Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

nabraj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 266 posts

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#181

Post by Dylan16807 »

tomjakubowski wrote: post #40
brutalhonesty wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really is basic math though. A 3 point shot with 36% chance to go in (league average) = 1.08 points per attempt. A mid-range 2 point shot with 45% chance to go in = .9 points per attempt. The math is very basic.

When you elect to take more three pointers you necessarily have to resort to shooting more difficult ones, which lowers the expected return on each one. In the real world it's not so simple. Similar reason why star players often have lower FG% than one might think: they are the ones tasked with trying _something_ when the shot clock winds down and there's no clear play. Not all shots are chosen equally.

> When you elect to take more three pointers you necessarily have to resort to shooting more difficult ones, which lowers the expected return on each one.

Well yeah, the idea is not to go all 3-pointer, it's that the borderline decisions need to adjust a few notches in favor of attempting 3-pointers, until the returns are balanced out.

> Not all shots are chosen equally.

I agree, that is a proper issue to figure out.

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#182

Post by hardwaregeek »

aaplok wrote: post #171
gfunk911 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the modern game. I just think the pendulum has swung a tiny bit too far toward 3s in the past 3-4 years, that's all. Just a nudge in the other direction. My ideal would be to try changing 2s and 3s to 3s and 4s. But that will never happen.

I don't watch basketball, so I am speculating, but isn't this a case where defence hasn't yet adapted to the new attacking strategies? Wouldn't you expect that in a few years teams will be better at defending against 3s, reducing their expected value and therefore swinging the pendulum back towards more 2s? The Nash equilibrium should be that the expected values of 2s and 3s are equal. If you're off, you would expect…

Ironically Steve Nash didn't shoot enough 3s, so his Nash equilibrium was pretty off.

In all seriousness, yes, there's a lot more to modern basketball than just "take more 3s". It's more like "try to get dunks and layups, but if that doesn't work get 3s, but also mid range is still valuable if it softens up defense". And defenses have learned to scramble and switch to cover a lot of 3 pointers, but that can still be exploited with cross court passing and switch hunting. Check out some cool plays here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qo-V_ujmMFo

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#183

Post by lawgimenez »

The_Blade wrote: post #128
streptomycin wrote: post #100

Danny Green is probably the father of [the 3-and-D] model, with his 40% career three-point field goal percentage and he also made into all-defensive team. Obviously people shot fewer 3s back then, but as far as I remember, Bruce Bowen was really the first 3-and-D player back in the 90s. Gone are the days of an all-around player. There is no longer a need for a player who does everything. Look at players like Kobe Bry…

Danny Green is not the father of the 3-and-d model, he's like the great nephew. Not only Bruce Bowen but you also have Shane Battier, and can also go back to Michael Cooper. Usage rates also show there is still plenty of heliocentrism so Copernicus remains happy

And Robert Horry too or sometimes Pippen.

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#184

Post by bdangubic »

kenjackson wrote: post #163
hardwaregeek wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I agree that more complexity is not better and there’s a real risk of alienating fans with complicated schemes. But chess has made real inroads by providing good commentators and analysis. You can’t make teams play dumber but you can teach fans to be smarter. As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. And in turn, the game has become l…

Thinking Basketball is great. The people who complain about the 3s in basketball probably didn’t watch the NBA in the older days. Horrible defense and far less skill — and that’s the era I grew up and loved. I have two major complaints about the game nowadays: (1) intentional fouling to get an advantage. It’s the only major sport where fouling can often work to your advantage. (2) The block call is so inconsistent it…

besides 7-footers chucking 3’s what “skills” do these new nba players have? there are maybe 10 that have any skills, the rest can shoot and that’s about fucking it.

90% of today’s players would play in D league two decades ago

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#185

Post by ecocentrik »

hardwaregeek wrote: post #89

Thinking Basketball is one of my favorite resources for basketball analysis. He recently made a video debunking myths about the modern game [1]. While yes, there’s far more analytics and knowledge in the game, it hasn’t lead to monotony or poor quality. It’s instead resulted in a Cambrian explosion of tactics, counter tactics, and really diverse team strategies. But the commentary and analysis in mainstream basketbal…

Thinking Basketball needs a prime time spot for his analysis. Very good stuff.

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#186

Post by jm4 »

lapcat wrote: post #169
hardwaregeek wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I agree that more complexity is not better and there’s a real risk of alienating fans with complicated schemes. But chess has made real inroads by providing good commentators and analysis. You can’t make teams play dumber but you can teach fans to be smarter. As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. And in turn, the game has become l…

> As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. I'd much rather watch NBA players miss 3's than watch a 23 minute YouTube video of someone talking about missing 3's. ;-) But the NBA FG% in 2025 is 46.5%, while it was 49.1% in 1985, so I'm skeptical that 3 pointers are simply replacing long 2 pointers with equal percentages. Obviously the % w…

The 3’s are not replacing 2’s at the same shot percentage. The 3’s are slightly lower percentage, but they are high enough that the overall value is higher than the long 2’s they replaced. They came to the conclusion that the long 2 was a high risk play so they replaced it with a comparable play with a higher reward. It’s common sense. Frankly, it’s the long 2 that’s a stupid play.

The video is worth watching and I’m not even a basketball fan. It shows parts of 3 games from 3 eras back to back and it’s really interesting. Personally, I find the modern game to be the most engaging.

The skill level of the guys who aren’t superstars is clearly much higher than the old days. Outside of the stars, you had guys with certain body types that were pretty much one dimensional. It was neat seeing a big guy like Jokic in the video making ridiculous passes and hitting 3’s. Twenty years ago, all he would have done is hang out 4 feet from the basket.

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#187

Post by pepa65 »

ks2048 wrote: post #6

I read something about Go - that very unusual (maybe even considered bad) playing could beat the super-AIs. They are so tuned to opponents in a "typical" style, that they don't know how to beat a player outside this distribution. Maybe an NBA team will come up with something like that.

That can't be true, especially not in a territorial game like Go. Could you find any link to that?

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#188

Post by ks2048 »

pepa65 wrote: post #187
ks2048 wrote: post #6

I read something about Go - that very unusual (maybe even considered bad) playing could beat the super-AIs. They are so tuned to opponents in a "typical" style, that they don't know how to beat a player outside this distribution. Maybe an NBA team will come up with something like that.

That can't be true, especially not in a territorial game like Go. Could you find any link to that?

The sister comment has a link. Maybe I shouldn’t say it can beat AlphaGo, but rather you can set up adversarial states that it is bad at.

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#189

Post by TeaBrain »

jordanmorgan10 wrote: post #28

This reads as someone who looks at data but doesn’t actually play basketball, coach basketball or generally know basketball. Numbers can only tell you so much, and 2025 Celtics and the rise of Steph have led to more 3s but the sport of basketball is not as predictable as the author suggests. For example, look at the college game, which doesn’t reflect this trend as much as the NBA does.

It's basically just seems like a riff off of a Bloomberg article published yesterday, titled "The NBA Has Fallen Into an Efficiency Trap", without any of the details in the article, besides the 3-pointer trend chart, which is basically a carbon copy. I'm not even sure this article is suggestive of someone simply looking at the data. Given the close timing, they probably just read the Bloomberg article, or a different blog inspired by the Bloomberg article, as opposed to just coming to this conclusion as a NBA aficionado.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-14/forget-do...

Re: Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

#190

Post by majormajor »

bballfan133 wrote: post #166
hardwaregeek wrote: post #89

Thinking Basketball is one of my favorite resources for basketball analysis. He recently made a video debunking myths about the modern game [1]. While yes, there’s far more analytics and knowledge in the game, it hasn’t lead to monotony or poor quality. It’s instead resulted in a Cambrian explosion of tactics, counter tactics, and really diverse team strategies. But the commentary and analysis in mainstream basketbal…

I really dislike this talking point. 1) That people who don't enjoy what they see are just unsophisticated. 2) That today's basketball is better because players have more skill and plays are more complex. I don't think that's the point at all. I've personally found it hard to sit through games this season - it feels like there isn't much at stake. What happens in the first quarter is a mere blip. And even in the four…

"The regular season is too long" and "the first quarter doesn't matter" (make that anything before the last 5 minutes, really) are practically ancient complaints at this point. Decades long.

"Too many threes" is a more novel complaint but one that should self-correct in a couple of ways:

* the passing/screens/movement that leads to a good look at a three is often pretty fun

* taking bad threes has a lot less mathematical advantage and as defenses get better at shutting down the schemes for the good ones, the best teams will adjust what other looks they try to generate

I would also be fine with moving the line back, or getting rid of the corner three entirely. The fixed-distance shot is an easier skill than being able to hit jumpers from various distances so as long as its easy-enough then you're never gonna see players who don't otherwise have much offensive game train themselves to be 3pt specialists.

Post reply on HN