Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GT Nuggets vs Raptors: 1st difficult game of a difficult back to back

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JimiCliff wrote: View Post
    That isn't my premise!

    My premise is that you should look at the probabilities of all possible outcomes, and then choose the strategy that gives you best chance of winning.

    This is all based on the idea that you would not have to rush your shot on either your first shot, or your hypothetical second shot. IMO they wouldn't have had to; given that they're advancing the ball with a timeout, they easily had time for two quality plays.

    This shouldn't be an issue for an NBA team.

    Neither should this. But granted, you are putting these situations into play if you lengthen the game.
    You haven't presented any alternatives that give the team a better chance of winning that what Casey called last night.

    My argument is that when you're down by 1 point with about 15 seconds left in the game, with the ball coming out of a timeout, there is no better chance of winning the game than designing/executing a single play to get the best possible game-winning shot attempt at/near the buzzer (likely a dunk, layup or short 2pt shot - all high % shots).
    Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013, 05:42 PM.

    Comment


    • JimiCliff wrote: View Post
      It's all about giving yourself one more chance if you happen to miss. That's it. An additional chance to win, all other things being equal. If you DO NOT strategize to give yourself this chance, then you play to make sure the other team doesn't have time to get off a decent shot for a walk-off win, which we didn't really do.

      And maybe that's being a little nit-picky, asking Rudy to just shave a couple more seconds off of the clock before he shoots the ball. Maybe the degree of difficulty is enough that you kinda have to take the shot that's there. But, he is getting paid 19 mil a year...
      I think you're missing the point that white men can't jump and I are making, in that by planning around a missed shot, all other things will NOT be equal.

      If you do make the shot with more time on the clock, then you've provided the opposition with a chance to win the game (quite possibly without ever getting the ball back).

      If you miss the shot, the best-case scenario is a quick foul and 2 missed foul shots. The result is that your team is in the exact same situation, but with a few less seconds on the clock. The worst-case situation is that several seconds run off the clock and both foul shots are made, leaving your team with much less time remaining and having to make a 3pt shot (far fewer options and way lower % than a 2pt shot) just to tie - you have absolutely no chance to win the game in regulation.
      Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Feb 13th, 2013, 05:44 PM.

      Comment


      • JimiCliff wrote: View Post
        It's all about giving yourself one more chance if you happen to miss. That's it. An additional chance to win, all other things being equal. If you DO NOT strategize to give yourself this chance, then you play to make sure the other team doesn't have time to get off a decent shot for a walk-off win, which we didn't really do.

        And maybe that's being a little nit-picky, asking Rudy to just shave a couple more seconds off of the clock before he shoots the ball. Maybe the degree of difficulty is enough that you kinda have to take the shot that's there. But, he is getting paid 19 mil a year...
        Your argument is flawed is what I'm saying, because even that last chance is better off the rebound attempt from a game-winner, or worst-case, a last ditch 3 with just a couple of seconds....All my scenarios included some give for the fact that they should be able to get at least a rebound attempt, if not time to foul as well, with less than 5 seconds left. Too much time actually increases the amount of scenarios that keep Denver in the lead. Basically, why is it better in your mind to be down 3 with 10 seconds left than down 3 with 2 seconds left? It's easier for them to foul you with more time. If you hit the shot, it still gives them time to run a play (assuming since by your logic, you would still take that shot and have a few seconds left just in case you wanted a chance at a rebound and another shot), and if you miss it and can't rebound, unlike with a 1 point game, you have no further opportunities...

        Basicaly your plan only focuses on quantity of attempts, while ignoring both quality and chances to win the game without going to OT.
        Last edited by white men can't jump; Wed Feb 13th, 2013, 06:00 PM.

        Comment


        • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
          You haven't presented any alternatives that give the team a better chance of winning that what Casey called last night.
          You're right, I haven't. So, here we go.

          JIMI'S STRATEGY:

          The possession begins with a quicker shot attempt. This is based on the premise that the shot attempt will be of the same quality as the one Rudy eventually took, i.e., not rushed. I believe there was enough time to make this happen.

          Ways to win:

          1a) Raps score on the initial possession. Denver holds for the last shot and misses.
          1b) Raps miss on the initial possession. Denver is fouled, they hit 0/1 FTs. Raps get the ball back with about ten seconds left. Raps take the lead. Denver does not get a final shot/they miss their final shot.
          1c) Same as 1b but Denver hits two FTs, Raps tie the game, then win in OT.

          Ways to lose:

          -1a) Raps score on first possession. Denver holds for the final shot, Ty Lawson (or whoever, but damn he was killing it) wins it at the buzzer.
          -1b) Raps miss on first possession. Fouling ensues, but let's assume no miracles, and Denver holds on.

          DWANE'S STRATEGY:

          Ways to win:

          2a) Raps score (as Rudy did). Denver misses.

          Ways to lose:

          -2a) Raps score. Denver scores for a walk-off win.

          The advantage with my strategy is that there are additional ways to win; 1b and 1c are not possible in Casey's strategy. The disadvantage to my strategy is with the difference in Denver's possibilities when the Raps score on their initial possession. In my strategy, they have more time to set up a shot, which may or may not give it a better chance of going in. So it comes down to this:

          Are the odds of 1b and 1c

          better than the difference in the odds between

          Denver scoring after the Raps score on their initial possession

          in my strategy

          versus Dwane's.

          Or you could say: by letting the clock run down, how much harder are you making it for Denver to score after the Raps score? And if so, how much harder is it; how much do their odds decrease? Then you have to compare that to the increase of the odds of the Raps winning from 1b and 1c.

          The only way for Casey's strategy to be the cut-and-dry one to use is, as Matt52 said way back, to make sure there there is next to no time left on the clock so that Denver has nothing better than a hail mary. And that isn't how the Raps played it; five seconds is enough time to get a good look.

          There's probably a simpler way to put all this, but I need to get some dinner.
          Last edited by JimiCliff; Wed Feb 13th, 2013, 08:29 PM.
          "Stop eating your sushi."
          "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
          "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
          - Jack Armstrong

          Comment

          Working...
          X