Phx-Suns.Net

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:43 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:37 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:19 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 12:38 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:18 am

NBA home teams win 72% of the games Zarba calls

https://www.nbastuffer.com/2024-2025-nba-referee-stats/

Just facts man.

Small sample size. 39 games. Check his career stats, I’m sure you won’t find that pattern.

I wonder if that’s complete. According to https://analyticsdev.refratings.com/wiki/zach-zarba/, home teams are 22-24 against the spread in Zarba games.

ETA: nbastuffer has Zarba’s stats split in two! 72% in 39 games, 40% in the other 10. 32-17 overall. League average would be 31-18. Your facts man aren’t facts after all.

How disappointing is this? You seemed excited to discover what you thought was a statistical justification for saying the ref is biased against us.

Or, I don't have the time to spend on this that you do.

Even so, you were awfully quick to jump to a conclusion based on 39 games, and just a 4 game deviation from league average. Smacks of an emotional need to believe the refs are biased against us. You wouldn’t have been fooled by such “evidence” if it had pointed to the opposite conclusion.

Indeed, the fact that you saw the 39 and not the 10 suggests you sorted by home win %. You were looking for Zarba at the top and found him there, and didn’t notice that he was also at the bottom, because that’s not where you were looking. You were looking hopefully for what you thought you found, and that’s why you thought you found it.

Good for you man, enjoy your pit of infinite sadness.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Gratuitous insult just because I wasn’t fooled by the same cognitive bias?

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:45 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:43 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:37 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:19 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 12:38 pm

Small sample size. 39 games. Check his career stats, I’m sure you won’t find that pattern.

I wonder if that’s complete. According to https://analyticsdev.refratings.com/wiki/zach-zarba/, home teams are 22-24 against the spread in Zarba games.

ETA: nbastuffer has Zarba’s stats split in two! 72% in 39 games, 40% in the other 10. 32-17 overall. League average would be 31-18. Your facts man aren’t facts after all.

How disappointing is this? You seemed excited to discover what you thought was a statistical justification for saying the ref is biased against us.

Or, I don't have the time to spend on this that you do.

Even so, you were awfully quick to jump to a conclusion based on 39 games, and just a 4 game deviation from league average. Smacks of an emotional need to believe the refs are biased against us. You wouldn’t have been fooled by such “evidence” if it had pointed to the opposite conclusion.

Indeed, the fact that you saw the 39 and not the 10 suggests you sorted by home win %. You were looking for Zarba at the top and found him there, and didn’t notice that he was also at the bottom, because that’s not where you were looking. You were looking hopefully for what you thought you found, and that’s why you thought you found it.

Good for you man, enjoy your pit of infinite sadness.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Gratuitous insult just because I wasn’t fooled by the same cognitive bias?

Go read your snarky initial reply. I only responded in kind. Good day.

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:47 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:45 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:43 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:37 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:19 pm

Or, I don't have the time to spend on this that you do.

Even so, you were awfully quick to jump to a conclusion based on 39 games, and just a 4 game deviation from league average. Smacks of an emotional need to believe the refs are biased against us. You wouldn’t have been fooled by such “evidence” if it had pointed to the opposite conclusion.

Indeed, the fact that you saw the 39 and not the 10 suggests you sorted by home win %. You were looking for Zarba at the top and found him there, and didn’t notice that he was also at the bottom, because that’s not where you were looking. You were looking hopefully for what you thought you found, and that’s why you thought you found it.

Good for you man, enjoy your pit of infinite sadness.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Gratuitous insult just because I wasn’t fooled by the same cognitive bias?

Go read your snarky initial reply. I only responded in kind. Good day.

That wasn’t an insult. That was constructive criticism. Being aware of your cognitive bias can help you correct for it if you want to.

There was no need for you to make it personal. Even if you thought my discussion of cognitive bias made you look bad, being a “counterpuncher” is not a virtue. But since you want something to complain about, and you’ve already complained about the insult I didn’t make, here’s a genuine insult for you to complain about:

You’re being a jerk.

You’re welcome.

BTW, I am not sad. You are attributing to me emotions that I do not have. Again jumping to unsupported conclusions, assuming you believe what you just said, and I can’t imagine why you’re so drawn to such a belief, unless it’s a belief that sadness would make me inferior to you if I were feeling it.

Seriously, be careful. Know what you’re doing.

Keep doing it if you want to, but be conscious of it.

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:50 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:47 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:45 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:43 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:37 pm

Even so, you were awfully quick to jump to a conclusion based on 39 games, and just a 4 game deviation from league average. Smacks of an emotional need to believe the refs are biased against us. You wouldn’t have been fooled by such “evidence” if it had pointed to the opposite conclusion.

Indeed, the fact that you saw the 39 and not the 10 suggests you sorted by home win %. You were looking for Zarba at the top and found him there, and didn’t notice that he was also at the bottom, because that’s not where you were looking. You were looking hopefully for what you thought you found, and that’s why you thought you found it.

Good for you man, enjoy your pit of infinite sadness.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Gratuitous insult just because I wasn’t fooled by the same cognitive bias?

Go read your snarky initial reply. I only responded in kind. Good day.

That wasn’t an insult. That was constructive criticism. Being aware of your cognitive bias can help you correct for it if you want to.

There was no need for you to make it personal. But since you want something to complain about, and you’ve already complained about the insult I didn’t make, here’s a genuine insult for you to complain about:

You’re being a jerk.

You’re welcome.

BTW, I am not sad. You are attributing to me emotions that I do not have. Again jumping to unsupported conclusions, assuming you believe what you just said, and I can’t imagine why you’re so drawn to such a belief, unless it’s a belief that sadness would make me inferior to you if I were feeling it.

Seriously, be careful. Know what you’re doing.

Keep doing it if you want to, but be conscious of it.

You guys are piling on Cap a lot lately for being negative. Can't ya just let the guy be not okay? There's plenty to be down about right now.

I’m not down, I’m not “not okay,” I’m just pessimistic about the Suns’ future. I’m coping with it just fine, really.

Cap wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 2:14 pm

I’m not down, I’m not “not okay,” I’m just pessimistic about the Suns’ future. I’m coping with it just fine, really.

There's not a whole hell of a lot to be optimistic about with this team.

Should be a good test
I do believe we've found a little something regarding lineups/energy and turnovers helping us get fastbreak points been important

My concern is still however halfcourt offense. Just can't understand y we must always be so stagnant and I think last time Cavs D caused problems and even did lots of zone which we couldn't figure out.

So hopefully more hustle again tonight and some kinda decent execution on offense

Only 3 games but his play has been visibly



How about this for an answer
His mindset is definitely it

Oso gonna have to play 48 minutes?

Split T wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 6:08 pm

Oso gonna have to play 48 minutes?

Bol is an option. Not a great fit at C, but he’ll do in a pinch.

The Cavs bigs are going to feast tonight.

Looking good early. KD is a tough cover for Allen

SHOCKING THAT PLAYING CG DUNN AND OSO GOING WELL. Who would have known!!!!! 2 months ago.

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:18 pm

SHOCKING THAT PLAYING CG DUNN AND OSO GOING WELL. Who would have known!!!!! 2 months ago.

Gillespie too, knowing he doesn't need shots seems to help Booker

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:20 pm

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:18 pm

SHOCKING THAT PLAYING CG DUNN AND OSO GOING WELL. Who would have known!!!!! 2 months ago.

Gillespie too, knowing he doesn't need shots seems to help Booker

That’s who CG is.

SunsRIt wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:23 pm

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:20 pm

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:18 pm

SHOCKING THAT PLAYING CG DUNN AND OSO GOING WELL. Who would have known!!!!! 2 months ago.

Gillespie too, knowing he doesn't need shots seems to help Booker

That’s who CG is.

Didnt see it tbh

Is this the first time we've gotten the better NBA brother first? Or is Caleb better?

TOO wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:28 pm

Is this the first time we've gotten the better NBA brother first? Or is Caleb better?

Markieff was better than Marcus at that point in their careers.

Almost had Steph Curry…