MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[Gregory Sager]

Hey, gotta quibble over something, right?

Here's the opening games for each of the eight MIAA teams:

Adrian	Fri, Nov 19 @ Widener
Albion	Tue, Nov 16 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
Alma	Tue, Nov 16 vs. Indiana-Northwest
Calvin	Tue, Nov 16 @ Davenport
Hope	Tue, Nov 23 @ Davenport
Kalamazoo	Mon, Nov 15 @ Defiance
Olivet	Tue, Nov 16 @ Aquinas
Trine	Tue, Nov 16 @ Franklin

[pointlem]

The hot hand research literature is one I happen to know pretty well, and I've gotta say that KnightSlappy and Happy Calvin Guy have accurately reported the facts of life, and that our fun discussion has illustrated (for the umpteenth time) how deeply ingrained the hot hand myth is.  (And kudos to HopeConvert for aptly reporting the statistical claim—despite my having not yet persuaded him!)

Let's recap:  The esteemed Flying Dutch Fan portrays this scenario:
   * Player A is 0-6 that night from 3, but averages 40% from behind the arc. 
   * Player B is 4-5 from 3, but only averages 25% from behind the arc. 
   * Who do you run the play for?

FDF pretty obviously would go with Player B, and might not be pleased if his Hope College coach rested Player B after going 4-5. 

FDF's assumption is that the two players' in-game, recent shooting results are predictive of the next outcome . . . yes, FDF?

However, that's precisely the hypothesis that has been tested, not only by Cornell researcher Tom Gilovich and his colleagues in the paper to which KnightSlappy pointed us, but also in repeated studies of men's and women's college and university teams, and of NBA shooting.  And the hypothesis has been repeatedly disconfirmed.  Place your money on Player A. 

But are there not streak players?  One reputed streak shooter was the Detroit Pistons' Vinnie "Microwave" Johnson.  When the researchers analyzed his shooting strings, they found that after making a few baskets he became more likely to shoot (though his percentage didn't change), and thus to score baskets in bunches.

So, why do players, fans, and coaches perceive a hot hand phenomenon that's not there (even if confidence and lots of other factors matter)?  It's because the streaks are so very real (and after the fact get labelled).  Chance variation in all realms of life has more streaks than the human mind expects.  (If asked to mentally simulate coin tosses, people propose too few strings of heads and tails.) 

Ergo, strings of baskets made (hot nights) and missed (cold nights) are precisely what we should expect from 50 percent shooters whose individual shot outcomes vary unpredictably (given lots of factors at work). 

The moral:  there's no need to question KVS or MEN (Matthew E. Neil!) for executing their normal rotations and resting their player with the hot hand.  And if you're a player, don't lose confidence if you've missed your last couple shots (there are some Hope players who visibly seem to hold back after missing) and do stay within your game even if you've made several in a row.

The chance streakiness and unpredictability of shot outcomes is not what I would have predicted.  As Agatha Christie's Miss Marple said, "It wasn't what I expected. But facts are facts, and if one is proved to be wrong, one must just be humble about it and start again." 

[gohope]

You fellow posters are a hoot!!  I hadn't checked the website for just a few days, and 7 pages later all I can say is that "My head hurts!!!"    :

And... speaking of calendars, which calendar are you using for your base Mr. Sager: Lunar, Solar, Rule-based, Gregorian, Julian, Bahai, Malayalam, Chinese, etc...??!!!!   

As for me it looks like there are only 35 more days until tipoff!!

[Mr. Ypsi]

pointlem, excellent summary IF bball players (and coaches and opponents) were mindless coins.  There IS no real support for the "hot hand".  EXCEPT... what if the evidence against is because opponents adjust and tighten the defense?

I will again suggest that this debate is unanswerable.  My personal feeling is that the "hot hand" DOES exist (due to psychological reasons) but cannot be proven (or disproven) due to opponents' responses. 

Bottom line: coaches have to use 'psychology' to decide - will my 'hot' shooter be so covered that I should go with my 'usual' star (or vice versa)?  I suspect there is no 'right' answer (unless you can get into the opposing coach's brain).

[KnightSlappy]

pointlem, excellent summary IF bball players (and coaches and opponents) were mindless coins.  There IS no real support for the "hot hand".  EXCEPT... what if the evidence against is because opponents adjust and tighten the defense?

I will again suggest that this debate is unanswerable.  My personal feeling is that the "hot hand" DOES exist (due to psychological reasons) but cannot be proven (or disproven) due to opponents' responses. 

Bottom line: coaches have to use 'psychology' to decide - will my 'hot' shooter be so covered that I should go with my 'usual' star (or vice versa)?  I suspect there is no 'right' answer (unless you can get into the opposing coach's brain).

I believe the studies have been repeated under controlled conditions (no defense). Again, no hot hand effect.

[OC_SID]

Hey, gotta quibble over something, right?

Here's the opening games for each of the eight MIAA teams:

Adrian	Fri, Nov 19 @ Widener
Albion	Tue, Nov 16 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
Alma	Tue, Nov 16 vs. Indiana-Northwest
Calvin	Tue, Nov 16 @ Davenport
Hope	Tue, Nov 23 @ Davenport
Kalamazoo	Mon, Nov 15 @ Defiance
Olivet	Tue, Nov 16 @ Aquinas
Trine	Tue, Nov 16 @ Franklin

Not sure about the other teams, but Olivet will have played four games before Hope plays its first. Olivet has games Nov. 16, 18, 19 and 22.

[Gregory Sager]

And... speaking of calendars, which calendar are you using for your base Mr. Sager: Lunar, Solar, Rule-based, Gregorian, Julian, Bahai, Malayalam, Chinese, etc...??!!!!   

Not familiar with the solar calendar, eh? OK, to save you the trouble of counting up the days on your fingers and toes ...

1. Wednesday, October 20
2. Thursday, October 21
3. Friday, October 22
4. Saturday, October 23
5. Sunday, October 24
6. Monday, October 25
7. Tuesday, October 26
8. Wednesday, October 27
9. Thursday, October 28
10. Friday, October 29
11. Saturday, October 30
12. Sunday, October 31
13. Monday, November 1
14. Tuesday, November 2
15. Wednesday, November 3
16. Thursday, November 4
17. Friday, November 5
18. Saturday, November 6
19. Sunday, November 7
20. Monday, November 8
21. Tuesday, November 9
22. Wednesday, November 10
23. Thursday, November 11
24. Friday, November 12
25. Saturday, November 13
26. Sunday, November 14
27. Monday, November 15

You're welcome.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

The hot hand research literature is one I happen to know pretty well, and I've gotta say that KnightSlappy and Happy Calvin Guy have accurately reported the facts of life, and that our fun discussion has illustrated (for the umpteenth time) how deeply ingrained the hot hand myth is.  (And kudos to HopeConvert for aptly reporting the statistical claim—despite my having not yet persuaded him!)

Let's recap:  The esteemed Flying Dutch Fan portrays this scenario:
   * Player A is 0-6 that night from 3, but averages 40% from behind the arc. 
   * Player B is 4-5 from 3, but only averages 25% from behind the arc. 
   * Who do you run the play for?

FDF pretty obviously would go with Player B, and might not be pleased if his Hope College coach rested Player B after going 4-5. 

FDF's assumption is that the two players' in-game, recent shooting results are predictive of the next outcome . . . yes, FDF?

Wow you missed that by a mile.  Your assumption of my assumption was 100% wrong!

First I have not indicated which player I would go to, it's still a question in my mind that would require a lot more information before I could make it - like what the defense does (in other words, who does the other coach focus on stopping, thus allowing another one of my players to get a better look). 

[Flying Dutch Fan]

pointlem, excellent summary IF bball players (and coaches and opponents) were mindless coins.  There IS no real support for the "hot hand".  EXCEPT... what if the evidence against is because opponents adjust and tighten the defense?

I will again suggest that this debate is unanswerable.  My personal feeling is that the "hot hand" DOES exist (due to psychological reasons) but cannot be proven (or disproven) due to opponents' responses. 

Bottom line: coaches have to use 'psychology' to decide - will my 'hot' shooter be so covered that I should go with my 'usual' star (or vice versa)?  I suspect there is no 'right' answer (unless you can get into the opposing coach's brain).

I believe the studies have been repeated under controlled conditions (no defense). Again, no hot hand effect.

Well that's valuable, since we play so many games against no defense.  Might be usefull if you're playing Grinnell.

The psychological part of this keeps getting ignored - unless they are somehow able to do a study where they can do a psychological evaluation of the player after each and every shot he takes.  Ridiculous for sure, but that is how fast his confidence and emotions are changing.

[ziggy]

pointlem, excellent summary IF bball players (and coaches and opponents) were mindless coins.  There IS no real support for the "hot hand".  EXCEPT... what if the evidence against is because opponents adjust and tighten the defense?

I will again suggest that this debate is unanswerable.  My personal feeling is that the "hot hand" DOES exist (due to psychological reasons) but cannot be proven (or disproven) due to opponents' responses. 

Bottom line: coaches have to use 'psychology' to decide - will my 'hot' shooter be so covered that I should go with my 'usual' star (or vice versa)?  I suspect there is no 'right' answer (unless you can get into the opposing coach's brain).

I believe the studies have been repeated under controlled conditions (no defense). Again, no hot hand effect.

Well that's valuable, since we play so many games against no defense.  Might be usefull if you're play Grinnell.

Removing as many variables as possible helps to prove the point that a shot is no more likely or unlikely to go in based on the outcome of the previous shot. Add in all the aspects of a live game and it is impossible to argue for the "hot hand" theory. Basically, it can't be true in a game if it isn't true under ideal circumstances.

[Happy Calvin Guy]

As they say, you can lead a (dead) horse to water, but you can't make him pull the wool from over his eyes. 

I'm just glad the actual games start, um, soon. 

Go Knights!

[Flying Dutch Fan]

I completely understand the reasoning to remove the variables, but you are making a very gross assumption. You are assuming the variables always have a negative impact.  That is simply not true.

[ziggy]

I completely understand the reasoning to remove the variables, but you are making a very gross assumption. You are assuming the variables always have a negative impact.  That is simply not true.

Don't confuse hot and cold with external reasons for shooting better and reasons for shooting worse.

[Knightmare]

Exhibit "A" in support of hot streaks (and corresponding cold streaks).  These are the highlights of Vinnie Johnson 4th quarter of game 4 of the 1985 playoff series against the Boston Celtics.

Take a quick look.  And for good measure "The Microwave" tosses in a double pump perimeter shot for the icing on the cake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcKu-U49GA8&feature=related

[ziggy]

Exhibit "A" in support of hot streaks (and corresponding cold streaks).  These are the highlights of Vinnie Johnson 4th quarter of game 4 of the 1985 playoff series against the Boston Celtics.

Take a quick look.  And for good measure "The Microwave" tosses in a double pump perimeter shot for the icing on the cake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcKu-U49GA8&feature=related

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4596.msg1242754#msg1242754