Finger pointing in Clipper land?

[Mainstreet]

If he had fouled Raja, Raja would have been shooting 3 free throws. He was much better off to d-up close, keep his hands straight up and see where things go.

I would venture to say that there is a higher probability of Raja making 3 free throws in a row, than of him hitting that shot.

(hint: nerd bait)

Actually, if Raja shot the three point shot, was fouled in the act of shooting and missed there is a high probability Cassell would have also received a flagrant foul. Thus, Raja should have received a techical free throw as well for being thrown into the fifth row with the popcorn man in addition to the three free throws.

So actually Raja would have only had to make three out of four free throws to tie the game. Now, what are the probabilities the referee would have made the call and Raja hit four free throws in a row to win the game in regulation?

Does this make be an official nerd for exploring other possibilities?

 

[JCSunsfan]

Actually, if Raja shot the three point shot, was fouled in the act of shooting and missed there is a high probability Cassell would have also received a flagrant foul. Thus, Raja should have received a techical free throw as well for being thrown into the fifth row with the popcorn man in addition to the three free throws.

So actually Raja would have only had to make three out of four free throws to tie the game. Now, what are the probabilities the referee would have made the call and Raja hit four free throws in a row to win the game in regulation?

Does this make be an official nerd for exploring other possibilities?

While I would like to think I caught one, you aren't really a nerd until you actually start talking numbers and definitions of statistical terms.

 

[Errntknght]

If you REALLY want to know about probability, you need to read about distributional statistics and in particular Bayesian statistics.

I suppose there could be some basketball statistics where Bayesian methods are required but none come to mind. One could certainly grasp the the majority of the statistics of the game without learning about Bayes Theorem and its applications. (Now a dyed in the wool Bayesian will see it cropping up everywhere but just because its possible to use it, doesn't mean its necessary. I've worked a fair amount in statistics and probability and I've needed to use Bayes Theorem just twice.)

 

[Errntknght]

Incidentally, in the Nash free-throw example, the single most likely specific sequence over ten trials is ten makes. But the various one-miss sequences sum to a greater overall likelihood.

If someone shoots over 50% then the most likely specific sequence of 10 shots is 10 makes. There are 1024 different specific sequences so it is not saying much to say that one is the most likely. (If someone shoots exactly 50% then each specific sequence has probability 1/1024 so 10 makes is as likely as any other and as the shooting probability rises it is the sequence with 10 makes that gains the most.)

 

[Errntknght]

From the photo that showed Raja taking the shot, he looks well squared up and with a completely clear view... I'd guess that he'd make it with his typical probability.

 

[elindholm]

Okay, so Monty Hall presents you with three doors...

 

[Chaz]

Actually, if Raja shot the three point shot, was fouled in the act of shooting and missed there is a high probability Cassell would have also received a flagrant foul. Thus, Raja should have received a techical free throw as well for being thrown into the fifth row with the popcorn man in addition to the three free throws.

So actually Raja would have only had to make three out of four free throws to tie the game. Now, what are the probabilities the referee would have made the call and Raja hit four free throws in a row to win the game in regulation?

Does this make be an official nerd for exploring other possibilities?

Not an official nerd yet, you get demerits because Bell would have won in the first OT with a four point play and you misspelled technical.

 

[devilalum]

Here there are actually 6 choices, but in basketball you really have only 2 choices.

That just depends on how you count. You could say in basketball there are many choices: swish, goes in off the rim, goes in off glass, misses short, misses long, etc.

The number of choices is irrelevant. What matters is the relative likelihood of each one.

Please understand, this is not a matter of opinion.

:smileyjerkingoff:

 

[Mainstreet]

Not an official nerd yet, you get demerits because Bell would have won in the first OT with a four point play and you misspelled technical.

My bad. For some reason I kept thinking Bell's shot came at the end of regulation... not at the end of the first OT.

I'll try to work on my spelling.

 

[DeAnna]

Back to our regularly scheduled thread:

From the LA TIMES:
Said Cuttino Mobley: "It all comes down to who's going to sacrifice. I'm not going to start nothing, but you've got to sacrifice."

Mobley was probably talking about an inside Clippers presence — read Chris Kaman — that did not outrebound the smaller Suns and that produced only eight second-chance points.

Elton Brand heard the quote but refused to point fingers.

"I'm not going to belittle my teammates," Brand said. "But I will say there is no excuse for the defense that we played."

Kaman heard the quote, and shrugged.

"I didn't feel that way, I felt we all worked hard tonight," he said. "We just didn't get it done."