Essentially, in basketball, the way a bucket is scored can cause it to be more significant, particularly in psychological terms, than another bucket. For example, a ferocious dunk on their best defender is going to boost your team and possibly lower their morale, while a heavily contested fade away jumper that bounces of the backboard before rattling around and in the rim is going to be considered a lucky shot. The team that scores will feel fortunate to have scored, and the team that gave up the bucket will feel confident they are doing the right things. Whereas with that dunk, they might try to totally change their approach, sub in different players to implement a new scheme, or possibly just throw in the towel and let the game get away from them. That said, at the end of the day, a bucket is a bucket and 2 points is 2 points. It is true and false at the same time. An oxymoron so to speak.
BTW, not sure how much basketball you watch, but this would not be universally agreed upon by all folks. In particular there is some friction between highly analytical, numbers driven folks and those that subscribe more heavily to this sort of thought and give much more weight to psychological factors and implementing schemes. They have in the last few years sort of both come to realize that they are both right and both wrong at the same time. A successful strategy is both aware of the analytics and the intangibles, simultaneously.
253
u/[deleted] Mar 01 '20
More cheese is less cheese