This past Saturday I was watching the pregame show for the NCAA basketball Division 1 semi finals. The commentators were talking about how much more difficult it is to shoot in a dome than in a regular arena and this conclusion was made by looking at the last few years of final fours when the games have been in domes and compared the shooting percentages to the teams regular shooting percentages. Based on the fact the shooting percentages in the final fours are significantly lower than the rest of the season they all seemed to make the conclusion that shooting in a dome adversely affected shooting percentages. While this conclusion might be true, the dome was not the only variable they should have considered. For example, in the Louisville vs Kentucky game, Louisville shot 34.8 percent from the field. For the entire season they shot 42.2 percent from the field. Based on this one might conclude the dome had a dramatic affect on their shooting percentage. If you watched the game you might conclude differently. The fact that Kentucky has an amazing defensive team led by the best shot blocking player in the country MIGHT have also affected this percentage. Interestingly, Kentucky didn’t not seem to be affected by the “dome affect” as it shot above it’s season average.
One of my clients sells apparel online and for the past few days has sold over 600% more than they did last year at this time. Is this a trend they can count on repeating next year? No. They are taking advantage of a current event that will not happen again.
Make sure when you make conclusions, that you take into account all variables when looking at facts.
Have a great day!