On Hopson's Last Shot

[Unimane]

It was a desperation buzzer beater. I like my chances in that situation, but maybe you don't.

A "desperation" buzzer beater is a half court shot, not an open look from the top of the key.

And, where is your argument now? Have you totally discarded the timeout argument? You "like your chances" with the Michigan State shot? What happened to not giving the other teams the opportunity?

In any event, Izzo is actually the one showing how this strategy works out very well. He was down and took a shot with 18 seconds left instead of waiting for the last second like you stated. So, even though Maryland hit a shot, look at how much time Michigan State had to counter and get a great shot at the buzzer. Izzo proves my point very well here.

 

[LawVol13]

A "desperation" buzzer beater is a half court shot, not an open look from the top of the key.

And, where is your argument now? Have you totally discarded the timeout argument? You "like your chances" with the Michigan State shot? What happened to not giving the other teams the opportunity?

In any event, Izzo is actually the one showing how this strategy works out very well. He was down and took a shot with 18 seconds left instead of waiting for the last second like you stated. So, even though Maryland hit a shot, look at how much time Michigan State had to counter and get a great shot at the buzzer. Izzo proves my point very well here.

I would call a timeout in that situation; I didn't suggest that every coach in America would do that, but I have seen a done many, many times. Michigan State took a shot with almost 25 seconds when they couldn't have taken the last shot because the shot-clock was on. We took possession of the ball when Michigan State took their shot. In that situation, you might take the shot. That's not comparable to what we did. We had the opportunity to take the last shot; most coaches do exactly what I have said earlier.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with that strategy; I have a problem with you questioning people's knowledge of the game when you simply disagree with the philosophy.

 

[Unimane]

I would call a timeout in that situation; I didn't suggest that every coach in America would do that, but I have seen a done many, many times. Michigan State took a shot with almost 25 seconds when they couldn't have taken the last shot because the shot-clock was on. We took possession of the ball when Michigan State took their shot. In that situation, you might take the shot. That's not comparable to what we did. We had the opportunity to take the last shot; most coaches do exactly what I have said earlier.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with that strategy; I have a problem with you questioning people's knowledge of the game when you simply disagree with the philosophy.

Well, two things. One, it is not "my philosophy", it is a fundamental philosophy accepted by every coach I've ever known (as I stated in the beginning). Secondly, it wasn't a simple "disagreement" when you were saying it was stupid for Scotty to shoot it so early.

As far as the Michigan State-Maryland game, the shot clock differential was about 2 seconds, so that negates it's practical relevance to the argument. And, I still would like the names of these "most coaches" because I don't know a single one. I listed a number of coaches who do it the way I explained and could throw in a bunch more, if necessary, because that's how a good coach does it.

It's not like I conjured up this thought in order to remain some "Pearlophile".

 

[Heebs]

I didn't like the shot, thought it was too far out, with too much time left. MSU was going to take the last shot (if we didn't), regardless of how much time we left them on the clock.

Scotty's not who I wanted taking that shot. It should have been JP or Bobby with a drive to the hole or a chance for Chism to pound it down low.

 

[LawVol13]

Well, two things. One, it is not "my philosophy", it is a fundamental philosophy accepted by every coach I've ever known (as I stated in the beginning). Secondly, it wasn't a simple "disagreement" when you were saying it was stupid for Scotty to shoot it so early.

As far as the Michigan State-Maryland game, the shot clock differential was about 2 seconds, so that negates it's practical relevance to the argument. And, I still would like the names of these "most coaches" because I don't know a single one. I listed a number of coaches who do it the way I explained and could throw in a bunch more, if necessary, because that's how a good coach does it.

It's not like I conjured up this thought in order to remain some "Pearlophile".

There was a 4 second difference between game clock and shot clock; so yes, it is relevant. I took 5 seconds and found a video of showing exactly what all of us in the other thread said we should have done. You didn't list a multitude of coaches that would favor taking a contested shot at 12-15 seconds. In fact, you only listed one that didn't call timeout when he could take the final shot.

Just to edit this: I watched the video of Keith Smart's shot. IU down 1 (just like UT). Bob Knight, the coach you cite as using your strategy, elected to have Smart shoot the ball with 6 seconds on the clock just like I advocated earlier. Imagine that.

 

[GAVol]

2) He should have shot the ball with enough time to get a putback. You don't shoot it with enough time for the other team to come down and make a couple passes to get a shot.

I could see doing that when ahead or tied, but nobody does that when they're behind.

 

[LawVol13]

I could see doing that when ahead or tied, but nobody does that when they're behind.

I guess you should tell that to Bob Knight in the example that Unimane used then. He ran 30 seconds off the clock while behind and took a shot with 6 seconds to go to win.

 

[Unimane]

There was a 4 second difference between game clock and shot clock; so yes, it is relevant. I took 5 seconds and found a video of showing exactly what all of us in the other thread said we should have done.

Well, as long as a bunch of internet fans say it, I guess that trumps the plethora of coaches I ever known. And it's not like there aren't people here who agree with me as well.

The video actually shows 3 seconds, but the time is still negligible. If Izzo had wanted to deploy your strategy, it would've have been very easy for him to do so. A shot would've have went up with 5-3 seconds left and, even if it would've went in, only allowed for 2-3 seconds, at best, by the time the shot went in.

No, Izzo went for the standard coaching practice. You do not wait to score if you are down in the last seconds. Both Izzo and Williams employed the same strategy when they were down in the last seconds. Izzo simply had the last open look and his player knocked it down. There's not a coach in the NCAA who would've disagreed with either's decisions.

Look, I know we've battled on many issues and I can be as stubborn as you. In fact, I'll concede that it looks as if you may be correct on the never ending Woolridge argument. But, I'm telling you, this I'm definitely right on. This is standard operating procedure for coaches (for the non-Hal Mumme crackpot type coaches), I promise you.

Let's just move on to another argument.

 

[Unimane]

I guess you should tell that to Bob Knight in the example that Unimane used then. He ran 30 seconds off the clock while behind and took a shot with 6 seconds to go to win.

No, he didn't hold the ball, he ran his offense until the first good shot. I guarantee Knight was wanting an earlier shot, just not a forced one.

Seriously, like I said, it's SOP. I'm 100% on this one. Next thing, ok?

 

[LawVol13]

No, he didn't hold the ball, he ran his offense until the first good shot. I guarantee Knight was wanting an earlier shot, just not a forced one.

Seriously, like I said, it's SOP. I'm 100% on this one. Next thing, ok?

Agree to disagree. But if you favor what Knight did in the '87 Championship Game, I agree, and that's what I advocated for in my earlier posts.

 

[GAVol]

I guess you should tell that to Bob Knight in the example that Unimane used then. He ran 30 seconds off the clock while behind and took a shot with 6 seconds to go to win.

I really doubt that anyone that can defend at all would ever do that on purpose. Everybody just plays to get a good look.

Now you can argue whether a contested 17 footer constitutes a good look . . .

 

[Titanic]

Agree to disagree. But if you favor what Knight did in the '87 Championship Game, I agree, and that's what I advocated for in my earlier posts.

Bruce spoke to this point today. Basically the goal is to get a shot up with enough time to get a rebound or, worst case scenario, foul and then get back down for a legitimate three. Jason Shay said on 104.5 maybe you wait two or three more seconds optimally, but you don't want to wait so long that if the other team gets possession you don't have time to foul and get the ball back with a chance to still tie.

So to summarize: Your way is one way, but it's not the "correct" way.

Some NBA teams do it the way you're advocating, but that is a completely different situation. NBA players are better overall, better shooters in pressure situations, and the rules in the NBA are such that giving the opposition another possession is more likely to lead to a score. In the college game the "correct" way, in terms of giving yourself the best chance to win, is to do it the way it was done. Much like in poker there are many different interpretations, but generally speaking that is the statistically correct answer.

The thing people should be criticizing was our decision not to throw the ball over half court, take a timeout, and then setup a double screen for a three or a lob to Prince. Even Bruce admitted he wishes he had that one back.

I don't think we'll ever stop questioning this game.

 

[LawVol13]

Bruce spoke to this point today. Basically the goal is to get a shot up with enough time to get a rebound or, worst case scenario, foul and then get back down for a legitimate three. Jason Shay said on 104.5 maybe you wait two or three more seconds optimally, but you don't want to wait so long that if the other team gets possession you don't have time to foul and get the ball back with a chance to still tie.

So to summarize: Your way is one way, but it's not the "correct" way.

Some NBA teams do it the way you're advocating, but that is a completely different situation. NBA players are better overall, better shooters in pressure situations, and the rules in the NBA are such that giving the opposition another possession is more likely to lead to a score. In the college game the "correct" way, in terms of giving yourself the best chance to win, is to do it the way it was done. Much like in poker there are many different interpretations, but generally speaking that is the statistically correct answer.

The thing people should be criticizing was our decision not to throw the ball over half court, take a timeout, and then setup a double screen for a three or a lob to Prince. Even Bruce admitted he wishes he had that one back.

I don't think we'll ever stop questioning this game.

This is what I was referring to. I think the shot has to be taken with 5-9 seconds left not 12-15.

 

[GAVol]

The thing people should be criticizing was our decision not to throw the ball over half court, take a timeout, and then setup a double screen for a three or a lob to Prince. Even Bruce admitted he wishes he had that one back.

I have a hard time questioning that. You have to figure that 1) completing a halfcourt pass is tough enough; 2) It would take at least half a second or more for a player to gather himself and call timeout; 3) if it does work, there's no way the opposing team allows an entry pass into the lane or a lob from halfcourt.

 

[Unimane]

Agree to disagree. But if you favor what Knight did in the '87 Championship Game, I agree, and that's what I advocated for in my earlier posts.

No, Indiana set up their offense at about 16 seconds. In fact, Daryl Thomas was looking to shoot at about 9 seconds until Derrick Coleman stepped in.

 

[LawVol13]

I have a hard time questioning that. You have to figure that 1) completing a halfcourt pass is tough enough; 2) It would take at least half a second or more for a player to gather himself and call timeout; 3) if it does work, there's no way the opposing team allows an entry pass into the lane or a lob from halfcourt.

I agree. It's not as if MSU was just going to allow an easy pass to half court. If that's the plan and the ball is tipped or anything, you don't even get a shot. Therefore, I think the right decision was made.

 

[Freak]

I have a hard time questioning that. You have to figure that 1) completing a halfcourt pass is tough enough; 2) It would take at least half a second or more for a player to gather himself and call timeout; 3) if it does work, there's no way the opposing team allows an entry pass into the lane or a lob from halfcourt.

Probably not a lob, but something closer than half court wouldn't have been out of the question in that scenario.

 

[Unimane]

I have a hard time questioning that. You have to figure that 1) completing a halfcourt pass is tough enough; 2) It would take at least half a second or more for a player to gather himself and call timeout; 3) if it does work, there's no way the opposing team allows an entry pass into the lane or a lob from halfcourt.

1.6 seconds with the length of the court to go is a total crapshoot, I'm not sure what people are expecting there, realistically. I'll bet if we had 2.6 seconds, we would've tried the Bryce Drew play, but that would have looked like a clusterf-ck, too. It's damn near impossible in those situations.

 

[GAVol]

No, Indiana set up their offense at about 16 seconds. In fact, Daryl Thomas was looking to shoot at about 9 seconds until Derrick Coleman stepped in.

That's pretty much what happened. If you watch the replay, they did kill a little clock, but they were mainly just setting up and then running the offense trying to get a good shot. They tried to go inside before settling for Keith Smart's floater.

YouTube - Keith Smart winning shot 1987

 

[GAVol]

Probably not a lob, but something closer than half court wouldn't have been out of the question in that scenario.

What I would have liked to have seen is Chism call the last timeout rather than settling for throwing it to JP Prince 50 feet from the rim . . .

. . .but there just aren't a lot of good options in that scenario.

 

[Titanic]

I have a hard time questioning that. You have to figure that 1) completing a halfcourt pass is tough enough; 2) It would take at least half a second or more for a player to gather himself and call timeout; 3) if it does work, there's no way the opposing team allows an entry pass into the lane or a lob from halfcourt.

Well, if you go back and watch the end of the game we had people open over half court. It took us .2 seconds to rebound the ball and call timeout because Bruce told the official we were going to call timeout as soon as we got it. He could have done the same thing on a long toss over half court. MSU was not pressuring the catch because they didn't want to take a chance of a ticky tack foul getting us to the line. Sure there's the chance of a bobble, but that chance is no greater than Prince bobbling it the way he did, and the chance of running a successful inbound play with 1.2 or even 1.0 left from halfcourt is much higher than JP's desperation heave.

It was the wrong move, and Bruce said in the interview today that we will be prepared for it next time and will not repeat it. It's still probably only a 10-15% chance of success, but that's better than the 1% we had with the play we went with.

Also Othella Harrington says "Sometimes they do leave it open" with regards to the lob from halfcourt. It worked twice in like a two week period for Georgetown.

 

[Freak]

What I would have liked to have seen is Chism call the last timeout rather than settling for throwing it to JP Prince 50 feet from the rim . . .

. . .but there just aren't a lot of good options in that scenario.

That's really the bottom line.

 

[Unimane]

This is what I was referring to. I think the shot has to be taken with 5-9 seconds left not 12-15.

Fair enough, I'll take that as a concession and I'll concede that Woolridge sucks.

Although, I do hope that Woolridge turns out like the other previous whipping boys on our team, JP, Bobby, Melvin and Brian, in the end.

 

[LawVol13]

That's pretty much what happened. If you watch the replay, they did kill a little clock, but they were mainly just setting up and then running the offense trying to get a good shot. They tried to go inside before settling for Keith Smart's floater.

YouTube - Keith Smart winning shot 1987

They got the ball with about 27 seconds left in the game, which is almost exactly when we got possession of the ball against MSU. They shot it with 6 seconds to go. All I have ever stated on here is that is when I think the shot should be taken not with 12 seconds.

 

[GAVol]

The best option would have been for Williams and Hopson to make free throws.