Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter August 10, 2022

Does the ball lie? Testing the Rasheed Wallace hypothesis

  • Brian J. Meehan ORCID logo EMAIL logo , Javier E. Portillo and Corey Jenkins

Abstract

Former NBA all-star forward Rasheed Wallace popularized the catchphrase “Ball Don’t Lie.” Rasheed would often shout this after an opponent missed a free throw. It was used by Rasheed to illustrate the mental impact on a free throw shooter from knowing the foul was questionable and its impact on likelihood of converting the ensuing free throw. The tendency to miss free throws associated with questionable foul calls—or the propensity for the ball to miss—would be followed by Rasheed’s “Ball Don’t Lie!” exclamation. This paper aims to test whether the ball was less likely to go through the hoop during free throws following questionable foul calls. We use a proxy to identify the questionableness of a foul call, one that Rasheed Wallace was very familiar with—whenever the original shooting foul was immediately followed by a technical foul. This proxy is meant to capture player and coach reactions to a shooting foul call. If the call was bad, or questionable, we expect more outrage from the team the foul was called on, which tends to draw technical fouls. Our findings do not support Rasheed’s prediction; the propensity to make a shooting foul free throw does not appear to change after a technical. In fact, using a subset of our data period under which the NBA changed technical foul rules to target complaining about foul calls, we find a small increase in free throw percentage after a technical foul call.


Corresponding author: Brian J. Meehan, Campbell School of Business, Berry College, Mount Berry, 30149-9707, GA, USA, E-mail:

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this article.

Appendix
Table A1:

Impact of technical foul call immediately preceding shooting free throws. (Same shooter for technical and shooting free throws).

Variables Full sample (2004–2016) Post technical foul rule change (2010–2016)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
LPM LPM LPM Probit Logit LPM LPM LPM Probit Logit
First free throw 0.0285 0.0261 0.0250 0.0270 0.0292 0.0649b 0.0583c 0.0585c 0.0680b 0.0735b
after tech
(0.0241) (0.0255) (0.0256) (0.0253) (0.0260) (0.0282) (0.0313) (0.0316) (0.0333) (0.0352)
First free throw −0.0287c −0.0294 −0.0284 −0.0266 −0.0296c −0.0249 −0.0213 −0.0203 −0.0225 −0.0245
(0.0171) (0.0184) (0.0185) (0.0177) (0.0178) (0.0257) (0.0290) (0.0295) (0.0252) (0.0254)
Third free throw −0.0564 −0.0455 −0.0510 −0.0591 −0.0546 −0.0767 −0.0544 −0.0569 −0.0730 −0.0691
(0.0796) (0.0844) (0.0857) (0.0704) (0.0687) (0.101) (0.0991) (0.101) (0.0836) (0.0790)
Second quarter −0.00297 0.0142 0.0133 0.000949 −0.00149 −0.0265 −0.0158 −0.0124 −0.0212 −0.0259
(0.0224) (0.0297) (0.0292) (0.0224) (0.0225) (0.0309) (0.0431) (0.0437) (0.0305) (0.0306)
Third quarter −0.00502 0.00291 0.00648 −0.00173 −0.00354 0.000951 −0.0159 −0.00869 0.00216 0.000610
(0.0229) (0.0301) (0.0303) (0.0227) (0.0229) (0.0308) (0.0472) (0.0480) (0.0308) (0.0322)
Fourth quarter −0.0109 −0.0217 −0.0173 −0.00983 −0.0104 0.00146 −0.00416 −0.00410 −0.00121 0.00152
and OT
(0.0307) (0.0377) (0.0370) (0.0303) (0.0307) (0.0468) (0.0627) (0.0607) (0.0443) (0.0456)
Point differential 0.000839 0.000269 0.000111 0.000792 0.000842 0.00255 0.00385c 0.00361c 0.00268 0.00284
(0.00119) (0.00159) (0.00163) (0.00119) (0.00121) (0.00160) (0.00206) (0.00214) (0.00176) (0.00187)
Point differential 0.000978 0.00213 0.00226 0.00155 0.00121 −0.00236 −0.00397 −0.00305 −0.00149 −0.00232
X Fourth/OT
(0.00254) (0.00323) (0.00320) (0.00255) (0.00263) (0.00409) (0.00584) (0.00572) (0.00378) (0.00389)
Home −0.0143 −0.0116 −0.0111 −0.0161 −0.0137 −0.0186 −0.0334 −0.0335 −0.0196 −0.0171
(0.0169) (0.0199) (0.0204) (0.0170) (0.0167) (0.0240) (0.0299) (0.0300) (0.0223) (0.0225)
First free throw after −0.0167 −0.0136 −0.0143 −0.0165 −0.0168 −0.0421 −0.0355 −0.0374 −0.0459 −0.0519
tech X
Home (0.0335) (0.0354) (0.0354) (0.0334) (0.0342) (0.0409) (0.0445) (0.0447) (0.0429) (0.0443)
Ave FT percentage 0.969a 0.921a 0.867a 0.802a 0.694a 0.702a
(0.181) (0.147) (0.143) (0.274) (0.219) (0.198)
Observations 2694 2694 2694 2694 2694 1318 1318 1318 1318 1318
R-squared/Psuedo R2 0.019 0.137 0.141 0.0285 0.0201 0.020 0.178 0.181 0.028 0.023
Year FE No No Yes No No Yes
Player No Yes Yes   No Yes Yes
  1. Robust standard errors in parentheses.

  2. ap<0.01, bp<0.05, cp<0.1.

References

Azar, O. H., and M. Bar-Eli. 2011. “Do Soccer Players Play the Mixed-Strategy Nash Equilibrium?” Applied Economics 43 (25): 3591–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036841003670747.Search in Google Scholar

Bar-Eli, M., O. H. Azar, I. Ritov, Y. Keidar-Levin, and G. Schein. 2007. “Action Bias Among Elite Soccer Goalkeepers: The Case of Penalty Kicks.” Journal of Economic Psychology 28 (5): 606–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2006.12.001.Search in Google Scholar

Boudreaux, C. J., S. D. Sanders, and B. Walia. 2017. “A Natural Experiment to Determine the Crowd Effect upon Home Court Advantage.” Journal of Sports Economics 18 (7): 737–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002515595842.Search in Google Scholar

Cao, Z., J. Price, and D. F. Stone. 2011. “Performance under Pressure in the NBA.” Journal of Sports Economics 12 (3): 231–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002511404785.Search in Google Scholar

Cherry, T. L., P. Frykblom, and J. F. Shogren. 2002. “Hardnose the Dictator.” The American Economic Review 92 (4): 1218–21. https://doi.org/10.1257/00028280260344740.Search in Google Scholar

Chiappori, P. A., S. Levitt, and T. Groseclose. 2002. “Testing Mixed-Strategy Equilibria when Players Are Heterogeneous: The Case of Penalty Kicks in Soccer.” The American Economic Review 92 (4): 1138–51. https://doi.org/10.1257/00028280260344678.Search in Google Scholar

Foster, D. J., D. A. Weigand, and D. Baines. 2006. “The Effect of Removing Superstitious Behavior and Introducing a Pre-performance Routine on Basketball Free-Throw Performance.” Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 18 (2): 167–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200500471343.Search in Google Scholar

Gómez, M. A., L. Gasperi, and C. Lupo. 2016. “Performance Analysis of Game Dynamics during the 4th Game Quarter of NBA Close Games.” International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport 16 (1): 249–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2016.11868884.Search in Google Scholar

Gómez, M. Á., S. Avugos, M. Á. Oñoro, A. Lorenzo, and M. Bar-Eli. 2018. “Shaq Is Not Alone: Free-Throws in the Final Moments of a Basketball Game.” Journal of Human Kinetics 62 (1): 135–44. https://doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2017-0165.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Gómez, M. Á., S. Avugos, E. Ortega, and M. Bar-Eli. 2019. “Adverse Effects of Technical Fouls in Elite Basketball Performance.” Biology of Sport 36 (2): 155–61. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2019.83505.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Haynes, G., and T. Gilovich. 2010. “The Ball Don’t Lie”: How Inequity Aversion Can Undermine Performance.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46 (6): 1148–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.008.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffman, E., K. McCabe, K. Shachat, and V. Smith. 1994. “Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games.” Games and Economic Behavior 7 (3): 346–80. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1994.1056.Search in Google Scholar

Kozar, B., R. E. Vaughn, K. E. Whitfield, R. H. Lord, and B. Dye. 1994. “Importance of Free-Throws at Various Stages of Basketball Games.” Perceptual & Motor Skills 78: 243–8. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1994.78.1.243.Search in Google Scholar

Mandić, R., S. Jakovljević, F. Erčulj, and E. Štrumbelj. 2019. “Trends in NBA and Euroleague Basketball: Analysis and Comparison of Statistical Data from 2000 to 2017.” PLoS One 14 (10): e0223524, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223524.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Morris, B. 2015. Stephen Curry is the Revolution. FiveThirtyEight. Dec. 3rd. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stephen-curry-is-the-revolution/ (accessed July 28, 2020).Search in Google Scholar

Navarro, M., J. van der Kamp, R. Ranvaud, and G. J. Savelsbergh. 2013. “The Mere Presence of a Goalkeeper Affects the Accuracy of Penalty Kicks.” Journal of Sports Sciences 31 (9): 921–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.762602.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Oxoby, R. J., and J. Spraggon. 2008. “Mine and Yours: Property Rights in Dictator Games.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 65 (3–4): 703–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2005.12.006.Search in Google Scholar

Phatak, A., U. Mujumdar, R. Rein, F. Wunderlich, M. Garnica, and D. Memmert. 2020. “Better with Each Throw—A Study on Calibration and Warm-Up Decrement of Real-Time Consecutive Basketball Free Throws in Elite NBA Athletes.” German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research 50 (2): 273–9, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-020-00646-x.Search in Google Scholar

Ribeiro, H. V., S. Mukherjee, and X. H. T. Zeng. 2016. “The Advantage of Playing Home in NBA: Microscopic, Team-specific and Evolving Features.” PLoS One 11 (3): e0152440. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152440.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Sampaio, J., and M. Janeira. 2003. “Importance of Free-Throw Performance in Game Outcome during the Final Series of Basketball Play-Offs.” International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences 15 (2): 9–16.Search in Google Scholar

Shea, S. n. d. The 3-point Revolution: Shot Tracker. https://shottracker.com/articles/the-3-point-revolution (accessed July 28, 2020).Search in Google Scholar

Toma, M. 2017. “Missed Shots at the Free Throw Line: Analyzing the Determinants of Choking under Pressure.” Journal of Sports Economics 18 (6): 539–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002515593779.Search in Google Scholar

Vandebroek, T. P., B. T. McCann, and G. Vroom. 2018. “Modeling the Effects of Psychological Pressure on First-Mover Advantage in Competitive Interactions: The Case of Penalty Shoot-Outs.” Journal of Sports Economics 19 (5): 725–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002516672060.Search in Google Scholar

Zitek, E. M., and A. H. Jordan. 2011. “Technical Fouls Predict Performance Outcomes in the NBA.” Athletic Insight 3: 29–39.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-02-11
Accepted: 2022-07-12
Published Online: 2022-08-10
Published in Print: 2022-06-25

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 23.3.2023 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jqas-2020-0020/html
Scroll Up Arrow