Jump to content
Billikens.com Message Board
Sign in to follow this  
Basketbill

Shot Tracker

Recommended Posts

I am interested to see how this really works.  High tech data collection sometimes is information searching for a purpose.  However, it will be interesting to see how it impacts the players.  The app is available to download,  and apparently was used in the NAIA tournament last year.  There were also selected games from the the conference with San Diego State and Nevada.  That we can look at.  The article  Dr. Chaifetz tweeted about talked about release angle, speed and many data points that I do not see  available currently but will have to see how it progresses.  Anyway if you did not see the article check out the twitter feed below :

https://t.co/IwmxwDglxP

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is a great tool but my long experience with analytic tools says otherwise. Let's say that you, all of a sudden, develop valid data on release angle, ball speeds, and up to 10 total new parameters which had never been available before. The question is how do you make sense out of the new data. Let's say that an optimal release angle is (or angle range) is developed from this data. This may or may not be great because this "optimal" angle range may also be dependent upon jump height, proximity to basket, speed of the player at time of release, type of evasive motions he may have been doing, speed of the ball, etc. To make sense of 10 new parameter measures you first have to develop an extensive database to correlate all of this  information with yet additional data like player's height and weight, etc. Eventually you will in all likelihood be able to develop training goals for the players, which will hopefully translate into  improved scores. However this will not happen until there is enough data to make valid correlations. 

So, for the time being, and until an adequate database on these parameters can be developed, the new data is interesting and suggestive but cannot be used to evaluate players directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not see it as an evaluation tool, but a metric to assist with practicing, shot foot work etc.  coaches have commented how Thatch shoots so well in practice, but has yet to in games.  Now you have something that might show a difference as to why. Comparing practice shots metrics to games shot metrics may help.  Regardless the work will have to be put in, it is not magic,  benefit will have to be earned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will help a great deal if utilized properly. If you don’t believe me, look at how our great Yoda basketball master managed details in his practices. RM would blue tape spots on the floor, and incessantly drill his players to hit their spots. He would drill the f out of them, teaching angles, timing, amount of required force, leverage, and body positions, until it was automatic, every time, in practice.

He assumed 50% would transfer over into the live game, and that turned a team that got no invite into multiple conference champs and second weekend playing.

His acolyte asst coach turned the same system into a final four.

This tool, if used right and reinforced properly for each player, is an immediately and always available aid to support improvement in shooting. It drives documented successes while showing how progressive failure starts propagating. It is a great feedback tool for conceptualizing and implementing individual improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sold on the benefits of this device. Take a guy like Jimmerson for example. He obviously is in his comfort zone hitting 3s. Why tweak him with 10 different factors? It may well only put doubt in his mind about little things. Too much info can lead to over thinking things and result in a loss of confidence and your natural instincts. Firm believer in you trust with what got you here. Or, if it ain't broke don't eff with it. Yes, continual improvement should always be a player's goal, but if the risk reward is a 1 or 2% chance of improvement vs messing with the player's confidence and risk a serious slump, I say leave him alone. This happens to golfers all the time after they go to a swing analyzer. They start thinking about all these little tweaks and stop thinking about hitting the ball. I went thru it and finally said, screw this I'm putting my trust in the old swing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An addendum to my above post. While this device might best be ignored with a shooter like Jimerson, it might well be a real help to guys like JGood, Thatch, French et al. who need some work on their mechanics. Guess my point is you got to be really cautious how you use this tool. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I wrong to assume these guys have already used this technology prior to SLU?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SLU72, like all biometric analyses, you need someone who can parse the information properly, and can communicate the three important keys effectively to the individual.

This setup is not a mold to hammer everyone into  the mold buck. It also can take those who have good form and improve one or two areas, and for great shooters, it can blueprint their shot should they deviate from it.

This is how great pitching and hitting coaches intuitively work. They can give a poor player informed tips on two or three traits, and the player blossoms.

They can teach a good pitcher, like Jake Arrieta, that he needs more leg and back flexibility, and after taking that advice to heart within his workouts, he suddenly becomes the best pitcher in baseball.

They can take a speedster like Vince Coleman, and teach him to turn his hitting stroke into a ground ball generator, and he starts killing infield singles.

this is a refined tool that makes magic.

BTW, I can knock 5 strokes off your game if you are a 90+ golfer. Recognition of how to improve results within your physical attributes is easy.

Clock, they have used this for a decade with Olympic athletes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sheltiedave said:

SLU72, like all biometric analyses, you need someone who can parse the information properly, and can communicate the three important keys effectively to the individual.

This setup is not a mold to hammer everyone into  the mold buck. It also can take those who have good form and improve one or two areas, and for great shooters, it can blueprint their shot should they deviate from it.

This is how great pitching and hitting coaches intuitively work. They can give a poor player informed tips on two or three traits, and the player blossoms.

They can teach a good pitcher, like Jake Arrieta, that he needs more leg and back flexibility, and after taking that advice to heart within his workouts, he suddenly becomes the best pitcher in baseball.

They can take a speedster like Vince Coleman, and teach him to turn his hitting stroke into a ground ball generator, and he starts killing infield singles.

this is a refined tool that makes magic.

BTW, I can knock 5 strokes off your game if you are a 90+ golfer. Recognition of how to improve results within your physical attributes is easy.

Clock, they have used this for a decade with Olympic athletes.

I'm a solid 11-12, back in the younger days I got to a 4 -5 for about 10 years. I tried to get back with the help of a pro and the analyzer. Game went in the toilet for a while, until I gave up on all the little tweaks. Now, granted if I was really serious about it, I may well have stuck with the advice and hit 500 or so balls a day, but I knew the PGA was out of reach a very long time ago, so I chose mediocrity, a few beers a round, moderate betting, and just enjoying myself out there.

Of course there's a world of difference between a old geezer golfer and a D1 athlete who is constantly trying to reach their peak performance. I just get a little concerned when you take a natural, which is what Jimerson appears to be, and messing with his mechanics. Granted, if suddenly his shots go awry, this device would probably be of service in helping him regain his touch. I definitely see the benefits for guys like JGood, French, or any other player that needs to work on improving their accuracy, range, positioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, old geezer golf is more of a social event, provided you stay within bounds of the status quo mediocrity. Little tweaks indeed, a bit higher here, more turn there, feet pointing as such, and then just go out and try to remember all of the tweaks. It is worse if you try to concentrate upon a single tweak before going to the next, because the single tweak only works as intended if you manage to do all the other tweaks correctly. You may very well wind up improving your form, how you look, without improving your game, how you score. OHHH great swing, bad shot though.

In medical terms there is the phrase "A Harvard Death," that is someone that dies with totally normal lab results and tests. You are dead, but your tests look real good! Does this sound even vaguely familiar to anyone of you? Have you ever had a Dr. come up to you and tell you, we are so sorry your mother had a massive heart attack and passed away, nothing we could do. And you know, because you watched her going down into death, that she lost motion of one side of her body first and then could not talk before she died. Do you believe she had a heart attack? The Dr. is shooting from the hip, or giving the standard excuse, is the name for this. All the lab results and all the tests are fine, the patient must be fine... boom, down he goes to meet his ancestors.

Sure, measurements can help someone get back into the groove. What it really cannot do is to teach him how to do something new. Like the old joke: "Doc, will I be able to play piano after the surgery? Sure you will. Funny, I never could do it before." Technology and measurements for the sake of technology and measurements are crap. After the powers that be figure how to use the technology effectively, then it may become useful, not before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, slu72 said:

I'm a solid 11-12, back in the younger days I got to a 4 -5 for about 10 years. I tried to get back with the help of a pro and the analyzer. Game went in the toilet for a while, until I gave up on all the little tweaks. Now, granted if I was really serious about it, I may well have stuck with the advice and hit 500 or so balls a day, but I knew the PGA was out of reach a very long time ago, so I chose mediocrity, a few beers a round, moderate betting, and just enjoying myself out there.

Of course there's a world of difference between a old geezer golfer and a D1 athlete who is constantly trying to reach their peak performance. I just get a little concerned when you take a natural, which is what Jimerson appears to be, and messing with his mechanics. Granted, if suddenly his shots go awry, this device would probably be of service in helping him regain his touch. I definitely see the benefits for guys like JGood, French, or any other player that needs to work on improving their accuracy, range, positioning.

Idk why we're assuming mechanics are the things that they'll be fixing with this tool. Maybe that's a component, but I'd guess a lot of the output would be "Gibson shoots 50% from the wings but 40% from the baseline: spend more time practicing corner 3's" or "Thatch tends to release the ball lower and more quickly in games than in practice: tell him to relax, he elevates enough to not worry too much about close-outs."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Zink said:

Idk why we're assuming mechanics are the things that they'll be fixing with this tool. Maybe that's a component, but I'd guess a lot of the output would be "Gibson shoots 50% from the wings but 40% from the baseline: spend more time practicing corner 3's" or "Thatch tends to release the ball lower and more quickly in games than in practice: tell him to relax, he elevates enough to not worry too much about close-outs."

 

Look, I'm not knocking modern tech and how it helps athletes, but if I got a kid who's hitting 39-40% of his 3's I'm not gonna mess with him too much. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is claiming this process is designed to mess with success. It is a tool, and in order to use a tool, you need a coach who is 5% smarter than the tool.

Ford did not become one of the top ten three pt shooters in high school by guesswork. His dad worked with him, teaching him to square up his feet and shoulders, keep his elbow tucked, his hands positioned just so, and have the launch off his fingers. Land in the same spot he elevated from.

For a classic shooter, metrics gained from thousands of shots would show the bell curves for each parameter measured, and would also show which parameter(s) were the critical ones.

Similar curves will benefit the step forward 3 pt shooter, like Bess, and the floater 3 pt shooter like Isabell. It can be as easy as noticing Bess shot 0% on threes where his left foot is forward of his right foot, 15% on threes with his right forward but planted, and 40% when he moves his right foot forward, touch plants, and shoots.

Who cares about shot angle when you have a metric that screams look at me! Having a sheet that shows five metrics, and which measurables lead to your best result, is a godsend in a evidence based muscle memory task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...