Technical cost UConn 2 or 3 points not 1 | The Boneyard

Technical cost UConn 2 or 3 points not 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fgbrault

Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
336
Reaction Score
748
Is my memory wrong? It is true that Maryland missed on of the Technicals so it can be argued that only 1 point was lost. But, as I remember it, Maryland missed the first shot. If no technical had been called that would have resulted in only 1 point instead of 3 being scored and if it was a 1 and 1 (I think it was) no points and possession back to UConn if they got the rebound.

You can't know what would have happened if no technical had been called, but it appears likely that UConn would have had the ball still 3 points down or at most 4 points.
 
Of all the thoughts that were going through my mind after the game, this wasn't one of them.
 
It's hard to imagine how you could argue the technical could cost more than 2 points.
 
.-.
aceboon said:
what am I missing? UConn was down 3, Trimble got fouled and then KO got whistled for T. Trimble made 1 outta 2 of the technical FTs, then made both of the personal foul FTs. So KO cost them 1 point.
Expand ...

He's saying that because UM wasn't in the bonus, the first missed shot would have resulted in 0 points. He mistook the miss for the first shot, but it happened on the second. AND, of course the game dynamic and situation were entirely different, so we'll never know what would have happened.

I do think he's right that you can't say it was only worth one point. No way to know.

If anything, you might argue it's easier to hit the last 2 free throws if you have already shot 2.
 
upstater said:
He's saying that because UM wasn't in the bonus, the first missed shot would have resulted in 0 points. He mistook the miss for the first shot, but it happened on the second. AND, of course the game dynamic and situation were entirely different, so we'll never know what would have happened.

I do think he's right that you can't say it was only worth one point. No way to know.

If anything, you might argue it's easier to hit the last 2 free throws if you have already shot 2.
Expand ...
Trimble got into rhythm with four straight FTs. It's the difference, perhaps, of being down 4 vs. 6, I guess.

But there was time left. KO really shouldn't have gotten that tech, but of all the reasons they lost, this isn't in the top 3.
 
upstater said:
He's saying that because UM wasn't in the bonus, the first missed shot would have resulted in 0 points. He mistook the miss for the first shot, but it happened on the second. AND, of course the game dynamic and situation were entirely different, so we'll never know what would have happened.

I do think he's right that you can't say it was only worth one point. No way to know.

If anything, you might argue it's easier to hit the last 2 free throws if you have already shot 2.
Expand ...
They were in the bonus so all of the other riff raff is not needed
 
uchusky32 said:
Of all the thoughts that were going through my mind after the game, this wasn't one of them.
Expand ...
Just trying to make the point (unintended pun) that the technical most likely cost UConn more than one point. So many, including journalists. have said the technical cost UConn only one point.
 
.-.
upstater said:
He's saying that because UM wasn't in the bonus, the first missed shot would have resulted in 0 points. He mistook the miss for the first shot, but it happened on the second. AND, of course the game dynamic and situation were entirely different, so we'll never know what would have happened.

I do think he's right that you can't say it was only worth one point. No way to know.

If anything, you might argue it's easier to hit the last 2 free throws if you have already shot 2.
Expand ...

Thanks for the correction. My memory was off - not for the first or last time. :)
 
tzznandrew said:
Trimble got into rhythm with four straight FTs. It's the difference, perhaps, of being down 4 vs. 6, I guess.

But there was time left. KO really shouldn't have gotten that tech, but of all the reasons they lost, this isn't in the top 3.
Expand ...
He shouldn't have got the tech, but based on what we know of who is on the team, I have no reason to believe they were gonna make the plays necessary to pull that off. When they were down double digits or 9 the shots flowed easily, when they were down 3 the bricked shots and the multiple jab steps before finally releasing the shot(and missing) were back on display. A case of fully blown lemon booty was there for everyone to see, nothing different than what we've seen from the sabotage brothers for well over a season now.
 
tzznandrew said:
Trimble got into rhythm with four straight FTs. It's the difference, perhaps, of being down 4 vs. 6, I guess.

But there was time left. KO really shouldn't have gotten that tech, but of all the reasons they lost, this isn't in the top 3.
Expand ...

I totally agree with that. It's not the reason.

On the other hand, we've seen it over and over and over in the past and in this year. When you come back from 20 down, you are spent. And then as soon as there's a pivot or a turning point, you are cooked. I can vouch for the fact that everyone in the chat said it was done at point.
 
aceboon said:
When they were down double digits or 9 the shots flowed easily, when they were down 3 the bricked shots and the multiple jab steps before finally releasing the shot(and missing) were back on display. A case of fully blown lemon booty was there for everyone to see, nothing different than what we've seen from the sabotage brothers for well over a season now.
Expand ...

Um, the inbounds was off a made basket to get it down to 3.
 
.-.
upstater said:
Obviously, he was mistaken. As I wrote. I was translating.
Expand ...

I think you might have misunderstood him, he knew it was in the bonus, because he said if there was no tech then they would have gotten the ball back on a rebound. His comment about thinking it was 1 and 1 was to say that he thought it probably wasn't double bonus yet, which was correct.
 
Leebo said:
I think he's saying (and this is my recollection too) that we didn't have any offensive possessions while down 3.
Expand ...
I thought we did but if I am mistaken then I will definitely take my L on that fact. Doesn't change my overall point tho.
 
aceboon said:
I thought we did but if I am mistaken then I will definitely take my L on that fact. Doesn't change my overall point tho.
Expand ...

I really thought we were good until the tech. That punch was delivered to the guts, a KO (hah, hah!!)
 
.-.
Leebo said:
I think you might have misunderstood him, he knew it was in the bonus, because he said if there was no tech then they would have gotten the ball back on a rebound. His comment about thinking it was 1 and 1 was to say that he thought it probably wasn't double bonus yet, which was correct.
Expand ...

Yes, actually, I'm the one who screwed that up. I meant he thought they weren't in the double bonus.
 
upstater said:
It wasn't a bricked shot
Expand ...
Smh, I didn't say the bricked shots directly preceded the technical, I was referring to specific instances where they could have cut the lead down even further when Purvis bricked a good look from 3 and instead of Dham taking the shot soon as the ball was swung to him he instead jabbed stepped to death and then put up a brick. That was my overall point, the shots flow freely when they are trying to make up a defecit(that they cause with their lack of urgency), then when the game can be swung on key plays those sphincters get very tight. Its basically a routine at this point.
 
aceboon said:
what am I missing? UConn was down 3, Trimble got fouled and then KO got whistled for T. Trimble made 1 outta 2 of the technical FTs, then made both of the personal foul FTs. So KO cost them 1 point.
Expand ...
And the ref cost us the other 2. I think the call is the issue because it caused the T. The same ref that threw out Ern?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,487
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom