point) in front of the opponents goal. Goalie Crease – the area where no player’s feet or stick, except for the goalie, is allowed during play.
    [Show full text]
  • Basketball Statistics Manual
    Basketball Statistics Manual FIBA Europe Statistics Manual Field Goals A field goal attempt (FGA) is charged to a player any time they shoot, throw or tap a live ball at their opponent’s basket in an attempt to score a goal unless the player is fouled in the act of shooting and the goal is missed or not counted. When a violation or foul is committed by the shooter or a player from either team, after the ball has been released for a shot, a FGA is credited because the shot would count if successful. A field goal attempt (FGA) is not charged to the shooter if the shot is nullified because of illegal interference with the ball (goal tending) by an offensive player. In this case the offensive player who commits the violation is charged with a turnover and a team rebound charged to the defensive team. A field goal made (FGM) is credited to a player any time a FGA by them results in a goal being scored or being awarded because of illegal interference with the ball (goal tending) by a defensive player. When a player is fouled in the act of shooting and the shot results in a FGM, then a FGA must also be credited. A FGA is not charged if the player shooting the ball, a teammate or a defensive player commits a violation or foul just prior to the ball being released. The official will call the violation or foul and signal that the score or play following the call is canceled. This indicates that the ball was not released for the shot prior to the infringement so no FGA is awarded.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing the Influence of Player Tracking Statistics on Winning Basketball Teams
    Analyzing the Influence of Player Tracking Statistics on Winning Basketball Teams Igor Stan čin * and Alan Jovi ć* * University of Zagreb Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing / Department of Electronics, Microelectronics, Computer and Intelligent Systems, Unska 3, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia [email protected], [email protected] Abstract - Basketball player tracking and hustle statistics year at the Olympic games, by winning a gold medal in the became available since 2013-2014 season from National majority of cases. Off the court, there are specialized Basketball Association (NBA), USA. These statistics provided personnel who try to improve each segment of the game, us with more detailed information about the played games. e.g. doctors, psychologists, basketball experts and scouts. In this paper, we analyze statistically significant differences One of the most interesting facts is that the teams in the in these recent statistical categories between winning and losing teams. The main goal is to identify the most significant league, and the league itself, have expert teams for data differences and thus obtain new insight about what it usually analysis that provide them with valuable information about may take to be a winner. The analysis is done on three every segment of the game. There are a few teams who different scales: marking a winner in each game as a winning make all of their decisions exclusively based on advanced team, marking teams with 50 or more wins at the end of the analysis of statistics. Few years ago, this part of season as a winning team, and marking teams with 50 or organization became even more important, because NBA more wins in a season, but considering only their winning invested into a computer vision system that collects games, as a winning team.
    [Show full text]
  • Briann January 5–8 • Guard Spokane, Wash
    Briann January 5–8 • Guard Spokane, Wash. Arizona State CAREER NOTES AT ASU • Nearly posted a double-double with 10 points, nine assists and two • 2008 & 2009 Pac-10 Defensive Player of the Year. steals in ASU’s first round NCAA win over Georgia. Seven of her 10 • 2008 (AP) and 2009 (AP and WBCA) Honorable Mention All-American. points (3-5 FGs) and six of her nine assists came in the second half. • 2009 All-Pac-10 First Team. • Overcame foul trouble and a sprained ankle in the second half to score • Arizona State’s all-time leader in assists (538) and free throw 11 points and dish out a team-high six assists in ASU’s 63-58 come-from- percentage (.830). behind win over Florida State. • Was also among ASU’s all-time leaders in steals (second, 265), free • Matched her scoring high in an NCAA Tournament game with 22 throws (second, 401), 3-point field goal percentage (fourth, .399), points (8-10 FGs, 6-6 FTs) to go along with five assists, two steals and 3-point field goals (fifth, 132) and scoring (seventh, 1,317 points). one block in ASU’s 84-69 win over Texas A&M in the Trenton Regional • In 2008-09 January set the school’s single-season record for 3-point semifinal (Mar. 29). field goals (65). She also tied the school’s single-game record with seven 3-pointers in ASU’s win at UC Davis on Dec. 3. 2007-08 • Is the only player in school history to lead the team in steals and • 2008 Associated Press Honorable Mention All-American.
    [Show full text]
  • MBB Mechanics JWA Presentation
    2012-13 NCAA Men’s Basketball Officiating Mechanics Changes and Points of Emphasis September 2012 Option for Calling Official • Option to stay tableside to head off unsportsmanlike situation. • Use judiciously. Option for Calling Official Option for Calling Official Trail Official on All Free Throws • Position at 28-foot line for ALL free throws. • Observe correct player, correct order. • Assist with free-throw violations. • Assist with players “breaking the plane of the three-point line” prior to ball striking the ring, flange or backboard. Trail Official on All Free Throws Guidelines on Blocking Calls • Before offensive player becomes airborne, defender MUST have two feet on ground, facing opponent and be stationary. • Referee the defense. • “To and through” is NOT always a player-control foul. • Obtain proper angles and distance adjustments. • See completely through the play, meaning your vision must be unobstructed. Restricted Area Plays • When necessary to “get the play right,” it is the responsibility of the center official to deliver definite information, regarding the position of a secondary defender, to the lead official calling a restricted area block/charge play. Stop the Clock • Signal to stop the clock on fouls, violations or other reasons. • Not all games have automated timing devices and devices don’t always operate correctly. • When using courtside monitor to correct timing mistake, an official’s signal is a point of reference for when the clock should have stopped. Stop the Clock Stop the clock, point the direction, then indicate the throw-in spot. Month ##, Year NCAA Presentation Title page 11 Company Name Clear, Stop, Report • Clear prior to signaling/reporting fouls to table.
    [Show full text]