End of shotclock/half/game scenarios

[tower912]

Since our team is offensively challenged in some respects, who do you want to see with the ball in their hands with 5 seconds to go?    Yesterday, Vander decided that he was going on a straight line to the basket from 25 feet.   We all saw that was going to be a charge by the time he got to the foul line.   Junior can't create going to his left.   DG needs time to work.    Who do you want to take the shot at the end of the shotclock/half/ game, and why?    More importantly, how?   


  I think that I would have preferred to see Cadougan get the ball where Vander did and make the same move Vander did.    The difference is that Junior would have kept his options open and either thrown up a floater or dumped to Gardner, who was open.   

[GGGG]

Vander had very little choice.  The shot clock was almost out and they closed out on his shot.

The more important question is...why does it take so damn long to try to get a decent shot?  I know Georgetown is a very good defensive team, but they had about a dozen rushed shots yesterday.  Fortunately they hit a couple.

[tower912]

Too much Crean-like passing and standing around at the top of the zone.   When MU's offense was most effective yesterday was the stretch where JWilson was getting the ball at the elbow and short corner against the zone.   He made some shots and his mere presence with the ball there was enough to cause movement in the zone that created space for others.   That has been effective in year's past, I am not sure why this team has been so slow to embrace it.    Start getting Blue/Trent/Jamil the ball there on every possession against a zone. 

[brewcity77]

Too much Crean-like passing and standing around at the top of the zone.   When MU's offense was most effective yesterday was the stretch where JWilson was getting the ball at the elbow and short corner against the zone.   He made some shots and his mere presence with the ball there was enough to cause movement in the zone that created space for others.   That has been effective in year's past, I am not sure why this team has been so slow to embrace it.    Start getting Blue/Trent/Jamil the ball there on every possession against a zone. 

The worst of that I believe resulted in a Markel Starks steal and easy breakaway basket in the second half. The three on the perimeter simply passed it back and forth. The pattern was obvious, and Starks jumped one of the passes.

What really surprises me is that for the past few years, teams have been able to go to a zone and be very, very effective against us. Sure, there have been times we can bust it, but in general, we struggle mightily against the zone no matter who the 5 on the floor are. This has been a trend for at least 3-4 years now, how have we not figured that out? It seems that zone-busting should be bred into these guys from the second they hit campus. I'm sure we'll get better against them as the year goes on, but it really seems like we should be getting acclimated sooner.

[MUDPT]

I have no idea why Davante is setting screens on the top part of the zone, so late in the shot clock.  He needs to be somewhere near the basket for either a pass or to occupy the defender.

Too much Crean-like passing and standing around at the top of the zone.   When MU's offense was most effective yesterday was the stretch where JWilson was getting the ball at the elbow and short corner against the zone.   He made some shots and his mere presence with the ball there was enough to cause movement in the zone that created space for others.   That has been effective in year's past, I am not sure why this team has been so slow to embrace it.    Start getting Blue/Trent/Jamil the ball there on every possession against a zone. 

Totally agree.  On the Vander shot possession, I was sure we would try to find Jamil somewhere near the free throw line for either a shot or a look to Davante.  As my father texted me at the game, Vander needs to recognize when a "Cordell Henry" floater is needed.

[BCHoopster]

As a ex point guard, the key to beating a zone is having the point guard attack one of the outside defenders or getting the ball to a big at the free throw line, once you are inside
the lane you now have an advantage, passing the ball side to side does nothing but waste clock.  Junior walks the ball up so by the time they really get going there is only 18 seconds
on the play clock.  Not enough time if fool with it on top.  Very disappointed with the O against a zone, have to attack.  The charge by Vander was the best play, Buzz could draw up,
are you serious?  MU will have trouble with teams that score a little, Villy, St. Johns, ND, no chance against Syracuse or Louey.  Still think they have little chance on winning on the road,
Pitt is a good place to try, they were not very good what I saw yesterday on the tube.  The team that impresses me more is St. Johns, they can score.  Not great on D, but they can
put up points in a hurry.  Cincy has trouble scoring as well.  Besides the top 2 or 3, the league is up for grabs.  MU could finish as high as 4th but as well can be 10th.  Good start.  Beating
Pitt would shock me, then they can start 4-0. 

[brewcity77]

I have no idea why Davante is setting screens on the top part of the zone, so late in the shot clock.  He needs to be somewhere near the basket for either a pass or to occupy the defender.

Probably because no one was getting the ball to him, or really even trying. What really irritated me was that you could see holes in the Georgetown zone as we were passing around the perimeter. The problem was they closed quick, so to get the ball to Davante would have required an immediate catch-and-pass from a perimeter player when DG had position. There were a number of those chances, but guys waited too long to pass, which allowed GT to close the hole and forced us to keep passing around the outside. Had we been more decisive, Davante could have broken that zone himself. Thank god Jamil started knocking down the mid-range shots.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Probably because no one was getting the ball to him, or really even trying. What really irritated me was that you could see holes in the Georgetown zone as we were passing around the perimeter. The problem was they closed quick, so to get the ball to Davante would have required an immediate catch-and-pass from a perimeter player when DG had position. There were a number of those chances, but guys waited too long to pass, which allowed GT to close the hole and forced us to keep passing around the outside. Had we been more decisive, Davante could have broken that zone himself. Thank god Jamil started knocking down the mid-range shots.

Good call on Jamil...maybe Buzz's best adjustment was flashing him and bringing him out onto the baseline after half time.  MU's guards where struggling with Gtown's length.  Todd is still rusty but his spot up trey was huge...and will be a plus going forward.  Also, Gardner has to demand the ball in the post more...by demand I mean establishing HIS position in the block and making a target for himself on EVERY play...whether he gets the ball or not.

[bilsu]

To me Cadougan and Dominic James are cut from the same cloth. Neither could shoot, but with the game on the line they are tough players. I always wanted James to take the last shot and I feel the same way about Cadougan.

[NotAnAlum]

Absolutely agree with DC Hoopster.  Our zone offense was pathetic yesterday and not a lot better against UConn.  I thought the first half was so bad that it would force Buzz to try something different.
I like the idea of DG set up at the free throw line on those possession when he can't get good position early in the clock.  DG is a very good passer, has good vision for a big man and can even make a move or take a shoot from there.  These are all great attributes for a true PIVOT man against the zone.  Then you can get some high/low action to Wilson (thank God Wilson finally started to play yesterday), or get the guards cutting.  The pass around the perimeter is not working because the defense doesn't have to respect the 3 and our guards can't make an entry pass into the post (this MU is the worst at feeding the post I have ever seen, a turn over waiting to happen).
Agree that Junior needs to get the ball up quicker but even that won't work if we are going to waste the rest of the shoot clock with perimeter shoot fakes and drive fakes.
We better do something because so far we are really just "getting lucky" and that won't work more than 50% of the time and it won't work on the road.

[forgetful]

Probably because no one was getting the ball to him, or really even trying. What really irritated me was that you could see holes in the Georgetown zone as we were passing around the perimeter. The problem was they closed quick, so to get the ball to Davante would have required an immediate catch-and-pass from a perimeter player when DG had position. There were a number of those chances, but guys waited too long to pass, which allowed GT to close the hole and forced us to keep passing around the outside. Had we been more decisive, Davante could have broken that zone himself. Thank god Jamil started knocking down the mid-range shots.

DG struggled getting solid position against GU.  They were letting them play with a lot of contact and the GU bigs often times had DG off balance.  If you throw it into a big who doesn't have his feet set and good balance it is likely a TO.

[AZWarrior]

Too much Crean-like passing and standing around at the top of the zone.   When MU's offense was most effective yesterday was the stretch where JWilson was getting the ball at the elbow and short corner against the zone.   He made some shots and his mere presence with the ball there was enough to cause movement in the zone that created space for others.   That has been effective in year's past, I am not sure why this team has been so slow to embrace it.    Start getting Blue/Trent/Jamil the ball there on every possession against a zone. 

Very well said, Tower.

[ronald dragon]

I would say just give it to the player who has been hot that game, or at least hot recently in the game. If no one is doing well i'd say give it to JR. He has that senior leadership and I trust him to make the right move.

[Benny B]

Scenario:

Team M is up by 1 point with 0:01.0 remaining and is shooting the second of two FT attempts.  Team M intends to miss the FT attempt in order to start the clock.  Team G wants Team M to make the shot (or miss the rim) so that they may inbound the ball (thus giving them a chance to move the ball down court while the clock is stopped), so...

Team G intentionally commits a lane violation. Team M misses, and must try again.  Team G again commits a lane violation intentionally, and again and again and so on, until Team M unintentionally makes the FT attempt or misses the rim.

So what's to prevent this scenario from happening?  (I thought for sure this is what GTown was trying to do end of game yesterday).  Can you just keep committing lane violations over and over again, or does it become a technical foul at some point?

[brewcity77]

Scenario:

Team M is up by 1 point with 0:01.0 remaining and is shooting the second of two FT attempts.  Team M intends to miss the FT attempt in order to start the clock.  Team G wants Team M to make the shot (or miss the rim) so that they may inbound the ball (thus giving them a chance to move the ball down court while the clock is stopped), so...

Team G intentionally commits a lane violation. Team M misses, and must try again.  Team G again commits a lane violation intentionally, and again and again and so on, until Team M unintentionally makes the FT attempt or misses the rim.

So what's to prevent this scenario from happening?  (I thought for sure this is what GTown was trying to do end of game yesterday).  Can you just keep committing lane violations over and over again, or does it become a technical foul at some point?

That's a very good question and it certainly seems possible. But if it's the second FT, how do you know it's going to miss when you are stepping in before the shot goes up. After all, by the time you have a look at the trajectory enough to know if it will be a make or miss, wouldn't it likely be too late to commit a lane violation?

[MarquetteDano]

That's a very good question and it certainly seems possible. But if it's the second FT, how do you know it's going to miss when you are stepping in before the shot goes up. After all, by the time you have a look at the trajectory enough to know if it will be a make or miss, wouldn't it likely be too late to commit a lane violation?

But dont they only call the lane violation on the defense IF the ball goes in?  Thus, to Benny's point was jump in early and hope one of them goes in?

[brewcity77]

But dont they only call the lane violation on the defense IF the ball goes in?  Thus, to Benny's point was jump in early and hope one of them goes in?

The opposite. It's only called on the defense if the ball doesn't go in. The theory is you always want to make the free throw, so the defense violating the lane is potentially impeding the FT taker's ability to do that. The rule isn't designed for when you want to deliberately miss, which probably accounts for maybe 0.1% of all free throws taken.

[MarquetteDano]

The opposite. It's only called on the defense if the ball doesn't go in. The theory is you always want to make the free throw, so the defense violating the lane is potentially impeding the FT taker's ability to do that. The rule isn't designed for when you want to deliberately miss, which probably accounts for maybe 0.1% of all free throws taken.

Sorry mistype, meant if it is missed.  To Benny's point you could continously go in the lane until there is a make.

[brewcity77]

Sorry mistype, meant if it is missed.  To Benny's point you could continously go in the lane until there is a make.

But isn't it only a violation on the second free throw if you enter the lane before the ball leaves the shooter's hands? You could go in the lane, but you won't know if it's going to be a make or miss until the ball gets to the rim.

Might be time for a rules change where consecutive lane violations, regardless of the outcome of the shot, give the shooting team the ball out of bounds. And if they make the free throw, they get possession and the point.

[TJ]

But isn't it only a violation on the second free throw if you enter the lane before the ball leaves the shooter's hands? You could go in the lane, but you won't know if it's going to be a make or miss until the ball gets to the rim.

Might be time for a rules change where consecutive lane violations, regardless of the outcome of the shot, give the shooting team the ball out of bounds. And if they make the free throw, they get possession and the point.

I don't know, maybe they should wait for this to actually happen rather than changing the rule book because of a hypothetical scenario discussed on a message board.  Call me crazy.

[brewcity77]

I don't know, maybe they should wait for this to actually happen rather than changing the rule book because of a hypothetical scenario discussed on a message board.  Call me crazy.

Pretty sure it just happened, that's what we're talking about. There were consecutive lane violations by the same GT player on Trent's two misses.

[Benny B]

But isn't it only a violation on the second free throw if you enter the lane before the ball leaves the shooter's hands? You could go in the lane, but you won't know if it's going to be a make or miss until the ball gets to the rim.

Might be time for a rules change where consecutive lane violations, regardless of the outcome of the shot, give the shooting team the ball out of bounds. And if they make the free throw, they get possession and the point.

The defender committing the lane violation has already made the decision to violate before the ball is given to the shooter.

If I'm Team G, the whole point is to keep the clock off and gain an inbounds opportunity.  If it's a miss, the shooter shoots again.  If it's made, the lane violation isn't called and Team G's strategy is a success.

Here's another scenario to consider... think about the Laettner shot: with 1 second remaining, that type of catch and shoot is a monumentally higher percentage shot relative to hoping a missed FT rims right to a defender in time for him to wind up and launch a 3/4 court shot.

In effect, Team G can force a stalemate (so long as the shooter at least hits the rim every time) until the ball goes in.  If Trent can hit rim 20-30 times in a row without letting the ball go in, that last second of the game could have lasted another 10-15 minutes if GTown kept committing lane violations.

[brewcity77]

Here's another scenario to consider... think about the Laettner shot: with 1 second remaining, that type of catch and shoot is a monumentally higher percentage shot relative to hoping a missed FT rims right to a defender in time for him to wind up and launch a 3/4 court shot.

Laettner was completely different though because there was more time left when Kentucky scored (2.5 seconds), UK scored from the run of play (not the line), UK absolutely needed to score because they were behind, and once Laettner caught it he had enough time to both put the ball on the floor and give a shoulder fake to the left before turning right.

Granted, I agree that if Trent makes the FT, Georgetown has a better chance if they call a timeout and run a play than if he misses it and there's a 3/4 court heave with .6 left, but the scenarios are very different.

[Benny B]

Laettner was completely different though because there was more time left when Kentucky scored (2.5 seconds), UK scored from the run of play (not the line), UK absolutely needed to score because they were behind, and once Laettner caught it he had enough time to both put the ball on the floor and give a shoulder fake to the left before turning right.

Granted, I agree that if Trent makes the FT, Georgetown has a better chance if they call a timeout and run a play than if he misses it and there's a 3/4 court heave with .6 left, but the scenarios are very different.

My comparison was not the scenarios themselves, but how a Laettner-type shot would be a much preferred "last attempt" vs. a FT miss/rebound/launch.

[mileskishnish72]

Agree - there was team back in the 70's that won a national semifinal game with a court-long heave.