Golden opportunity blown Detroit

[msc]

Really, the Pistons should have fouled ANY Laker and I was certain they would.  If not Shaq, then Luke when Shaq passed it to him.  If not Luke, then Kobe when Luke handed off to him.

Strategically, you're up by 3, you put a guy on the line for 2 and get the ball back.  I don't understand why Larry Brown didn't do it.  As Lurker pointed out above, it has nothing to do with Hack a Shaq.

Larry Brown is a fantastic coach, I don't doubt that, but I don't think I'll ever understand why he didn't instruct the team to foul the first Laker available on that team.  I listened to Larry's "explanation" (I use the term loosely) during the press conference and I'm even more confused.  He basically said, "Well, I told them to foul Shaq if he got the ball down low" (which he didn't, he got it at the 3-pt. line), then he said something along the lines of "we thought about fouling, but they could have gotten the shot off and possibly gotten a 4-point play".  I still don't get it, probably never will.   :huh:



 

[Lurker]

There is another "Shaq" rule.  In the last 2 minutes of the game you can only foul the player with the ball.  If you foul a player off the ball then the coach can pick ANY player on the floor to shoot free throws and retain possession.  And...key point here....the refs actually have to blow the whistle instead of swallowing it.

[Reality]

There is another "Shaq" rule.  In the last 2 minutes of the game you can only foul the player with the ball.  If you foul a player off the ball then the coach can pick ANY player on the floor to shoot free throws and retain possession.  And...key point here....the refs actually have to blow the whistle instead of swallowing it.

Which msc makes it a strategical error 1st by LAL by getting the ball into Shaq and thus such a game ending  opportunity for Detroit.  There was Detroits chance.  Shaq held the ball from 10 to 8,  2 full seconds, Ben Wa was right behind him for a would be foul.

Why on Earth you'd want to bail the Lakers out is beyond me....

Even if Shaq would have shocked the world and hit all three FTs, Detroit is left with the ball with 8 seconds left instead of 2.1  
 

[Joe Vancil]

Actually, the reason I foul Shaq in that situation is a simple one:  the Lakers had NO TIMEOUTS, while the Pistons still have two.  One timeout moves the ball to half-court, leaving one for an in-bound emergency.

If Shaq makes the free throws, the Lakers are down by 1.  That means LA has to foul, and has no timeouts in which to set anything up nor to organize.  After the Billups miss, we saw the indecisiveness out there.  Any shot taken in an unprepared situation is likely to look like...well...what we saw when Detroit tried to get back in the overtime with 3-pointers.

 

[Guest]

Actually, the reason I foul Shaq in that situation is a simple one:  the Lakers had NO TIMEOUTS, while the Pistons still have two.  One timeout moves the ball to half-court, leaving one for an in-bound emergency.

If Shaq makes the free throws, the Lakers are down by 1.  That means LA has to foul, and has no timeouts in which to set anything up nor to organize.  After the Billups miss, we saw the indecisiveness out there.  Any shot taken in an unprepared situation is likely to look like...well...what we saw when Detroit tried to get back in the overtime with 3-pointers.

JV,

Not sure what you meant.

The Pistons were up 3 points at 89-86 with 10.9 seconds.  Shaq took the inbounds pass beyond the threebie arc.  Wallace was right on him.  Shaq held it for two seconds.  Foul for the love of!!!!
......So if Shaq hits the FTs its tied.

Chances of Shaq missing one of the FTs is good.  Chances of Pistons rebounding the miss (if 3rd) is good.  Lakers would then of course foul unless they got a steal off the rebound.  Seems like that 90% results in defensive team getting the rebound tho.  Piston hitting FTs could seal or all but seal.  Even if Piston misses FTs with LA having no timeouts it limits the chances of another .4 miracle.  



 

[ziggy]

Actually, the reason I foul Shaq in that situation is a simple one:  the Lakers had NO TIMEOUTS, while the Pistons still have two.  One timeout moves the ball to half-court, leaving one for an in-bound emergency.

If Shaq makes the free throws, the Lakers are down by 1.  That means LA has to foul, and has no timeouts in which to set anything up nor to organize.  After the Billups miss, we saw the indecisiveness out there.  Any shot taken in an unprepared situation is likely to look like...well...what we saw when Detroit tried to get back in the overtime with 3-pointers.

JV,

Not sure what you meant.

The Pistons were up 3 points at 89-86 with 10.9 seconds.  Shaq took the inbounds pass beyond the threebie arc.  Wallace was right on him.  Shaq held it for two seconds.  Foul for the love of!!!!
......So if Shaq hits the FTs its tied.

Chances of Shaq missing one of the FTs is good.  Chances of Pistons rebounding the miss (if 3rd) is good.  Lakers would then of course foul unless they got a steal off the rebound.  Seems like that 90% results in defensive team getting the rebound tho.  Piston hitting FTs could seal or all but seal.  Even if Piston misses FTs with LA having no timeouts it limits the chances of another .4 miracle.

Recognize that Shaq only gets 3 shots if he is shooting when behind the arc.  If he is not shooting then he only gets 2 shots.  Shaq isn't going to shoot a 3 in that situation, so he really only gets 2 shots.

[Joe Vancil]

My thinking exactly, Ziggy.



 

[Reality]

Recognize that Shaq only gets 3 shots if he is shooting when behind the arc.  If he is not shooting then he only gets 2 shots.  Shaq isn't going to shoot a 3 in that situation, so he really only gets 2 shots.

Ah yes I stand corrected and I hate that rule.  Why should the offensive team, in this case Shaq and LA, have been punished by only getting two foul shots?  Conversely the defensive team, in this case the would be fouling Pistons, be rewarded for...fouling to avoid a 3??  Bad Bad rule.  Intentional foul in that case should be FTs + ball.  I know I know whats intentional and whats unintentional.  

Remember tho all you have to do while getting fouled is make a shot attempt and you get 3 FTs.  Why this rule is good was personified one game years ago coincidentally between the Pistons and the Lakers.   Isiah Thomas got fouled.  He was not in the act of shooting.  However, once he felt the foul he flipped up a prayer in the vicinity of the hoop.  It fell.  It's precedent that who is a ref to say which shot attempt is bogus and which isnt.  In the game we are talking about if Detroit had done the obvious and fouled Shaq, it would have been a hoot for Shaq to have the presense of mind to hork up a shot attempt as soon as he felt contact.  A backwards one at that, Harlem Globetrotter style.

Anywho, either way the two FTs for an intentional foul that a defensive team does at the end of game is way bogus IMO.

[WayOutWest]

Actually, the reason I foul Shaq in that situation is a simple one:  the Lakers had NO TIMEOUTS, while the Pistons still have two.  One timeout moves the ball to half-court, leaving one for an in-bound emergency.

If Shaq makes the free throws, the Lakers are down by 1.  That means LA has to foul, and has no timeouts in which to set anything up nor to organize.  After the Billups miss, we saw the indecisiveness out there.  Any shot taken in an unprepared situation is likely to look like...well...what we saw when Detroit tried to get back in the overtime with 3-pointers.

JV,

Not sure what you meant.

The Pistons were up 3 points at 89-86 with 10.9 seconds.  Shaq took the inbounds pass beyond the threebie arc.  Wallace was right on him.  Shaq held it for two seconds.  Foul for the love of!!!!
......So if Shaq hits the FTs its tied.

Chances of Shaq missing one of the FTs is good.  Chances of Pistons rebounding the miss (if 3rd) is good.  Lakers would then of course foul unless they got a steal off the rebound.  Seems like that 90% results in defensive team getting the rebound tho.  Piston hitting FTs could seal or all but seal.  Even if Piston misses FTs with LA having no timeouts it limits the chances of another .4 miracle.

Flock you're and idiot.  

Shaq would only get two FT's.  Just cause you're behind the arc when you get fouled doesn't mean you get 3 FT's.  Only if you're in the act of shooting do you get 3 FT's.

Shaq should have been fouled as soon as he touched the ball.  The best the Lakers could have hoped for had they fouled Shaq was being down 1 with less than 8 seconds left and the Pistons with the ball.

[Reality]

Actually, the reason I foul Shaq in that situation is a simple one:  the Lakers had NO TIMEOUTS, while the Pistons still have two.  One timeout moves the ball to half-court, leaving one for an in-bound emergency.

If Shaq makes the free throws, the Lakers are down by 1.  That means LA has to foul, and has no timeouts in which to set anything up nor to organize.  After the Billups miss, we saw the indecisiveness out there.  Any shot taken in an unprepared situation is likely to look like...well...what we saw when Detroit tried to get back in the overtime with 3-pointers.

JV,

Not sure what you meant.

The Pistons were up 3 points at 89-86 with 10.9 seconds.  Shaq took the inbounds pass beyond the threebie arc.  Wallace was right on him.  Shaq held it for two seconds.  Foul for the love of!!!!
......So if Shaq hits the FTs its tied.

Chances of Shaq missing one of the FTs is good.  Chances of Pistons rebounding the miss (if 3rd) is good.  Lakers would then of course foul unless they got a steal off the rebound.  Seems like that 90% results in defensive team getting the rebound tho.  Piston hitting FTs could seal or all but seal.  Even if Piston misses FTs with LA having no timeouts it limits the chances of another .4 miracle.

Flock you're and idiot.  

Shaq would only get two FT's.  Just cause you're behind the arc when you get fouled doesn't mean you get 3 FT's.  Only if you're in the act of shooting do you get 3 FT's.

Shaq should have been fouled as soon as he touched the ball.  The best the Lakers could have hoped for had they fouled Shaq was being down 1 with less than 8 seconds left and the Pistons with the ball.

Ummn did you read my post that followed?

It was a collosal strategy error by Detroit and Brown and they would/will go down in history should LA start to enjoy their usual +10-35 FT advantage.

Props to you for stating they should be down 3-0.

Your ability to come out of the Krishna House and deliver solid logical takes makes me....sniff sniff :cry: ...well...just proud.

[WayOutWest]

Ummn did you read my post that followed?

It was a collosal strategy error by Detroit and Brown and would/will go down in history should LA start to enjoy their usual +10-35 FT advantage.

Props to you for stating they should be down 3-0.

Your ability to come out of the Krishna House and deliver solid logical takes makes me....sniff sniff :cry: ...well...just proud.

I started posting before the others responded.

While the Lakers could be down 3-0, they could also be up 2-1 had they came to play in game 1.

Still think the Lakers pull this out ala 1988!

[Joe Vancil]

I have to comment on something Reality said - specifically about the free throw advantage the Lakers typically enjoy.

I think last night's game showed that that advantage is completely out the window.  That free-throw advantage is a thing of the past.

I personally think that because the Lakers coming out lethargic in game 1, the idea is out there that Detroit *CAN* play with the Lakers.  I think this has a tendency to "even out" the favorable calls the Lakers get.  As a result, all of a sudden, the Lakers *AREN'T* getting the calls that they're used to.  There's no way some of the reach-ins by Ben Wallace on Shaq last night wouldn't have been called had the Lakers been the aggressors in game 1.  That's typically a call against Ben and for Shaq.  Last night, it was a no-call.  That happened several times in the second half.

As this series progresses, it will be more and more difficult to get calls if you're the Lakers, because every game the series is extended is one more game that people believe that Detroit just might be the better team.  And in the NBA, better team = more favorable calls.

I think last night's game made that fairly clear.