Who should be shooting the last shot?

[Bonus Jonas]

There's a video that I couldn't find of when Ray Allen and KG had just joined Boston and the interviewer asked the big three that if Boston was down three with 5 seconds left, who would take the three to tie. Pierce and KG both said Ray Allen and Ray Allen answered "The open man." to which the interviewer responded "Then Ray you better be the open man."

It relates because it's obvious that the shot should be going to the open man but Casey NEEDS to run a play to get someone open on the last shots, and it should be the whoever is hot that night.

I'd rather have Amir shoot a wide open catch and shoot three than have Lou shoot an off balance three with a defender in his face three feet behind the line.

[white men can't jump]

There's a video that I couldn't find of when Ray Allen and KG had just joined Boston and the interviewer asked the big three that if Boston was down three with 5 seconds left, who would take the three to tie. Pierce and KG both said Ray Allen and Ray Allen answered "The open man." to which the interviewer responded "Then Ray you better be the open man."

It relates because it's obvious that the shot should be going to the open man but Casey NEEDS to run a play to get someone open on the last shots, and it should be the whoever is hot that night.

I'd rather have Amir shoot a wide open catch and shoot three than have Lou shoot an off balance three with a defender in his face three feet behind the line.

Depends how much time on the clock...Amir takes about 8 seconds to actually release a 3, so it might not be practical at times

[Cody73]

I'd say whoever is open... inside. I'd rather tie the game than risk the three ball.

[Axel]

There's a video that I couldn't find of when Ray Allen and KG had just joined Boston and the interviewer asked the big three that if Boston was down three with 5 seconds left, who would take the three to tie. Pierce and KG both said Ray Allen and Ray Allen answered "The open man." to which the interviewer responded "Then Ray you better be the open man."

It relates because it's obvious that the shot should be going to the open man but Casey NEEDS to run a play to get someone open on the last shots, and it should be the whoever is hot that night.

I'd rather have Amir shoot a wide open catch and shoot three than have Lou shoot an off balance three with a defender in his face three feet behind the line.

I don't know how well you can actually get the hot hand open unless it's a catch and shoot play (which is fine for DD, Ross, Lowry or Lou but not a big). The hot hand will attract extra attention and that extra defender is coming from somewhere. Whoever our man is for that defender, we need to get them into a scoring opportunity and get them the ball.

[2kfeen]

I'll tell you what I don't want...
Derozan at the 3 point line trying to force his way inside, only to either dribble it out of bounds or get his ass rejected at the rim.

You really want to get your most efficient player and best finisher an easy look whenever you need a bucket. Stay away from a guy like Derozan who shoots 39% from the field and is horribly consistent. You should definately involve Amir and Lowry as much as possible.

Amir was the league's 2nd best finisher last season and has a monster shooting %. Lowry is a bulldog in the paint. Get a Lowry drive with an Amir handoff and that's an easy two any day.

If we are down by 3, I want a Lowry or Lou Will shot off the inbounds. Lou Will has saved our ass in so many games, and not just because of buzzer beaters. Guy heats up really quickly, and makes the craziest shot.

[DanH]

If you read the details of my order of operations, clearly indicates that ball doesn't stick. Use the hot hand to create a scoring opportunity, Use the mismatch to get someone open or score, use your star player.

It's not about who can shoot the ball last, it's about who can put enough pressure on the defence to create a good scoring opportunity. I guess the question is wrong as it lends itself to a player based ISO answer but should rather be, "who initiates the last possession?"

See, this is my issue. Hot hand? The defense knows who that is. Matchups? Last play if the game there likely won't be time to get a switch, and any competent defense will have capable defenders at all 5 spots. And Steve Novak had a quote where he said he loved it when opposing offences attacked him, thinking he was the weak link, because that meant they were going away from their offence and forcing it to a certain player. Then you have your star player list.

All of that is a problem. The defense will key on DeRozan for example. If DD has the hot hand, do you force it to him? You shouldn't. Yet your list suggests you do.

My point is that any list like that is nonsensical. No player can put more pressure on the defense by himself than a well run play can. The play should be initiated by the player best able to initiate a set. It is no more complicated than that.

[Axel]

Some fair points to be sure but I think you're focusing on the simple "no ISO" aspect and missing the bigger picture.

A matchup advantage doesn't need to be executed outside of a well run play. If Novak is on Ross for example, having Ross run off ball through multiple screens for a catch and shoot would be a positive play to run. Novak isn't a great athlete and the defence would have to account for that, which could result in another player (a screener could seal Novak on the low block with inside positioning for example) getting an even better look. A well run play is always the right call, but there are plays that can take advantage of the natural ebb/flow of the game. Now depending on how the game has gone to that point, Ross wouldn't be the natural choice unless he had the hot hand; hence the order of operations. If no hot hand exists, and no clear matchup advantage is there, then you run a play for your best player.

The team should have a large enough offensive repertoire to run a play that A) takes advantage of the hot hand to apply more pressure on the Defence, B) takes advantage of a defensive mismatch to apply more pressure on the defence or C) trust your star/best player to apply more pressure on the defence.

Your point remains valid, but within the concept I am saying. You can't simply choose a random play and say that's our best bet if we run it well.

[DogeLover1234]

A Lowry/Amir PnR with Ross and PPat spacing the floor is seriously deadly. Substitute Lou in for Lowry if you want, but either way someone is going to get a pretty high percentage look.

[DanH]

The entire point of most good offensive sets is not to generate one specific look - it is to generate a scenario such that any player on the floor might end up with a good look. Sure, you run Ross through screens, but do you think they let Novak trail through screens on a play where they need a stop to win? No. They switch and you end up with someone else open, because the play should have motion on the ball as well as off the ball, and screens set for more than one player.

Saying you run a play to get a specific look is again indicative of the kind of "this player should score" mindset that I think is a) very prevalent in the NBA and b) crazy talk.

Every good play should have multiple options. And it is up to the primary ball handler (Lowry) to decide which option to take. I'm not instructing my point guard to look for Ross specifically - I'm telling him to run the play and get the best possible shot out of it, whether that's a wide open Ross or a rolling Amir or a popping Patterson, or a drive himself. You start telling players "we are running a play for DeMar" or for Ross or for whoever and they get tunnel vision (as we've seen over and over again). The play to end the game should be a play like every other possession of the game - you run primary and secondary actions to force the defence to concede a good shot for someone, regardless of who that someone ends up being.

[DanH]

Anyway, it seems your argument has come to the point where you are no longer even attempting to describe who should be getting the last shot. It appears now that you are saying we should run a play and give the last shot to the open man. Which I obviously agree with.

[Axel]

But you choose your play based on the opportunities it creates. If you want Ross to have the last shot, then you run a play where he is the primary option. If you have a secondary player as your second choice but they aren't the natural second option, then perhaps the coach says something to the players "if Ross isn't open, look for -- in this spot" but in general, you would choose a play where the natural progression is optimal for the players on the court.

If in your example, Novak switches on the first screen, then you are possibly getting a matchup of JV or Amir on Novak on the block; which is an even better matchup to attack.

Point is, "whoever is open" is a pointless comment cause it doesn't actually indicate anything. Perhaps no one is open (as you've already said, most teams will have 5 good defenders on the court). You need to have a plan in order to create that last shot and if no one is open, you still need to generate a quality look. To have no priority of who you want taking that shot and just trusting your random play to get someone open is, frankly, a terrible coaching decision. So you can call me crazy for having an actual plan that prioritizes which players we are trying to get open, but it's actually the intelligent coaching move here.

[raptors999]

But you choose your play based on the opportunities it creates. If you want Ross to have the last shot, then you run a play where he is the primary option. If you have a secondary player as your second choice but they aren't the natural second option, then perhaps the coach says something to the players "if Ross isn't open, look for -- in this spot" but in general, you would choose a play where the natural progression is optimal for the players on the court.

If in your example, Novak switches on the first screen, then you are possibly getting a matchup of JV or Amir on Novak on the block; which is an even better matchup to attack.

Point is, "whoever is open" is a pointless comment cause it doesn't actually indicate anything. Perhaps no one is open (as you've already said, most teams will have 5 good defenders on the court). You need to have a plan in order to create that last shot and if no one is open, you still need to generate a quality look. To have no priority of who you want taking that shot and just trusting your random play to get someone open is, frankly, a terrible coaching decision. So you can call me crazy for having an actual plan that prioritizes which players we are trying to get open, but it's actually the intelligent coaching move here.

Casey had Novak a killer three point shooter and never ran a play for him. PPat is suffering the same fate. Not running Amy semblence of a play reduces players ability to find open players. Look at Demar on TeamUSA vs now

[Axel]

Casey had Novak a killer three point shooter and never ran a play for him. PPat is suffering the same fate. Not running Amy semblence of a play reduces players ability to find open players. Look at Demar on TeamUSA vs now

I would say that Novak's value on offence was more the attention the defence gave him vs actual scoring.

[raptors999]

I would say that Novak's value on offence was more the attention the defence gave him vs actual scoring.

Teams know Casey doesn't run plays for Novak. Why bother guarding him. Last play vs BKN, Lowry had four guys draped on him, likewise against Portland even with two 40% shooters in Ross and 2Pats. The entire league knows Casey runs an ISO play late. Decoys don't work if the team never passes.

[Axel]

Teams know Casey doesn't run plays for Novak. Why bother guarding him. Last play vs BKN, Lowry had four guys draped on him, likewise against Portland even with two 40% shooters in Ross and 2Pats. The entire league knows Casey runs an ISO play late. Decoys don't work if the team never passes.

True. I was speaking more generally in a basketball sense.

The last shot vs Brooklyn is a perfect example of a poor decision. No movement, no passing, allow the defence to collapse; basically all the things you can do wrong on a single possession.