Service errors are way overrated as a statistic. I'm not saying they're unimportant. They are important. But what is more important is the effectiveness of serves. Otherwise players would be back there serving underhanded. For some servers, they might as well be.
But because it's measured that's what everyone focuses on. I wish there was a stat for each player that showed the percentage of serves their team scores on. That's way more important than aces, which is also overrated as a stat. Obviously scoring a point is often as much about the rotation a player is in as it is the effectiveness of their serve, but it would still be way more useful than aces and errors, especially as a ratio. That's a dumb measurement of the effectiveness of a server, their aces to error ratio on serves.
There is a great site I went on that explained the analytics in terms of getting an advantage on one exchange and being able to capitalize on it, even if it wasn't during the very next exchange. It's similar to any net sport. You put the opposition in a disadvantageous situation where their response back over the net is relatively weak, it puts your team in a good spot to make a forceful shot, which may again get returned, but in a weak way such that your team is again able to make a commanding kill shot. The odds to get the point are in your team's favor with each exchange, even if the first hit over the net didn't score. None of that is measured in the aces/errors statistic.
That said, there are times I've seen Stanford service error themselves out of a match, so again, I'm not saying it's unimportant. Just over emphasized by the announcers and fans.
We see the opposite true on the Texas side sometimes. Not with serves, but with kill shots. Elliott puts a big emphasis on limiting errors, and sometimes IMO it causes our players to choose to tip the ball over rather than letting it rip. But it's hard to argue with the overall results. It can be frustrating to watch as a fan at times.