Statistically i think he did the right thing. They were outrebounded the whole night, so a putback or offensive rebound wouldve probably been out of the question. Also, Casey probably didnt want the game extended since Amir and Gay already had 5 fouls so the Nuggets wouldve just ran over those two in the extra period and theyre facing a back to back against the 2nd best team in their conference. So he probably thought win or lose, lets make this quick and get out of here.JimiCliff wrote:
Actually, if its a tied game, on your homecourt and not the first game of a back to back, i think coaches tend to take the tie and try to grind out a win in overtime, oh and considering their starters are not in foul trouble, but thats a whole different situation and discussion.
I was talking about the extra possession you get by shooting quickly. As in: you shoot, miss, other team rebounds, they get fouled, take free throws, then you have the ball again with ten seconds left.
How would you take a tie when you're down 1 point with 15 seconds left (like in last night's game)?
In last night's game, the Raptors had 5 options available:
1) go for game-winning shot at/near the buzzer - which is what they did
2) go for quick game-winning shot (shot missed), then hope to get a rebound for a 2nd chance
3) go for quick game-winning shot (shot missed), rebound lost, then foul (you'd likely need a 3pt shot to tie, as opposed the 2pt shot to win that you initially needed, before rushing to take a shot)
4) go for quick game-winning shot (shot made), then hope to prevent other team from making a game-winning shot
5) go for quick game-winning shot (shot made), hoping to have created a 2-for-1 situation, so that you can answer a go-ahead shot made by the opposition (assuming they don't make it a buzzer-beater)
I don't see how any option other than #1 is viable, given that there were less than 24 seconds remaining (too little time for option #4 to be realistic). Why would you ever give the other team the ball to decide the outcome of the game? Play for the win and let your team determine the outcome, every time!
Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 04:24 PM.
I still don't think it makes any sense to do that, because then you're still faced with needing to make a shot, but you've got less time on the clock to execute a play. You'd very likely need a 3pt shot to tie, as opposed to a 2pt shot to win. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
You're still taking the two point shot for the win, only earlier. An extra possession gives you another chance to tie or win if you miss. That's the whole point here, strategizing for what happens if you miss.
First, I think you should strategize a play with the intention/belief that you're going to make a shot, not miss a shot. You don't plan to fail, you plan to succeed. If you make your shot, you don't want the other team to have a chance to tie/win with the ball in their hands, if you can avoid it.
Second, even considering a missed shot, I still think your logic is flawed. If you take a rushed shot and miss (per your scenario), there are too many unknowns involved:
- What if they pass the ball and it takes too long to foul, then the game clock runs out? Game over, you lose.
- What if they make a basket and get fouled, making it a 2 possession game? Game over, you lose.
- Even if they get fouled immediately, chances are they make both foul shots, meaning you have less time to draw up a play that requires a 3pt shot to tie the game --> wouldn't you have been better off just drawing up a play and taking extra time to execute a play where a 2pt shot would win the game? Much greater chances of losing the game with your strategy.
Your entire premise is that you expect your team to miss the shot, so you plan for the wost. According to your strategy, your team now has much less time to make a 3pt shot just to tie, than they previously did to make a 2pt shot to win. If you're lacking confidence in your team's ability to plan/execute a play to make a single shot, why would you put them in an even worse situation?
- less time
- 3pt shot instead of 2pt shot (ie: no drives, so not chance for bail-out foul call, tip-in, rebound/put-back)
- making the shot results in a tie, instead of a win
Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 04:48 PM.
This still makes no sense.....so you miss the shot, get time like you say, foul them, they hit both, it's a 3 point game.....
-If you get a quick shot off, and miss, and foul, it becomes a two possession game if they hit one ft....loss
-If you get the quick shot off and make it, you still go to OT, assuming the other team doesn't score...in our particular situation, Gay and Amir had foul trouble, and Denver had all the momentum in the 2nd half...hard to believe we'd squeeze out a win
-If you have 10 seconds left and are down 3 and don't take a quick shot....you are forced to dribble out some clock if you try to take the last shot...in this situation, Denver will almost immediately foul, when the clock is at 6 or 7 seconds at the latest...if you miss any fts and then are forced to foul them, they can make it a 2 possession game. If you hit both and foul them, they can still make it a 3 pt game meaning your best hope is likely just OT, which again, would not have been a good scenario last night. Your best hope becomes hitting the first and missing the second to get a rebound, which is clearly not a high% option...I mean really, if you're down 3 with less than 10 seconds and trying to hold for a last shot, why wouldn't they just foul you?
I do not see how any of these scenarios lead to a sounder strategy than trying to score the winning bucket when you're down 1 and using as much clock as possible to do it. Again, as long as there are less than a handful of seconds for the bad scenario of missing that shot, for at least one chance to rebound and shoot for the win, or foul and shoot for the tie.
*Sorry CalgaryRapsFan, didn't see you did a somewhat similar breakdown...though I do think it's worth noting the "they could foul us" aspect of being down 3.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 05:16 PM.
That isn't my premise!
My premise is that you should look at the probabilities of all possible outcomes, and then choose the strategy that gives you best chance of winning.
This is all based on the idea that you would not have to rush your shot on either your first shot, or your hypothetical second shot. IMO they wouldn't have had to; given that they're advancing the ball with a timeout, they easily had time for two quality plays.
This shouldn't be an issue for an NBA team.
Neither should this. But granted, you are putting these situations into play if you lengthen the game.
It's all about giving yourself one more chance if you happen to miss. That's it. An additional chance to win, all other things being equal. If you DO NOT strategize to give yourself this chance, then you play to make sure the other team doesn't have time to get off a decent shot for a walk-off win, which we didn't really do.
And maybe that's being a little nit-picky, asking Rudy to just shave a couple more seconds off of the clock before he shoots the ball. Maybe the degree of difficulty is enough that you kinda have to take the shot that's there. But, he is getting paid 19 mil a year...
You haven't presented any alternatives that give the team a better chance of winning that what Casey called last night.
My argument is that when you're down by 1 point with about 15 seconds left in the game, with the ball coming out of a timeout, there is no better chance of winning the game than designing/executing a single play to get the best possible game-winning shot attempt at/near the buzzer (likely a dunk, layup or short 2pt shot - all high % shots).
Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 05:42 PM.
I think you're missing the point that white men can't jump and I are making, in that by planning around a missed shot, all other things will NOT be equal.
If you do make the shot with more time on the clock, then you've provided the opposition with a chance to win the game (quite possibly without ever getting the ball back).
If you miss the shot, the best-case scenario is a quick foul and 2 missed foul shots. The result is that your team is in the exact same situation, but with a few less seconds on the clock. The worst-case situation is that several seconds run off the clock and both foul shots are made, leaving your team with much less time remaining and having to make a 3pt shot (far fewer options and way lower % than a 2pt shot) just to tie - you have absolutely no chance to win the game in regulation.
Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 05:44 PM.
Your argument is flawed is what I'm saying, because even that last chance is better off the rebound attempt from a game-winner, or worst-case, a last ditch 3 with just a couple of seconds....All my scenarios included some give for the fact that they should be able to get at least a rebound attempt, if not time to foul as well, with less than 5 seconds left. Too much time actually increases the amount of scenarios that keep Denver in the lead. Basically, why is it better in your mind to be down 3 with 10 seconds left than down 3 with 2 seconds left? It's easier for them to foul you with more time. If you hit the shot, it still gives them time to run a play (assuming since by your logic, you would still take that shot and have a few seconds left just in case you wanted a chance at a rebound and another shot), and if you miss it and can't rebound, unlike with a 1 point game, you have no further opportunities...
Basicaly your plan only focuses on quantity of attempts, while ignoring both quality and chances to win the game without going to OT.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 06:00 PM.
You're right, I haven't. So, here we go.
JIMI'S STRATEGY:
The possession begins with a quicker shot attempt. This is based on the premise that the shot attempt will be of the same quality as the one Rudy eventually took, i.e., not rushed. I believe there was enough time to make this happen.
Ways to win:
1a) Raps score on the initial possession. Denver holds for the last shot and misses.
1b) Raps miss on the initial possession. Denver is fouled, they hit 0/1 FTs. Raps get the ball back with about ten seconds left. Raps take the lead. Denver does not get a final shot/they miss their final shot.
1c) Same as 1b but Denver hits two FTs, Raps tie the game, then win in OT.
Ways to lose:
-1a) Raps score on first possession. Denver holds for the final shot, Ty Lawson (or whoever, but damn he was killing it) wins it at the buzzer.
-1b) Raps miss on first possession. Fouling ensues, but let's assume no miracles, and Denver holds on.
DWANE'S STRATEGY:
Ways to win:
2a) Raps score (as Rudy did). Denver misses.
Ways to lose:
-2a) Raps score. Denver scores for a walk-off win.
The advantage with my strategy is that there are additional ways to win; 1b and 1c are not possible in Casey's strategy. The disadvantage to my strategy is with the difference in Denver's possibilities when the Raps score on their initial possession. In my strategy, they have more time to set up a shot, which may or may not give it a better chance of going in. So it comes down to this:
Are the odds of 1b and 1c
better than the difference in the odds between
Denver scoring after the Raps score on their initial possession
in my strategy
versus Dwane's.
Or you could say: by letting the clock run down, how much harder are you making it for Denver to score after the Raps score? And if so, how much harder is it; how much do their odds decrease? Then you have to compare that to the increase of the odds of the Raps winning from 1b and 1c.
The only way for Casey's strategy to be the cut-and-dry one to use is, as Matt52 said way back, to make sure there there is next to no time left on the clock so that Denver has nothing better than a hail mary. And that isn't how the Raps played it; five seconds is enough time to get a good look.
There's probably a simpler way to put all this, but I need to get some dinner.
Last edited by JimiCliff; Wed Feb 13th, 2013 at 08:29 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote