1. I probably won't do this myself but I'm interested in knowing if "timeout to sub on the O-line" is actually an effective strategy in the WUL/PUL. Coaches seem to think it's obviously the right choice but I see so many cases where that O-line turns it over before scoring. Curious to see what the stats say.
2. The "momentum breaking" timeout seems popular in the NBA. I wonder if people have studied whether it actually works there.
In fact, I just did a quick search and was able to find a paper. Here's a quote from the Results section:
"According to the regression results, the home team using a timeout is predicted to
enhance their short-term performance in the time period after the timeout (.5327 with timeout to .5253 without timeout), whereas for the away team, the usage of a timeout is predicted to hurt
their short-term performance slightly (.4909 with the timeout to .4901 without the timeout).
*However, it is important to note that neither of these predicted differences is statistically
significant*."
(links directly to PDF, I searched for "NBA momentum time out study")
1. I don't watch WUL/PUL so I'm also unable to answer here. I really dislike that the subbing during timeouts exists though.
2. Thanks for looking into studies for this. I read through that and I don't think it's a great paper, though I also can't imagine how you would go about objectively analyzing what is a subjective decision in this way - treating all 6-0 runs as the same without looking at any other factors is way too narrow a definition of momentum IMO. But again - how you could actually look at this without knowing the coaches' rationale for calling/not calling a timeout in a particular moment is beyond me.
I totally agree that we shouldn't give too much weight to this paper.
But I do find myself naturally skeptical of momentum timeouts. It just seems so ripe for confirmation bias — e.g. when the timeout "works", a coach remembers and counts it in favor of their effectiveness, but when the timeout doesn't work, they rationalize it as "we were losing anyway" and don't count it against the effectiveness of momentum timeouts...
I’m still a relatively new coach but about to play some big games. Is it realistic for players to play two points in a row at the end of the game? If so I’m thinking I’d use the timeout at 14-13 or 13-14 to run my best line two points in a row if needed. Most of my best players are best on the team at o and d.
Solid post, two thoughts:
1. I probably won't do this myself but I'm interested in knowing if "timeout to sub on the O-line" is actually an effective strategy in the WUL/PUL. Coaches seem to think it's obviously the right choice but I see so many cases where that O-line turns it over before scoring. Curious to see what the stats say.
2. The "momentum breaking" timeout seems popular in the NBA. I wonder if people have studied whether it actually works there.
In fact, I just did a quick search and was able to find a paper. Here's a quote from the Results section:
"According to the regression results, the home team using a timeout is predicted to
enhance their short-term performance in the time period after the timeout (.5327 with timeout to .5253 without timeout), whereas for the away team, the usage of a timeout is predicted to hurt
their short-term performance slightly (.4909 with the timeout to .4901 without the timeout).
*However, it is important to note that neither of these predicted differences is statistically
significant*."
(links directly to PDF, I searched for "NBA momentum time out study")
https://scholarship.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/c13af59d-819a-457e-8be5-6fb978264a2f/content
Thanks for reading!
1. I don't watch WUL/PUL so I'm also unable to answer here. I really dislike that the subbing during timeouts exists though.
2. Thanks for looking into studies for this. I read through that and I don't think it's a great paper, though I also can't imagine how you would go about objectively analyzing what is a subjective decision in this way - treating all 6-0 runs as the same without looking at any other factors is way too narrow a definition of momentum IMO. But again - how you could actually look at this without knowing the coaches' rationale for calling/not calling a timeout in a particular moment is beyond me.
I totally agree that we shouldn't give too much weight to this paper.
But I do find myself naturally skeptical of momentum timeouts. It just seems so ripe for confirmation bias — e.g. when the timeout "works", a coach remembers and counts it in favor of their effectiveness, but when the timeout doesn't work, they rationalize it as "we were losing anyway" and don't count it against the effectiveness of momentum timeouts...
Yes I like the for spectators/fans argument, as a broadcaster it's a lot better to run promos during an existing stoppage already :D
I’m still a relatively new coach but about to play some big games. Is it realistic for players to play two points in a row at the end of the game? If so I’m thinking I’d use the timeout at 14-13 or 13-14 to run my best line two points in a row if needed. Most of my best players are best on the team at o and d.
best two *lines
Depends how long the points last and the individual players.
But generally two points shouldn't be a problem