Do you buy into this theory???

[carolinajazz]

The price of anarchy in basketball
Authors: Brian Skinner
(Submitted on 12 Aug 2009 (v1), last revised 18 Jan 2010 (this version, v3))

Abstract: Optimizing the performance of a basketball offense may be viewed as a network problem, wherein each play represents a "pathway" through which the ball and players may move from origin (the in-bounds pass) to goal (the basket). Effective field goal percentages from the resulting shot attempts can be used to characterize the efficiency of each pathway. Inspired by recent discussions of the "price of anarchy" in traffic networks, this paper makes a formal analogy between a basketball offense and a simplified traffic network. The analysis suggests that there may be a significant difference between taking the highest-percentage shot each time down the court and playing the most efficient possible game. There may also be an analogue of Braess's Paradox in basketball, such that removing a key player from a team can result in the improvement of the team's offensive efficiency.

...you college hot shots discuss this type of thing every day in class, right? So is it true or false?

 

[GoJazz]

True and you see it all the time. A big named player goes down and passing/selfishness/shot selection/defensive intensity/ all go up.

 

[One Brow]

The analysis suggests that there may be a significant difference between taking the highest-percentage shot each time down the court and playing the most efficient possible game.

This is standard game theory. If you use a set strategy (such as only going for layups and corner 3s), your opponent can play a counter-strategy designed to take advantage of it (in this case, packing the paint and baseline). This counter-strategy fails badly if you are willing/able to take wide-open shots at other locatons.

There may also be an analogue of Braess's Paradox in basketball, such that removing a key player from a team can result in the improvement of the team's offensive efficiency.

For many years, the Rockets were more efficient on offense when McGrady was not in the game, IIRC.

 

[cjs55]

Yeah, I don't really know about network problems or the 'price of anarchy'. However, I've played poker for a living for a few years now, and it's absolutely true that you need to make 'unoptimal' plays fairly often. The reason for this is these plays can raise the EV (expected value) of future plays, due to your opponent being forced to account for the different possible plays you can make and thus changing their playstyle against you. I think this directly correlates to basketball. The open corner 3 from a good shooter is the most efficient shot in basketball. However, you can't just shoot 3s every position for various reasons. Look at the Spurs. Their offense is built around Duncan's amazing interior offense, and Parker/Ginobili's playmaking/penetration. But all of this actually exists to get easy open 3 point shots (or layups), from the defense collapsing.