I think Monte would have been able to brick it off the front of the rim easily. They would have at most gotten one dribble and a heave. The shot they got was way too good. Off a missed free throw they would of had no control as to who got the ball, like they did on the final play.
Awesome win, but...
- Thread starter WIB
- Start date
He should have not even shot, just taken the ball and throw it at a member of the opposing team. Hit him in the head or something so he is stunned and does not grab the ball, the clock runs out and we win. No way would the ref call a technical on that and give A FREE THROW to the other team and then the ball out of bounds. LOL
Last edited:
Lets not look at this from the aspect as to what ISU should have done, but rather from what Baylor could have done. After all they came up short. I would venture to say Baylor should take the rebound after Monte's first missed free throw to go for the three pointer. This is similar to what Kansas has been successful with in the past against ISU and contains the element of surprise. If Baylor makes their three, it puts much more pressure on Monte to make the second free throw or lose the game. The ISU coaches decision to have Monte make or miss the free throw, then becomes a mute point. Another aspect of this strategy is the clock operator would not be expecting a live ball, and could fail to start the clock in timely fashion. For as many years as Scott Drew has coached one has to wonder if he is a student of the game. (Jmlad)
I'm surprised that JP decided to pay Prohm as much as he does. Knowing that JP likes to go cheap, he could have chosen one of the very many potential coaches on CF for much, much cheaper than CSP.
Thread is an early strong contender for a 2017 Clonee as Derp Thread of the Year.
First of all, I find it hilarious that OP is up to 60 disagree + dislikes, rightfully so IMO. Has there ever been an OP with more?
Second, I think @clonedude is a bit off with his 30+% chance for Baylor to make the final shot.
A) the odds of them cleanly catching the in bounds pass & subsequent handoff has to be fairly low.
B) McClure's season 3 % is 34%. A last second buzzer beater for the tie isn't your run of the mill 3 pointer, it's going to be harder for anybody not named Naz. Not to mention it was a highly contested shot.
Add all that up & I'd put the chance of them executing that play perfectly AND making the shot at maybe 5%. I would take a 5% chance of OT over a 1% chance of losing every time.
Second, I think @clonedude is a bit off with his 30+% chance for Baylor to make the final shot.
A) the odds of them cleanly catching the in bounds pass & subsequent handoff has to be fairly low.
B) McClure's season 3 % is 34%. A last second buzzer beater for the tie isn't your run of the mill 3 pointer, it's going to be harder for anybody not named Naz. Not to mention it was a highly contested shot.
Add all that up & I'd put the chance of them executing that play perfectly AND making the shot at maybe 5%. I would take a 5% chance of OT over a 1% chance of losing every time.
Yep, if you actually add up the chances to win vs chances to lose you have at least 3x more chances to win being up 3 vs up 2 with a long attempt.
I haven't read every post -- but miss or make on the FT wasn't really a question -- Monte needed to make. But Baylor wasn't in the bonus (either 4 or 5 fouls, can't remember). We should have fouled on the inbounds - no question. Baylor did manage a fairly clean 3-pt look in just over a second.
It was mentioned that fouling would mean Baylor would be able to in bound the ball at half court. Not desirable.
This was my original thought as well, but thinking through it changed my mind. If we foul Motley on the catch, it would have had to been immediate (either no time off the clock or VERY little) and then they get to inbound the ball on their side of the court with almost the exact same time. If you foul the guy who shot it, well, that's 3 FTs because he shot it as soon as he caught it.
The fouls should have come on the previous possessions instead of giving them good looks from 3.
But...who cares, we won.
First off, I find no issue discussing this topic, as long as it is presented correctly. I do take issue with people (not you, clonedude) saying that the end of the game "couldn't have been managed any worse", that shows an obvious vendetta against Prohm.
I think the real split in camps is all about loss aversion. How much risk are you willing to take on? I would advise my player to make that shot every time, just because weird stuff can happen. Monte could miss rim entirely, or he could miss and Baylor lets the ball roll out of bounds without touching it. Had Monte missed on purpose and Baylor rims out a heave I think Prohm is taking a lot of heat, even with a win.
I was much more upset that we weren't running their shooters off of the three point line under a minute left, that showed more of a lack of awareness, the other argument is just preference I think.
I think the real split in camps is all about loss aversion. How much risk are you willing to take on? I would advise my player to make that shot every time, just because weird stuff can happen. Monte could miss rim entirely, or he could miss and Baylor lets the ball roll out of bounds without touching it. Had Monte missed on purpose and Baylor rims out a heave I think Prohm is taking a lot of heat, even with a win.
I was much more upset that we weren't running their shooters off of the three point line under a minute left, that showed more of a lack of awareness, the other argument is just preference I think.
I think it was managed poorly and love Prohmy. Hell, I'd give him an extension after this season.
Um, yeah. Coach K specifically stated that he wanted to avoid going to overtime because he had two key players with 4 fouls. In Saturday's game Baylor had one key player out already and their star had 4 fouls. Young was the only ISU player who even had 3 fouls. This is a totally different situation based on the very reasoning that Coach K used for his decision.
