Whether or not you have been enthralled by March Madness, culminating in this week's championship games, there is much to be learned from the game of basketball. Across all major sports, the use of analytics has revolutionized the way teams perform in game and in the back office. Applying statistical analysis to improve performance obviously makes number sense, but where it falls short is in overcoming "common sense." When prevailing thought, no matter how flawed, supersedes statistical facts, poor choices are made and performance suffers.

A “Big” Problem

Since James Naismith first hung up peach baskets at a gymnasium in Springfield, Massachusetts, his game has often been dominated by the "big men." So dominant, they are immediately recognizable to even non-sports fans with just one name: Kareem, Wilt, Olajuwon, Shaq, etc. However, for all of their success under the basket, an "Achilles heel" really seemed to flare up for many of these big boys at the free throw line.

Perhaps most famous were the free-throw woes of Shaquille O'Neal. For all his dominance, O'Neal was so poor at shooting free throws that, in close games, opposing teams would opt for fouling the big man, a technique known as "Hack-a-Shaq." The logic being the best way to keep him from scoring was to just let him shoot ... free throws. In his 19-year professional career, O'Neal made 5,935 free throws, which seems impressive until you look at the other side of the equation. He took 11,252 free throw shots, meaning he only made about half.

So, where does "common sense" come in?

Throughout his career, O'Neal had a number of shooting coaches attempt to improve his free throw shooting, with only marginal success. There was one technique that could have potentially greatly improved his accuracy: the "granny shot," a shot taken by tossing the ball with an underhanded style, rather than the traditional over-the-head shot.

In 2017, researchers from Yale and Harvard conducted a study to test the veracity of the underhand shot as compared to overhand. “Our mathematical analysis shows that if the thrower is capable of controlling the release angle and speed well, the underarm throw is slightly better for a basketball free throw,” said Madhusudhan Venkadesan, who led the work at Yale University.

Proving the merits of the granny shot is not just theoretical, however. Retired NBA player Rick Barry, who used the underarm free throw technique, was one of the most effective free-throw shooters of all time, ranking first in NBA history with his 90% free throw record when he retired in 1980. And, another notoriously poor free throw shooter, Wilt Chamberlain, also adopted the technique for one season, in 1961-62. The result? Chamberlain’s highest single season free throw percentage at 61% from the stripe. Now, 61% may not seem great, but for context, he only shot 50% the year prior. Not only did Chamberlain’s free throw percentage improve as a result of the new technique, but he averaged over 50 points per game that season, a career-high and an NBA record that still stands today.

So, with research and real world examples proving its merits, why did Shaq never attempt the granny shot? "I'd rather shoot 0% than to shoot underhand ... I'm too cool for that," said O'Neal in an interview with Business Insider. It’s hard to know if shooting underhand would have made a difference in wins and losses during O’Neal’s career or if he would have been able to achieve the 11% increase that Chamberlain did. But, we can hypothesize:

In 1993-94, O’Neal’s Orlando Magic team was swept by the Indiana Pacers 3-0 in the first round of the playoffs. The Magic lost the first game of the series 89-88 and the second game 103-101. Collectively, O’Neal went 11-24 on his free throws in those games. In the 94-95 season, the Magic lost to the, ahem, Houston Rockets in the finals, giving up game one 120-118 and game three 106-103. Shaq went 12-20 from the foul line in those games. Had his free throw percentage been 11% better, what might have been?

What Might Have Been?

It’s a question we all ask in our professional life at some point, or perhaps multiple points. “Had I worked a little harder, would I have gotten that promotion?” “Had I chosen another field, where would I be today?” “If I got started just a little sooner…” These questions can be haunting, but a better use of your time may be instead to ask, “What might be?” In the Business Insider interview, O’Neal ponders what might have been if he shot “like Steph Curry from the free throw line” (Curry has a 90.8% free throw average for his career), concluding that he would have been the best player ever created. Unfortunately, because he was “too cool” to try the underhand shot, he will never know.

For most of us, our hesitations about attempting to achieve more and pursue a goal have nothing to do with the perception of being cool, but they can be just as sabotaging. We worry about if we will be successful, if it is worth the extra time and money, or if we will get the results we desire. The reality is you just don’t know until you try. And, if you do find that boldness, know that the Glasscock School is here to help. Our staff and instructors are 100% invested in your success. You just have to step up to the line.

Where do you want to be at this time next year?

• Is it time to improve your leadership skills? Shoot your shot.
• Do you need to be a better manager of people and projects? Shoot your shot.
• Do you want to help others achieve their potential? Shoot your shot.
• Is it time to upskill your computer and data science capabilities? Shoot your shot.
• Do you need to build your communications and marketing skills? Shoot your shot.
• Are you interested in working in the legal field? Shoot your shot.
• Is managing the bottom line your bottom line? Shoot your shot.
• Have you been thinking about a graduate degree? Shoot your shot.

Wherever you want to be in your career tomorrow, it starts with what you do today. After all, as they say, “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.”