When Mich rebounded the ball it should have been put in D. Walt’s hands immediately and let him create the play. Under the way things played out I would have preferred a time out if MAAR was not going straight to the hoop. When he passed it to Zak with no pressure he virtually decided who would make the play. Zak had a good look and missed. Everybody should be over this by now or are you just looking for ways to continue your dump party.
Nailed it. I wonder why no one told Walton how much time was left at the end of the Iowa game. Or maybe he wasn’t “playing basketball.”
All those other buzzer beaters where guys shoot as the clock expires must be complete luck and nothing to do with guys having better clock awareness.
As usual your analogy sucks. Shot clock violations are often because of bad offense (or good defense). Pretty different scenario. A better comparison would be “how many times do we see people chuck a shot with 4 seconds left on the shot clock because they think the shot clock is expiring early?”
Hell, Zak himself even said he needed better awareness there. You’re saying he’s wrong?
Down to 31.1% on the season.
On that note, I’m going to bow out of this thread. It will be an endless cycle of people who care about stats vs people who don’t care about stats.
Great, Hail has been kind enough to leave this thread to those of us who care about stats.
One of the questions about the late game strategy was whether JB should have called time out. I found this interesting article that claims that teams that do not call time out score more often and more points than teams that do:
Is intervention bias accounted for in Ezekowitz analysis? I think it is normal for coaches to refrain from taking a timeout when they see something they think might be giving their team an advantage in the moment. Assuming a coach is able to recognize advantage/ disadvantage in the moment, the result difference in success rates between calling a timeout versus not calling a timeout will tend to be exaggerated or even responsible for spinning out unreliable data sets.
I know everyone had good stats today for UM, but quietly Irvin has been productive within the system last 3 road games. 15pts on 9 shots today, 12 on 10 shots at NU, 16 on 10 shots at MIN.
If during tournament play he continues to stay right around 10 field goal attempts with 12-15pts, it give UM good enough production AND opens the court up for Wilson, Robinson, MAAR to remain in support roles better suited for their skills.
I’m with you. He’s been great the last few games. I hope he keeps it up/ plays within himself and the offense. The real test is when things are tight or not going well can he keep making good decisions and try not to do too much/ be a hero.
“Great” might a little bit of hyperbole; if Irvin starts scoring 20pts a game on 12-14 shots then I’ll upgrade him to great.
Now DWalton, by and large, has been “great” the last month-plus.
I think he’s played great. I don’t think he’s a 20 point scorer. The role he’s filled the last few games is what’s best for him and the rest of the team. His decision making and shot selection has largely been on point. This is why I said he’s played " great" cause I think he’s adjusted well and making good choices and hitting them and doing what’s best for the team to win. I hope it continues.
If Zak shoots like he did last night, he can shoot as much as he wants .
Not sure I would say as much as he wants… but he is certainly trending in the right direction which is playing within himself and taking shots that he has had success in making in the past.
Did his shot look a little different to anyone last night? Almost smoother?
I just see it as playing in the flow of the offense and not having to be the main initiator. Makes life less complicated.
I thought he looked more fluid. I’m sure that’s because he is playing within the motion of the offense and taking the opening or passing.
Well, it’s a good point, but I have a couple thoughts. One, to some extent, isn’t that exactly what you’re measuring? The point is that a coach’s first job is to get his players to try to get into an advantageous position and then not call time out. You better not call timeout unless you need to or you’re now in the class of possessions with a much lower expected value. Second, the possessions include a number that will probably negate some of the advantage recognition. It includes all possessions, for example even if they began after a made basket. It includes timeouts called by the opposing team (presumably after a made basket or maybe a deflection out of bounds). But good question raised.
That seems like a good and clear way to think about the decision to call a timeout.