2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

[TheShizNo1]

Deshaun Thomas is what I think Carl Winslow would've looked like in college.

[weeeeeeez]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Indiana's A game is pretty good.

[37]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

huge road win for IU...hopefully this erases the bad taste from their mouths and catapults them into big things at the end of the year

[skywalkah]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Southerland in. Glad to see him back. Shake off that walk. XD

[iRepIndiana]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Biggest win of the year.

I forgot we even lost to Illinois.

[xxedgexx]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

If you didn't know Russ Smith was JR's little brother you know now.

I thought that JR Smith's younger brother was Chris Smith, who played for Louisville and graduated last year?

[skywalkah]

Hah it is Chris. Think Russ was the joke.

[ZM Punk]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Hah it is Chris. Think Russ was the joke.

Yeah, it was supposed to be a shot at Russ for being more like J.R. than his actual brother was for Louisville. Didn't come off very good, but I'm glad someone got.

[Psyblast]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Hey I wasn't able to see the game yesterday (thankfully). When you say "final play" are you talking about the half court shot? Or are you referring to something that happened in overtime? If it's the former, I agree with you about the inbound pass. Though, I suppose the idea was to prevent getting beat deep, which would be just about the only way for a team to get a good three point look with that little amount of time left and the ball on the opposite baseline. Still, I think I'm with you and I would have placed a defender in front of the ball.

On the flip side, I'm not sure I agree with the idea of fouling, at least when a team must go the length of the floor and try to find themselves a good three point look with 2.4 seconds remaining. Even when a team is inbounding in the half court, I tend not to be an advocate of the foul-when-leading-by-three strategy because I feel like it introduces a lot of unusual scenarios (player fouling as opposition begins to shoot immediately; opposition fouled without shooting but hits first free throw, misses second and has rebound won and tipped; making both, creating panicked turnover and regaining possession now only trailing by one, etc.).

I'm not a fan of giving up clean looks at game tying shots, but I am a fan of forcing the opposing team into shooting a super contested, leaning, falling away, 43 foot three pointer. As a coach, I'd take that shot any day of the week from my opposition. In this case, the fellow just hit a miraculous shot. It was incredible. There's really nothing a team can do when something crazy like that occurs.

Of course, if you were talking about fouling in another situation and not this one, then clearly I'm wildly off base.

Edit: Of course, the minute after I write all of that, I see a video of John Beilein saying he wanted to foul but his players just didn't. He mentioned it wasn't a situation that's really easy to establish and execute. Also, it sounds like there were fouls to give. Is that true? That'd almost convince me more not to foul. If Caris fouled in that situation, at half court, suddenly there's an inbound at half court with about 1.4 seconds left. To me, that creates a much more realistic scoring opportunity for Wisconsin. But who knows.

Beilein also talks about putting someone on the ball and expressed his fear of losing a one-on-one jump ball at the other end of the floor, so he wanted McGary down there as safety. And that's something I can understand as well. I'd still prefer guarding the ball, but I guess he was thinking the makeable pass and play would be an almost blind chuck to the opposite three point line and in that case, McGary's not affecting that pass and the aforementioned jumpball takes place at the other end.

Basically, I think there's merit to any decision a coach makes in that situation but usually, when a crazy shot is hit, I tend to just call it a crazy shot and move on. It's really not as if Wisconsin executed their play to perfection and got the clean look they wanted. Whenever the strategy goes wrong, we always like to pretend the other strategy would have been a sure thing, but I do not believe that. Sometimes teams succeed in completing the incredible regardless of what the opposition throws their way. In this case, Michigan threw a defensive scheme that forced a 43 foot ultra-contested, leaning desperation heave. It was just... a special play made by Wisconsin.

Yes, I was talking about the final play in regulation. If you put 6'10, 250-pound Mitch McGary in front of the inbounds man, waving his arms, you force Wisconsin into an uncomfortable inbounds pass, likely one that involves someone coming back to the ball. Instead, Michigan gave them an unharassed look, which let them get the ball to Brust as he was already moving toward the other end of the floor. The shot he hit was still miraculous, but it was still a much better look than they would've gotten in 2.4 seconds if Michigan had pressured the inbounds play. Exact same thing that Michigan screwed up against Evan Turner in the Big 10 Tournament a few years back, with the exact same result.

The team that wins the Big Ten is/was likely going to be the first team to score a big win on the road later in the season. Indiana held serve at home against Michigan and MSU, Michigan held serve against Ohio State, MSU held serve against Ohio State, etc. Michigan should've had it against Wisconsin yesterday, and now Indiana winning at Ohio State makes the path for the Hoosiers that much easier.

[phenom1990]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

I was able to see the last minute of regulation til the end of the Louisville Notre Dame game on ESPN Classic... wow, that tip in the 4th OT was ridiculous. Pitino throwing the water bottle in one of the overtimes had me laughing.

[13]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Can anyone honestly tell me why Duke is ranked above Miami? Being completely serious I don't see how they aren't flipped the other way.

[VDusen04]

Re: 2/4-2/10 Game Discussion Thread

Yes, I was talking about the final play in regulation. If you put 6'10, 250-pound Mitch McGary in front of the inbounds man, waving his arms, you force Wisconsin into an uncomfortable inbounds pass, likely one that involves someone coming back to the ball. Instead, Michigan gave them an unharassed look, which let them get the ball to Brust as he was already moving toward the other end of the floor. The shot he hit was still miraculous, but it was still a much better look than they would've gotten in 2.4 seconds if Michigan had pressured the inbounds play. Exact same thing that Michigan screwed up against Evan Turner in the Big 10 Tournament a few years back, with the exact same result.

Truly, with such a small amount of time left on the clock, I think the chances of something good happening when having to go the length of the floor is pretty darn slim whether a defender is guarding the inbound pass or not. As I said, I think I'd prefer to have someone on the ball but again, when a team's down by three, it's probably going to be a baseball heave regardless, almost a hail mary type, so a jumping defender's only going to do so much. For instance:

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0haGKGiX9qA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Also, I found the Brust play to be much different than the Turner shot, though the results remained the same. Not guarding the inbounds passer is one thing. Opting not to defend the best player on the other team and letting him more or less walk unobstructed past half court for a mostly unchallenged shot is quite another. Unfortunately, that's what happened in the Evan Turner play:

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/MVLWsHjVu9Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

On the flip side, even without anyone guarding the inbounds, Wisconsin nearly committed a violation (passer was a split second from leaning and falling into play). With the opposite end of the court eaten up by two Wolverines and a roamer (McGary) the only option Wisconsin had was to catch the ball 60 feet away from the hoop with a defender stuck to his side. Even though Beilein wanted to foul, I think forcing that 43 ft. fallaway triple with a hand in the grill is about the best case scenario you're hoping for as a Wolverine coach. No jump ball pass leading to a weird bounce and open three look. No immediate foul allowing Wisconsin to take the ball out of bounds at half court and set up a good look from there. They got a terrible look and they drilled it.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M9W7AVuN9dI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>