Bazz should have intentionally missed ft

[itgoeslike]

There were bigger lapses that put BC in a position to win, which I am sure KO will look to improve. With regard to missing, sometimes the shot kicks out long and a quick guard grabs the rebound and drives. Or worse, a stupid foul is committed and BC is shooting free throws for the victory. With 2.3 on the clock and up by one, either decision has pros and cons. If the clock was at 1.5 seconds or less I would miss the shot. I'm just happy we got the victory and look forward to beating Indiana.

 

[champs99and04]

I was screaming at the TV for Bazz to miss the free throw - it's the difference between the clock beginning to run 90 feet from the basket and the clock starting to run 40 feet from the basket. If they have a timeout left, it's a different story.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

If we were even an AVERAGE rebounding team, I might agree that he should have missed it. But with our rebounding woes, do we really believe anything would happen other than a clean BC rebound if he missed it?

Who cares if they get a clean rebound? It will still be virtually impossible to get the ball past half court in 2.3 seconds.

When you make the free throw, you are giving BC a chance to pass the ball as far as they can throw it without any time going off the clock. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills - it really doesn't get any more clear-cut than this.

And why would anybody bring up the Celtics game when they had a timeout? If BC had a timeout, it's a completely different scenario.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

sometimes the shot kicks out long and a quick guard grabs the rebound and drives.

Where is he driving to? Halfcourt? Still not as close as they got it by passing the ball twice down the court.

 

[HuskyHoopFan]

Sat next to former coach and Pacers scout Matt Daugherty and he was even saying you gotta miss that free throw. Think they were specifically checking out DD.

 

[Cassius Klaiber]

My only problem with bazz missing the FT intentionally is the mechanics of missing. The conventional "missing strategy" seems to be go for the back rim (though I guess that's usually when you need the ball back, not to waste clock) with a hard rebound toward the shooter. That's what scared me, if Hanlon grabbed the ball on the run as it headed toward shabazz, he would've had momentum and the time to get past half court.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

My only problem with bazz missing the FT intentionally is the mechanics of missing. The conventional "missing strategy" seems to be go for the back rim (though I guess that's usually when you need the ball back, not to waste clock) with a hard rebound toward the shooter. That's what scared me, if Hanlon grabbed the ball on the run as it headed toward shabazz, he would've had momentum and the time to get past half court.

I disagree that he'd get that far because I'm not sure he has enough time for two dribbles. But even if you're right, that just means that if Napier were to miss, everything would have to go perfectly for BC to advance the ball over half court. By being able to inbound the ball after the make, they easily made it well past half court using two passes.

There's no scenario where they get as close as they did if they had to rebound a miss.

 

[Leebo]

And why would anybody bring up the Celtics game when they had a timeout? If BC had a timeout, it's a completely different scenario.

It's an example of missing a free throw going wrong, nothing more. Specifically just the action of the miss, not the consequences.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

A 3 pointer beats you either with a miss or make.

With no time outs they are getting the ball at best to a 3 pointer - which beats you anyways.

 

[upstater]

How hard can an intentional miss be anyway? Just put some juice on it and go for the back rim. If the ball falls in, it falls in. Just make sure not to airball it. The goal should be not to miss the rim. It shouldn't be to make sure the ball doesn't go in. That's a bit more difficult than making contact with the rim. I think even Shaq could do this.

 

[Tenspro2002]

It's not cut-and-dried, but I think missing is the right call, especially since they had no timeouts. Having a 2-point lead vs. a 1-point lead is as meaningful in that situation as it is in the last minute of a football game -- not at all.

If you can coach your team up to execute it properly: brick the shot, have the shooter and one other guy apply token pressure in the backcourt -- without fouling! -- and 3 other guys near midcourt. The best look they could conceivably get is a 50-60-foot heave, like Gordon Hayward at the end of the Duke-Butler championship game.

If you make the shot, they could conceivably get a look similar to Bryce Drew (Valpo) in 1998, with a similar amount of time left. BC even tried to execute that exact type of play, except the pass was too short, and Boat had the shooter well-defended.

The real question is this: how often have you seen a team make a shot off of a miss in that situation? (Never.) Versus, how often have you seen a team make a shot off of an inbound pass from the baseline? (Sometimes.)

The only wild card is: if we miss the free throw, might Brimah have been dumb enough to contest the rebound and end up committing a game-losing foul (a la Pitt vs. Butler in 2011)? That's where coaching comes into play.

 

[Leebo]

I hope KO starts concluding practices every day with 100 missed free throws so we'll be ready next time.

 

[Cassius Klaiber]

I disagree that he'd get that far because I'm not sure he has enough time for two dribbles. But even if you're right, that just means that if Napier were to miss, everything would have to go perfectly for BC to advance the ball over half court. By being able to inbound the ball after the make, they easily made it well past half court using two passes.

There's no scenario where they get as close as they did if they had to rebound a miss.

I think he could've gotten more than two dribbles in. I know he received the pass a little beyond the FT line, but for Hanlon's 3, from the time ball is in hand to release at the 3-pt line it's about 3 seconds. I agree, it would've had to be perfect for BC, but if Hanlon either pulls up from 5 feet farther than he did on their last play, or finds a guy already inside the arc as soon as he receives it, things get dicey. Just glad this is all hypothetical... If I thought he would miss without a rebound headed for mid court, I'd be 100% on board.

 

[itgoeslike]

Where is he driving to? Halfcourt? Still not as close as they got it by passing the ball twice down the court.

If a speedy guard grabs the rebound at the top of key he probably gets as close, and he's not catching and shooting. We don't have to look too far for an example. In the New Mexico game which aired before the UCONN game the guard caught the ball with about 3.3 seconds left, drove down the court and released it with 1.4 ticks left on the clock to send the game into overtime. What matters most is how the players handle themselves, and in this case Boat came through. The best strategy is to find ways to preserve a lead down the stretch.

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400499267

 

[Palatine]

The clock starts when the ball is touched. So if Bazz misses, it starts as soon as someone grabs a rebound. That player would then have to secure the ball to throw it down the court. So the entire time the ball is in the air the clock would be running.

If the player wanted to dribble down the court, he would still have to secure the rebound and then dribble. Unlikely he could ever get inside the three point line.

On a make, the ball thrown down the court would happen with the clock stopped.

So missing the FT gives the opponent less time and opportunity to get off a good shot.

 

[jleves]

in that situation you wouldn't want your guys in there battling for rebounds, a foul and BC goes to the line in the double bonus.

Pitt lost a game a few years ago doing exactly this. Up one or two - they fouled on the board with a couple seconds (or less) left and lost the game. This board was all over Pitt and their coach for having anyone in there for a rebound. Correct play is to get everyone out of there and try to miss. Two guys in the half court to lightly harass the ball and three guys in the back court - cover their best shooters. I suppose you can put a guy in the the rebounding area as a decoy just to make sure they don't only put two guys there for the board - but he does nothing but stand there. Don't go for the ball.

 

[Kembacity]

You're insane. He misses w 2.3 left, they call time out and set up a play. If they hit a shot they win. Crazy.

I agree, I thought that when Ollie threw in Brimah he was telling Shabazz to try to miss toward Brimah so he could just get a few finges on the ball and launch it up in the air. With the way the Celtics beat the Heat earlier in the year only because Wade tried to intentionally miss but ended up turning the ball over, I dont blame shabazz for not making a more blatant attempt to miss. For all we know though he could have been aiming for a slight miss and simply ended up making it.

All that matters is we got the W last night

 

[Gurleyman]

He definitely should have missed with them out of timeouts. If you don't make contact with the rim (i.e. Wade), you make the situation marginally worse. Then you can lose on a long inbounds and a two (George, Laettner, Russia '72). But that's the worst case scenario. Contact with the rim means Gordon Hayward vs. Duke is the best you can do - and that shot beats you make or miss.

Bazz actually made a worse mistake on the ensuing inbounds play. Left his man all alone to go chase the ball at midcourt and put himself in absolute no man's land, doing nothing. The Bryce Drew play to the opposite side would have left Hanlan with a completely wide open shot to win. They threw the ball to the other side, though (the play by play says Hanlan took that three, but it was clearly someone else). The highlights are here:

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400496868

 

[HuskyBballFan]

If a speedy guard grabs the rebound at the top of key he probably gets as close, and he's not catching and shooting. We don't have to look too far for an example. In the New Mexico game which aired before the UCONN game the guard caught the ball with about 3.3 seconds left, drove down the court and released it with 1.4 ticks left on the clock to send the game into overtime. What matters most is how the players handle themselves, and in this case Boat came through. The best strategy is to find ways to preserve a lead down the stretch.

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400499267

Debating the minutiae masks the overall point, which I believe trumps everything else. Had Napier missed, BC's best possible scenario (other than a Uconn foul) is a running 35-40 footer. And that's only if everything breaks right - i.e. the ball bounces long instead of short (or sideways) and ends up in Hanlan's hands rather than a big guy's.

By making the free throw, BC now has every possible shot at their disposal if they make a good inbounds pass - they could get a layup to send it to overtime or they could get an open 3 from just behind the arc for the win. Those shots are literally not possible if you miss the free throw (hitting the rim of course).

 

[Scoe]

Bazz did the right thing making what he should have done is make both of them thats what he should have done then this isn't a conversation .

 

[Husky25]

I hope KO starts concluding practices every day with 100 missed free throws so we'll be ready next time.

Yup, I read that that right...Still can't believe it was written.

The right call may have been to miss the free throw. The problem is that Napier is 78.2% FT shooter for his career and is at 82.8% so far this year. It is actually hard for a good free throw shooter to miss a free throw.

What if the ball doesn't hit the rim, a la Dwayne Wade vs. the Celtics last week? BC didn't have a timeout so the ball is inbounded from the foul line, extended, not mid court, but that is still only 71 feet away instead of 90 (The is four feet from the baseline to the backboard). Second, say Napier missed the rim, that then leaves UConn with a 1 point lead instead of 2 and gives BC options. They can take a higher percentage jumper or lay up to win instead of tie. Up by 2 BC's chance to win is lower, given no set play out of bounds. Bottom line is that he should have made the first one and the point would be moot.

 

[Leebo]

Did you read any of my other posts in this thread, Husky25? >_>

 

[itgoeslike]

Debating the minutiae masks the overall point, which I believe trumps everything else. Had Napier missed, BC's best possible scenario (other than a Uconn foul) is a running 35-40 footer. And that's only if everything breaks right - i.e. the ball bounces long instead of short (or sideways) and ends up in Hanlan's hands rather than a big guy's.

By making the free throw, BC now has every possible shot at their disposal if they make a good inbounds pass - they could get a layup to send it to overtime or they could get an open 3 from just behind the arc for the win. Those shots are literally not possible if you miss the free throw (hitting the rim of course).

The point is that it is splitting hairs. Being 1 pt. down and 2.3 ticks left falls into a somewhat gray area, hence the debate. Reminds me of certain hands in poker. If we missed the shot on purpose and one of our freshman committed a foul on the floor and we lose on free throws the title of the thread would be different. In some respects, by making the second shot, we mitigated that risk.

 

[Husky25]

Did you read any of my other posts in this thread, Husky25? >_>

No...actually I did see the one about ending practice with 100 misses, but I didn't see who wrote it.

Glad we're on the same page though.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

The point is that it is splitting hairs. Being 1 pt. down and 2.3 ticks left falls into a somewhat gray area, hence the debate. Reminds me of certain hands in poker. If we missed the shot on purpose and one of our freshman committed a foul on the floor and we lose on free throws the title of the thread would be different. In some respects, by making the second shot, we mitigated that risk.

Poker is actually a perfect analogy for this scenario - the whole idea of poker is to make what you believe to be the correct mathematical decision. If you make the right decision, sometimes you'll still get unlucky and lose, but over the long haul you will end up ahead.

The best mathematical decision is to miss the free throw. Sure, a small percentage of the time Napier won't hit the rim or somebody will commit a stupid foul going for a rebound - just like a small percentage of the time BC will fumble the rebound or take an extra dribble and not even get a shot off in time. But by a long shot, the most common outcome of missing the free throw will be a 60-foot heave at the buzzer. When you make the free throw, there's a very good chance that the other team gets a much better look than that. They got one last night, we're just lucky to have the only 5'10'' guy who could jump high enough to block it.