End-of-game strategy -- is our luck due to run out?

Moderators: greenyellow, Autzenoise, UOducksTK1

User avatar
greenyellow
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35676
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:54 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Re: End-of-game strategy -- is our luck due to run out?

Post by greenyellow »

If you have a shooter with an open shot that's in rhythm, then there should be no hesitation in allowing them to that shot.
Image
maxduck
Senior
Posts: 3769
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: End-of-game strategy -- is our luck due to run out?

Post by maxduck »

We know what Altman thinks...

Tyler Dorsey heard a familiar voice as he debated taking his last three-pointer.

“I yelled at him to shoot it because I saw his hands down and his feet were right,” Oregon coach Dana Altman said.

With the score tied, Dorsey followed Altman’s directions and made the game-winning shot with 38 seconds remaining to lift third-seeded Oregon to a 75-72 victory over Rhode Island in the second round of the NCAA Tournament on Sunday night at Golden1Center.
User avatar
pudgejeff
Senior
Posts: 4897
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:21 am
GM: Sacramento Kings GM

Re: End-of-game strategy -- is our luck due to run out?

Post by pudgejeff »

paduck wrote:
Duck07 wrote:
paduck wrote:We've got a couple days to kill before the Sweet 16 starts up, so I thought I'd start a discussion about end-of-game strategy. My theory, if you will, is that Oregon has been pretty lucky this year in close games as the clock winds down. Quick breakdown:

UCLA @ Oregon: Oregon down 2, Brooks with a long 3-pointer for the W
Oregon @ Cal: Tie game and another Brooks game-winning 3
Rhode Island vs. Oregon: Tie game, Dorsey with the dagger

These are all great moments in the season. AMAZING shots by really clutch players. When I use the term lucky, I don't mean the shot itself was luck -- I mean that, given the situations, these shots weren't the correct basketball play but worked out anyway.

Down two or tied, doesn't it make more sense to take the ball to the basket? Even last night, Oregon was in the double bonus and RI couldn't stop penetration without hand-checking and fouling. If Dorsey misses that shot last night, don't we all agree it's a foolish play? What do you think?

Again, just figured it might make for an interesting discussion.

PS: What an awesome year so far. Love this team's grit and fight.
Given the situation, how can you say the first two examples weren't the correct play? What should they have done on those plays to get the right look? I'm all for talking end of game strategy but this is just using the final shot and making leaps. Had Dorsey missed, we'd all be talking more about the missed FTs than taking a rhythm jumper if we lost.
I guess I'm old school and more used to seeing a jumper off a ball-screen or another set play in the waning moments. Against Cal, if memory serves, the Ducks inbounded with roughly 8 seconds left. To me, you can get closer than a sized-up 3-pointer. Same with Dorsey last night (although the 2-for-1 was in play).

But my original post was more hypothetical than to dwell on games the Ducks have already won. How many times have you seen a guy take a 3-pointer with the score is tied or down 2, missed in the last possession, and the commentators are wondering why the team didn't get a better/higher-percentage look? I know the game is changing (thanks, Steph Curry), and I was just looking for others' thoughts to pass the time since we've got 4 days before the next Ducks basketball fix.

Tyler got a double ball screen up top, that's how he ended up with a post on him.
Post Reply