• 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!

Is rj right about the hot hand and the nerds are wrong?

Yes. You’d run the play for the player who has a higher chance of making the shot. Since you can’t predict if the hot hand or cold hand is going to continue or is at its end, you go for player A.

So based on all of the information I gave you, you think player A has a higher chance of making that specific shot?
 
Que?

Player A is a 40% 3 point shooter. He shoots 46% from the right corner, 36% from the left, and 42% from the top of the arc. He’s been guarded by Robert Covington for most of the night. He’s 1-10 from three, has played 44 minutes on the second night of a back to back, and is dealing with a nagging ankle injury.

Player B is a 32% 3 point shooter. He shoots 42% from the right corner and <30% from everywhere else. He’s 6-7 from three on the night and shooting 44% over the last three games. He’s a 36% 3 point shooter at home, where you are playing tonight. He was a DNP-rest last night.


You have a play that you can run for either player that pretty much guarantees a clean look for that player from the right corner. Player A can also create his own shot from the top of the key. There are 5 seconds left and you need a three to tie.

Which of those three shots is most likely to go in.

this is the analysis that coaches are paid to do

just popping in to note that WF hasn't had a coach conduct this sort of analysis, one time, ever

not saying a coach shouldn't do so - just saying no WF coach has ever done anything near this
 
I’ll let plama weigh in, as he’s the poker expert.

Typical...too lazy to look up anything that shows you to be wrong and me to be right.

I couldn't program responses that prove my point about you and better than you are doing yourself.
 
What makes you think he doesn’t?

He’s tired, he’s being guarded by one of the best wing defenders in the world, and both are clearly affecting his shot tonight.

If he took 100 threes under substantially similar conditions, I would expect him to make fewer than 46.

Meanwhile, Player B is well rested, confident, and has seen a recent uptick in his shot.
 
Typical...too lazy to look up anything that shows you to be wrong and me to be right.

I couldn't program responses that prove my point about you and better than you are doing yourself.

You’re fucking hysterical RJ. You put Plama up on a pedestal when it comes to poker and then try to criticize me when I say I’d rely on his opinion.

Maybe try viewing threads as a conversation instead of an attack on you.
 
If anyone actually has a 40 percent three point chance and we know that’s the percentage I want them taking the three unless we know someone else has one higher. That’s just basic math.
 
He’s tired, he’s being guarded by one of the best wing defenders in the world, and both are clearly affecting his shot tonight.

If he took 100 threes under substantially similar conditions, I would expect him to make fewer than 46.

Meanwhile, Player B is well rested, confident, and has seen a recent uptick in his shot.

And what if confidence turn to overconfidence from Player B and lead to a bad miss heat check shot? What if his hot hand ends on his next shot? Unless you believe the uptick is his new normal, he will regress to his mean eventually. How do you know the regression is not starting on the play that you’re drawing up?
 
If anyone actually has a 40 percent three point chance and we know that’s the percentage I want them taking the three unless we know someone else has one higher. That’s just basic math.

Right. But the point is that we can’t ever actually know what percentage chance a player has to hit a particular shot. We can approximate that chance to a reasonable degree of certainty, but overall 3P% typically isn’t that great of an approximation on its own.
 
And what if confidence turn to overconfidence from Player B and lead to a bad miss heat check shot? What if his hot hand ends on his next shot? Unless you believe the uptick is his new normal, he will regress to his mean eventually. How do you know the regression is not starting on the play that you’re drawing up?

Besides, your hypothetical is irrelevant to the offered scenario that includes the choice between a 25% shooter and a 40% shooter.
 
We can, because you just showed that you don't basketball.

I loved this response right out of the gate.

The next intangible factor to include is "clutch." Some players can hit the big shot better than others. Some players choke. Stats be damned, I want Randolph taking my game winning shot. He's got the cojones to make it.

kudos to you for propertly spelling "cojones," rather than the oft-misused "cajones."
 
And what if confidence turn to overconfidence from Player B and lead to a bad miss heat check shot? What if his hot hand ends on his next shot? Unless you believe the uptick is his new normal, he will regress to his mean eventually. How do you know the regression is not starting on the play that you’re drawing up?

It’s a designed play at the end of a game, I want whoever I’m drawing the play for to be overconfident.

What would the evidence be that his “hot hand” had ended or that the regression to the mean began on the play I drew up? A missed shot? Even if everything I mentioned has bumped up his chance of making that corner 3 by 7% points, he’s still more likely to miss the shot than make it.
 
But the whole point we are all making besides RJ is that it comes down to percentages as an analysis. Even if we don’t know the perfect percentage.
 
No it’s not. It’s just a less extreme example.

It’s one that’s worth discussing because of the closeness in percentages and other factors you’ve added. But the answer to your question isn’t going to be applicable to the 25 vs 40 scenario.
 
It’s a designed play at the end of a game, I want whoever I’m drawing the play for to be overconfident.

What would the evidence be that his “hot hand” had ended or that the regression to the mean began on the play I drew up? A missed shot? Even if everything I mentioned has bumped up his chance of making that corner 3 by 7% points, he’s still more likely to miss the shot than make it.

And that’s the whole point. Statistics don’t tell you what’s going to happen. Just what’s most likely to happen. Make it or miss it, you still chose the less likely option if you go with B.

If you want to go with your gut, go with B. But your gut has no statically valid predictive value.
 
Back
Top