Can someone explain how this works in basketball...

I understand if you flip a coin 1000 times it should close to 500 heads and 500 tails...How does the law of averages work with team sports and skillsets and gameplans?

It works if you you are a coach of UofM on planet earth, but your fans are in outer space.

(03-02-2015 05:34 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Can someone explain how this works in basketball...

I understand if you flip a coin 1000 times it should close to 500 heads and 500 tails...How does the law of averages work with team sports and skillsets and gameplans?

The majority of studies on probability theory related to basketball stop with freethrows. There are some that try to predict the probability of winning games, like Pomeroy with his "pythagorean winning percentage" based on points scored vs points allowed. There is also one study I read recently (have to go back and search for a link) that tried to delve a little deeper, but it's just really complex when you have so many variables.

The best use of probability in teaching basketball is shot selection. For instance, I shoot 40% from three and 70% on layups. If I have a choice, which one should I take? That would be .4 (probability) x 3 (payoff) = 1.2 points = expected return of shooting a three-pointer vs .7 x 2 = 1.4 points = expected return of shooting a layup. If those were my averages, I should shoot a layup.

I know that one might seem obvious, but if you're bad at layups, it could work the other way.

(03-02-2015 05:52 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(03-02-2015 05:34 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Can someone explain how this works in basketball...

I understand if you flip a coin 1000 times it should close to 500 heads and 500 tails...How does the law of averages work with team sports and skillsets and gameplans?

The majority of studies on probability theory related to basketball stop with freethrows. There are some that try to predict the probability of winning games, like Pomeroy with his "pythagorean winning percentage" based on points scored vs points allowed. There is also one study I read recently (have to go back and search for a link) that tried to delve a little deeper, but it's just really complex when you have so many variables.

The best use of probability in teaching basketball is shot selection. For instance, I shoot 40% from three and 70% on layups. If I have a choice, which one should I take? That would be .4 (probability) x 3 (payoff) = 1.2 points = expected return of shooting a three-pointer vs .7 x 2 = 1.4 points = expected return of shooting a layup. If those were my averages, I should shoot a layup.

I know that one might seem obvious, but if you're bad at layups, it could work the other way.

So, what has Tony Allen have to do with this?

Everyone is in outer space

(03-02-2015 09:02 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  Everyone is in outer space

I was just about to post that.

If you have above average facilities, above average recruiting classes and a below average coach-----> you get a very average basketball program

(03-02-2015 09:32 PM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  If you have above average facilities, above average recruiting classes and a below average coach-----> you get a very average basketball program

(03-02-2015 05:52 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  The best use of probability in teaching basketball is shot selection. For instance, I shoot 40% from three and 70% on layups. If I have a choice, which one should I take? That would be .4 (probability) x 3 (payoff) = 1.2 points = expected return of shooting a three-pointer vs .7 x 2 = 1.4 points = expected return of shooting a layup. If those were my averages, I should shoot a layup.

Something else you also have to take into consideration is how many of each shot you would be allowed to take. It's much harder to be open to attempt a layup than to just to throw up a three. If that weren't the case, then basketball would just be each team shooting layups over and over and over (see women's basketball.)

Before someone hunts me down and beats me up, I'm mostly kidding about women's basketball. ;-)

(03-02-2015 09:32 PM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  If you have above average facilities, above average recruiting classes and a below average coach-----> you get a very average basketball program

Finally some math I can understand!!!

Law of Averages: If you consider that x percent of coaches are decent... if we hire enough coaches, eventually we will get one that is decent.

The real problem is that the "law of averages" isn't a real thing. See, Gamblers fallacy.