Hot hand thread

[m2002brian]

It’s a game by game thing. Thats it. Period

[shangrila]

You two need to internet less.

[Note30]

The very research you used to support your stance said It's hard to detect the hot hand. Sample sizes in basketball are too small to be meaningful. He also said their was no true evidence of hot hands. He excused it with his catch phrase absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. This is your hand picked research for supporting your stance.

Bang your head all you want, but I think I provided a pretty good baseline of 3 out of 4 to be hot or cold. I tracked every instance of a player being hot to see if he remained hot and every instance of a player being cold to see if he remained cold. Every time the player did not maintain his hot or cold status. Out of random chance the players should have maintained 2 of the five times but they didn't. Why do you get frustrated with me maintaining my belief when all the evidence points to my belief being correct.

You still didn’t acknowledge any of the things I pointed out. You refuse to acknowledge that NBA players and coach believe, teach, and react to the hot hand. You refuse to acknowledge shots like uncontested layups have no barring on hot or cold. I could go on and on. I would say the conversation is getting circular, but that is an understatement. If you don’t like then how about

Of course players and coaches believe in that. That doesn't mean anything. You have so many stipulations on hot hands that it is just ridiculous. If they get a layup or dunk it doesn't count. If they rest it doesn't count. If they don't shoot for a while it doesn't count. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. I acknowledge all of those things you talk about. It still doesn't support hot hands being a detectable, useful, phenomena.

Yeah I and most other people are going to take the words of a myriad of professional coaches and players who have incorporated the hot hand over the decades over some guy sitting in his armchair saying that hot hands doesn't exist.

Just because it's not something that's easy to track doesn't mean it's not there.

I and others have seen that you refuse to admit when you're wrong and you're super stubborn about it.

[KGdaBom]

You still didn’t acknowledge any of the things I pointed out. You refuse to acknowledge that NBA players and coach believe, teach, and react to the hot hand. You refuse to acknowledge shots like uncontested layups have no barring on hot or cold. I could go on and on. I would say the conversation is getting circular, but that is an understatement. If you don’t like then how about

Of course players and coaches believe in that. That doesn't mean anything. You have so many stipulations on hot hands that it is just ridiculous. If they get a layup or dunk it doesn't count. If they rest it doesn't count. If they don't shoot for a while it doesn't count. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. I acknowledge all of those things you talk about. It still doesn't support hot hands being a detectable, useful, phenomena.

Yeah I and most other people are going to take the words of a myriad of professional coaches and players who have incorporated the hot hand over the decades over some guy sitting in his armchair saying that hot hands doesn't exist.

Just because it's not something that's easy to track doesn't mean it's not there.

I and others have seen that you refuse to admit when you're wrong and you're super stubborn about it.

I can be stubborn, but I will always admit to being wrong if proven to be so. How about you? Will you admit to being wrong when I prove you to be wrong about this beyond any reasonable doubt? I'm not saying players don't get hot or cold. They do. I am saying you can't rely on it or predict how long it will last. All the evidence is that the Hot Hand and cold hand are not something you can rely on as a strategy to help win games.

It was very easy to track using making or missing 3 out of 4 shots as a definition. In my first tracking of this yesterday the hot or cold hand failed 5 times out of 5 as a predictor in the Dallas OKC game. I'm almost certain it will continue to fail far more often than it succeeds as I continue to track it. I'll track it in all Wolves games for a little while. If it succeeds as a predictor most of the time I will admit I'm wrong. Absolutely admit it without any reservations. If it fails as a predictor most of the time will you admit you are wrong. I really doubt it, but maybe you will surprise me.

[Note30]

Of course players and coaches believe in that. That doesn't mean anything. You have so many stipulations on hot hands that it is just ridiculous. If they get a layup or dunk it doesn't count. If they rest it doesn't count. If they don't shoot for a while it doesn't count. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. I acknowledge all of those things you talk about. It still doesn't support hot hands being a detectable, useful, phenomena.

Yeah I and most other people are going to take the words of a myriad of professional coaches and players who have incorporated the hot hand over the decades over some guy sitting in his armchair saying that hot hands doesn't exist.

Just because it's not something that's easy to track doesn't mean it's not there.

I and others have seen that you refuse to admit when you're wrong and you're super stubborn about it.

I can be stubborn, but I will always admit to being wrong if proven to be so. How about you? Will you admit to being wrong when I prove you to be wrong about this beyond any reasonable doubt? I'm not saying players don't get hot or cold. They do. I am saying you can't rely on it or predict how long it will last. All the evidence is that the Hot Hand and cold hand are not something you can rely on as a strategy to help win games.

It was very easy to track using making or missing 3 out of 4 shots as a definition. In my first tracking of this yesterday the hot or cold hand failed 5 times out of 5 as a predictor in the Dallas OKC game. I'm almost certain it will continue to fail far more often than it succeeds as I continue to track it. I'll track it in all Wolves games for a little while. If it succeeds as a predictor most of the time I will admit I'm wrong. Absolutely admit it without any reservations. If it fails as a predictor most of the time will you admit you are wrong. I really doubt it, but maybe you will surprise me.

It's unlikely, but possible that hot or cold hands exist

You've been arguing that it doesn't exist, I'm sure I could find more if I dug through the pages.

Also hot and cold is not just xyz player taking shots. Every player has their "sweet spot". Getting hot is specifically different for every player. Just cause you make a few shots doesn't mean you're a hot hand.

Here is the best possible example I could find of "feeding the hot hand".

[youtube]https://youtu.be/cNWUcy2wKUs?si=4qI5vy4aUqepbGnr[/youtube]

Cassipi keeps getting fed the ball in the same spot he's good at till he feels more comfortable and his confidence spikes and he starts shooting from all over the top of the key.

Curry's range is everywhere and he gets hot after two shots and that competition fuels the two.

Casspi missed his first two shots of the third quarter and he didn't take many more shots after that, but the team understood his hand hand cooled. The halftime basically iced him.

[fattymcgee]

Dumb thread. Someone should delete this abomination.

[KGdaBom]

Yeah I and most other people are going to take the words of a myriad of professional coaches and players who have incorporated the hot hand over the decades over some guy sitting in his armchair saying that hot hands doesn't exist.

Just because it's not something that's easy to track doesn't mean it's not there.

I and others have seen that you refuse to admit when you're wrong and you're super stubborn about it.

I can be stubborn, but I will always admit to being wrong if proven to be so. How about you? Will you admit to being wrong when I prove you to be wrong about this beyond any reasonable doubt? I'm not saying players don't get hot or cold. They do. I am saying you can't rely on it or predict how long it will last. All the evidence is that the Hot Hand and cold hand are not something you can rely on as a strategy to help win games.

It was very easy to track using making or missing 3 out of 4 shots as a definition. In my first tracking of this yesterday the hot or cold hand failed 5 times out of 5 as a predictor in the Dallas OKC game. I'm almost certain it will continue to fail far more often than it succeeds as I continue to track it. I'll track it in all Wolves games for a little while. If it succeeds as a predictor most of the time I will admit I'm wrong. Absolutely admit it without any reservations. If it fails as a predictor most of the time will you admit you are wrong. I really doubt it, but maybe you will surprise me.

It's unlikely, but possible that hot or cold hands exist

You've been arguing that it doesn't exist, I'm sure I could find more if I dug through the pages.

Also hot and cold is not just xyz player taking shots. Every player has their "sweet spot". Getting hot is specifically different for every player. Just cause you make a few shots doesn't mean you're a hot hand.

Here is the best possible example I could find of "feeding the hot hand".

[youtube]https://youtu.be/cNWUcy2wKUs?si=4qI5vy4aUqepbGnr[/youtube]

Cassipi keeps getting fed the ball in the same spot he's good at till he feels more comfortable and his confidence spikes and he starts shooting from all over the top of the key.

Curry's range is everywhere and he gets hot after two shots and that competition fuels the two.

Casspi missed his first two shots of the third quarter and he didn't take many more shots after that, but the team understood his hand hand cooled. The halftime basically iced him.

Players getting hot exists. Feeding hot hands and not feeding cold hands does not exist in a way you can reliably utilize them. That is my argument. You present no evidence that indicates they can be utilized reliably.

To discuss the existence of hot or cold hands and what they imply we have to agree on a definition. Without a definition it can't be discussed or studied. My definition of hot hand is making 3 out of 4.
My definition of cold hand is missing 3 out of 4.
I think those are reasonable definitions.
If you don't like those definitions we can't discuss this unless you can come up with definitions that I agree to.

I expect the research I'm working on right now will conclusively demonstrate this. If it doesn't I will change my mind.

[KGdaBom]

Dumb thread. Someone should delete this abomination.

You're dumb. We should delete you. Who are you to say that this can't be discussed?

[Note30]

I can be stubborn, but I will always admit to being wrong if proven to be so. How about you? Will you admit to being wrong when I prove you to be wrong about this beyond any reasonable doubt? I'm not saying players don't get hot or cold. They do. I am saying you can't rely on it or predict how long it will last. All the evidence is that the Hot Hand and cold hand are not something you can rely on as a strategy to help win games.

It was very easy to track using making or missing 3 out of 4 shots as a definition. In my first tracking of this yesterday the hot or cold hand failed 5 times out of 5 as a predictor in the Dallas OKC game. I'm almost certain it will continue to fail far more often than it succeeds as I continue to track it. I'll track it in all Wolves games for a little while. If it succeeds as a predictor most of the time I will admit I'm wrong. Absolutely admit it without any reservations. If it fails as a predictor most of the time will you admit you are wrong. I really doubt it, but maybe you will surprise me.

It's unlikely, but possible that hot or cold hands exist

You've been arguing that it doesn't exist, I'm sure I could find more if I dug through the pages.

Also hot and cold is not just xyz player taking shots. Every player has their "sweet spot". Getting hot is specifically different for every player. Just cause you make a few shots doesn't mean you're a hot hand.

Here is the best possible example I could find of "feeding the hot hand".

[youtube]https://youtu.be/cNWUcy2wKUs?si=4qI5vy4aUqepbGnr[/youtube]

Cassipi keeps getting fed the ball in the same spot he's good at till he feels more comfortable and his confidence spikes and he starts shooting from all over the top of the key.

Curry's range is everywhere and he gets hot after two shots and that competition fuels the two.

Casspi missed his first two shots of the third quarter and he didn't take many more shots after that, but the team understood his hand hand cooled. The halftime basically iced him.

Players getting hot exists. Feeding hot hands and not feeding cold hands does not exist in a way you can reliably utilize them. That is my argument. You present no evidence that indicates they can be utilized reliably.

To discuss the existence of hot or cold hands and what they imply we have to agree on a definition. Without a definition it can't be discussed or studied. My definition of hot hand is making 3 out of 4.
My definition of cold hand is missing 3 out of 4.
I think those are reasonable definitions.
If you don't like those definitions we can't discuss this unless you can come up with definitions that I agree to.

I expect the research I'm working on right now will conclusively demonstrate this. If it doesn't I will change my mind.

I give up. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Loaf_of_bread]

Lock this

[KGdaBom]

You've been arguing that it doesn't exist, I'm sure I could find more if I dug through the pages.

Also hot and cold is not just xyz player taking shots. Every player has their "sweet spot". Getting hot is specifically different for every player. Just cause you make a few shots doesn't mean you're a hot hand.

Here is the best possible example I could find of "feeding the hot hand".

[youtube]https://youtu.be/cNWUcy2wKUs?si=4qI5vy4aUqepbGnr[/youtube]

Cassipi keeps getting fed the ball in the same spot he's good at till he feels more comfortable and his confidence spikes and he starts shooting from all over the top of the key.

Curry's range is everywhere and he gets hot after two shots and that competition fuels the two.

Casspi missed his first two shots of the third quarter and he didn't take many more shots after that, but the team understood his hand hand cooled. The halftime basically iced him.

Players getting hot exists. Feeding hot hands and not feeding cold hands does not exist in a way you can reliably utilize them. That is my argument. You present no evidence that indicates they can be utilized reliably.

To discuss the existence of hot or cold hands and what they imply we have to agree on a definition. Without a definition it can't be discussed or studied. My definition of hot hand is making 3 out of 4.
My definition of cold hand is missing 3 out of 4.
I think those are reasonable definitions.
If you don't like those definitions we can't discuss this unless you can come up with definitions that I agree to.

I expect the research I'm working on right now will conclusively demonstrate this. If it doesn't I will change my mind.

I give up. You have no idea what you're talking about.

So ridiculous. I know 100% what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the idea of hot hands or cold hands are not a consistent, reliable, predictable phenomenon and can't be used to help win games. You get uncomfortable because you see that I'm taking a rational scientific approach to this and that could prove your thinking wrong.

[KGdaBom]

Lock this

says the Freshman troll.

[BlacJacMac]

Lock this

If it keeps the topic out of other threads, this is a godsend.

[KGdaBom]

Lock this

If it keeps the topic out of other threads, this is a godsend.

Eggzactly.

[KGdaBom]

I started out on this as some good natured ribbing of W4L with his huge belief in what I considered a very ridiculous notion. It has now gotten serious for me. I'm going to show this Hot Hand thinking to be a useless concept or find out I'm wrong if I can't.

My chief opponent W4L is placing all kinds of restrictions on hot hands such as dunks and layups don't count, taking a break from the game nullifies it. If the player doesn't shoot for a couple minutes nullifies it. His list of nullifiers goes on and on. However, he counts all of Keegan Murray's hot shooting from a month ago even though there was a half time during the hot streak. So if the hot streak continues half time is not a nullifier, but if the hot streak doesn't continue half time is a nullifier.

My definition of hot/cold hands is very simple. Making or missing 3 out of 4 shots. As soon as I stated the definition one of my opponents Note gives up saying I don't know what I'm talking about. Even if I'm wrong It's still obvious I know what I'm talking about. If he thinks I don't know what I'm talking about he shouldn't give up he should back up his belief with something useful.

[WolfAddict]

Lock this

Calm down Eeyore - Just don't open the thread you bloody sad sack

[winforlose]

I started out on this as some good natured ribbing of W4L with his huge belief in what I considered a very ridiculous notion. It has now gotten serious for me. I'm going to show this Hot Hand thinking to be a useless concept or find out I'm wrong if I can't.

My chief opponent W4L is placing all kinds of restrictions on hot hands such as dunks and layups don't count, taking a break from the game nullifies it. If the player doesn't shoot for a couple minutes nullifies it. His list of nullifiers goes on and on. However, he counts all of Keegan Murray's hot shooting from a month ago even though there was a half time during the hot streak. So if the hot streak continues half time is not a nullifier, but if the hot streak doesn't continue half time is a nullifier.

My definition of hot/cold hands is very simple. Making or missing 3 out of 4 shots. As soon as I stated the definition one of my opponents Note gives up saying I don't know what I'm talking about. Even if I'm wrong It's still obvious I know what I'm talking about. If he thinks I don't know what I'm talking about he shouldn't give up he should back up his belief with something useful.

KG, what in gods name are you on about? I never introduced nullifiers or said anything like not shooting for a couple of minutes nullifies it. What I have been trying to tell you is that hot hand and cold hand are not absolutes. They don’t always last a whole game, they don’t always happen in a game, they don’t always reach their full potential if they are not fed. I even used a specific example of AJ green needing to take more than 4 shots to make more than 4 shots. If the coach had benched him during the normal rotation, or if his teammates looked for their own shot instead of feeding him, he doesn’t go off. I showed you clips of a head coach and NBA PG both talking about feeding the hot hand. The latter of which specifically tells you that NBA PGs keep mental notes on who is hitting jump shots/3s and if they see one or two go down they try and create another for that player. I responded to Shrink’s 1985 study by showing a video that debunked it. A coin flip can be done mechanically with no variation. If you have Karl and Rudy stand in opposite corners and take 100 3s you will see a variation. I pointed out that plenty of humans cannot even make an NBA 3, and of those who can there are natural skill variances.

You want to talk about predictive value. If you see a skilled shooter struggling, maybe don’t have them shoot for a while. They can distribute more and try again the next quarter or half. If you see a Josh Okogie type player swish a 3, give him another crack at it. If it goes in, let him shoot again, if not look for another option. When a Luka type player makes 6 of 7 in a quarter, have him shoot more than 1 or 2 shots in the second. When Karl drops 44 in the first half, maybe run offense for him to get open instead of giving him the ball getting out of the way, and expecting him to do everything. When a player makes an uncontested layup or an easy and 1 that doesn’t effect hot or cold. Like Dom said earlier, the value of the hot hand is in how you use it to create open shots for your teammates, and how they run offense to get you open.

[Note30]

I started out on this as some good natured ribbing of W4L with his huge belief in what I considered a very ridiculous notion. It has now gotten serious for me. I'm going to show this Hot Hand thinking to be a useless concept or find out I'm wrong if I can't.

My chief opponent W4L is placing all kinds of restrictions on hot hands such as dunks and layups don't count, taking a break from the game nullifies it. If the player doesn't shoot for a couple minutes nullifies it. His list of nullifiers goes on and on. However, he counts all of Keegan Murray's hot shooting from a month ago even though there was a half time during the hot streak. So if the hot streak continues half time is not a nullifier, but if the hot streak doesn't continue half time is a nullifier.

My definition of hot/cold hands is very simple. Making or missing 3 out of 4 shots. As soon as I stated the definition one of my opponents Note gives up saying I don't know what I'm talking about. Even if I'm wrong It's still obvious I know what I'm talking about. If he thinks I don't know what I'm talking about he shouldn't give up he should back up his belief with something useful.

KG, what in gods name are you on about? I never introduced nullifiers or said anything like not shooting for a couple of minutes nullifies it. What I have been trying to tell you is that hot hand and cold hand are not absolutes. They don’t always last a whole game, they don’t always happen in a game, they don’t always reach their full potential if they are not fed. I even used a specific example of AJ green needing to take more than 4 shots to make more than 4 shots. If the coach had benched him during the normal rotation, or if his teammates looked for their own shot instead of feeding him, he doesn’t go off. I showed you clips of a head coach and NBA PG both talking about feeding the hot hand. The latter of which specifically tells you that NBA PGs keep mental notes on who is hitting jump shots/3s and if they see one or two go down they try and create another for that player. I responded to Shrink’s 1985 study by showing a video that debunked it. A coin flip can be done mechanically with no variation. If you have Karl and Rudy stand in opposite corners and take 100 3s you will see a variation. I pointed out that plenty of humans cannot even make an NBA 3, and of those who can there are natural skill variances.

You want to talk about predictive value. If you see a skilled shooter struggling, maybe don’t have them shoot for a while. They can distribute more and try again the next quarter or half. If you see a Josh Okogie type player swish a 3, give him another crack at it. If it goes in, let him shoot again, if not look for another option. When a Luka type player makes 6 of 7 in a quarter, have him shoot more than 1 or 2 shots in the second. When Karl drops 44 in the first half, maybe run offense for him to get open instead of giving him the ball getting out of the way, and expecting him to do everything. When a player makes an uncontested layup or an easy and 1 that doesn’t effect hot or cold. Like Dom said earlier, the value of the hot hand is in how you use it to create open shots for your teammates, and how they run offense to get you open.

Don't bother.

[KGdaBom]

I started out on this as some good natured ribbing of W4L with his huge belief in what I considered a very ridiculous notion. It has now gotten serious for me. I'm going to show this Hot Hand thinking to be a useless concept or find out I'm wrong if I can't.

My chief opponent W4L is placing all kinds of restrictions on hot hands such as dunks and layups don't count, taking a break from the game nullifies it. If the player doesn't shoot for a couple minutes nullifies it. His list of nullifiers goes on and on. However, he counts all of Keegan Murray's hot shooting from a month ago even though there was a half time during the hot streak. So if the hot streak continues half time is not a nullifier, but if the hot streak doesn't continue half time is a nullifier.

My definition of hot/cold hands is very simple. Making or missing 3 out of 4 shots. As soon as I stated the definition one of my opponents Note gives up saying I don't know what I'm talking about. Even if I'm wrong It's still obvious I know what I'm talking about. If he thinks I don't know what I'm talking about he shouldn't give up he should back up his belief with something useful.

KG, what in gods name are you on about? I never introduced nullifiers or said anything like not shooting for a couple of minutes nullifies it. What I have been trying to tell you is that hot hand and cold hand are not absolutes. They don’t always last a whole game, they don’t always happen in a game, they don’t always reach their full potential if they are not fed. I even used a specific example of AJ green needing to take more than 4 shots to make more than 4 shots. If the coach had benched him during the normal rotation, or if his teammates looked for their own shot instead of feeding him, he doesn’t go off. I showed you clips of a head coach and NBA PG both talking about feeding the hot hand. The latter of which specifically tells you that NBA PGs keep mental notes on who is hitting jump shots/3s and if they see one or two go down they try and create another for that player. I responded to Shrink’s 1985 study by showing a video that debunked it. A coin flip can be done mechanically with no variation. If you have Karl and Rudy stand in opposite corners and take 100 3s you will see a variation. I pointed out that plenty of humans cannot even make an NBA 3, and of those who can there are natural skill variances.

You want to talk about predictive value. If you see a skilled shooter struggling, maybe don’t have them shoot for a while. They can distribute more and try again the next quarter or half. If you see a Josh Okogie type player swish a 3, give him another crack at it. If it goes in, let him shoot again, if not look for another option. When a Luka type player makes 6 of 7 in a quarter, have him shoot more than 1 or 2 shots in the second. When Karl drops 44 in the first half, maybe run offense for him to get open instead of giving him the ball getting out of the way, and expecting him to do everything. When a player makes an uncontested layup or an easy and 1 that doesn’t effect hot or cold. Like Dom said earlier, the value of the hot hand is in how you use it to create open shots for your teammates, and how they run offense to get you open.

You absolutely talked about things that nullify hot hands. Leaving the game or not shooting for a while were things you mentioned. Give me a concrete definition of hot hand and maybe I will agree to it. Your Debunking video didn't debunk a thing. It was terrible. It also stated as I pointed out that you couldn't predict or rely on hot hands as NBA sample sizes are too small to be useful whatsoever.

Players do get hot and cold, but since you can never have a clue how long they will stay hot or cold what good does that information do you. I've got a simple definition for hot or cold hands. Once a player has established a hot or cold hand I'm going to track what happens afterwards. Show me how Hot/cold hands can be a consistent reliable predictor of upcoming shot success/failure. You do that I will become a believer in hot/cold hands. So far out of 5 identified hot/cold hands not one time did they continue hot or cold. For me to become a believer I will need to see the status maintained 60% of the time or better. I predict right now it won't even maintain 25% of the time which is enough to prove to me that using hot/cold hands to help win games will likely lose games.

[KGdaBom]

I started out on this as some good natured ribbing of W4L with his huge belief in what I considered a very ridiculous notion. It has now gotten serious for me. I'm going to show this Hot Hand thinking to be a useless concept or find out I'm wrong if I can't.

My chief opponent W4L is placing all kinds of restrictions on hot hands such as dunks and layups don't count, taking a break from the game nullifies it. If the player doesn't shoot for a couple minutes nullifies it. His list of nullifiers goes on and on. However, he counts all of Keegan Murray's hot shooting from a month ago even though there was a half time during the hot streak. So if the hot streak continues half time is not a nullifier, but if the hot streak doesn't continue half time is a nullifier.

My definition of hot/cold hands is very simple. Making or missing 3 out of 4 shots. As soon as I stated the definition one of my opponents Note gives up saying I don't know what I'm talking about. Even if I'm wrong It's still obvious I know what I'm talking about. If he thinks I don't know what I'm talking about he shouldn't give up he should back up his belief with something useful.

KG, what in gods name are you on about? I never introduced nullifiers or said anything like not shooting for a couple of minutes nullifies it. What I have been trying to tell you is that hot hand and cold hand are not absolutes. They don’t always last a whole game, they don’t always happen in a game, they don’t always reach their full potential if they are not fed. I even used a specific example of AJ green needing to take more than 4 shots to make more than 4 shots. If the coach had benched him during the normal rotation, or if his teammates looked for their own shot instead of feeding him, he doesn’t go off. I showed you clips of a head coach and NBA PG both talking about feeding the hot hand. The latter of which specifically tells you that NBA PGs keep mental notes on who is hitting jump shots/3s and if they see one or two go down they try and create another for that player. I responded to Shrink’s 1985 study by showing a video that debunked it. A coin flip can be done mechanically with no variation. If you have Karl and Rudy stand in opposite corners and take 100 3s you will see a variation. I pointed out that plenty of humans cannot even make an NBA 3, and of those who can there are natural skill variances.

You want to talk about predictive value. If you see a skilled shooter struggling, maybe don’t have them shoot for a while. They can distribute more and try again the next quarter or half. If you see a Josh Okogie type player swish a 3, give him another crack at it. If it goes in, let him shoot again, if not look for another option. When a Luka type player makes 6 of 7 in a quarter, have him shoot more than 1 or 2 shots in the second. When Karl drops 44 in the first half, maybe run offense for him to get open instead of giving him the ball getting out of the way, and expecting him to do everything. When a player makes an uncontested layup or an easy and 1 that doesn’t effect hot or cold. Like Dom said earlier, the value of the hot hand is in how you use it to create open shots for your teammates, and how they run offense to get you open.

Don't bother.

You don't provide anything beneficial so you have earned one of my few very selective iggy awards.