Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="nelsonmuntz, post: 3948647, member: 833"] Basketball, unlike other games where analytics have been used, is not static. Unlike football or baseball, basketball does not stop between plays so everyone can organize. Each play in basketball impacts the next play, and each event is dependent on the event before. Most analytics is done performing static evaluations. For example, a shot from one spot on the court has a higher expected value than a shot from another sport on the court. But when the analysis is done dynamically, for example, where a shot from one spot on the court creates a higher probability of scoring for the defense if the shot is missed, it will lead to different strategies. Run the analysis not just based on where the shot was taken, but where everyone else is on the court when the shot is taken. Now run that analysis for 110 to 115 possessions a game, 82 games a season. The game will change. My theory is that there will be at least two significant changes as analytics becomes more dynamic: When and where 3 pointers are taken. Corner 3's are considered good shots in a static analysis, but I believe they are terrible shots in a dynamic analysis, because corner 3's are difficult to rebound for the offense and the offensive players in the corners can not get back to stop the transition on a change of possession off a steal or rebound. Offensive rebounds are much more valuable in a dynamic analysis. Short shots increase the chance of offensive rebounds, and offensive rebounds are high percentage shots. Therefore, teams should shoot more shots that result in offensive rebounds, which will result in a return to inside play. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach