End of game coaching

[tower912]

Yesterday, after Seton Hall scored to go up 1 with 9 seconds to go, Calipari chose to not use one of his two remaining timeouts and let his very young team play it out, resulting in a contested 3 with the shooter flopping, hoping for a call.    IMO, he made the wrong call because this particular team is young and not particularly efficient yet.   

I would make the counter argument if it happened to MU.    I think with Howard, the Hausers, Sacar and Chartouny on the floor, there is time for them to race up the floor, get to their spots and get a screen and a shot.   

What say you?    MU has just given up a basket to go down 1 with 10 seconds left.   Timeouts remaining.    Timeout or no timeout?

I don't know that there is a right answer.   If the team scores, the coach is smart for not letting the defense get set.    If the team doesn't score, the coach is dumb for losing with a timeout in his pocket.

[wadesworld]

Young or old, I’m a fan of not taking a timeout. Unless, for some reason, your stud is on the bench when you’re getting the ball back. With 10 seconds and a full court to go, you’re not going to run a set offense. So don’t let the defense get their best defenders on the court and get organized with matchups and get the ball moving up the court in a hurry.

[Silkk the Shaka]

T.O. for sure. If there's one thing we've been consistently very good at under Wojo, it's been getting quality looks out of the T.O.

[brewcity77]

What say you?    MU has just given up a basket to go down 1 with 10 seconds left.   Timeouts remaining.    Timeout or no timeout?

Right now I'd say no timeout, though that will probably get a contested shot from Howard. Yesterday's out of timeout plays were really bad. I felt like every timeout led to passing around the perimeter until there was 5 seconds left on the shot clock and we'd take a bad contested shot. I'd rather let them play and get the look than let the defense reset. I also assume we're going to have our best offensive options out there already, so no sense in letting the defense make substitutions.

[NickelDimer]

Honestly it depends on how good of an in game coach you are. Not sure Cal’s strength is drawing up a play out of a timeout whereas someone like Brad Stevens is a master at it. I thought Wojo drew up a beautiful play for Joeys corner 3 and also got Sam free coming out of another timeout but Sam didn’t pull the trigger. I don’t quite trust Markus enough to have not called a timeout at the end of regulation and we saw the result. He didn’t take a bad shot but he definitely went a second late

[1SE]

I'll have to admit, I was pretty livid about our end of regulation. Watching live I didn't see the off-the-ball action, but it certainly looked like Markus held it until there was 6 on the game clock and then dribbled into 4 guys and chucked up a prayer, just like everyone knew he would.

Of course taking the T.O. is always risky - have to navigate an inbounds. But I can't believe that Wojo wouldn't have something up his sleeve for that situation - especially with a full shot clock, where you get the ball into Markus' hands but then have him get it to Joey or Sam - exactly since everyone in the building KNEW Markus was going to take the shot.

But I would have been much more livid if we would have lost in OT. Winning cures all.
 

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I think it depends if your offense is play based or a system.  Cal I believe does the dribble drive offense exclusively.  So why not let them play.   

[94Warrior]

T.O. for sure. If there's one thing we've been consistently very good at under Wojo, it's been getting quality looks out of the T.O.

Absolutely.  The bolded part.

[brewcity77]

T.O. for sure. If there's one thing we've been consistently very good at under Wojo, it's been getting quality looks out of the T.O.

Generally, yes. Yesterday, no.

[MU82]

I thought Wojo drew up a beautiful play for Joeys corner 3 and also got Sam free coming out of another timeout but Sam didn’t pull the trigger.

I was going to bring up these exact two plays.

I'll have to admit, I was pretty livid about our end of regulation. Watching live I didn't see the off-the-ball action, but it certainly looked like Markus held it until there was 6 on the game clock and then dribbled into 4 guys and chucked up a prayer, just like everyone knew he would.

Of course taking the T.O. is always risky - have to navigate an inbounds. But I can't believe that Wojo wouldn't have something up his sleeve for that situation - especially with a full shot clock, where you get the ball into Markus' hands but then have him get it to Joey or Sam - exactly since everyone in the building KNEW Markus was going to take the shot.
 

I have absolutely no problem with the shot Markus got.

First, in a tie game, you want the buzzer to go off at the shot. You want the worst-case scenario to be overtime. So the timing actually was perfect.

Second, I didn't think it was a "prayer" at all. Markus has made more difficult shots, he beat his man and there was only one F%cky player in position to challenge the shot at all, and Markus got a very good look. When it first left his hand, I thought it was in. You want to talk about a prayer? The shot that Powell hit to put Hall ahead in the final seconds of regulation was a prayer -- a double-pump 3 with a defender draped all over him -- and it left enough time on the clock for Kentucky to hit their own prayer and send it into OT. I'll take Markus' shot every time, even though it didn't go in yesterday.

Third, over the years, there have been thousands of similar situations when everybody in the arena knew who was going to take the winning shot. Michael missed a lot of them, as did Kobe, as has LeBron, as has Kemba, etc, etc, etc. Yes, every once in awhile, MJ or LeBron passed instead of shot; when it worked, MJ was praised for finding Pax or Kerr; when it didn't, LeBron was criticized for passing instead of shooting. Markus' game has not developed enough yet for him to create that kind of shot for others; hopefully it will.

Now, of course one could debate whether Markus really is "our MJ" or "our LeBron," but you play to strengths. One of Markus' strengths is that, despite his size, he can almost always get a decent look on a make-able shot. Which he did yesterday.

[brewcity77]

First, in a tie game, you want the buzzer to go off at the shot. You want the worst-case scenario to be overtime. So the timing actually was perfect.

I'm going to strongly disagree with this. The ball should leave Howard's hands with 4-5 seconds left on the clock. It leaves enough time for a rebound and putback, but not enough for the defense to get anything other than a desperation heave. As fun as the buzzer-beater to win the game is, you want the chance for a second shot, especially when you have dominated second-chance points.

[MU82]

I'm going to strongly disagree with this. The ball should leave Howard's hands with 4-5 seconds left on the clock. It leaves enough time for a rebound and putback, but not enough for the defense to get anything other than a desperation heave. As fun as the buzzer-beater to win the game is, you want the chance for a second shot, especially when you have dominated second-chance points.

We will agree to disagree, although I will slightly change my view to say that if a great shot -- like a wide-open 3 for Sam -- materializes with several seconds left, I'd take it. But in general, that's not going to happen, and I want one that "dies at the cup."

Anyhoo, thanks for making me think, brew.

[GB Warrior]

If I trusted Howard more as a distributor, I'd say let them play. But end of regulation is exaclty why, at this moment, you call TO and remind Howard that when 3 guys crash him, his instincit needs to be to have his head up looking for the wide open shot

[Loose Cannon]

I'm going to strongly disagree with this. The ball should leave Howard's hands with 4-5 seconds left on the clock. It leaves enough time for a rebound and putback, but not enough for the defense to get anything other than a desperation heave. As fun as the buzzer-beater to win the game is, you want the chance for a second shot, especially when you have dominated second-chance points.

But doesn't the possibility exist that we commit a foul in those seconds.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I'm going to strongly disagree with this. The ball should leave Howard's hands with 4-5 seconds left on the clock. It leaves enough time for a rebound and putback, but not enough for the defense to get anything other than a desperation heave. As fun as the buzzer-beater to win the game is, you want the chance for a second shot, especially when you have dominated second-chance points.

I disagree with your strong disagreement.

If Howard makes the shot with 2-3 seconds left,  Wisconsin can get a shot for the win.

It might be a clean look from halfcourt,  it might be a Bryce Drew play, etc. At home, I take my chances in OT if MU misses.

[rocky_warrior]

Just since I haven't seen it mentioned....watching on TV, the last play of regulation it appeared Wojo was instructing Markus what to do.  I swear I even heard Woj say "hold it" - meaning to just drain the clock, and hopefully a shot at the end of it. (all without a TO)

And given the shooter he was giving instructions to, I don't have a problem with that strategy.  Just didn't work this time (but did guarantee OT).

Of course, I could have misheard, or misunderstand what I heard

[brewcity77]

But doesn't the possibility exist that we commit a foul in those seconds.

The odds are just as good they commit one and send us to the line. Most of the time the refs aren't going to call that anyway.

If Howard scores and leaves 2-3 seconds, you trust the defense. If Howard misses, you have a chance for a putback with virtually zero chance of them getting a shot off even if they get the board. Yesterday, it looked like Ed was in great position for the putback.

[GGGG]

I think they played it perfectly.  I don't think you play for an offensive rebound.  That was a good look for Howard - just didn't fall.

[Marcus92]

We didn't get many wide open looks from our set offense all day. Wisconsin is a very good defensive team, legitimate Top 20 in the country. I was okay with the play call at the end of regulation. Markus didn't get a great shot, but it was good enough to give MU a chance to win.

I think whether you call the TO or not depends on the game and the moment. Not just in order to call a specific play. But maybe the team just needs to settle down. Everyone's probably both pumped up on adrenaline and physically tired at that point -- a few words in the huddle might be just what they need to focus. Or, the coach likes the flow of the game and decides not to mess with their rhythm.

[Loose Cannon]

The odds are just as good they commit one and send us to the line. Most of the time the refs aren't going to call that anyway.

If Howard scores and leaves 2-3 seconds, you trust the defense. If Howard misses, you have a chance for a putback with virtually zero chance of them getting a shot off even if they get the board. Yesterday, it looked like Ed was in great position for the putback.

Kinda like a Hail Mary in the End Zone.  Thanks

[#UnleashSean]

Unless your best two scorers are both on the bench, never call a timeout in that situation. Going up against a defense who is unorganized/celebrating the big play is a lot better then going up against one who is completely setup.

[MUMountin]

The odds are just as good they commit one and send us to the line. Most of the time the refs aren't going to call that anyway.

If Howard scores and leaves 2-3 seconds, you trust the defense. If Howard misses, you have a chance for a putback with virtually zero chance of them getting a shot off even if they get the board. Yesterday, it looked like Ed was in great position for the putback.

One of my favorite late game plays was Vander Blue’s layup to beat St Johns in OT—puts it up with about two seconds to play.  The shot bounced on the rim a few times before dropping, but almost simultaneously Jamil Wilson and Trent Lockett leapt on either side of the bucket ready to tip in while Davante is parked directly underneath in case it came off the front of the rim.  Absolutely beautiful play.

The winner against Davidson was almost the same with Davante sitting low while Jamil looked like he was supposed to crash high for the follow-in tip (but slipped as he was about to jump) if it was needed.  Again, great play design with a good primary look but having rebounding built into the play design as well.  Don’t remember if Buzz’s special teams plays were always that great, but those two stood out in the midst of a great run.

Both plays start at about the 2:40 mark of this video. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2R7hgZZQ3io

[brewcity77]

One of my favorite late game plays was Vander Blue’s layup to beat St Johns in OT—puts it up with about two seconds to play.  The shot bounced on the rim a few times before dropping, but almost simultaneously Jamil Wilson and Trent Lockett leapt on either side of the bucket ready to tip in while Davante is parked directly underneath in case it came off the front of the rim.  Absolutely beautiful play.

The winner against Davidson was almost the same with Davante sitting low while Jamil looked like he was supposed to crash high for the follow-in tip (but slipped as he was about to jump) if it was needed.  Again, great play design with a good primary look but having rebounding built into the play design as well.  Don’t remember if Buzz’s special teams plays were always that great, but those two stood out in the midst of a great run.

Both plays start at about the 2:40 mark of this video. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2R7hgZZQ3io

+1 gazillion. Those worked at 2 seconds because Vander got right to the hoop. I expected Markus to go for a pull-up which is why I said "he needs to get the shot off at 4" to the people next to me. Those two plays, nearly identical, worked flawlessly not just because Blue made the basket but because if it was bouncing off it would've been put back in. The St. John's play at the 3:00 mark is a perfect look.

[BM1090]

Right now I'd say no timeout, though that will probably get a contested shot from Howard. Yesterday's out of timeout plays were really bad. I felt like every timeout led to passing around the perimeter until there was 5 seconds left on the shot clock and we'd take a bad contested shot. I'd rather let them play and get the look than let the defense reset. I also assume we're going to have our best offensive options out there already, so no sense in letting the defense make substitutions.

I thought this on first watch. But we had two nice ATOs for open Hauser corner 3s and he drilled them. We also had one that resulted in a Markus made floater.

The end of game we really struggled getting the ball inbounds

[WarriorFan]

One of the easiest things to do in CBB today because of the inconsistent refereeing allowing lots of holding and blocking during dead ball situations and because there are no Chris Paul's at this level is to defend the inbound pass for 5 seconds.  Because of this, you only call TO if you don't have the right guys on the court...  for example you need a 3 and don't have shooters because of a previous defensive sub... or you don't have rebounders and the strategy is to throw it up with 6 seconds and get the putback.  The issue here is that these are not in-game decisions.  These are practice issues - scenarios that are repeated over and over again so it's like instinct. 

Does Wojo come up with good plays after most TO's?  Yes.  Would I stop play if I had 2 Hausers + Marcus + Sacar on the floor?  Not a chance... get a 3 with 5-6 seconds and then crash the boards. 

[GGGG]

UW was making it tough for MU to inbound.  They actually have fairly decent length.  As I said, I will take that shot 10 times out of 10 - and Markus will generally hit it 8 out of those 10.

[CTWarrior]

One of the easiest things to do in CBB today because of the inconsistent refereeing allowing lots of holding and blocking during dead ball situations and because there are no Chris Paul's at this level is to defend the inbound pass for 5 seconds.  Because of this, you only call TO if you don't have the right guys on the court...  for example you need a 3 and don't have shooters because of a previous defensive sub... or you don't have rebounders and the strategy is to throw it up with 6 seconds and get the putback.  The issue here is that these are not in-game decisions.  These are practice issues - scenarios that are repeated over and over again so it's like instinct. 

Does Wojo come up with good plays after most TO's?  Yes.  Would I stop play if I had 2 Hausers + Marcus + Sacar on the floor?  Not a chance... get a 3 with 5-6 seconds and then crash the boards.

This.

[ATWizJr]

Didn’t like that he didn’t call time out to set something up but in reflecting about it Wojo showed a great amount of confidence in his team. Even though it didn’t work out this time it should show future dividends.

[mu03eng]

In a home game against a rival, I 100% go with a shot in my best players hand that is going to leave no time left of the clock. Markus had a good look and I thought it was going in. Besides something like 70% of rebounds are defensive anyway so why take the risk of a silly over the back foul on the rebound or leaving 2-3 seconds for a heave and shot?

Generally in that game I wished Markus was looking more to distribute than create for himself because he was doubled in the lane a ton, but the last play in regulation was perfect for what a top 20 defense in Wisconsin was going to let us have.

[MU82]

One of my favorite late game plays was Vander Blue’s layup to beat St Johns in OT—puts it up with about two seconds to play.  The shot bounced on the rim a few times before dropping, but almost simultaneously Jamil Wilson and Trent Lockett leapt on either side of the bucket ready to tip in while Davante is parked directly underneath in case it came off the front of the rim.  Absolutely beautiful play.

I won't disagree with this at all ... but there was major difference between this situation and the one on Saturday:

We were behind against Davidson. We NEEDED to give ourselves a chance at a tip-in had Vander missed. No basket there and the game -- and the season -- is kaput. In that situation, you go as quickly as you can and take the first good shot you can.

In a tie game, especially at home, I still say you want the ball to go in just as the buzzer sounds. Brew makes a decent case, but he and I (and others) disagree.

It would be interesting to talk to a panel of coaches we all respect and get their viewpoints, but I want the very worst-case scenario there to be OT on my home court.

And again, I had no problem with Wojo's strategy or the shot we got: a pretty darn good look for a proven scorer who has made similar shots dozens of times.

If you ask Markus to do something he's not great at -- such as drive, create and kick -- maybe he throws the ball out of bounds or travels or gets the ball stolen with 5 seconds left. And then, when F%cky scores the winner at the buzzer, we can really hear some Scoopers howl about what an idiot Wojo is.

[JakeBarnes]

In a home game against a rival, I 100% go with a shot in my best players hand that is going to leave no time left of the clock. Markus had a good look and I thought it was going in. Besides something like 70% of rebounds are defensive anyway so why take the risk of a silly over the back foul on the rebound or leaving 2-3 seconds for a heave and shot?

Generally in that game I wished Markus was looking more to distribute than create for himself because he was doubled in the lane a ton, but the last play in regulation was perfect for what a top 20 defense in Wisconsin was going to let us have.

For all the hero ball he tried, this was the right shot at the end of the game. I would have said in Markus' hands or Sacar's for a drive and floater. That's what happened.

[GGGG]

I won't disagree with this at all ... but there was major difference between this situation and the one on Saturday:

We were behind against Davidson. We NEEDED to give ourselves a chance at a tip-in had Vander missed. No basket there and the game -- and the season -- is kaput. In that situation, you go as quickly as you can and take the first good shot you can.

In a tie game, especially at home, I still say you want the ball to go in just as the buzzer sounds. Brew makes a decent case, but he and I (and others) disagree.

It would be interesting to talk to a panel of coaches we all respect and get their viewpoints, but I want the very worst-case scenario there to be OT on my home court.

And again, I had no problem with Wojo's strategy or the shot we got: a pretty darn good look for a proven scorer who has made similar shots dozens of times.

If you ask Markus to do something he's not great at -- such as drive, create and kick -- maybe he throws the ball out of bounds or travels or gets the ball stolen with 5 seconds left. And then, when F%cky scores the winner at the buzzer, we can really hear some Scoopers howl about what an idiot Wojo is.

He wasn't talking about Blue's shot v. Davidson.  He was talking about the one earlier that year v. St. Johns that clinched the BE.  That was a tie game situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QygEB3AYu2g

[MU82]

He wasn't talking about Blue's shot v. Davidson.  He was talking about the one earlier that year v. St. Johns that clinched the BE.  That was a tie game situation.

Oh shyte ...

I gotta work on my reading comprehension.

So on half of my post, anyway, I'll pull an Emily Litella!

[mu03eng]

For all the hero ball he tried, this was the right shot at the end of the game. I would have said in Markus' hands or Sacar's for a drive and floater. That's what happened.

Yeah we had a debate on the Scrambled Eggs pod about Markus' hero ball (shameless plug: https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=57181.0) I think Markus' hero ball in the game was not good, but I agree 100% called for at the end of the game. I trust him more than any other player to create a shot that gives us a chance and it's not close.

[MUMountin]

Oh shyte ...

I gotta work on my reading comprehension.

So on half of my post, anyway, I'll pull an Emily Litella!

No worries.  I realized that the Davidson play was when we were down one but included it anyway in my post since the two plays were so similar.  Very clear that they had practiced the timing of those plays many times.

I actually have very little problem with Howard's shot or Wojo letting them play in that situation--it was a good look and most of the time Marcus makes that shot.  I'm glad he pulled up instead of trying to drive all the way and get blocked at the rim.

Personally, I'd rather see him initiate his drive a second or two earlier to put the shot up with enough time for a put-back regardless of whether we are tied or not.  Morrow did a great job of getting position and grabbing the board, but didn't have time to put the shot back up.  It'll be interesting to see how they adjust to late game situations going forward.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Yeah we had a debate on the Scrambled Eggs pod about Markus' hero ball (shameless plug: https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=57181.0) I think Markus' hero ball in the game was not good, but I agree 100% called for at the end of the game. I trust him more than any other player to create a shot that gives us a chance and it's not close.

Agree, I'll take a 13-foot decent look from Markus in that situation every time.