shadowfax Show full post »
edki
moremilk wrote:


confused why you think that was by design. I get that the plan was to stay home on the shooters, but once green was beat, there was time for people to rotate and have somebody at the rim to at least make it a difficult shot. On that drive, Fournier had really only two options, score, or pass to one of the corners. If ibaka was leaving his man, and whoever was guarding at the guy at the top would rotate to cover ibaka's man, there was no way Fournier could have passed behind his back.

But all that happened in second or so, so players would have to be extremely in sycn to pull it off. Perhaps, Nurse knowing that we are far from that kind of cohesion, decided to play it safe and avoid the 3pt shot, but an elite defensive team should be able to cover it and, hopefully, later in the season it won't happen again.


Green should've fouled Fournier once he went to the rim. leaving a 3  pt sideline shot while rotating to close penetration would be a game loosing mistake
Quote 0 0
elT
moremilk wrote:


confused why you think that was by design. I get that the plan was to stay home on the shooters, but once green was beat, there was time for people to rotate and have somebody at the rim to at least make it a difficult shot. On that drive, Fournier had really only two options, score, or pass to one of the corners. If ibaka was leaving his man, and whoever was guarding at the guy at the top would rotate to cover ibaka's man, there was no way Fournier could have passed behind his back.

But all that happened in second or so, so players would have to be extremely in sycn to pull it off. Perhaps, Nurse knowing that we are far from that kind of cohesion, decided to play it safe and avoid the 3pt shot, but an elite defensive team should be able to cover it and, hopefully, later in the season it won't happen again.


No, it has nothing to do with cohesion. The decision was obviously to stick to shooters and take our chances with one on one defense no matter what. Don't allow a three, don't commit a shooting foul. Veteran team with really good individual defenders, why not take that chance?

The only mistake is Green pressed too hard. But he made up for it.

It was a good, confident decision. You trust your defense, ATO offense and get the last shot. You don't do anything stupid and at the very least you get an overtime. Worked out good.

Our offense was getting good looks all night. Shots weren't falling but you never get hung up on that. Green got a good look and hit it. Game over.
Quote 4 0
LX
There was also a foul to give, which Green failed to pick up on. So the plan was likely to apply a lot of pressure, again to ensure there was no 3, and if he drives then foul and take things from there, but Green only picked up on the first part of the plan. Nurse needed to maybe communicate that better as well?
Quote 1 0
DanH
LX wrote:
There was also a foul to give, which Green failed to pick up on. So the plan was likely to apply a lot of pressure, again to ensure there was no 3, and if he drives then foul and take things from there, but Green only picked up on the first part of the plan. Nurse needed to maybe communicate that better as well?


Green said after the game that that was part of the plan and he just lost focus in the heat of the moment and forgot to foul (at least long enough that by the time he would have there's a risk it becomes a shooting foul).
Quote 1 0
LX
DanH wrote:


Green said after the game that that was part of the plan and he just lost focus in the heat of the moment and forgot to foul (at least long enough that by the time he would have there's a risk it becomes a shooting foul).


He said he didn’t pay attention in the huddle and apologized to Nurse for missing that detail.
Quote 3 0
elT
LX wrote:


He said he didn’t pay attention in the huddle and apologized to Nurse for missing that detail.


Now we know why Pop often yelled at him. 😉
Quote 1 0
moremilk
LX wrote:
There was also a foul to give, which Green failed to pick up on. So the plan was likely to apply a lot of pressure, again to ensure there was no 3, and if he drives then foul and take things from there, but Green only picked up on the first part of the plan. Nurse needed to maybe communicate that better as well?


Aha, that makes sense, didn't realize there was a foul.

Pretty bad decision by Fournier too in that case, as they would have had very little time to design a play if we fouled.
Quote 0 0
moremilk
DanH wrote:


Green said after the game that that was part of the plan and he just lost focus in the heat of the moment and forgot to foul (at least long enough that by the time he would have there's a risk it becomes a shooting foul).


Still should have fouled, even a 90% shooter misses now and then :)

I thought Green was distracted all night on defense, that's the final proof ...
Quote 0 0
DanH
moremilk wrote:


Still should have fouled, even a 90% shooter misses now and then 😉

I thought Green was distracted all night on defense, that's the final proof ...


The risk would be if the refs gave him continuation and he hit the shot.  Then it's a free throw to win.

Yeah, last night was not the best game for Green.  Came through big time on offence to close it out though, with two late threes and obviously that game-winner.
Quote 0 0
MikeToronto
Still - the defense did its job. They've held a very good shooting team to 91 points on their own home court - what more can you ask for?

If the Raps hit half of the wide-open threes available in this game, it's a blowout.
Quote 4 0
LeBronIsYourDaddy
edki wrote:


Green should've fouled Fournier once he went to the rim. leaving a 3  pt sideline shot while rotating to close penetration would be a game loosing mistake


 Giving an "and 1" there is worse than giving the 3. Risky business.
Quote 0 0
elT
MikeToronto wrote:
Still - the defense did its job. They've held a very good shooting team to 91 points on their own home court - what more can you ask for?

If the Raps hit half of the wide-open threes available in this game, it's a blowout.


3-14 on wide open threes as categorized by NBA.com (no defender within 6 feet).
9-35 overall.
Quote 1 0
edki
LeBronIsYourDaddy wrote:


 Giving an "and 1" there is worse than giving the 3. Risky business.


Raptors had foul to give.
Quote 0 0
DanH
edki wrote:


Raptors had foul to give.


Yes, but if he gets into a shooting motion, he still gets two free throws (or an and-one if he hits the shot), no matter how many fouls the Raps had to give.
Quote 1 0
LeBronIsYourDaddy
DanH wrote:


Yes, but if he gets into a shooting motion, he still gets two free throws (or an and-one if he hits the shot), no matter how many fouls the Raps had to give.



 exactly. if you are going to foul there you do it way before he gets close to the rim not after you are beat. thats the worst possible outcome of all outcomes, i rather him dunk uncontested.
Quote 0 0