• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

How many points do y'all think timeouts are worth?

I keep hearing "he holds on to timeouts". Has anybody ever done a study showing positive effects from timeouts, or is it just one of those things where it's always been done so he should do it?
 
Deacsfan27 said:
How many points do y'all think timeouts are worth?

I keep hearing "he holds on to timeouts". Has anybody ever done a study showing positive effects from timeouts, or is it just one of those things where it's always been done so he should do it?
Click to expand...

You over rely on statistics. You know that, right?
 
Deacsfan27 said:
How many points do y'all think timeouts are worth?

I keep hearing "he holds on to timeouts". Has anybody ever done a study showing positive effects from timeouts, or is it just one of those things where it's always been done so he should do it?
Click to expand...

I would be interested to see this.
 
deacvision7 said:
You over rely on statistics. You know that, right?
Click to expand...

I mean this seems a perfect time to use statistics does it not?

There are tons of data points and people always say coaches should use timeouts. What if using timeouts actually resulted in the other team scoring more often right after it because the other coach is better? I would want to know whether or not calling timeouts increases my win expectancy, is neutral, or works against me. Just because everybody else does it is a poor reason to do it without knowing why you do it.

Seems dumb to arbitrarily declare that our coach should use more timeouts with no numbers to back it up. If there have been studies done showing it helps in a lot of cases then by all means do it. If not, then maybe we should focus on other aspects of the game instead of when we call timeout to instill 30 seconds of knowledge to our team.
 
That's like a long version of a Trump tweet. Don't question Doofus unless you have undisputed evidence to back it up.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
How many points do y'all think timeouts are worth?

I keep hearing "he holds on to timeouts". Has anybody ever done a study showing positive effects from timeouts, or is it just one of those things where it's always been done so he should do it?
Click to expand...

I can't think of a good way to design an objective experiment around this - it'd have to be a content analysis approach - you'd have to code the result after each timeout - and then there's really too much noise (time position in the game, fatigue of players, effect of TO on individual shooter) to determine with validity whether timeouts are effective to a five man squad.
 
What's interesting about timeouts is both teams get the same experience regardless of who called it. I don't think it would be difficult to design a study with the right data. You could do longitudinal analysis.

You can control for those factors. Actually you could look at it from the individual player level under the belief that some players on the same team may benefit differently from the same timeout experience.
 
PhDeac said:
That's like a long version of a Trump tweet. Don't question Doofus unless you have undisputed evidence to back it up.
Click to expand...

It's the opposite of a Trump tweet. Trump says things with absolutely no truthful or statistical backing.

I didn't say "indisputable evidence". I'll take any study as evidence. If it works then more power to calling timeouts.

Coaches overmanage and micromanage everything else---it's odd that they wouldn't want to use easily "gatherable" evidence to figure out if there is an overarching relationship (either way) between pre-timeout play and post-timeout play.

Accounting for variables would be difficult, but looking at every data point as a whole wouldn't be too hard. It would be interesting to know what is noise versus what is useful data to extrapolate to your own team.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
I mean this seems a perfect time to use statistics does it not?

There are tons of data points and people always say coaches should use timeouts. What if using timeouts actually resulted in the other team scoring more often right after it because the other coach is better? I would want to know whether or not calling timeouts increases my win expectancy, is neutral, or works against me. Just because everybody else does it is a poor reason to do it without knowing why you do it.

Seems dumb to arbitrarily declare that our coach should use more timeouts with no numbers to back it up. If there have been studies done showing it helps in a lot of cases then by all means do it. If not, then maybe we should focus on other aspects of the game instead of when we call timeout to instill 30 seconds of knowledge to our team.
Click to expand...

How do you know which coach is better? How does that fit into the statistical model?


Timeouts should be called to calm your team down, especially a young team. It isn't some magical momentum changer.


And I'm not even one that rides Manning for his lack of timeouts.
 
TenaciousKory said:
I can't think of a good way to design an objective experiment around this - it'd have to be a content analysis approach - you'd have to code the result after each timeout - and then there's really too much noise (time position in the game, fatigue of players, effect of TO on individual shooter) to determine with validity whether timeouts are effective to a five man squad.
Click to expand...

witch.jpg


STATISTICS ANYWAY

burn_them.jpg
 
PhDeac said:
What's interesting about timeouts is both teams get the same experience regardless of who called it. I don't think it would be difficult to design a study with the right data. You could do longitudinal analysis.

You can control for those factors. Actually you could look at it from the individual player level under the belief that some players on the same team may benefit differently from the same timeout experience.
Click to expand...


only advanced stat research i've seen on timeouts shows that because of the bolded, taking a timeout late in a game with possession of the ball is a net negative. players can run offense much better without coaching than players can defend without coaching. defending a team is more chaotic and a know your personnel situation, there are multiple ways to defend the same play and advanced scout work comes more into play on that side of the ball. effective offense can be much less nuanced.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
It's the opposite of a Trump tweet. Trump says things with absolutely no truthful or statistical backing.

I didn't say "indisputable evidence". I'll take any study as evidence. If it works then more power to calling timeouts.

Coaches overmanage and micromanage everything else---it's odd that they wouldn't want to use easily "gatherable" evidence to figure out if there is an overarching relationship (either way) between pre-timeout play and post-timeout play.

Accounting for variables would be difficult, but looking at every data point as a whole wouldn't be too hard. It would be interesting to know what is noise versus what is useful data to extrapolate to your own team.
Click to expand...

Do you believe in momentum in sports?
 
Manning is a bad coach because he doesnt use timeouts. Now that is laughable.
 
BigDeac8 said:
Manning is a bad coach because he doesnt use timeouts. Now that is laughable.
Click to expand...

It isn't that he doesn't use time outs, it is that he has either called not called them when momentum has swung in the other teams favor, or worse of all, he uses the time poorly.
 
Coaches massively overuse timeouts, but there are times to use them:

- end of game/ half to stop play and substitute (defense for offense or vice versa)
- save a possession (player about to be tied up or is trapped or 5 or 10 second call)
- player is hurt or tired and you don't want to sub
- make a defensive or offensive change that can't be communicated on the fly

Unless you have a scorer on the bench, hate the offensive end of game timeout as it makes things much easier on the defense; playing defense is much easier when you have time to set up versus a helter skelter play on a live ball.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
It's the opposite of a Trump tweet. Trump says things with absolutely no truthful or statistical backing.

I didn't say "indisputable evidence". I'll take any study as evidence. If it works then more power to calling timeouts.

Coaches overmanage and micromanage everything else---it's odd that they wouldn't want to use easily "gatherable" evidence to figure out if there is an overarching relationship (either way) between pre-timeout play and post-timeout play.

Accounting for variables would be difficult, but looking at every data point as a whole wouldn't be too hard. It would be interesting to know what is noise versus what is useful data to extrapolate to your own team.
Click to expand...

Make Wake Forest Basketball Great Again
 
Pilchard said:
Coaches massively overuse timeouts, but there are times to use them:

- end of game/ half to stop play and substitute (defense for offense or vice versa)
- save a possession (player about to be tied up or is trapped or 5 or 10 second call)
- player is hurt or tired and you don't want to sub
- make a defensive or offensive change that can't be communicated on the fly

Unless you have a scorer on the bench, hate the offensive end of game timeout as it makes things much easier on the defense; playing defense is much easier when you have time to set up versus a helter skelter play on a live ball.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree that there are obvious times to use them (injury/fatigue/something blatant occurring on the court).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top