The New York Times has posted an article describing the Scientific Free-Throw Distraction that the Mavericks have attempted to use in their home games. Here’s an excerpt: “According to Daniel Engber, a basketball fan with a master’s degree in neuroscience, the standard ‘free-throw defenses’ are too haphazard to be effective. . . . The key to a successful free-throw defense, Engber argues, is to make a player perceive a ‘field of background motion’ that tricks his brain into thinking that he himself is moving, thereby throwing off his shooting. In other words, fans should wave their ThunderStix in tandem.” I think what the Mavericks have tried is really creative in the fact that at least they’re trying everything they can think of to give them an advantage at home.

Mark Cuban has apparently received the suggestion to have the arena dead silent when the other team is shooting. Here’s what he wrote in response to both the NY Times Article and the silence suggestion:

As far as the Free Throw Distraction. The article wasnt 100pct correct. Daniel provided the idea. I ran with it. It worked the first couple games. But dont tell anyone, but we didnt abandon it….The problem however is in getting everyone behind the basket to work in unison. Too many years of waiving bricks haphazardly I guess. But we are working on it. And for the record, for those who email me about how hard it would make it on the Free Throw shooter if the arena were dead silent. If we cant get them to waive a sign in unison, how are we going to get 20k fans to shut up ?

I agree that it would be next to impossible to make it work, but would it hurt anything to give it a try? Humble Billy could announce it on the PA, it could be flashing on the big screen and the wrap-around sign (which is really cool, by the way), and the Hoop Troop could hold up signs that read “SILENT.” Heck, you could even have AMC Theaters sponsor the whole thing. “Silence is Golden.” How’s that for creativity Mark?

UPDATE ON MAVS FREE THROW SHOOTING:
Road 219 / 288 76.0%
Home 280 / 379 73.9%

If you’ve followed the Dallas Mavericks for any decent amount of time, you know the TNT commentater Charles Barkley does not like them. No matter what they do, Charlie is quick to criticize and degrade them. Early this year, when the Mavs beat the Suns on opening night, Barkley criticized the Mavericks poor defense–even though they won. His biggest point was that the Mavs were switching on the pick-and-roll, which he said would never allow them to be a good defensive team.

Mark Cuban, in a recent blog entry, pointed me toward a great article that objectively looked at the effectiveness of the switch on the pick-and-roll. Kevin Pelton from 82games.com analyzed the Pistons’ defensive effectiveness against the Suns’ pick-amd-roll. Here’s a snippet from his article:

Commentator Doug Collins . . . noted at the 6:07 mark coming out of a timeout, “Remember what happened against Dallas – they started switching all those screens and the Suns got very stagnant.” Magic Johnson on “Inside the NBA” also noted that switching was key to the Pistons’ victory. Did anyone criticize Detroit coach Flip Saunders’ strategy or the validity of switching? Nope.

Here is where I think Cuban has a legitimate criticism of Barkley and Smith. Not that the numbers and charting do not help, but they’re not necessary to see whether a team’s pick-and-roll defense is working. But Barkley and Smith weren’t looking at Dallas’ defense with an objective eye; they were looking for evidence supporting their long-held contention that the Mavericks do not play enough defense to win a title. When a team known for its defense did the same thing, it didn’t fit Barkley’s and Smith’s storyline.

I’m glad someone has finally been able to prove that Charles Barkley is biased against Dallas. I don’t think this will change him, but I do know it proves what I’ve known for a long time.

I go to a lot of Mavericks games. I think Mark Cuban has put together a great entertainment package. The game itself is almost always competitive. The atmosphere is a lot of fun. And the little extras make going to the games a great evening. While I’m at the games, I can’t help but think about what might give the Mavs a little bit of an edge. I’m always trying to figure out why Coach Johnson made a substitution or called a certain play. I’m looking for mismatches that I think they should try to exploit.

One of the ideas I’ve thought of while at the games is what should the fans do when the other team is shooting free throws. At the AAC, the Mavs pass out “Acme Bricks” for the fans to wave while the other team is shooting free throws. The announcer tells the crowd to make a lot of noise. And the general idea is to be as loud and annoying as possible. The thought is that this would distract the other team and not let them focus on making a free throw.

I don’t think it works. In fact, I think it’s harder to shoot a free throw when it’s quiet. I mean, think about it. You’re at the line, there are 20,000 people staring at you, and it’s dead silent. That would freak me out!!! I think I saw an example of this when Dirk was shooting Thursday night against the Spurs. The arena was almost dead silent and it seemed it distracted him.

Anyway, I was curious enough as about this that I did a little research. I wanted to know if the Mavs have a better free throw percentage at home or on the road. What I found out was the Mavs shoot 75.1% on the road and 74.5% at home. Not a huge difference, but you would think they’d be better at home.

I don’t think it will ever happen, but it would be so cool to have the AAC be the one place where everyone gets dead silent right when the other team is trying to make free throws. It couldn’t hurt, could it?