[Pivotpoint]

The only people who believe it was a bad strategy to miss the free throw were guys laying points on Sparty.

Mich St fans, players and Virginia backers with the 2 and the hook or even + 3 were rejoicing.

Coach 'em up Tom. Coach 'em up.

[goduke]

The only people who believe it was a bad strategy to miss the free throw were guys laying points on Sparty.

Mich St fans, players and Virginia backers with the 2 and the hook or even + 3 were rejoicing.

Coach 'em up Tom. Coach 'em up.

I didnt bet the game but which strategy has the potential to lose the game?

[Pivotpoint]

Long shot either way. What do you think would be the better % shot? Hitting a 3 on a in-bound pass with 1.4 seconds, or grabbing a rebound off the rim or board after the clock started. Almost impossible to catch and throw the ball down court and then launch a shot in 1.4 seconds. That is also assuming you get the rebound.

Either way it's close and a judgement call. Izzo just wants to win. He doesn't give a penetrate about the points. The thought that the game was fixed to avoid the hook called for the Homer Simpson brain X-ray.

[goduke]

Long shot either way. What do you think would be the better % shot? Hitting a 3 on a in-bound pass with 1.4 seconds, or grabbing a rebound off the rim or board after the clock started. Almost impossible to catch and throw the ball down court and then launch a shot in 1.4 seconds. That is also assuming you get the rebound.

Either way it's close and a judgement call. Izzo just wants to win. He doesn't give a penetrate about the points. The thought that the game was fixed to avoid the hook called for the Homer Simpson brain X-ray.

Except that which shot is a better % shot doesnt matter because one shot wins the game the other doesnt win the game. I said that the strategy wasnt better and who knows if Izzo cares about the spread or not. Neither one of us can truly say for a fact that he doesnt stand to benefit in some way. He could, he could not. My argument wasnt that though it was that the strategy isnt better then making the free throw period

[Swift Thinking]

Long shot either way. What do you think would be the better % shot? Hitting a 3 on a in-bound pass with 1.4 seconds, or grabbing a rebound off the rim or board after the clock started. Almost impossible to catch and throw the ball down court and then launch a shot in 1.4 seconds. That is also assuming you get the rebound.

Either way it's close and a judgement call. Izzo just wants to win. He doesn't give a penetrate about the points. The thought that the game was fixed to avoid the hook called for the Homer Simpson brain X-ray.

you see fat middle aged white man taken from stands hit half court shots to win 100k or a car
so I would def think it's easier to hit a running half court short then inbound the ball make a Lin point accuracy throw turn around and shoot a 3 basically with 1.4 seconds left yes even tho you have plenty of time get shot up you have to catch a insane throw make sure your in good shooting motion

[jtoler]

Cant expect all men to think alike, thats one of the problems with society. Honestly he was taking a risk, I assume it was calculated in his mind that the 70+ foot heave would be made at a smaller percentage than a possible 20 foot shot. Risk either way, yeah youre taking a shot at losing and no possible OT with the missed FT, but thats what he decided on.

[las8]

I read like the first 3 posts and decided to stop reading the garbage I saw from a select few. It was a good move by Izzo and I had MSU -2.

Let me break it down for you. The decision was quite simple but I will go into complete detail. The choice Coach Izzo had was to have Virginia quickly force up a full court shot which is nearly impossible especially with .5-.9 sec left to do it. The second choice was to potentially give Vir a chance to set up down the court for an inbound pass without running time on the clock. As a Duke fan you should know who Christian Laettner is, so you know it is possible. I have seen so many more half court shots than full court shots. MSU could have also possibly fouled a 3 point shooter. If I were to guess the decision he made had less than 1% failure chance, let's call it .5%. While the other choice had a 3-8% failure chance. I will go with the higher estimate of 8% chance of them making a 1/2 court shot to a .5% chance to make a full court shot. That would make the half court shot 16 times more likely, to something that theoretically would only happen 1 out of 200 attempts. It was clearly the correct decision as it worked. Tom Izzo is one of the best coaches of our time, if you actually pay attention that the games you might learn something. You are either too upset you lost or pushed with Mich, too stubborn to admit your previous statement was incredibly stupid, or just trying to be a dumb fukk on purpose, I guess they are calling that trolling. If it was the latter you succeeded.

[jtoler]

I read like the first 3 posts and decided to stop reading the garbage I saw from a select few. It was a good move by Izzo and I had MSU -2.

Let me break it down for you. The decision was quite simple but I will go into complete detail. The choice Coach Izzo had was to have Virginia quickly force up a full court shot which is nearly impossible especially with .5-.9 sec left to do it. The second choice was to potentially give Vir a chance to set up down the court for an inbound pass without running time on the clock. As a Duke fan you should know who Christian Laettner is, so you know it is possible. I have seen so many more half court shots than full court shots. MSU could have also possibly fouled a 3 point shooter. If I were to guess the decision he made had less than 1% failure chance, let's call it .5%. While the other choice had a 3-8% failure chance. I will go with the higher estimate of 8% chance of them making a 1/2 court shot to a .5% chance to make a full court shot. That would make the half court shot 16 times more likely, to something that theoretically would only happen 1 out of 200 attempts. It was clearly the correct decision as it worked. Tom Izzo is one of the best coaches of our time, if you actually pay attention that the games you might learn something. You are either too upset you lost or pushed with Mich, too stubborn to admit your previous statement was incredibly stupid, or just trying to be a dumb fukk on purpose, I guess they are calling that trolling. If it was the latter you succeeded.

Hindsight is 20/20, I think it was a bad move, but thats after the fact, Im not under the same pressure as he.

[goduke]

I read like the first 3 posts and decided to stop reading the garbage I saw from a select few. It was a good move by Izzo and I had MSU -2.

Let me break it down for you. The decision was quite simple but I will go into complete detail. The choice Coach Izzo had was to have Virginia quickly force up a full court shot which is nearly impossible especially with .5-.9 sec left to do it. The second choice was to potentially give Vir a chance to set up down the court for an inbound pass without running time on the clock. As a Duke fan you should know who Christian Laettner is, so you know it is possible. I have seen so many more half court shots than full court shots. MSU could have also possibly fouled a 3 point shooter. If I were to guess the decision he made had less than 1% failure chance, let's call it .5%. While the other choice had a 3-8% failure chance. I will go with the higher estimate of 8% chance of them making a 1/2 court shot to a .5% chance to make a full court shot. That would make the half court shot 16 times more likely, to something that theoretically would only happen 1 out of 200 attempts. It was clearly the correct decision as it worked. Tom Izzo is one of the best coaches of our time, if you actually pay attention that the games you might learn something. You are either too upset you lost or pushed with Mich, too stubborn to admit your previous statement was incredibly stupid, or just trying to be a dumb fukk on purpose, I guess they are calling that trolling. If it was the latter you succeeded.

Wow, okay did you just make up these percentages and theories? First off I hope you know how much time was on the clock when laettner hit his shot then this scenario and the team was down 1. These are completely opposite in every way. As for fouling the three point shooter, fine lets say he does foul the three point shooter. They still dont lose the game. Its truly that simple. Neither strategy is better then the other and to argue that it is baffles me. I can guarantee you if you found someone that truly had a way to measure these scenarios with math the missing ft would have a higher percentage of losing the game then the inbound play simply because of the one point difference.

[las8]

And you are not one of the best college coaches ever. Pressure? That situation for Tom is analogous to you brushing your teeth, which hopefully you do twice daily. Ain't nothing for him.

[goduke]

And you are not one of the best college coaches ever. Pressure? That situation for Tom is analogous to you brushing your teeth, which hopefully you do twice daily. Ain't nothing for him.

This is the most obtuse post. I hope this wasnt your rebuttal. Are there any people on this forum that are educated and know how to have a discussion with coherent thoughts? I dont know why I bother

[las8]

That was to the other guy. I have nothing to say to you as you clearly missed the statement about my numbering being theoretical (that means I made them up) and how you think a full court shot to win by one has better odds than a half court shot to tie the game, where theoretically the game would be 50:50 in OT.

[las8]

Seriously how many times have you seen something like this...