“Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.
I generally believe not calling a timeout in that situation is a better idea than calling a timeout. A timeout helps the defense more than the offense.
A scamble situation is almost always better than a play coming after a timeout.
I think George Hill made a big mistake, why he stopped at the three point line, I'll never know. If he would have kept going all the way to the basket, at the very least would have drawn a defender his way and opened it up for PG. (we didn't need a three and sure I understand drawing a defender away from the basket, but the Magic weren't scared with the Hill spotting up from 23 feet with PG and West inside of 15 ft) And who knows why Watson was in the dead corner. If he would have gone to the basket that might have opended up a lot of things.
I agree with Quinn, we take too many threes on the fastbreak. And I'll criticize Vogel for this because on a last second play we had two guys stop at the three point line when we didn't need a three and we didn't need spacing. They stopped instinctively, because that is the way they are coached. (not saying it isn't a decent option at times, but we do it too much)
Or if PG had given the ball up early to Hill, maybe they could have gotten the defense out of position a little which would have opened up a pass back to PG. (although I know the clock was winding down. PG took the shot with 4.2 seconds lef, so there was some time for 1 pass or two quick ones.
Bottomline on that last play and after looking at it a dozen times today, pacers shou;ld havbe gotten a better shot than they ended up with, and they should have gotten a better shot than a wide open three from George Hill (or Watson) Pacers had a 4 on three, and in the end we allowed their three to guard our two because two of our guys just stopped. Pacers had enough time to get a wide open 15 ft shot or even a open shot in the lane.
Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-10-2014 at 05:18 PM.
I think in that situation at most you want to make one pass to an open shot to give yourself a chance for a tip in if it doesn't go in. 2 passes, even quick ones, would have taken it down too much where it would be unlikely to get a second chance on a miss.
Vogel is so good coming out of a timeout. They score so often, so easily after a TO. Would have liked to have seen them give it a shot instead of the crapola that they ended up with.
I believe that one pass to Hill was all that was needed. Any wide open shot in the NBA is a very good shot and in
GHill's hands that was almost as good as a layup. If he had gone to the hoop with the way the whistle is swallowed in those circumstances he would have never scored anyway. Plus there was still time for a rebound if Hill had missed.
No timeout was needed and would not have presented any better shot that what George Hill had.