How at the end of the game when you come out of the timeout do you not go for the quick shot so your assure yourself the final shot in case you miss. Which of course we didn’t do and missed our shot and gave them the final shot which if they make we lose ! We got lucky and that again to me is poor coaching
2 for 1
- Thread starter richthedentist
- Start date
Pike was asked that question. He said is goal is to get a good shot and play good defense. When you rush to get two you usually get two bad shots
i knew that would be his answer but that is BS. And not how it played out at all !!! He had them stand around and go iso and got a low quality shot with no play run... there was plenty of time to do that earlier in the shot clock without being rushed at all. That was literally one of the worst basketball coaching calls I’ve ever wintessed
I don’t agree with Pike’s response. All we were doing was running the clock down and letting Geo create anyway. It’s not like we ran a set that we wouldn’t have had time to execute. Should have just let Geo do his thing and get the 2 for 1
I love pikiell but that was silly especially when they held the ball for 8 seconds. Analytics or not an assistant should have been in is ear. If we saw it, the commentators saw it, the big 10 post game saw it then he or his assistants should have saw it.
but again long game one play doesn’t not make or break the game. A lot lead up to that.
Pike obviously saw it. Joe couch watcher sees it. There is a reason he didn't do it. Agree or disagree but there was a reasonable reason.
I think Pike is stubbornly against having the game clock dictate when to shoot. I think he like believes at totally ignoring it and doesn’t care if coaches told him otherwise.
It was dumb, plain and simple. Nobody is saying you have to rush up a shot but if you are going to have Geo go one on one at the end of the clock, do it right away. Pike set us up to lose. We miss a shot and you hand Northwestern the last shot. We miss early and we probably get the ball back.
This is the same garbage that I heard on WFAN a few decades ago. Some guy from Brooklyn was telling how the Duke coach should have
played a game. The bottom line is that Pikiell has a way of coaching and it has been more than successful. The fact that a particular play might not have worked out, with the advantage of hindsight, does not mean anything over the long run. He is proving that his method of coaching is a success.
played a game. The bottom line is that Pikiell has a way of coaching and it has been more than successful. The fact that a particular play might not have worked out, with the advantage of hindsight, does not mean anything over the long run. He is proving that his method of coaching is a success.
Yup, what a terrible coach we have. i will say it again, you are a clown. Enjoy the journeyPounding Nails
Just cannot agree with that statement as much as I like Pike!
Most college teams don’t worry about getting 2 for 1. That’s an NBA thing.
Analytics don't back you up on the college game. Sorry kyk. It is very team and context dependant. In the nba it is a winning strategy
Too many people don’t realize that this isn’t the nba where they get those situations many times in a season (especially because they play four quarters and not two halves.)
You want to get a good look ...that’s the goal
Doesn't mean a coach can't learn to make some adjustments to become even more successful.
But non of this happened! Geo didn’t go one on one. Ron took a standing still open 3. The NW came down, Rutgers defenses and NW took a horrible shot... so if pike is bad Collins is worse.
that being said they did exactly what pikiell said he wanted. Get a good shot and defend. If Ron makes that we call pike a genius for using geo as a decoy. He misse and we attack him.
Pikiell like every coach has a style of coaching. Right or wrong. The most important thing is his style has given us more wins then they have given us loses. I disagree with the timing of the last possession but at end of the day it went how he wanted it to go. Guys need to make ahots
During the game i wanted us to go 2 for 1. for one. But at the end of the day he's the coach. He's the guy with the strategies that are obviously working for us. We can disagree but I respect his position if that's what he thinks we need to do.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Dude this is like literally the exact opposite of hindsight lol. We won tonight. We all posted pre timeout that we should go for the 2 for 1, posted it live. Hindsight wouldve been saying nothing then it causing us to lose and then all of us bringing out pitchforks. Not what happened here
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Completely agree. I get that it's harder to execute a 2 for 1 in college but that was the easiest possible situation to do it in. There were 50 seconds left so you didn't really have to rush too much and you're coming out a timeout.
Instead, Geo was literally just standing with the ball for a good 10-15 seconds which accomplished nothing other than ruin the 2 for 1. Especially coming out of a timeout you can at least draw something up for a potential quick bucket.
THIS.
I wasn’t that upset about not going 2 for 1. We’re not a great offensive team and this isn’t the NBA. You don’t see many 2 for 1’s in college. Also Geo has been and is clutch with the iso as the clock winds down. You work to get the best shot.
Find something else to ***** about people.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Analytics do back it up lol. When you inbound the ball with 54 seconds left and your average possession length is 17.5 seconds and you average .983 points per possession while your opponent averages .957 points per possession that stats are ridiculously in your favor to go for a 2 for 1. In fact to not get a 2 for 1 in that situation would be out of the norm of your teams tendencies. However, pike intentionally opted to NOT go for a 2 for 1, quite literally instructed the team not to
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
You tell this team to go 2 for 1 and there’s good chance that we throw up a terrible/rushed shot.
We aren’t a gifted team offensively and have to work for our baskets. If the 2 for 1 is there you take it obviously but I don’t think it’s a must.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Again, we inbounded the ball with 54 seconds left and our average possession length is 17.5 seconds. Wed have to really go out of our way to not go for a 2 for 1 and thats exactly what we did. Its inexcusable and couldve cost us the game
Pike knows his players and feels if he tells them he wants two possessions to the opponent’s one it’ll screw his kids heads up.
I’m sure he’s tried it in practice and doesn’t like what he sees
I’m sure he’s tried it in practice and doesn’t like what he sees
The more and more I think of it I realize pikiell was right. We had 48 seconds or so. We would have had to get a shot up within 4/5 seconds in order to have an effective 2 for 1. The NBA it works because 24 second shot clock. We have 30.
let say we get a shot up in 7 seconds seconds, we miss NW gets a rebound that leaves them with roughly what 38/39 seconds. That means if NW winds it all the way down which they would have, make or miss we only have 4 or 5 seconds to either win or tie? Just not enough time to play 2 for 1 game. By rushing the first shot we have to rush the second as well
let say we get a shot up in 7 seconds seconds, we miss NW gets a rebound that leaves them with roughly what 38/39 seconds. That means if NW winds it all the way down which they would have, make or miss we only have 4 or 5 seconds to either win or tie? Just not enough time to play 2 for 1 game. By rushing the first shot we have to rush the second as well
We got a great shot. Rushing a shot up there is a bad move. Get a good shot and play defense.
Kyk you are off we had 48 seconds not 54 seconds.
By your analytics if we took the average amount of time to get a shot off (17.5 seconds) that is not working a 2 for 1 with a 30 second shot clock.
If we purposely went for a 2 for 1 we would have rushed a shot. That is nothing something you do with a team that struggles offensively.
If the 2 for 1 is there you take it but you do not have to design a play to rush for a 2 for 1. That could leave you with 2 bad shots....instead of 1 good shot.
We had 48 seconds left on the sideout. Sorry, I disagree with going two for one. You see so many low quality two for attempts all the time. The fact that we have fans over here saying we need a analytics guy to figure this out. Pike’s not stupid. He obviously thought about it and decided to opt for a play that got a shooter wide open. Harper just missed.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Heres the thing youre missing. We inbound it with 54 seconds, so what do 99% of coaches in america do? They call timeout with 54 seconds left, not 48. Or they buzz it up to half in 2 seconds and call timeout with 52 seconds left and draw up a set for a 10 second shot. Its inexcusable, theres no excuse for it. You wont find a single basketball coach or analyst tell you other wise
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Bingo!!! Our second possession would also come with less than 10 seconds left. Surely a low quality and rushed possession. Do our fans really think Pike didn’t think about this?
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Thing is, there wasnt a play. They just blized geo and he swung it to harper. That wasnt a play.