White not enough touches in 2nd half, Marble to many?

[ddiction]

That may be statistically true. But anyone whos played the game knows that when you're on you are most certainly on and when you're off you're off.

Most times its in between.

Being a streaky shooter is a real thing. Your physical motion is a variable and does change.

I'd say making a few shots makes you feel better, and thus more likely to take another shot if the opportunity presents itself. Missing a few makes you feel less confident and thus less likely to take an open shot. But the likelihood of making the shots you do take doesn't really change (assuming other factors are equal like the defense, how fatigued you are, etc). The illusion that your likelihood of making a shot changes based on past performance is just an example of people placing importance on imaginary factors, the same way uninformed gamblers at craps tables go nuts and bet like crazy when they think somebody has a "hot hand". You should play the same way whether you're hot or cold.

 

[tm3308]

I'd say making a few shots makes you feel better, and thus more likely to take another shot if the opportunity presents itself. Missing a few makes you feel less confident and thus less likely to take an open shot. But the likelihood of making the shots you do take doesn't really change (assuming other factors are equal like the defense, how fatigued you are, etc). The illusion that your likelihood of making a shot changes based on past performance is just an example of people placing importance on imaginary factors, the same way uninformed gamblers at craps tables go nuts and bet like crazy when they think somebody has a "hot hand". You should play the same way whether you're hot or cold.

Again, statistically, that's true. But the other factors usually aren't equal at all times. Assuming everything is equal except for confidence is just a way to support the "streaks aren't real" argument. As a hitter in baseball, sometimes you're just seeing the ball out of the pitcher's hand better than usual, or mechanically something clicks for a few games. The same thing applies in any sport, especially the mechanics. In basketball, maybe you're shooting off balance and struggling to get it through the hoop. There's almost always something.

In those instances, a guy truly does have a hot hand. Obviously, all streaks come to an end. But when a guy has something clicking like I described above, his past performance is an indicator of (short term) future performance. The same applies for when a guy is struggling.

 

[ddiction]

Again, statistically, that's true. But the other factors usually aren't equal at all times. Assuming everything is equal except for confidence is just a way to support the "streaks aren't real" argument. As a hitter in baseball, sometimes you're just seeing the ball out of the pitcher's hand better than usual, or mechanically something clicks for a few games. The same thing applies in any sport, especially the mechanics. In basketball, maybe you're shooting off balance and struggling to get it through the hoop. There's almost always something.

In those instances, a guy truly does have a hot hand. Obviously, all streaks come to an end. But when a guy has something clicking like I described above, his past performance is an indicator of (short term) future performance. The same applies for when a guy is struggling.

My point is that statistical analysis does not agree with the notion of streaks. If streaks were real and the factors you mentioned really affected the likelihood of a shot going in, one would expect actual basketball players to have more strings of consecutive makes and consecutive misses than a series of "dice rolls" based on that player's FG%. They don't. What players and fans perceive as hot and cold streaks are no more than the normal distribution of makes and misses attributable to pure chance.

Now, if a lockdown defender is on a guy and is wearing him like a straitjacket, then yeah, his likelihood of making a shot will decrease and he probably shouldn't be shooting. But that wasn't necessarily the case in the Indiana game. Marble got plenty of looks. He should not be adjusting his game based on whether shots are going in, as long as he's taking good shots. If the only way he can get a shot up is by forcing one up with a hand in his face, then he shouldn't be shooting.

 

[Foval21]

I agree with the basics of statisical analysis but fatigue on a shot is a major factor. The only place where the factors are limited is the free throw line. And fatigue still can hurt them. Plus you can look at fg or ft %s from different quarters/halves. Look at mj's fg% in the last 5 min of a game. Or ft% of shaq during the end of the game. Or any player some actually do seem to raise their ability at those critical moments. I liken it to romo seeming to be more capable to throw an interception late in a game during a big moment. According to statistics it is just as likely early based off percents. But if you watch you would know he seems to screw up more late in big games as he is very talented but seems to choke.

I agree that marble needed to keep shooting but when shots aren't falling a player like him should adjust his game a little and I think he did to a degree. He started taking it to the hole and getting to the line instead of relying on his jump shot. Now the strength to finish is what he needs so as to shoot the and 1 instead of shooting 2 free throws.

 

[HawkeyeTech]

No such thing as a streak? Explain Gatens at the end of last year.

 

[BigD]

I finally found the time to watch the game on my DVR. I thought the kids played a pretty good game against a team that is ranked in the top ten and at one point was ranked number one in the country. I was pleased that Woodbury stood his own ground defensively and did a great job on the boards. As he grows stronger and takes his time and let's the game come to him offensively and not rush his shots as much, then the scoring will come and he will be a force in the conference that other teams will have to donate more than one player to defend against, thus opening up other players to pass to for easy baskets. So I was pleased with his first game in the conference. Gesell and White also had good games. McCabe gave his usual performance. May and Oglesby could have taken a few more shots. Clemmons seemed like a non-factor as he seemed to neither help nor hurt in a substantial fashion.

Then there is Marble. What can you say other than his shot was not falling. I am not too concerned at this point as one game doesn't make a season, but if he continues to play this way against the rest of the top teams in the conference then concern will be warranted. Agains some of the exuberance expressed earlier in the non-conference I questioned how well he would do in the big ten conference with being consistant. Against inferior opponents where the games wasn't in question is was a more relaxed shot and justifiably so. Back then with big leads and teammates who had a rebounding edge over their opponent, well if he missed a shot it wasn't a significant issue. Anyone who has played the game understands that aspect. Hopefully he comes back and can play consistently the rest of the season. This is why I questioned some of the NBA talk. If he struggles against average big ten level competition how can people expect him to do against the best of the best in the NBA night in and night out? I hoping it was just a bad game for him and that those will start to become the rarity and not the rule in conference play. He is a key cog in the wheel of this team, and we really need him to be successful if we are going to be dancing in March.

My overall grade of the teams performance in their conference opener is a "B".

 

[ddiction]

No such thing as a streak? Explain Gatens at the end of last year.

No such thing as a streak? Explain why I just flipped a coin and had it land heads 7 times in a row.

 

[BasketballMan]

No such thing as a streak? Explain why I just flipped a coin and had it land heads 7 times in a row.

Two headed coin?

 

[ddiction]

Update: I looked up Gatens' numbers from last season. 75 made threes out of 183 attempts. As most of us are aware, he had a streak of 12 made threes. I made a column in Excel of 183 cells with 75 labeled "make" and 108 labeled "miss". Next to each cell I used the =rand() function to assign a random number, then sorted the list based on the random numbers and looked for streaks. The first time I did it, RoboGatens had a streak of 10 made threes and a streak of 8 made threes. RoboGatens was on fire! Clearly the computer has almost as much mental toughness as the real Matt Gatens.

 

[ILHawk]

Update: I looked up Gatens' numbers from last season. 75 made threes out of 183 attempts. As most of us are aware, he had a streak of 12 made threes. I made a column in Excel of 183 cells with 75 labeled "make" and 108 labeled "miss". Next to each cell I used the =rand() function to assign a random number, then sorted the list based on the random numbers and looked for streaks. The first time I did it, RoboGatens had a streak of 10 made threes and a streak of 8 made threes. RoboGatens was on fire! Clearly the computer has almost as much mental toughness as the real Matt Gatens.

You really did that? Wow... Need a life? Might explain several wins last year...

 

[bcl20]

Stats, mom's basement, LULLLLLZ!!!!

 

[ddiction]

You really did that? Wow... Need a life? Might explain several wins last year...

It really isn't that hard. It took about as much time to do it as it took to type the post.

 

[PCHawk]

I assume anyone who says there is no such thing as streaks have never played sports. Sometimes you're in the zone and you know its going in before you even shoot it and sometimes you can have a night where the ball never feels comfortable coming off your hand. Confidence is a major part of shooting. Sometimes you have it and sometimes you don't.

 

[ddiction]

I assume anyone who says there is no such thing as streaks have never played sports. Sometimes you're in the zone and you know its going in before you even shoot it and sometimes you can have a night where the ball never feels comfortable coming off your hand. Confidence is a major part of shooting. Sometimes you have it and sometimes you don't.

If it were real, the effect of it would be measurable in actual performance. Numbers don't lie. Hot and cold shooting nights make you more or less likely to take a shot and may affect the way a player is defended, but they have little if any effect on the outcome of each individual shot. If streaks really made successive shots more or less likely to go in, then actual game logs would reflect significantly more consecutive makes and misses than a completely random distribution of the total makes and misses over the course of the season. As hard as it may be to believe, that just doesn't happen.

 

[PCHawk]

If it were real, the effect of it would be measurable in actual performance. Numbers don't lie. Hot and cold shooting nights make you more or less likely to take a shot and may affect the way a player is defended, but they have little if any effect on the outcome of each individual shot. If streaks really made successive shots more or less likely to go in, then actual game logs would reflect significantly more consecutive makes and misses than a completely random distribution of the total makes and misses over the course of the season. As hard as it may be to believe, that just doesn't happen.

I get the angle you're taking here but you're wrong. When you make 5 shots in a row the odds of you making the next shot are way higher then they are if you've missed your last 5. Just because actual makes in a row compare to a computer simulation doesn't mean streaks don't exist. Your reasoning works for coin flips but not for humans taking shots.

 

[tm3308]

I get the angle you're taking here but you're wrong. When you make 5 shots in a row the odds of you making the next shot are way higher then they are if you've missed your last 5. Just because actual makes in a row compare to a computer simulation doesn't mean streaks don't exist. Your reasoning works for coin flips but not for humans taking shots.

This. Going back to baseball here.

If something just isn't clicking with your swing, you're probably going to have a bad night/week/what have you. The random distributions come from having everything but the smallest variables be consistent. Like you're swing is clicking, but you just got fooled on a pitch or just missed the sweet spot. You'll probably come back the next time and find a different result in those cases. Even when guys have the hot hand, they usually miss a few times (Gatens last year).

Maybe you can make the argument for positive streaks having no bearing on future results. But negative streaks typically stem from an issue that DOES have an impact on future results. When you're just not feeling it, you should stop jacking it up.

 

[ddiction]

I get the angle you're taking here but you're wrong. When you make 5 shots in a row the odds of you making the next shot are way higher then they are if you've missed your last 5. Just because actual makes in a row compare to a computer simulation doesn't mean streaks don't exist. Your reasoning works for coin flips but not for humans taking shots.

Do you agree that if the odds were higher to make a shot if you've made the last few, then there would be more streaks in real life than if the numbers were completely random?

 

[PCHawk]

Do you agree that if the odds were higher to make a shot if you've made the last few, then there would be more streaks in real life than if the numbers were completely random?

I believe that some shooters would have more streaks then a random computer simulator and some players would have less. On the other hand, if your the type of player that gets in the zone more often then average, you would have a higher shooting percentage because of it. If you program a higher shooting percentage into a computer I assume it would show more streaks then a lower percentage would.

You are pretty much what your percentage says you are. How often you get in the zone and how well you shoot when you're in it very from player to player but they all are factored in to your shooting percentage.

 

[HawkeyeTech]

If it were real, the effect of it would be measurable in actual performance. Numbers don't lie. Hot and cold shooting nights make you more or less likely to take a shot and may affect the way a player is defended, but they have little if any effect on the outcome of each individual shot. If streaks really made successive shots more or less likely to go in, then actual game logs would reflect significantly more consecutive makes and misses than a completely random distribution of the total makes and misses over the course of the season. As hard as it may be to believe, that just doesn't happen.

I take it you're not a golfer. I am, and have streaks where every putt seem so go in, and others where I can't make a 3-footer. It's all in the head, just like shooting hoops.

 

[ddiction]

I take it you're not a golfer. I am, and have streaks where every putt seem so go in, and others where I can't make a 3-footer. It's all in the head, just like shooting hoops.

My post was not about golf. It was about basketball. Streaks may exist in golf; I have no idea, nor do I care. My point is that statistical analysis shows that in basketball, streaks do not occur with any greater frequency in real life than one would find by simply scrambling the same number of makes and misses randomly.

And for what it's worth, I was surprised by those findings as well. I had assumed like most people that a lot of shooting is tied to confidence. Turns out the effect is so small that it has no measurable impact.