Second Guessing the Coach for Fun and Sport

R

Rambob

Insider
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Posts
364
Likes
242
This thread is meant to be taken somewhat lightly and maybe spark some intelligent discussion without name calling.

I have two second gueses to offer:

1. With 5 minutes left, the score 68-64 and the team on the floor playing well together, leave Larry on the bench a few more minutes or maybe the rest of the game if the tide did not begin to turn.

2. With 20 some seconds left, down 1 and the ball, call time out to set up the final play.
 
Rambob said:
2. With 20 some seconds left, down 1 and the ball, call time out to set up the final play.
Click to expand...
Great points Bob, I think that specific TO was a non-issue. If Joey makes that bucket, we don't here a peep about it. The fact of the matter is, sometimes you call the timeout, sometimes you don't and let the team play. We still had another chance after that play anyways. I do feel Shaka could have taken a timeout during one or two of their runs a little sooner, but that's water under the bridge. He's the coach, he knows what he's doing.
 
My favorite thing about Anthony Grant was he would force the team most of the time to play through the other teams momentum run after half time. Instead of calling the 30 second time out that extends. I thought it built great character with the team and taught them to play through adversity a ton. I am typically a fan of letting them play unless....
 
My favorite thing about Anthony Grant was he would force the team most of the time to play through the other teams momentum run after half time. Instead of calling the 30 second time out that extends. I thought it built great character with the team and taught them to play through adversity a ton. I am typically a fan of letting them play unless....
 
TP....remember what Grant said after the loss to UCLA?

I shouldn't have called that **** timeout and should have just let them play!
 
Calling the TO late is a double-edged sword. It not only gives you the chance to set your play, but it also give the defense a chance to set the defense. And in the case of VCU, it gives the defense a chance to rest before a big play.

I'd call it if there was 30 or more seconds left. But if I've got the ball, with a chance to win or tie, and it looks like my team can eat up the clock before the shot, I don't call it. Your players practice these situation everyday in practice. If you have done your job, they know what to do. In the last possession yesterday, we got a good look that just did not fall.

But overall it is a coaches call. He should know his players, know how they look at any point in the game, and know if they look confused or confident. His call.

I trust Shaka to make that decision.
 
Yeah, but then again didn't Maynor wave off the timeout against Duke?

Personally, I say run the play.

VCU4LIFE said:
TP....remember what Grant said after the loss to UCLA?

I shouldn't have called that **** timeout and should have just let them play!
Click to expand...
 
What do y'all think about playing more zone defense? We've given up way too many points inside in the last 2 games.

Larry's not the best at guarding his own man, but a zone would keep him a positon where he could be more effective as a help defender...and perhaps as a rebounder.
 
G-Man said:
What do y'all think about playing more zone defense? We've given up way too many points inside in the last 2 games.

Larry's not the best at guarding his own man, but a zone would keep him a positon where he could be more effective as a help defender...and perhaps as a rebounder.
Click to expand...

One of the biggest problems with a zone is allowing offensive rebounds, which was definitely a problem at ODU. As a team the Rams are allowing almost 13 o-rebs a game as it is.
 
Our biggest problem, as it has been all season, was not stopping dribble penetration. Their guards were much bigger and stronger than ours. Shaka can't coach his way out of that situation.

If you wanna second-guess anything you could ask why Larry was on the court at the end of the game rather than Terrance. That would have taken a huge set of stones for a rookie coach to sit, arguably, one of the best players in the league. But Larry wasn't getting it done on Saturday, and Terrance was.
 
I'd have run the play too. J-Rod got a pretty open look, but he just missed. You can't fault him there.
 
DCDuck said:
I'd have run the play too. J-Rod got a pretty open look, but he just missed. You can't fault him there.
Click to expand...

I agree, he has been hitting that shot a lot lately. I thought it was a good look for him, and he took it with just enough time left that we could have gotten a put back with an O rebound.
 
Coach himself said that was not the shot they had drawn up (I guess on a previous time out or during practice) but was a pretty good open look.
 
Concerning the timeout:

As others have said, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Look no further than our two first round NCAA games. No TO called against Duke and we win. TO is called against UCLA and we lose.

You win some, you lose some.
 
I don't mind Joey taking the shot at all however i prefer to have the ball in the hands of someone that can either drive and score or pull up and hit a jumper (ie maynor). for us that would be burgess or skeen. both played well and shot well on saturday. you always want to put the pressure on the defense by having the ability to drive and score. Joey cant do that unless he is wide open. burgess and skeen can either drive or pull up and shoot. so can nixon but his size can be neutralized by a good shot blocker since he is only 6-3. just my thoughts about the lost shot scenario.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top