Tonight’s question has to do with streak shooting, specifically how to value a hypothetical player who - over the course of 82 games - shot something like 80% in 41 of the games and 20% in the others, resulting in an overall shooting percentage of 50%, which I think we all would agree, is very good, especially if he is playing the 1 or the 2 (for reference 43.6% is average this season for guards).
Would you be okay with this guy on your team, or would you prefer to have a guy who shot, say, 60% in one half of his games and 40% in the other?
As far as I know, none of the advanced stats account for consistency. And it may be because numbers-minded analysts/journalists/fans don’t believe in “the hot hand” or the consistency of streakiness … and, to go one step further, I’m not sure there is any empirical evidence to support the existence of extremely streaky shooters…
But I would sure like to know if there was.
The general idea is that an extremely streaky shooter would help your team win by a bunch of points some nights and help them lose by a bunch of points other nights. The overall effect would probably be the same either way (or, for that matter, if a team had a player who shot exactly 50% every single night). Since a team’s point differential is the best predictor of future success, i.e. winning percentage, winning two games by 1 point each or winning one game by 20 points and losing another by 18 points says the same thing, statistically speaking, about the quality of a team.
Of course, that would all change in the playoffs because you can’t wait 82 games for things to even out.
My gut tells me I’d rather have the consistent shooter for that exact reason … but, then again, I might also want the streaky shooter, just so long as I can guarantee that he’s streaking for the Conference Finals and the Finals.
Oh yeah, the Cavs beat the Spurs by two points tonight, after Mo Williams made a couple of key free throws :)
