Player & Team Grades after 4 games


formerlybis

Active member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
113
Reaction score
97
Points
28
Limiting possessions favor the bad team? Mathematically that is true when you go by percentages as it requires a bad team to win more possessions. That being said some bad teams are more equipped to employ it that way vs. slower play.
Focusing on the above comment - I don't understand. Fewer possessions gives you a *smaller* margin of error mathematically, doesn't it? Therefore, wouldn't a bad team want more possessions?

If you were told to get >50% heads when flipping a coin, you'd have a better chance if you flipped it 100 times than if you flipped it 10. If you flip tails 4 times in a row (analogous to an empty possession in basketball), it's much harder to get to 50% heads with fewer flips. Now, it's not nearly so dramatic as having 10 times the possessions in basketball, but the same principle applies - more possessions equals more opportunities to make up for bad possessions.
 

Gopherfan84

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
3,984
Reaction score
2,838
Points
113
Focusing on the above comment - I don't understand. Fewer possessions gives you a *smaller* margin of error mathematically, doesn't it? Therefore, wouldn't a bad team want more possessions?

If you were told to get >50% heads when flipping a coin, you'd have a better chance if you flipped it 100 times than if you flipped it 10. If you flip tails 4 times in a row (analogous to an empty possession in basketball), it's much harder to get to 50% heads with fewer flips. Now, it's not nearly so dramatic as having 10 times the possessions in basketball, but the same principle applies - more possessions equals more opportunities to make up for bad possessions.
I understand your math, but When a lower skilled/worst team plays a better one, it’s requiring more against the norm play for both. It’s requiring a bad team to play good for more possessions and a good team to play bad for more possessions. In my opinion that’s harder to sustain even if the margin for error becomes greater in a mathematical sense. Of course this is dependent on the team so it’s probably a moot point. So yeah the margin for error is smaller with lower possessions, but when you’re bad, that also means less possessions to be bad at.
 

formerlybis

Active member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
113
Reaction score
97
Points
28
I understand your math, but When a lower skilled/worst team plays a better one, it’s requiring more against the norm play for both. It’s requiring a bad team to play good for more possessions and a good team to play bad for more possessions. In my opinion that’s harder to sustain even if the margin for error becomes greater in a mathematical sense. Of course this is dependent on the team so it’s probably a moot point. So yeah the margin for error is smaller with lower possessions, but when you’re bad, that also means less possessions to be bad at.
Whenever people say "not to belabor this", they always belabor it, so...

To belabor this....

The data say there is no advantage to playing slow or fast, period. Tempo reflects a style that the team has chosen in order to be efficient, which is the most important stat. A lesser team tends to be lesser, whether they pay at a high possession tempo or low. If you score less than 1 point per possession, it doesn't matter whether you play 56 possessions per game or 72, you suck either way.
 

Gopherfan84

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
3,984
Reaction score
2,838
Points
113
Whenever people say "not to belabor this", they always belabor it, so...

To belabor this....

The data say there is no advantage to playing slow or fast, period. Tempo reflects a style that the team has chosen in order to be efficient, which is the most important stat. A lesser team tends to be lesser, whether they pay at a high possession tempo or low. If you score less than 1 point per possession, it doesn't matter whether you play 56 possessions per game or 72, you suck either way.
totally agree. I just think it’s easier for a bad team to catch lightening in a bottle for 56 possessions vs 72. I think 72 requires more luck. I’m only speaking in a one game scenario.
 
Last edited:


formerlybis

Active member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
113
Reaction score
97
Points
28
totally agree. I just think it’s easier for a bad team to catch lightening in a battle for 56 possessions vs 72. I think 72 requires more luck. I’m only speaking in a one game scenario.
OK. I can understand one-game aberrations are better for low possessions, but it cuts both ways. Using that coin flip analogy, you might get 6 heads out of 10, but you also might get 4 (what's the opposite of lightning in a bottle? Rolling snake eyes?). That goes for both the good and bad low possession teams.

The other thing that happens when a low plays a high (especially when they're both good - think Virginia vs. UNC) is that the slow team stays deliberate and doesn't get sped up, leading to fewer transition opportunities that lead to easy baskets. Without the easy baskets that they rely on, the fast team tends to get impatient, and their efficiency can suffer. I think the slow team often has an advantage in those situations unless the fast team has it in them to be methodical as well - this ability is what makes MSU a tough team, IMO.
 




Top Bottom