Question for the board
- Thread starter Halldan
- Start date
Scared the hell out of me but can't argue with the result. Balls of steel for ASM. Take the W and move on.
I was thinking we needed to try it. We did. It worked. Me like.
Hated it.
Why do that when a simple inbound pass would have resulted in a Marquette foul? If that pass is overthrown the ball would have been brought back to Marquette's baseline. And if it was intercepted Marquette had plenty of time to rush up the court and shoot a three, hopefully for their part before we fouled.
Why do that when a simple inbound pass would have resulted in a Marquette foul? If that pass is overthrown the ball would have been brought back to Marquette's baseline. And if it was intercepted Marquette had plenty of time to rush up the court and shoot a three, hopefully for their part before we fouled.
Loved it, took a risk to slam the door. A short inbound would be no sure thing either, but assuming we did get it in we're still looking at a 1-and-1 with nearly 6 seconds on the clock for a team that's struggled from the line lately. Plenty of time for MU to get a shot off a missed front end.
Gotta trust how it’s worked in practice, which must have been effective enough to use in a game.
It was well executed, so I’d say the confidence in trying it was warranted..
It was well executed, so I’d say the confidence in trying it was warranted..
Did not like it but executed perfectly. Now it’s on film and it could help down the road as long as we don’t actually throw it long again.
I didn’t mind it. Much better than getting the pass stolen under the basket. I would have preferred Clark passing the ball back to ASM to take the final foul shots however.
If Shaheen used the timeout to set up 2 plays (the inbounds to Simp and then the bomb to Clark), I think it was really sharp. The first play clearly set up the second. Everyone thought the second play was going back to Simp.
I knew your answer from the same play years ago. ...we disagreed then, now I have mixed emotions.
Not only did I like the play but I think Clark should have gone to the basket. Ahead of the field, if you make the layup you're up five with under five seconds to play.
If he misses the front end of the one-and-one and Marquette hits a three to tie, we're having a very different discussion.
If he misses the front end of the one-and-one and Marquette hits a three to tie, we're having a very different discussion.
Clark called that option himself.
After the foul when we inbounded the ball, Clark saw how he was being played and said something to ASM. ASM nodded and threw the baseball pass. I had a good angle and happened to catch the quick exchange.
After the foul when we inbounded the ball, Clark saw how he was being played and said something to ASM. ASM nodded and threw the baseball pass. I had a good angle and happened to catch the quick exchange.
Last edited:
Dislike. Much higher degree of difficulty and risk if that ball is shorted. Is that the play they designed?
Thankfully it worked though!
Thankfully it worked though!
I think the play had been well rehearsed in practice and discussed in the timeout. I felt it was totally designed and not a fling it down the court kind of pass. If that is true, then I agree with it. Marquette (and I) was caught a little flat footed. The execution was also well done.
Feel same way. Was practiced and drawn up by SHA at the right time. LIKE
Took everyone in arena
Including MU by surprise
I like it because it worked. Honestly I could go 50-50 on this because there are drawbacks to both a long pass and a short pass in that game situation. Bottom line the team executed and dare I say even had a little fun with it. That's always a win for me. Good job by Sha on this.
Would have loved it more had Bud gone for the layup and 6.5 cover!!!
I’d have to watch it again, but it was probably unnecessary. It worked out though so all good. In the moment, I thought Budd should have given the ball up to a better free throw shooter. He proved me wrong and I couldn’t be happier.
We act like the other option had no danger or downside. Anyone remember Sina throwing away that game in Brooklyn with a bad pass on a baseline inbound pass that was intercepted and I think lead to a 3 that took almost no time?? Or thay awful pass by Parker yesterday.
We had a timeout so if we were having difficulty finding a man we would not have had to force an inbound pass. Then you use that as an option out of a time out if you can't inbound the ball short. The play worked so I believe that's why so many are supporting it. But I wonder if it didn't what the tone of the board would have been.
All that said, an incredibly accurate pass from out of bounds. It had to be near perfect and it was. Just enough loft to (hopefully) ensure it didn't go untouched and out of bounds.
All that said, an incredibly accurate pass from out of bounds. It had to be near perfect and it was. Just enough loft to (hopefully) ensure it didn't go untouched and out of bounds.