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

31–40 of 266 posts

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

#31

Post by brutalhonesty »

raincole wrote: post #21
Xenoamorphous wrote: post #9

> Recently, teams have realized three-pointers have higher point value despite their lower scoring percentage. This was such an eye-opener for me. A high-stakes sport like basketball/the NBA went on for decades without realising the simple math that three pointers are more valuable than two-pointers if you just do the basic math. How many areas in our lives are yet to be optimised with really basic math?

It's such an arrogant comment. "Really basic math"? Do you think NBA coaches reached this conclusion like this: 1. A player can throw X 2-points in a game. 2. Or he can throw Y 3-points in a game. 3. 3Y > 2X, so we should just throw 3-points all the time. It's absolutely not what happened. And the reason teams didn't discovery the current strategy decades earlier was absolutely not that they couldn't do basic math.

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.

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

#33

Post by chatmasta »

brutalhonesty wrote: post #31
raincole wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's such an arrogant comment. "Really basic math"? Do you think NBA coaches reached this conclusion like this: 1. A player can throw X 2-points in a game. 2. Or he can throw Y 3-points in a game. 3. 3Y > 2X, so we should just throw 3-points all the time. It's absolutely not what happened. And the reason teams didn't discovery the current strategy decades earlier was absolutely not that they couldn't do basic math.

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.

It was not always 36% and in fact for a while it had lower EV than two pointers.

(Also, any league average for three pointers will suffer from obvious selection bias.)

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

#34

Post by legitster »

Professional athletes are freaks of nature being given millions of dollars to optimize for the problem. If you give them an unopposed chance to score, you're going to have very unfun sports.

The same problem is happening in baseball pitching and football kicking.

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

#36

Post by tclancy »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #9

> Recently, teams have realized three-pointers have higher point value despite their lower scoring percentage. This was such an eye-opener for me. A high-stakes sport like basketball/the NBA went on for decades without realising the simple math that three pointers are more valuable than two-pointers if you just do the basic math. How many areas in our lives are yet to be optimised with really basic math?

It’s a bit of a dodge. In the 80s and 90s, there were a handful of players making 40% of threes and most shooters were closer to 30% so the math didn’t used to be the same.

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

#37

Post by grandempire »

brutalhonesty wrote: post #31
raincole wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's such an arrogant comment. "Really basic math"? Do you think NBA coaches reached this conclusion like this: 1. A player can throw X 2-points in a game. 2. Or he can throw Y 3-points in a game. 3. 3Y > 2X, so we should just throw 3-points all the time. It's absolutely not what happened. And the reason teams didn't discovery the current strategy decades earlier was absolutely not that they couldn't do basic math.

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.

This assumes the game is static and the question is selecting A or B, but all the variables are intertwined.

How does the percentage change when the other team knows you will go for 3? How much more effective is the three when you are able to have the threat of other scoring? A layup is 80-90% isn’t it worth it to try to create one?

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

#38

Post by mnky9800n »

lawgimenez wrote: post #19

I think the NBA needs to focus on how to make more people tune in to the first half of the season. And player’s load management is getting ridiculous.

Yes. The season is so long it gets boring tbh. I never watch the season to begin with only the playoffs but a big reason is there’s so many games it’s not really interesting to watch that many games. But if it was half as long and half as many games in the season I probably would watch every one.

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

#39

Post by bmitc »

Not a particularly well written article, but I haven't ever really believed that jacking up threes is a global maximum in the basketball optimization problem.

For example, if you have a team that posts up in the middle, actually moves the ball around and not just around the perimeter, and utilizes the shot clock well, this is going to wear down a team by forcing them to play rough defense, reducing the effectiveness of the three point shot over the course of the game.

Part of the reason of the decline e of interesting basketball is the insane relaxation of rules. Offensive players can travel, carry, flop, ect. all the while knowing that defensive players are handicapped in the contact they can initiate.

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

#40

Post by tomjakubowski »

brutalhonesty wrote: post #31
raincole wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's such an arrogant comment. "Really basic math"? Do you think NBA coaches reached this conclusion like this: 1. A player can throw X 2-points in a game. 2. Or he can throw Y 3-points in a game. 3. 3Y > 2X, so we should just throw 3-points all the time. It's absolutely not what happened. And the reason teams didn't discovery the current strategy decades earlier was absolutely not that they couldn't do basic math.

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.

Post reply on HN