I think its a very veteran, effective tactic because no defender will flop on that play and act out an offensive foul, nor the refs calling an off. foul on a slight push close to the end of regulation.
I'm really amazed with the things that Rudy Gay brings to the table. Things that i've never seen with any of the Raptors, he's like a combination of Garbo and VC.
Last edited by TheGloveinRapsUniform; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 11:31 AM.
I'll preface this by saying that I've been a Dwane Casey supporter since he got here. I also think that coaches should be given room to make mistakes; you always need to do a certain amount of learning on the job, and I don't think an NBA coach should be expected to be perfect from the get-go.
That said, there are basic basketball principles that an NBA coach should be expected to have grasped long before they coach their first game, and to my eyes, Casey violated a pretty obvious one last night.
Down by one, fifteen seconds left. After they inbound the ball, Lowry dribbles out about eight seconds before he gets it to Gay. Casey clearly told him to do this, the idea being (I assume) that Gay hits the shot and Denver then only has a few seconds to run a play...
We were down by one! If Gay misses, then we have to foul and we'll have very little time left when we get the ball back.
Whereas if you draw up a quick shot, and you miss that, you'll still have a good ten seconds to get up another shot to tie (or win). It seems obvious to me that you do it this way, especially if you're the home team. I've seen it done this way many times before, if not every time the situation has come up.
It's instances like this that have me beginning to doubt Casey.
What do you guys think?
The only time I'd agree with taking a shot more quickly, is if there's 25-48 seconds left and you play the 2-for-1 possession game. The ironic part about this strategy is that is's all about getting the ball in your own team's hands as the clock expires, as opposed once again to giving the opposition the final, game-deciding possession.
Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 12:24 PM.
The other thing is, Denver STILL had the chance to respond with a winning shot; the Raps didn't let the clock wind down far enough...although that could be on the players, not Casey.
I know it sounds like I'm being negative in spite of the win, raining on the little parade and all, but Jeff Van Gundy has a great quote: "If it's unacceptable in defeat, then it's unacceptable in victory."
Gay has hit that shot so many times in his career he always goes to that side and burries that J wouldnt call it a coinflip. and thats what we are paying him for closing.
Even with the shot being made, Denver didn't have sufficient time to take more than a desperation shot. Had the Raptors left 10-15 seconds on the clock, then Denver would have had the advantage and the ultimate outcome of the game would have been out of the Raptors' hands.
I'd run the play as it went 10 times out of 10, even if Gay missed his shot and the Raptors had lost.
Can't find the stats for end of game shots specifically, but I'd be shocked if he was significantly over 50% for his career.
-First, they clearly wanted the chance to rebound the ball and get another attempt up...
-Second, they wanted a chance at a quality attempt. You say it was a lot of time for the Nuggets to run a play, but if Toronto missed, and got the board (assuming it wasn't just a tip-in), it would maybe give them enough time to call another timeout, which I think they had as well(but could be wrong), and actually run a play...the key is here you are angry that Denver had a chance to respond, but wouldn't you rather that the Raps have a chance to respond as best they can with another attempt?
I thought it was absolutely the right call. I didn't think Gay went early because I thought the whole time they would want 3-4 seconds left to get more than just a scramble attempt.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 01:06 PM.
Then I said that if you're going to run the clock down, you may as well run it all the way down. But you guys are right about that - you should give yourself some time after the miss.
If you would want Lowry to go earlier, and maybe he or Gay force a worse shot with it being a 1 point game, so that we still have time to foul and possibly make it a 3 point game, how is that a good thing??? It was a one point game, you definitely don't plan for missing the shot, you plan to make it....call the play you think gives you the best closing option (Gay iso), and just give yourself what you think is the minimum amount of time you need to either rebound and try again, or foul and still have a chance at a last ditch 3 if it comes to that.
If the Raps had missed Gay's shot, and say, gotten a foul with 3 second left, that's plenty of time to take a 3 if the Nuggets make 2 fts...but if you go early, to give yourself 10 seconds or something like that, and you end up down by 3, you're still probably just going to end up taking a last ditch 3 pt attempt, which doesn't take 10 seconds to get.
*Not to mention the 3 only gets you to OT, the best attempt to close it out gets you a win. And the way we were playing, and with the foul situation, OT would've been tough.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 02:14 PM.
You try to take as much time as possible to get a good shot in iso for a game winner. Honestly I dont know if anyone saw it but Lowry save the day disrupting Lawson on the PnR after inbounds and he had to toss up something with no business going in.
Keep in mind I am thinking in the most perfect of terms or situations. Ideally the ball is going through the net with as little time as possible.
I'd play for the win in that situation every time..... but that is just my opinion.
"You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"Bruno Caboclo
And again, I realize that it seems ridiculous to be bringing all this up after a win, but I'm just becoming more curious about Casey's clock management strategies. Specifically, there was a play a few games ago (Clips I think) where he did not go for a 2 for 1 at the end of a quarter where he clearly (in my amateur opinion [imao?]) should have.
If they end up having to foul because they miss, and even if they have time to get up another attempt...why would Denver let them? It would be hard enough to get up a quality 3 pt attempt in a 3 pt game on the last possession, with the other team knowing they don't have to guard inside the 3 pt line at all....but ignoring that, if you believe statistics should be taken into consideration...what are the odds a similar coach WOULDN'T JUST FOUL TORONTO when they're up 3, forcing us to make 2 fts instead of letting us take a shot that could tie the game......
Last edited by white men can't jump; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 03:02 PM.
The ideal play in that situation is to get a shot off with about 3 seconds left at most, allowing enough time for a tap-in/put-back shot off a miss, with minimal/no time for the other team to have a legitimate chance to win the game after a made bucket. You play for the win. Always.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)