• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

UVA post game thoughts - venting or whatever

Last edited:
bobknightfan said:
Bzdellick was 17-51 (25%) in the ACC. So far, Manning is 6-20 (23%) in the ACC.

It will be interesting to see how this thing plays out in the next couple of years.
Click to expand...

Interesting in his first season Carl Tacy was 3-9 for 25%, second season 3-9 again [25%] and his third season was 2-10 [16%] for a grand total of 8-36 [22.2%]. He seemed to do pretty good for us when he got his own players like Skip Brown, Rod Griffin, Jerry Schellenberg, Frank Johnson, Alvis Rogers, Jim Johnstone, Mike Helms, Guy Morgan, Muggsy Bogues, Kenny Green, Delaney Rudd, Anthony Teachey and Danny Young. The Gentleman had an 8-4 in 76-77 and got us to the Elite 8, several 9-5's and another Elite 8 in 1984. Give Danny some time BKF. The cupboard was bare and he is restocking, just like Carl had to do.
 
TheReff said:
Interesting in his first season Carl Tacy was 3-9 for 25%, second season 3-9 again [25%] and his third season was 2-10 [16%] for a grand total of 8-36 [22.2%]. He seemed to do pretty good for us when he got his own players like Skip Brown, Rod Griffin, Jerry Schellenberg, Frank Johnson, Alvis Rogers, Jim Johnstone, Mike Helms, Guy Morgan, Muggsy Bogues, Kenny Green, Delaney Rudd, Anthony Teachey and Danny Young. The Gentleman had an 8-4 in 76-77 and got us to the Elite 8, several 9-5's and another Elite 8 in 1984. Give Danny some time BKF. The cupboard was bare and he is restocking, just like Carl had to do.
Click to expand...

Great stats.
 
MichDeac25 said:
Of course the risk there is a foul, which puts them at the line. Crawford making one leaving them needing a 3 was the right play given the circumstance.
Click to expand...

No way. With 3.8 seconds all you need is to minimally disrupt their ball movement up the court. Just get a hand up, make them pick up a dribble, throw a shorter pass. Something. Instead we made a nearly meaningless free throw, didn't guard the inbounds pass and allowed an uncontested pass to half court. That takes up no time, leading to a shot, that while complete bs and contested, was only from 20 feet or less. You've got to force a desperation 35 plus footer in that situation.
 
Tin Cup said:
No way. With 3.8 seconds all you need is to minimally disrupt their ball movement up the court. Just get a hand up, make them pick up a dribble, throw a shorter pass. Something. Instead we made a nearly meaningless free throw, didn't guard the inbounds pass and allowed an uncontested pass to half court. That takes up no time, leading to a shot, that while complete bs and contested, was only from 20 feet or less. You've got to force a desperation 35 plus footer in that situation.
Click to expand...

Players get from baseline to baseline in 4 seconds. And yeah, the risk is still a foul on a rebound. Do you trust DT or Dinos not to do something stupid in that situation?
 
MichDeac25 said:
Players get from baseline to baseline in 4 seconds. And yeah, the risk is still a foul on a rebound. Do you trust DT or Dinos not to do something stupid in that situation?
Click to expand...

Yes I trust a 4 year and 2 year starter to not do something stupid. I'm just looking for anything that disrupts going 47 feet uncontested with no time coming off.
 
It's pretty hard to argue that sprinting down the court off a rebound (which would be contested) to set up a decent look from 2 is significantly harder than having time to set up a play and get the correct spacing from the baseline. Even if they don't do the long toss, they can run a play like the Chris Paul winning runner in the nut-punch game.
 
Tin Cup said:
Yes I trust a 4 year and 2 year starter to not do something stupid. I'm just looking for anything that disrupts going 47 feet uncontested with no time coming off.
Click to expand...

With all the questioning of our bb iq do you really think we wouldn't foul on the rebound?
 
CantStandYa said:
It's pretty hard to argue that sprinting down the court off a rebound (which would be contested) to set up a decent look from 2 is significantly harder than having time to set up a play and get the correct spacing from the baseline. Even if they don't do the long toss, they can run a play like the Chris Paul winning runner in the nut-punch game.
Click to expand...

If nothing else, the clock is running as you make a long pass to half-court or beyond. When you're inbounding the ball the clock does not start until the pass is caught, so Virginia had the whole 3.8 to work with from half court. Look, you could lose either way, but it's crazy to argue that missing the free throw would've gave them less time to work with and maybe a lower percentage shot.
 
CantStandYa said:
It's pretty hard to argue that sprinting down the court off a rebound (which would be contested) to set up a decent look from 2 is significantly harder than having time to set up a play and get the correct spacing from the baseline. Even if they don't do the long toss, they can run a play like the Chris Paul winning runner in the nut-punch game.
Click to expand...

Sure, but that's easily overcome by the fact that you lose on a 2 or a 3 and likely a foul when you intentionally leave it a 1 point game. UVA threw it up the court to try to get something going to the basket - they weren't actually trying to throw it to one of their worst players for a desperation 3 pointer. Out of the scenarios where they score in 4 seconds, most likely is a foul, 2nd most likely is a guard with speed getting inside the arc and scoring 2 points against a defense that doesn't want to foul, 3rd most likely is a made 3 pointer at the buzzer. Assuming they make the free throws, missing intentionally turns all of those scenarios into losses instead of just the least likely one.

It's also not like they had a timeout to set up a play. Still think it's hindsight on the coaching decisions but very clear our players simply didn't execute in a disastrous variety of ways.
 
DCDeac said:
Sure, but that's easily overcome by the fact that you lose on a 2 or a 3 and likely a foul when you intentionally leave it a 1 point game. UVA threw it up the court to try to get something going to the basket - they weren't actually trying to throw it to one of their worst players for a desperation 3 pointer. Out of the scenarios where they score in 4 seconds, most likely is a foul, 2nd most likely is a guard with speed getting inside the arc and scoring 2 points against a defense that doesn't want to foul, 3rd most likely is a made 3 pointer at the buzzer. Assuming they make the free throws, missing intentionally turns all of those scenarios into losses instead of just the least likely one.

It's also not like they had a timeout to set up a play. Still think it's hindsight on the coaching decisions but very clear our players simply didn't execute in a disastrous variety of ways.
Click to expand...

No doubt.
 
I don't claim to know much at all about basketball strategy. That said, that last play looked like "prevent defense" to me. And generally speaking, across all sports, "prevent defense" seems to prevent the defending team from winning more often than not.
 
I will say this, under either strategy, it's important that the defense doesn't allow the other team to just freely get the ball up the court and since we didn't prevent that when they inbounded the ball, I doubt we would've done it had we missed the free throw. You can make the other team have to take more time getting the ball up the court without fouling. Letting them get the inbound pass to halfcourt was where we really screwed up, had we not done that, they don't get near as good a shot and it wasn't a great look to begin with. It was a good enough look though, that shooter was able to square up.
 
Deacon923 said:
I don't claim to know much at all about basketball strategy. That said, that last play looked like "prevent defense" to me. And generally speaking, across all sports, "prevent defense" seems to prevent the defending team from winning more often than not.
Click to expand...

Agree, we should've been more agressive. If you foul, probably the worst that happens is OT. You don't play super aggressive in that situation for fear of fouling, but you also can't let them almost freely able to throw the inbounds pass to half court. Heck, one of the advantages for us in the situation was they didn't have a time out and couldn't make a quick inbound, call the TO and then inbound from halfcourt. We basically allowed them to run their play as if they were inbounding from halfcourt though.
 
liveanddiedeac said:
Agree, we should've been more agressive. If you foul, probably the worst that happens is OT. You don't play super aggressive in that situation for fear of fouling, but you also can't let them almost freely able to throw the inbounds pass to half court. Heck, one of the advantages for us in the situation was they didn't have a time out and couldn't make a quick inbound, call the TO and then inbound from halfcourt. We basically allowed them to run their play as if they were inbounding from halfcourt though.
Click to expand...

That doesn't reflect a lack of quality coaching?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top