Dominic was fantastic BUT

[NotAnAlum]

I have to question the wisdom of taking a 3 point shot to end the game.  He is basically taking a shot that he misses 2/3 of the time.  Plus a 3 pointer generally creates a long rebound which means less chance for an offensive tip (an area where Marq should have the advantage) plus an outside chance that a long rebound could lead to a quick outlet and a long shoot by Valpo to win.  Hard to argue because the 3 went in but the odds were against him and he should know that.  I'd much rather see him drive to the hole, possibly get fouled, dish to someone else or if all else fails put it up on the rim and let the other 4 guys crash the boards.
I'd love to here from someone who was at the game if they felt the 3 was well considered.  Can't see it on the radio.
Finally again not to beat on Dominic because we love him but this now makes 2 games in a row that he has taken over at the end.  Their are lots of offensive weapons on that team and I'm not sure if, just because he has the ball in his hands he needs to do all the scoring.  No problem with foul shooting as long as he makes them (which he seems to down the stretch) and I'd rather have him take over offensively than McNeal but ideally it would be nice to see some assists and some balance.

[DoubleMU0609]

In the post-game interview (not sure if it was Matthews or Crean) they said that driving to the basket was the first option unless the defense switched to a zone.  When they inbounded Valpo was in a zone so they went to their second option to avoid getting bogged down in the middle.

[MUDPT]

It was an open shot, so it was a good shot.

[spiral97]

First off, welcome NotAnAlum!

Secondly, at first glance I would tend to agree with the concerns about shooting a 3 at the end of the game like that... However, I reason it out like this and come to a different conclusion:
1.) this isn't unique to this team or even this season.. I remember many games where a 3 was the winning shot late.  Several games against Louisville jump to mind immediately (from both sides of the ball).  There's gotta be more to it that makes it more sensible.  Perhaps it's the fact that the defense is probably playing prevent-style and giving up the low(er)-percentage shots while clamping down on the higher percentage ones - as well as consciously avoiding commiting fouls.  When the game is tied it's not make or break.. if it goes in, great!  if it doesn't, you have overtime.. unless......
2.) you take the shot relatively early (someone else mentioned there were 3 seconds left after DJ's 3 went in) and the opponent can heave a buzzer beater attempt... on one hand, beggers can't be choosers and when you got an open look you got an open look.. on the other hand.. if you wait two more seconds and then launch, even if it's not as open worst case is you miss and you're headed to overtime... which brings me to the decision maker argument..
3.) it defies all logic but when someone is a proven clutch player and that someone is obviously in their personal zone in a clutch situation, there are nearly NO low-percentage shots.  The "misses 2/3 of the time" stat really applies to non-clutch/non-dialed play and this time period of the game transcended that for DJ.  The right play was to give him the rock, let him shoot from wherever he got an open look, and let him win the game for you.  Exactly what Crean did - he said he had two options in the play (perimeter and inside) both for DJ and DJ came through.

[TJ]

I have to question the wisdom of taking a 3 point shot to end the game.  He is basically taking a shot that he misses 2/3 of the time.  Plus a 3 pointer generally creates a long rebound which means less chance for an offensive tip (an area where Marq should have the advantage) plus an outside chance that a long rebound could lead to a quick outlet and a long shoot by Valpo to win.  Hard to argue because the 3 went in but the odds were against him and he should know that.  I'd much rather see him drive to the hole, possibly get fouled, dish to someone else or if all else fails put it up on the rim and let the other 4 guys crash the boards.
I'd love to here from someone who was at the game if they felt the 3 was well considered.  Can't see it on the radio.
Finally again not to beat on Dominic because we love him but this now makes 2 games in a row that he has taken over at the end.  Their are lots of offensive weapons on that team and I'm not sure if, just because he has the ball in his hands he needs to do all the scoring.  No problem with foul shooting as long as he makes them (which he seems to down the stretch) and I'd rather have him take over offensively than McNeal but ideally it would be nice to see some assists and some balance.

To answer your first question, I said to my friends during the timeout with 13 seconds left that I would be angry if the shot came from outside 15 feet or with more than 3 seconds on the clock.  They didn't do either of those, so I was definitely a little miffed, but how can you be too angry when the shot goes in and you just won a close game?  I do agree with you that there should have been a higher percentage shot taken if at all possible, and I'm glad to at least hear that it was the first option.

About the end of the game and DJ's scoring run, only about 10 of that was him taking over the game at the end - from about the 2:30 mark he hit two 3's, a long jumper, and some free throws.  It's true the last minute and a half he had no intention of giving the ball up, but the streak of 18 started before that, and he wasn't really hogging the ball it seemed to me.  The other players just couldn't get a shot to fall for many reasons.  The officiating really threw MU off their game, especially with the charges MU couldn't really play their game and drive to the hole.  Many times in the second half there were problems with MU trying to avoid charges instead of taking it strong to the hole, creating turnovers and bad shots.

[WashDCWarrior]

I actually thought it was a good job of not over-coaching on Crean's part.

[Big Papi]

DJ was hot at the end so I didn't have a problem with him taking the shot when he did.  If he would have missed his last 5 shots than yes I would have had a problem.  Also, a miss with 3 seconds left allows us to grab a board and have a putback.  Something this team has done with regularity early in the season.

[SoCalwarrior]

I actually thought it was a good job of not over-coaching on Crean's part.

This is what I'm most happy about.  Crean has a very high basketball IQ.  He runs an NBA esque playbook.  In the past, he has had a tendency to micro manage the play on the court.   With that said, he has scaled back some and adjusted his style to the tremendous athletes we now have.

[mu03eng]

To answer your first question, I said to my friends during the timeout with 13 seconds left that I would be angry if the shot came from outside 15 feet or with more than 3 seconds on the clock.  They didn't do either of those, so I was definitely a little miffed, but how can you be too angry when the shot goes in and you just won a close game?  I do agree with you that there should have been a higher percentage shot taken if at all possible, and I'm glad to at least hear that it was the first option.

About the end of the game and DJ's scoring run, only about 10 of that was him taking over the game at the end - from about the 2:30 mark he hit two 3's, a long jumper, and some free throws.  It's true the last minute and a half he had no intention of giving the ball up, but the streak of 18 started before that, and he wasn't really hogging the ball it seemed to me.  The other players just couldn't get a shot to fall for many reasons.  The officiating really threw MU off their game, especially with the charges MU couldn't really play their game and drive to the hole.  Many times in the second half there were problems with MU trying to avoid charges instead of taking it strong to the hole, creating turnovers and bad shots.

I think the thing everyone forgets is that yes the shot was taken with 3 seconds left on the clock, but how much time is left if the shot misses and either we rebound or Valpo rebounds.  If it misses and we rebound we have a chance for a quick put back to score and the game is over.  If DJ misses and Valpo rebounds....its a running clock and they were out of timeouts.  What kind of quality shot are they going to get after fighting for the rebound, finding an outlet pass and running down the court with the clock at 3 seconds when the shot hits the rim? 

I actually very pleased with the shot selection.  If it goes in, Valpo has to hit a three with no timeouts to set up a play.  What it avoids, is the possibility of DJ getting fouled while driving to the hoop.  This stops the clock while DJ goes to the line....he then has the pressure to hit them both AND Valpo has time to get organized for a last second shot.

IMHO, I think you take that shot against a zone defense with between 5 and 2 seconds left on the clock and you do it every game.

[MarquetteVol]

True, but they nearly hit a shot at the buzzer to tie it. So, I would say there was a litttle too much time left. 

[dwaderoy2004]

yeah but i think that's the point.  the only reason they had time is because he made it and the clock stopped.  and then, the very best they could do was send off a 40-footer for the TIE.  they had no way of winning in regulation (yeah i know, three and a foul...but wasn't going to happen).  i have no problem with the shot selection.  i agree with mu03 that even if james misses that shot, valpo doesn't have time to get a shot off if they could even secure the rebound.

[TJ]

none of this is wrong - it is very true that a miss with 4 seconds left is very unlikely to be turned into a basket at the other end.  However, I had no idea what the timeout situation was - the scoreboard at Valpo was very basic - so that may help you to understand my thinking at the time (timeout after a miss and they could have had 3 seconds and time to set up a play).  Also, a missed three can create a long rebound away from the basket that a guard could pick up and have 3 seconds to dribble down and shoot - outside chance, but something that could have happened.  3 seconds is enough time to get a decent shot off in that situation.

Plus, I really thought that we would have a very good shot at beating them in an overtime period (they couldn't hit miracle 3's forever, right?), so I really wanted the buzzer to sound with the ball in the air in that situation.  Make it and it's over, miss it and there's OT.  That's why I would have preferred a shot with less time on the clock.

Either way, it worked.  I wouldn't say I was angry over the play - I just would have tried to coach it differently if I were in charge.

[MarquetteVol]

I agree, TJ. Valpo was in some serious foul trouble, too. However, you never want to send the game into OT when you're on the road.

[muhoosier260]

as far as james taking over the game late goes: in the duke game remember he had a considerable amount of free-throws, and last night against valpo especially he was getting to the line time after time after time. granted he had some nice pull up j's 15-18 feet and two huge threes, but dj is getting to the line like a leader should and he's getting the job done from the line, 11-13 last night, who would've guessed that after the idaho state game?!

[Big Papi]

True, but they nearly hit a shot at the buzzer to tie it. So, I would say there was a litttle too much time left. 

They might have nearly hit the shot at the buzzer but it was not a high percentage shot.  Unfortunately the game was not televised but it sounded like it was 28 plus feet away when it was launched.  I would let them shoot that anytime.  Of course they can hit it but at a very low rate.  You have to play the odds on this.  Better chance for us to rebound a miss and put it back in than for them to race up the court and throw up a prayer of a shot.

[Tampa Warrior]

I actually thought it was a good job of not over-coaching on Crean's part.

This is what I'm most happy about.  Crean has a very high basketball IQ.  He runs an NBA esque playbook.  In the past, he has had a tendency to micro manage the play on the court.   With that said, he has scaled back some and adjusted his style to the tremendous athletes we now have.

Yes, I'm liking that from TC this year. He's maturing as a coach, as expected.