.04 sec....Really?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from walk2run. Show walk2run's posts

    .04 sec....Really?

    How the heck can you lose someone (your opponent's MVP) in .04 seconds left in a game? C'mon KG....really?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    with .04 left, you have to guard the alley oop or tip ins.,

    Leaving Amare free behind the 3 point line was fine by me. Its almost impossible to catch the ball and drill a 3 all in one motion.  Protecting the paint was the smart thing to do imo
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    We really didn't defend that final play correctly.

    KG was guarding against the alley oop to the rim as Gallinari came around off the back pick from Amare.  As in football, KG was the "read" guy.  If KG steps up, the ball goes to Gallinari at the rim.  If KG steps back, the ball goes out front to Amare for the 3-point attempt.

    When I saw the play, I shouted "switch, switch".  If Pierce switches onto Amare, he could at least contest the shot better, even set himself and put a hand in his face.  If KG eventually switched to Gallanari, they definitely would have inbounded to Amare but the Celtics would have at least had someone on him.

    Maybe next time we start with Pierce on Amare and KG on Gallinari in anticipation of a back pick.  Even without a back pick, I like my chances with Pierce slightly "contesting" a long jumper by Amare with .04 left.

    I just hope if we see this again with say, .08 seconds, we defend it better by switching.  We lose if it's .08!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]We really didn't defend that final play correctly. KG was guarding against the alley oop to the rim as Gallinari came around off the back pick from Amare.  As in football, KG was the "read" guy.  If KG steps up, the ball goes to Gallinari at the rim.  If KG steps back, the ball goes out front to Amare for the 3-point attempt. When I saw the play, I shouted " switch, switch ".  If Pierce switches onto Amare, he could at least contest the shot better, even set himself and put a hand in his face.  If KG eventually switched to Gallanari, they definitely would have inbounded to Amare but the Celtics would have at least had someone on him. Maybe next time we start with Pierce on Amare and KG on Gallinari in anticipation of a back pick.  Even without a back pick, I like my chances with Pierce slightly "contesting" a long jumper by Amare with .04 left. I just hope if we see this again with say, .08 seconds, we defend it better by switching.  We lose if it's .08!
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    I was fine with the defense.. the only question was would the guy running the clock start it correctly.  If the clock started on time, its 1 in a million someone catches the inbounds while facing the basket and pretty much has to shoot it as they catch it... cant reset or pull back to gain some power.

    Under those circumstances, Id prefer Pierce not beng anywhere near Amare on that shot. The way things were going last night, Id fear a whistle from the ref if PP was anywhere near
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to .04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]How the heck can you lose someone (your opponent's MVP) in .04 seconds left in a game? C'mon KG....really?
    Posted by walk2run[/QUOTE]

    HAHAHA!!!

    Did you know that if only .03 remains you CANNOT catch and shoot. It has to be a tip-in if you want it count with .03 remaining.

    Is there really a big difference between .03 and .04?

    HAHAHA!!! AGAIN!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    Karllost, that is why the defense wasn't fine.  If the clock operator "had" started the clock late (which we've seen before), we lose because nobody was near Amare.  We needed to have someone to contest him

    It would really take a blatant, obvious foul at that moment for the ref to blow the whistle and that is NOT going to happen.  Pierce stepped up and contested Amare on NY's previous possession so I have confidence, unlike you, that Pierce could have contested him again.  Besides, no ref would have the ballz to blow a whistle with .04 on the clock.

    As you saw, NOBODY was near Amare.  He had a totally clean catch, set and look and our only saving grace was that there was only .04 on the clock.

    Given that situation again, with say, .08 seconds left, we cannot defend that the same way.  KG had to stay back but Pierce could have stayed with the pick guy, Amare.

    Again, that defense causes us to lose if there was .08 on the clock.  It wasn't fine.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    Decimals, guys!!  It's .4 seconds.  4 tenths!!!  You all are writing 4 hundreths.

    And Fierce is right, according to the rules, you cannot catch and shoot in .3 seconds, has to be a tip in.

    I think it was smart not to guard Amare way out there for three reasons:
    1.  He's not a great 3 pt shooter
    2.  You can't catch, square and shoot in .3 seconds
    3.  BUT, you can get fouled and shoot 3 FT's!!!!

    Great win, very impressive. NYK played very well the entire game.

    I'm going to say something not popular here.  I don't think they need Melo.  I think they need a Gerald Wallace/Kendrick Perkins type  muscle guy.  Ronny Turiaf is not cutting it, he is too small!!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]Karllost, that is why the defense wasn't fine.  If the clock operator "had" started the clock late (which we've seen before), we lose because nobody was near Amare.  We needed to have someone to contest him It would really take a blatant, obvious foul at that moment for the ref to blow the whistle and that is NOT going to happen.  Pierce stepped up and contested Amare on NY's previous possession so I have confidence, unlike you, that Pierce could have contested him again.  Besides, no ref would have the ballz to blow a whistle with .04 on the clock. As you saw, NOBODY was near Amare.  He had a totally clean catch, set and look and our only saving grace was that there was only .04 on the clock. Given that situation again, with say, .08 seconds left, we cannot defend that the same way.  KG had to stay back but Pierce could have stayed with the pick guy, Amare. Again, that defense causes us to lose if there was .08 on the clock.  It wasn't fine.
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    Of course the Celtics would have not left Amare open if there was .08 remaining. Doc Rivers is not a dumb coach!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    I feel that the score should have dictated the proper defense. As we had a 2 point lead, the 3 can beat us so we should have had someone(KG/Pierce) put a hand in Amare's face...but not foul him. Protecting under the paint for an alley oop or tip in only prevented the game from being tied & going into OT. At least a 2 point score doesn't beat us in regulation. Now, if we feel they had the momentum, came back to tie from way down, we had key players out in foul trouble or injured, yes, we should avoid OT & want to end it gambling as we did that time would run out or the 3 pointer would be missed.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]I feel that the score should have dictated the proper defense. As we had a 2 point lead, the 3 can beat us so we should have had someone(KG/Pierce) put a hand in Amare's face...but not foul him. Protecting under the paint for an alley oop or tip in only prevented the game from being tied & going into OT. At least a 2 point score doesn't beat us in regulation. Now, if we feel they had the momentum, came back to tie from way down, we had key players out in foul trouble or injured, yes, we should avoid OT & want to end it gambling as we did that time would run out or the 3 pointer would be missed.
    Posted by mandobello[/QUOTE]

    Again, how could you tip-in a 3-point shot? 

    I've never seen a tip-in 3-pointer.

    If the clock showed .08 Amare would NEVER be open.

    Give credit to the Celtics' coaching staff, they knew that .04 is not enough for a catch and shoot.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    hedleylamarr, good catch about the time (.4 vs .04) but you CANNOT leave anyone alone.  Amare is not a 3-point shooter, you're right.  But he is a SCORER and you don't leave him alone ANYWHERE.  The only person who could have been left alone on that final inbounds play was the player inbounding the ball.

    I do agree about .3 versus .4, it's going to take an extremely quick shot to win the game.  However, stranger things have happened.  Like Karllost said, the timekeeper could have easily granted NY some home cooking and started the clock a tad late.  You can't leave Amare completely alone on that final play.

    Some token defense should have been applied.  I'm talking about standing near the guy so he knows someone is there - putting a hand straight up.  Something.  Token defense makes a player pump-fake or think a second before putting up the shot.  You just cannot give up a totally clean look like that in that situation. 

    That cannot be how we defend that inbounds play because with .08 left, again, we lose that game.  That clock starts .2 seconds late and we lose and ask why Amare was that wide open.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]hedleylamarr, good catch about the time (.4 vs .04) but you CANNOT leave anyone alone.  Amare is not a 3-point shooter, you're right.  But he is a SCORER and you don't leave him alone ANYWHERE.  The only person who could have been left alone on that final inbounds play was the player inbounding the ball. I do agree about .3 versus .4, it's going to take an extremely quick shot to win the game.  However, stranger things have happened.  Like Karllost said, the timekeeper could have easily granted NY some home cooking and started the clock a tad late.  You can't leave Amare completely alone on that final play. Some token defense should have been applied.  I'm talking about standing near the guy so he knows someone is there - putting a hand straight up.  Something.  Token defense makes a player pump-fake or think a second before putting up the shot.  You just cannot give up a totally clean look like that in that situation.  That cannot be how we defend that inbounds play because with .08 left, again, we lose that game.  That clock starts .2 seconds late and we lose and ask why Amare was that wide open.
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    What the Celtics were doing was guard the paint, no tip-ins. Didn't you guys see the Celtics packed the shaded lane? 

    Amare left open at the 3-point line with .04 remaining was by design.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really? : Of course the Celtics would have not left Amare open if there was .08 remaining. Doc Rivers is not a dumb coach!
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    P34, how many times have you seen the clock start a tad late in this situation?  I anticipated that when I saw the Knicks about to inbound the ball.  If the clock starts, say, .2 or .3 seconds later, who says that shot doesn't count?

    It's easy to say that at .4 seconds remaining the strategy is to leave a proven SCORER completely wide open on an inbounds play near the 3-point line.  I doubt that is their strategy.  I'm not saying Doc is a dumb coach but somebody almost missed it.

    I just don't see how nobody is acknowledging that the common practice of starting the clock late for the home team would have doomed us.  .4 seconds could be .499 seconds which turns into .6 seconds with a slow start to the clock.

    I am so glad we won but I would have loved to see some token defense on the last play.

    We'll all just simply disagree on the strategy of that last play.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from basketbert. Show basketbert's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    I remember Derek Fisher making a shot with .4 on the clock against sacramento (or spurs) in a final game of a western conference finals game some years ago. You have to shoot exptremely fast with that little time, basically one movement of catching the ball and shoot.

    With the issue of the clock being started too late, if that happens in a game-deciding situation, would it not be possible to contest and overrule it?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really? : P34, how many times have you seen the clock start a tad late in this situation?  I anticipated that when I saw the Knicks about to inbound the ball.  If the clock starts, say, .2 or .3 seconds later, who says that shot doesn't count? It's easy to say that at .4 seconds remaining the strategy is to leave a proven SCORER completely wide open on an inbounds play near the 3-point line.  I doubt that is their strategy.  I'm not saying Doc is a dumb coach but somebody almost missed it. I just don't see how nobody is acknowledging that the common practice of starting the clock late for the home team would have doomed us.  .4 seconds could be .499 seconds which turns into .6 seconds with a slow start to the clock. I am so glad we won but I would have loved to see some token defense on the last play. We'll all just simply disagree on the strategy of that last play.
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    Look at the play again. KG intentionally didn't leave the paint. It's all in the video. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    When the Celtics lost to OKC the Celtic fans were outraged because the Celtics lost to a team without its 2 best players. When the Celtics beat the Knicks some of the fans are complaining because the Celtics could have lost.

    HAHAHA!!!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BuzyDizzyIzzy. Show BuzyDizzyIzzy's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    I honestly wasn't impressed with NY last night. Whether they won or lost by one point. Lets be REAL here, they played against a Celtics team with a HURT PG in Rondo, and US missing 3 of our front line bigs and a quality backup PG, in THEIR BUILDING NONETHELESS! Perkins,Shaq,Jermaine O'neil, and Delonte West. Thats 4 SOLID/STARTING rotation players plus an injured 5th in Rondo. WHy are we even having this discussion? NY played against a number of players who would normally be on the bench for most of the game or log a DNP. Are we fr*ggin serious here?

       Lets see how the Knicks and A'mare would do when he has Perkins/Shaq/JO behind his back all game instead of rookie Erdin or undersized/fat baby and West in the PG position with Robinson back to the SG position where he belongs.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from CHEisCHE. Show CHEisCHE's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to .04 sec....Really? : HAHAHA!!! Did you know that if only .03 remains you CANNOT catch and shoot. It has to be a tip-in if you want it count with .03 remaining. Is there really a big difference between .03 and .04? HAHAHA!!! AGAIN!
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    Fierce ---- tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick,
    Yeah, every tick counts. I'm sure you know how to count.Wink

    do you know how many ticks in sec?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from existentialparquet. Show existentialparquet's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]with .04 left, you have to guard the alley oop or tip ins., Leaving Amare free behind the 3 point line was fine by me. Its almost impossible to catch the ball and drill a 3 all in one motion.  Protecting the paint was the smart thing to do imo
    Posted by Karllost[/QUOTE]


    +1.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Icon11. Show Icon11's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]Decimals, guys!!  It's .4 seconds.  4 tenths!!!  You all are writing 4 hundreths. And Fierce is right, according to the rules, you cannot catch and shoot in .3 seconds, has to be a tip in. I think it was smart not to guard Amare way out there for three reasons: 1.  He's not a great 3 pt shooter 2.  You can't catch, square and shoot in .3 seconds 3.  BUT, you can get fouled and shoot 3 FT's!!!! Great win, very impressive. NYK played very well the entire game. I'm going to say something not popular here.  I don't think they need Melo.  I think they need a Gerald Wallace/Kendrick Perkins type  muscle guy.  Ronny Turiaf is not cutting it, he is too small!!
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    Were you thinking of someone else?  Gerald Wallace is a SF.  Turiaf is way bigger than Wallace.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from soups. Show soups's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    Cetlics won one last week on a trick play; remember the alley oop to KG?

    Never, ever lose a game like that.  Even if it means you leave a 7 footer open four steps behind the 3 pt line.  And let's be honest; Amare wasn't spotting up for a 3 pointer.  Watch where he was on the court.  It's at least four feet beyond the line.

    I'd actually say KG read the play correctly.  Play the odds.  Had he come out on Amare, this would be a much different discussion.  Not only that, but a Knick (Felton?) hit a garbage half court shot at the halftime buzzer.  That was almost the difference in that game.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really? : I'd be nervous that Pierce would do the unthinkable: foul someone taking a tough three pointer.  Doubt it would happen, but...wait...that's what he did at the end of Q3!
    Posted by jallen3531[/QUOTE]

    No jallen3531.  Pierce rotated on the NY's previous possession and made Amare miss.  Had Pierce not rotated, Amare would have had an easy path to the rim.  Pierce rotated and contested the shot and Amare missed.

    Let's give Pierce a little more credit than you're giving him.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]Karllost, that is why the defense wasn't fine.  If the clock operator "had" started the clock late (which we've seen before), we lose because nobody was near Amare.  We needed to have someone to contest him It would really take a blatant, obvious foul at that moment for the ref to blow the whistle and that is NOT going to happen.  Pierce stepped up and contested Amare on NY's previous possession so I have confidence, unlike you, that Pierce could have contested him again.  Besides, no ref would have the ballz to blow a whistle with .04 on the clock. As you saw, NOBODY was near Amare.  He had a totally clean catch, set and look and our only saving grace was that there was only .04 on the clock. Given that situation again, with say, .08 seconds left, we cannot defend that the same way.  KG had to stay back but Pierce could have stayed with the pick guy, Amare. Again, that defense causes us to lose if there was .08 on the clock.  It wasn't fine.
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    With .8 second on the clock we would have defended differently.  I think Doc probably knows what to do in this situation.  I have seen fouls called in this situation before.  No need to chance it.  The chances of Amare catching, turning, and getting a shot off was nearly impossible. We played defense perfect for that situation.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re:.04 sec....Really?

    In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re:.04 sec....Really? : I'd be nervous that Pierce would do the unthinkable: foul someone taking a tough three pointer.  Doubt it would happen, but...wait...that's what he did at the end of Q3!
    Posted by jallen3531[/QUOTE]

    It was just like 3 or 4 other times during the game where the C's got called for a phantom call, while at the other end we were getting clobbered with no calls in site.  That is the reason you don't chance getting a foul called in that situation.
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share