Rotation Intelligence
Built from our own 2026 play-by-play rebuild for Baylor Bears (score-reconciled games only): substitution events reconstructed into continuous stints, then measured for what changes when a player returns from the bench. The validated finding is an involvement change, not a fatigue finding — no cause has been established, and Coach Ready says so on every screen.
Re-Entry Ramp: production candidate · Stint Involvement Curve: supporting · Foul-State Behavior: validating · Personal fatigue threshold: tested and not supported
Re-entry profiles
Cameron Carr
G · Baylor Bears · 34 games · 33.8 min/g
Typical rotation
Reconstructed from 142 continuous stints across 34 games of our own play-by-play.
First two minutes after re-entry
Within-player comparison: the first 2:00 of every return against his own settled floor time (everything past 2:00 into a stint). Rates are per 30 minutes of floor time.
| Involvement | First 2:00 | Settled baseline | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shot involvement | 10.47 | 11.65 | -10% |
| Rebound involvement | 4.42 | 5.44 | -19% |
| Assist involvement | 2.13 | 2.52 | -15% |
| Turnovers | 1.96 | 2.05 | -4% |
| Fouls | 0.98 | 1.41 | -30% |
| Shooting efficiency (TS%) | 76.4 | 61.4 | +15 pts |
Time to baseline involvement
Shot involvement per 30 minutes in 30-second slices after returning. Thirty-second slices are noisy by construction — read the shape, not a single bar.
Settled baseline: 11.65 shots per 30 min
Cameron Carr takes fewer shots per minute in his first two minutes back (-10% shot involvement versus his settled baseline), and shooting efficiency differs by +15 true-shooting points, on a small sample. He is less involved immediately after re-entry — not less accurate.
High confidence · 34 games · 94 qualifying stints · 4402 relevant possessions
- If the intent is for him to initiate immediately on returning, consider pairing his re-entry with a lineup or action that creates an early touch.
- Consider whether short stints are worth their re-entry cost for this player, or whether fewer, longer stints fit him better.
- Review the first 2:30 back on film before treating this as a rotation problem — the cause may be lineup or role, not the player.
- These are considerations for staff review, not instructions, and no causal claim is being made.
This is an involvement observation. It is not fatigue, conditioning, effort or bad play, and no cause has been established. Plausible explanations Coach Ready cannot separate with this data:
- He returns into a different lineup than the one he left, changing who initiates.
- The offense's first actions back may not involve him by design.
- Opponent substitutions and matchups change at the same dead ball.
- Game state at the substitution (margin, clock, foul count) shifts shot distribution.
- Natural possession flow: a two-minute window is a small number of possessions.
- Staff rotation structure — when and with whom he is brought back.
Splits
Only splits with at least 12 qualifying returns and 15 minutes of window floor time are reported. Everything else is shown as insufficient rather than estimated.
| Split | Returns | Shots /30 | Reb /30 | Ast /30 | TS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First half returns Returns in the first period only. | 45 | +2.15 | -0.39 | -0.5 | +23 |
| Second half returns Returns in the second period or overtime. | 49 | -4.33 | -1.62 | -0.29 | +0.6 |
| Returns in close games Returns while the margin is within five points. | 26 | -1.84 | -1.4 | -0.21 | +15.5 |
| Returns with a cushion Returns while leading by more than five. | 33 | +0.15 | +0.22 | -0.16 | +9.7 |
Stint involvement curve
Supporting signal. How involvement changes the longer a stint runs.
| Time into stint | Shots /30 | Reb /30 | Ast /30 | Fouls /30 | TS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–3 min | 11.27 | 4.79 | 1.87 | 0.97 | 72.5 |
| 3–5 min | 13.4 | 6.48 | 3.31 | 1.3 | 62.6 |
| 5–7 min | 8.34 | 4.17 | 1.19 | 1.39 | 61.1 |
| 7–10 min | 11.79 | 6.22 | 2.79 | 0.64 | 60.1 |
| 10+ min | 11.29 | 4.56 | 2.72 | 1.95 | 57.2 |
Involvement is approximately stable across stint length (0.02 shots per 30 between 0–3 min and 10+ min) while efficiency differs by -15.3 true-shooting points. No stint-length effect found for this player.
The original fatigue-threshold hypothesis — that efficiency falls past a personal minutes limit — was tested and not supported. Coach Ready shows that result rather than hiding it.
Foul-state behavior
Secondary signal, still in validation. How his style changes after his second personal foul — not whether the change is intentional.
| State | Floor time | Fouls /30 | Shots /30 | Rim share | Three share | TS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before second foul | 396:52 | 2.72 | 10.73 | 24% | 52% | 62.9 |
| After second foul | 240:18 | 1.87 | 11.11 | 29% | 49% | 57.6 |
Re-entry action
Framework, not a recommendation. Coach Ready will not tell you which action is right until it has your playbook and personnel information. Staff input below is the first half of that connection to the Program Brain.
Selections are a working draft in this prototype and are not stored yet. Once the playbook lives in the Program Brain, these become the re-entry actions Coach Ready can check against what actually happened.