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

51–60 of 266 posts

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

#51

Post by apgwoz »

thakoppno wrote: post #16

My proposal to fix this is to automatically award a point for all non-reboundable free throws.

You mean, a free throw is a chance shot that when missed awards the defense?

Seems like that would have a huge impact on end of game strategy.

It would change the “in the paint” strategy—maybe defense would foul earlier to avoid the 2+1? Hoping instead to split the 2, 1-1 with a miss. Of course, the centers and forwards, who typically aren’t great free throw shooters, are gonna get the ball less. Where does the play go? 3pt land, where it’s way more risky to foul.

I still like the idea.

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

#52

Post by Xenoamorphous »

grandempire wrote: post #37
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.

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?

Precisely. Shooting lots of threes with good/decent efficiency also made two pointers more likely as more players would be defending the perimeter. Again, seemingly nobody thought of this for decades.

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

#53

Post by grandempire »

E sports actually gave me a lot of insight into regular sports which decreased my interest. The real power is with the league, not the players. And they steer the sport to promote business engagement. If the sport is hyper optimized and boring they will change the rules. If teams from smaller markets keep winning they will do what they need to, to help other teams win.

Playing sports is a fun activity to get exercise, it’s not worth getting emotionally invested in teams or leagues.

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

#54

Post by anon84873628 »

1123581321 wrote: post #8

Basketball rules will change. It's becoming a more widespread view that the corner 3 should be eliminated, and perhaps the 3 line moved back in general. In the meantime, threat of 3s makes proactive defense more necessary and that's exciting to watch. Defense has evolved so much since the Jordan era. Some matches are not exciting right now, though.

As someone who doesn't follow the sport, what's the problem with corner 3's specifically?

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

#55

Post by apgwoz »

nabaraz wrote: post #7

I personally think the 3-point line needs to be uniform distance. It is 22 feet from the corner compared to ~24ish feet from the center.

I don’t have the stats in front of me, but I’d guess more 3s are made with more backboard visible. Need to be way more accurate from the corners.

(Not that people bank off the backboard, but hit the rim, backboard, in, type accidents)

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

#56

Post by grandempire »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #52
grandempire wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Precisely. Shooting lots of threes with good/decent efficiency also made two pointers more likely as more players would be defending the perimeter. Again, seemingly nobody thought of this for decades.

It’s not insightful to say your team is more effective when you have the real threat of scoring 3s. That’s not a new idea.

Comparing probability of shot A vs shot B is just not a sufficient model. Its not simple math to model basketball.

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

#57

Post by teej »

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?

This is classic innovators dilemma.

Coaches and owners are not rewarded for innovation. Fans strongly discourage taking bets that could fail.

And then there’s preparing for the strategy change. Training, practice, and coaching time is extremely limited. How much do you re-allocate to this new approach? You don’t just tell players to take more 3s, it’s more complicated than that.

So in traditional innovators dilemma fashion, it’s much easier to follow when you see that the new way works. It’s easier to convince everyone (fans, coaches, players, owners) to get on board when you can point to Steph Curry doing it right.

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

#58

Post by anon84873628 »

krustyburger wrote: post #10

Even if true this has nothing to do with the value of the sport to the spectator or the competitor. Seeing world-class athletes push themselves to their physical limits is intrinsically exciting even if everyone is on the same page on how to win.

Nothing to do? If that were true, Olympic weightlifting would be a primetime sport.

The strategy, drama, and player celebrity are all part of what makes a popular spectator sport. Lots of casual viewers found the recent Superbowl to be boring because of the early runaway score, despite lots of great athleticism on display.

And of course it's a tautology that "true fans" will always find something to enjoy.

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

#59

Post by Xenoamorphous »

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

But then 2 pointers become easier. You can’t defend tightly both the perimeter and the paint at the same time. Sounds like a win-win. Again, nobody seemingly noticed.

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

#60

Post by jitl »

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.

Claim the math is very basic is reminding me of the different conclusions people have drawn from this image: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias#/media/Fil...
Post reply on HN