Kemba Envy

[RickyMoore21]

I think if there was a tournament for "saying what you would do from the comfort of your couch" you would probably have a good shot at the finals, my man.

what do you think is the better chance of scoring there, the shot shabazz took or driving to the basket?

 

[sparky]

I have no problem with Bazz taking the shot. I think he could have penetrated and dished, but WV will was broke so an OT favored us. Loved JC's embrace of Bazz after it. That's why they love him

 

[Gurleyman]

I'd have preferred a stop and pop in the mid-range area somewhere, all things being equal, but he felt his man sag off him and got a pretty clean look. It was on line and hit the front rim. Maybe not the best shot ever taken, but often you see guys drive and fling hopeless prayers at the rim because the refs swallow the whistles and there's no space to get a shot off. Bazz's shot was deep, but it wasn't a prayer. And I was disagreeing with Doris - who I think is a decent analyst for the most part - in real time because I didn't want him to "go" until the clock was right around 5 seconds. Wait as long as possible, and don't bring losing into the equation.

There is a little bit more time to play with in college, since in the NBA you can advance the ball 70 feet with a timeout off a rebound, but there have been plenty of fullcourt plays that have worked with less than five seconds (most famously, Tate George, Laettner, Bryce Drew, Tyus Edney, Russians in '72, Capel forcing OT against UNC when Duke stunk, not to mention the Devendorf 3 that didn't count in the 6-OT game). Just don't even put yourself in that position.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

HA! Williams just asked this same question about how bad of a shot it was, and of all people, Gottlieb pwnd him.

 

[RickyMoore21]

it wasn't a "bad" shot. like, as he shot it nobody was complaining "dont shoot that!" but i would agree with Calhoun that it certainly wasn't the best option

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

it wasn't a "bad" shot. like, as he shot it nobody was complaining "dont shoot that!" but i would agree with Calhoun that it certainly wasn't the best option

yes, not the best, but not a mistake.

 

[Gurleyman]

That's true RM - and your earlier point about the putback is a good one too - the WV bigs never had to leave to help, so the odds of us getting an offensive rebound off that shot were very, very slim (unless it was something like JL flying in from the wing).

Where Kemba and Bazz are different in those situations is that Kemba had such an explosive first step that he could beat one defender with ease. Bazz is more of a shifty/crafty driver than an explosive one, so if he doesn't get the defender to start to lean forward worrying about contesting a jumper, he's less likely to be able to create something of quality off the bounce. I think he measured up his guy, who never leaned forward to take away the 3 and give him a driving lane, and decided to take what he had.

 

[RickyMoore21]

and one could also make the argument, Bazz pretty much single handidly gave himself the opportunity there so in the final moment hes essentially gets to choose what shot he takes. Hes got the hot hand and the ball is in his hands so he gets to call his own shot.

 

[NaughtybyNapier]

and one could also make the argument, Bazz pretty much single handidly gave himself the opportunity there so in the final moment hes essentially gets to choose what shot he takes. Hes got the hot hand and the ball is in his hands so he gets to call his own shot.

Agree. That's not the spot where you experiment with what our offense "should" be. You play to win the game there. I could easily see AD walking or throwing up an awkward turnaround, or Lamb dribbling into the corner and trouble, etc... I'll take a clean look there - not a "great" look, but Bazz knocks that down 1 in 3 times - instead of a turnover/no shot. Can't kill him for that shot.

 

[Mike Honcho]

So which was it, Kemba envy or a lack of balls to take it into the lane? I'm confused now.

It could be that someone is just trying to justify a ****ty original post.

Sorry, but I don't think having Shabazz take deep, contested threes as time expires is a good end-game strategy. Simple as that. The Nova game definitely gave him the confidence to do so. Fine. That situation was different -- we had only 5 seconds to drive the length of the court.

In a full possession, I'd much rather have some penetration set up a decision -- either a pass to Jeremy or a mid-range shot. Make the defense work, draw defenders. You might not get a foul called, but I think there's a higher probability for a better outcome. Having our offense stagnate, as it did in the second half when it revolved around one player creating for himself -- is not a sustainable winning formula.

 

[Mike Honcho]

Id much rather he didnt shoot it and they kept passing right to the horn.

Honestly some of you scare me sometimes.

Not surprised that you are scared easily.

I'd rather see some semblance of execution like during the Syracuse game. Not a great result but it was a better look and there were options.

 

[Gurleyman]

Sorry, but I don't think having Shabazz take deep, contested threes as time expires is a good end-game strategy. Simple as that. The Nova game definitely gave him the confidence to do so. Fine. That situation was different -- we had only 5 seconds to drive the length of the court.

In a full possession, I'd much rather have some penetration set up a decision -- either a pass to Jeremy or a mid-range shot. Make the defense work, draw defenders. You might not get a foul called, but I think there's a higher probability for a better outcome. Having our offense stagnate, as it did in the second half when it revolved around one player creating for himself -- is not a sustainable winning formula.

Don't forget - we were just coming off a possession where we called timeout, inbounded the ball near midcourt and couldn't even execute a simple handoff against some heavy pressure to get the ball in the hands of the guy we wanted to start the offense. You say you want to make the defense work, but the defense might work well enough where they force a trap and get a turnover and the ball ends up in the wrong guy's hands (imagine Drummond getting it at the foul line as a bailout pass against a trap, for example). And we lose in regulation.

With this situation, game tied, the team a little rattled from the last possession, two guys on the floor (AO, AD) who you don't want touching the ball more than a foot from the basket in an end-game situation (if at all), and a somewhat erratic secondary ballhandler who is a freshman, I was fine with not calling a TO, getting the ball in Bazz's hands, letting him take what he could get, and either win it or go to overtime. If WV was up on him tighter, he might have driven, but the defender got back on his heels and gave him that look. It wasn't like when it was en route I was thinking "no chance" - it was tracking the rim nicely.

In a way it hurts that we aren't a team with a lot of end-game offensive options. Lamb is a good one, but Jeremy's man isn't ever going to give help if someone penetrates, so we either have to time a play for him to catch and shoot, or let him iso if we like the match-up. I could also live with Boat shooting an open J off a kickout, but not sure if I want him making the big decision/play at this stage of his career. The risk of running something more sophisticated with limited options is that you can end up never getting the ball in the hands of the guy you want, since the other team is going to try to take away what you want to do and give you some things you don't want.

 

[Prezidint]

Why else would Napier take that shot as time expired? Can't imagine Calhoun was too happy with the execution.

You're a donkey-hole for posting a complaint about the guy who won the game for us before the sneaker squeaks have even subsided. Jerk.

 

[August_West]

First of all, bazz just made a shot 10 feet deeper than that to win a game 2 weeks ago.
Second, I will take that shot over the roscoe smith fiasco at the end of the cuse game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tenspro2002]

Kemba had a lot of awesome game-winning plays last year:

1) Step-back J in the waning seconds to beat Texas
2) Floater in the lane to beat Nova
3) Ankle-breaking step-back J at the buzzer to beat Pitt

But you know which one doesn't get nearly as much press?

4) Kemba knifing into the lane, drawing the defense, and dishing to Lamb for the bucket that beat Louisville

With that said, I'll make two points:

- If you notice, each of Kemba's game-winners, even the ones he took himself, started by him attacking the basket with the dribble
- Getting into the paint forces the defense to react, and usually over-react in these late-game situations, and often leads to wide-open teammates around the rim

Bazz needed to penetrate and force the defense to guard 5 guys, not just 1.

 

[zls44]

Not surprised that you are scared easily.

I'd rather see some semblance of execution like during the Syracuse game. Not a great result but it was a better look and there were options.

So you would rather have Roscoe fading away from twelve feet instead of a decent look from Shabazz who was playing out of his mind?

Best win of the year, people still bitch. Worst fans in America.

 

[Mike Honcho]

Don't forget - we were just coming off a possession where we called timeout, inbounded the ball near midcourt and couldn't even execute a simple handoff against some heavy pressure to get the ball in the hands of the guy we wanted to start the offense. You say you want to make the defense work, but the defense might work well enough where they force a trap and get a turnover and the ball ends up in the wrong guy's hands (imagine Drummond getting it at the foul line as a bailout pass against a trap, for example). And we lose in regulation.

With this situation, game tied, the team a little rattled from the last possession, two guys on the floor (AO, AD) who you don't want touching the ball more than a foot from the basket in an end-game situation (if at all), and a somewhat erratic secondary ballhandler who is a freshman, I was fine with not calling a TO, getting the ball in Bazz's hands, letting him take what he could get, and either win it or go to overtime. If WV was up on him tighter, he might have driven, but the defender got back on his heels and gave him that look. It wasn't like when it was en route I was thinking "no chance" - it was tracking the rim nicely.

In a way it hurts that we aren't a team with a lot of end-game offensive options. Lamb is a good one, but Jeremy's man isn't ever going to give help if someone penetrates, so we either have to time a play for him to catch and shoot, or let him iso if we like the match-up. I could also live with Boat shooting an open J off a kickout, but not sure if I want him making the big decision/play at this stage of his career. The risk of running something more sophisticated with limited options is that you can end up never getting the ball in the hands of the guy you want, since the other team is going to try to take away what you want to do and give you some things you don't want.

Good insight. It doesn't diminish the fact that he was under heavy pressure, but Shabazz's TO a possession before was actually just a bobble. He had possession he just coughed it up.

Having Jeremy as an option, they could at least try to run him off curls, instead of just running an iso. At the very least it would cause the defense to work and potentially make something happen. Pretty sure he was just standing around, which doesn't do anyone good except occupy one defender.

Getting back to my original post, it is clear from all his post-game quotes, Shabazz wants to be the guy with the ball in his hands at the end of the game. But I hope he's not forcing the role. Though he played great for a stretch today and single-handedly got us back in the game, he still made enough head-scratching plays that I'm still not convinced he's there.

 

[Mike Honcho]

So you would rather have Roscoe fading away from twelve feet instead of a decent look from Shabazz who was playing out of his mind?

Best win of the year, people still bitch. Worst fans in America.

Pretty sure you are the worst fan in America. Didn't you call Shabazz the worst PG of the Calhoun era just a couple of weeks ago? I've never jumped off the bandwagon going back to the Dream Season. You seem to hop on and off the bandwagon at will.

 

[Scoe]

the posession could have been better but it also could have been worse, this isnt just Bazz it does seem alot of times teams are more concerned with running clock then they are executing the play not saying one or the other is right or wrong, I remember JC had Kemba dribble at the top of the key near the end of the Arizona game and we didnt run the play till there was about 5 on the shot clock, of course we know how it ended thankfully those 3's Zona had at the end didnt go in.

 

[aceboon]

Pretty sure you are the worst fan in America. Didn't you call Shabazz the worst PG of the Calhoun era just a couple of weeks ago? I've never jumped off the bandwagon going back to the Dream Season. You seem to hop on and off the bandwagon at will.

YUP

 

[Dogbreath2U]

Why else would Napier take that shot as time expired? Can't imagine Calhoun was too happy with the execution.

Who do you think put the ball in his hands to take that shot? Why would he take the shot? Because his coach told him to. Yes, he started too late, but he got off a clean shot. Without him, we are blown out today.

 

[Excalibur]

Sorry, but I don't think having Shabazz take deep, contested threes as time expires is a good end-game strategy. Simple as that. The Nova game definitely gave him the confidence to do so. Fine. That situation was different -- we had only 5 seconds to drive the length of the court.

In a full possession, I'd much rather have some penetration set up a decision -- either a pass to Jeremy or a mid-range shot. Make the defense work, draw defenders. You might not get a foul called, but I think there's a higher probability for a better outcome. Having our offense stagnate, as it did in the second half when it revolved around one player creating for himself -- is not a sustainable winning formula.

So your original post was bullshit. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Gurleyman]

Who do you think put the ball in his hands to take that shot? Why would he take the shot? Because his coach told him to. Yes, he started too late, but he got off a clean shot. Without him, we are blown out today.

I'd even argue that he didn't start too late, but the opposing viewpoint is reasonable. He definitely didn't start too late by NBA rules (with a timeout letting you advance the ball). In fact, his shot was even a bit too early if they were playing by NBA rules (where if they get the ball with any more than 0.3, they can win on a catch and shoot after a timeout). In college you can go a little sooner because the other team still has to go fullcourt after a timeout, but I'm of the mindset that you should not bring losing in regulation into the equation.

It's different at the end of the first half when the clock does not stop after a made basket. You should go much earlier then (plus it's not a win-or-lose situation).

 

[UofCT]

Why else would Napier take that shot as time expired? Can't imagine Calhoun was too happy with the execution.

Shabazz is playing like Shabazz.

 

[Tenspro2002]

I'd even argue that he didn't start too late, but the opposing viewpoint is reasonable. He definitely didn't start too late by NBA rules (with a timeout letting you advance the ball). In fact, his shot was even a bit too early if they were playing by NBA rules (where if they get the ball with any more than 0.3, they can win on a catch and shoot after a timeout). In college you can go a little sooner because the other team still has to go fullcourt after a timeout, but I'm of the mindset that you should not bring losing in regulation into the equation.

It's different at the end of the first half when the clock does not stop after a made basket. You should go much earlier then (plus it's not a win-or-lose situation).

You should absolutely bring losing in regulation into the equation when the alternative is a greater chance of losing the game in overtime. Would you rather take a good shot and leave 3 seconds left or take a tty shot as time expires?

Let's say you have a 50% chance of making a "good" shot, a 2-pointer, with 3 seconds left.
Let's also say the other team has a 10% chance of making a game-winning 3 immediately thereafter, off of either the make or the miss.

In that case, you win the game in regulation 45% of the time, lose the game in regulation 10% of the time, and go to overtime 45% of the time (let's say you win half of those), for an overall odds of winning of 67.5%.

Alternatively, let's say you have a 20% chance of making a "bad" shot as time expires.

In that case, you win the game in regulation 20% of the time, lose the game in regulation 0% of the time, and go to overtime 80% of the time (again, say you win half of those), for an overall odds of winning of 60%. This is a lower percentage than if you take the good shot with time on the clock.

You can tweak the percentages, but my point is that just because you introduce the chance of losing in regulation doesn't mean you're increasing the chances of losing, period.