This principle helps explain why people behave differently from what pure logic would predict.
More quotesThe first number says shooting accuracy fell. The second says points per possession rose. Both describe the same season.
That apparent contradiction exists because three-point shots are harder and worth more. A team can miss more often and still score more efficiently. One column looks worse; the game was won.
The shot chart changes first. Attempts move away from the comfortable middle distance and towards the arc. Makes fall as a proportion of attempts. Points from each possession climb. Calling the first movement decline and the second progress describes the arithmetic accurately, then quietly chooses which arithmetic matters.
The discomfort comes from hierarchy. Shooting percentage is concrete, familiar and easy to compare. “Improve it” sounds like serious coaching. Yet once players deliberately attempt more valuable shots, protecting that local number can damage the result everyone claims to care about.
The season ends with 47% in one column and 1.18 points per possession in another. The first number is familiar enough to attract blame. The second is closer to the result the team wanted.
Which one appeared in the original target? Which one shaped selection? Did opponents change their defence as the season continued? The excerpt supplies the trade and leaves those questions on the page.