Are we sure?

[intlzncster]

We got a good shot off. If you call timeout there, you would have settled for getting that shot again, and that's even if they don't foul you and prevent you from having a chance.

You're well aware that this is an outcome biased argument. If we didn't get a good shot off, the entire board would be apoplectic.

The argument is about which option is ideal to maximize outcome over the long haul.

There is literally zero basis to be complaining about that decision except that Christian happened to miss.

Of course there is. Multiple actually. One of which being that you could have devised a scenario to get two shots off, which when you're down, gives more potential chances to tie.

 

[businesslawyer]

You're well aware that this is an outcome biased argument. If we didn't get a good shot off, the entire board would be apoplectic.

The argument is about which option is ideal to maximize outcome over the long haul.



Of course there is. Multiple actually. One of which being that you could have devised a scenario to get two shots off, which when you're down, gives more potential chances to tie.

Your first point is fair. I should have said that the decision to try to get a shot off without calling a TO and letting the defense set up was perfectly rational, as was evidenced by the fact that if we thought we could draw up a play for that good a shot, we would have taken it.

I have no clue what your second point is. The odds that, in the 10 seconds we had, we should have not been focused on getting off a good shot but leaving time for getting off a shot, grabbing an offensive rebound and then having left us time to throw out to a shooter who was spotted up and free and gotten a second off is absurd. That is such a low percentage event that you don't decrease the odds of your first and primary 3 going in.

 

[intlzncster]

I have no clue what your second point is. The odds that, in the 10 seconds we had, we should have not been focused on getting off a good shot but leaving time for getting off a shot, grabbing an offensive rebound and then having left us time to throw out to a shooter who was spotted up and free and gotten a second off is absurd. That is such a low percentage event that you don't decrease the odds of your first and primary 3 going in.

It's not that hard to design a play for a quick three (double screen), say within 5 seconds. Then you make guys aware they are going for a tip out or secure a rebound with a TO. It makes sense to at least try this, given our shooting woes (sans Polley).

 

[superjohn]

It's not that hard to design a play for a quick three (double screen), say within 5 seconds. Then you make guys aware they are going for a tip out or secure a rebound with a TO. It makes sense to at least try this, given our shooting woes (sans Polley).

What?

 

[intlzncster]

What?

How hard is that to understand? Run a double screen (or whatever you want) on the inbounds for a relatively quick three. If he makes it, play D. If he misses, try for the tap out on the rebound. Call TO if we inadvertently rebound.

 

[Caronimo]

You have 8 seconds and the ball and one time out. You have option A - call time out draw a play up for the best shooter or option b let your team do whatever they want and hope your best shooter gets a look.

There is one right answer, draw up a play.

If we had a pure shooter I would comment on this. Going to pass tho.

 

[superjohn]

How hard is that to understand? Run a double screen (or whatever you want) on the inbounds for a relatively quick three. If he makes it, play D. If he misses, try for the tap out on the rebound. Call TO if we inadvertently rebound.

Businesslawyer had no idea what you're talking about either.

 

[UCSouth]

Sure thing super Welch. Most college coaches are terrible so I’m not sure what that point means. The data says calling a timeout is the correct decision, but of course you know everything super welch. I agree with not calling a to in the nba because they have much higher bb IQ you’d expect them to make a good choice.

How can you blast superjohn for his opinion, isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black. He has a valid point that doesn't align with yours.....good to know who is the all knowing recliner coach.