Dre's stats in Dukes losses

[Kedsy]

Ryan is more of a liablity on Defense than Andre is due to the constant flopping, which almost always leads to an easy offensive put back or dump off for a dunk, while he is laying on the floor underneath the basket.

You and others have said this often, but my observation is Ryan draws a lot of offensive fouls. I don't have any numbers, but my eyes tell me his attempts to draw charges do not "almost always" lead to bad results. I also don't know that there's a right or wrong answer to this question. More likely is you happen to take more notice of the bad results and I happen to take more notice of the good results.

whether he has made his previous shots has no predictive value whatsoever on whether he'll make his next one.

We've had this argument before, but I think you are mischaracterizing what makes up "hot shooting." Shooting mechanics are not always consistent. Some days a shooter has his motion locked better than others and/or he has more confidence in his shot. Teammates notice this and pass to him more often, so they can "feed the hot hand." The player then tries harder to get open and it becomes an upward spiral. Watching the games, it is quite obvious when this phenomenon occurs with Andre.

Whether he made his previous shot (or shots) may not have predictive value on whether he makes his next one, but it doesn't necessarily follow that there's no such thing as a hot shooter.

[RockyMtDevil]

I think the fact that we are even discussing both respective player's defensive abilities or lack thereof says something about their level of play. It's a none issue if the consensus is that both actually play good, solid D and nobody can say that with much confidance at this stage in the game. Ryan actually plays fairly decent help defense, coming up with several blocks off his man, I just wish he would resist the urge to flop. We tend to get those calls against inferior opponents and at home, but not against solid teams and certainly not on the road or on neutral courts, which is all we have left.

[gus]

Whether he made his previous shot (or shots) may not have predictive value on whether he makes his next one, but it doesn't necessarily follow that there's no such thing as a hot shooter.

Huh? That makes no sense.

If having a "hot hand" or "cold hand" have no predictive value on the next shot, what's the point? If you're acknowleding that "hot" and "cold" are meaningless in predicting a shooter's next shot, well... then what's the debate about?

[Kedsy]

If having a "hot hand" or "cold hand" have no predictive value on the next shot, what's the point? If you're acknowleding that "hot" and "cold" are meaningless in predicting a shooter's next shot, well... then what's the debate about?

I'm not admitting that. I'm saying one shot is not what "hot" and "cold" are about. You are oversimplifying the issue and defining "hot" and "cold" to fit your conclusion.

Hot shooters sometimes miss, or lose their focus. They sometimes get overconfident and take a bad shot that is less likely to go in. Cold shooters sometimes get lucky, or they fix the mechanical and/or psychological problems that led them to be cold and thus break out of the slump. I also agree there are random elements at play. But there are a lot of other factors as well. If a guy goes 9 for 12 one day and 0 for 5 the next there's often something going on there besides random chance.

Not only that, there aren't just two states here. Sometimes shooters feel "hotter" than usual. Sometimes they feel "colder." But most of the time they're neither. So most of the time the previous shot has nothing to do with "hot" or "cold," and that has to skew your analysis. You also don't take into account the myriad additional factors that may affect the next shot, other than whether the last shot went in. How much time elapsed between shots? What's the game situation? Is it the same or a different defender? Is the shooter closely guarded or wide open after a screen? Etc., etc.

But putting all that aside, if a 50% shooter hurts his wrist, and shoots 2 for 12, you wouldn't have a problem explaining at least some of the subpar performance to the injury, would you? You wouldn't break it down shot by shot and try to credit the entire difference to random chance, would you? So why can't you accept that people's psychological state can affect their shooting in a similar manner to a physical injury?

For the most part, that's what I think "hot" and "cold" are, a combination of psychological state and temporarily better (or worse) mechanics. You may disagree with that, but simply predicting whether the shooter will make his next shot is inconsistent with my definition.

[-jk]

I'm curious what difference being "hot" or "cold" makes, then. If the historic "next shot" has no statistical meaning for hot and cold, and hot and cold have no meaning that can be measured, I think y'all are talking past each other.

-jk

[Kedsy]

For the most part, that's what I think "hot" and "cold" are, a combination of psychological state and temporarily better (or worse) mechanics. You may disagree with that, but simply predicting whether the shooter will make his next shot is inconsistent with my definition.

I've been thinking about this some more, and I suppose I have to admit that a hot shooter should hit a higher percentage of his next shots than a cold shooter (or a neither hot nor cold shooter). I was wrong when I said predicting the next shot is inconsistent with my definition.

However, I still think the problem is the definition of "hot" and "cold" in this context. Your study of Andre's shots combined all his shooting, when he was hot, cold, or neither. Our differences therefore lie not in whether determining the next shot is important, but in whether you have properly identified whether a hot or cold (or neither) shooter took that shot. In my opinion, making (or missing) one (or two or even three) shots doesn't necessarily show "hotness" or "coldness," and this is what renders your results inconclusive in my mind.

The rest of the reasoning in my previous post explains why I don't accept your definition of hot and cold, and I still stand by that explanation.

[Kedsy]

I'm curious what difference being "hot" or "cold" makes, then. If the historic "next shot" has no statistical meaning for hot and cold, and hot and cold have no meaning that can be measured, I think y'all are talking past each other.

-jk

It's possible. Gus and I have talked past each other on this subject in the past. I have stepped back from saying the next shot has no meaning, though (see my most recent post, right after yours). I was wrong when I said that.

What I've been trying to say for some time (with varying amounts of clarity) is that he has not defined "hot" and "cold" properly and thus his study doesn't show whether hot Andre is more likely to hit his next shot because he has jumbled data from hot periods together with periods where Andre wasn't necessarily hot. There is a study (from Cornell, I think) that people have cited in the past that does the same thing. In that study they take an old season of the 76ers and analyze whether players who make a shot (or two or three) are more likely to hit or miss their next shot than those who missed their previous one (or two or three) shots. The problem I have with the study is they didn't take into account any factors other than whether the previous shot was made. For example, if a guy made a dunk, it was grouped together with a guy who made a 20 foot shot. How can a dunk be evidence of "hot shooting"? If a guy threw up a prayer at the first quarter buzzer, it went right into the data along with every other shot. If the opponent switched defenders or defended a player more closely it was not considered in the analysis of the data.

Also, even if gus is right that there's no such thing as hot shooting (and I reiterate that I don't believe he is right), there are certainly ramifications if players believe their teammate is hot. As I said in an earlier post, players are more likely to pass to a "hot hand," or set screens to get him open. The player himself will probably be prone to try harder to get open because he thinks he'll get the ball, and thus that player is more likely to get more shots. With more shots, he'll score more, and since he'll have more confidence he'll probably shoot at a higher percentage, thus justifying the belief that he was hot in the first place. We've seen this phenomenon with Andre several times this season.