BC Part II Post Game

[jncuse]

It's time to get nerdy.

According to AI:
If a player is a 90% free throw shooter, the chance of them missing two foul shots is 1%.

Explanation:

• To miss a free throw, the probability is 10% (since they make 90%).
• Since each free throw is independent, to miss both, you multiply the probability of missing one by itself: 0.1 x 0.1 = 0.01, which is 1%.

---

So if Donald Hand Jr. was 91%, the chances of missing a free throw was 9%. The chances of missing five are 0.09 x 0.09 x 0.09 x 0.09 x 0.09 which is 0.00059049%.

Nerd response 2. Thought of it while sitting in bed this morning.

I think I have the answer although it’s a guess because I didn’t do any research.

I believe the odds of him missing 5 of 8 shots, is 2 in a 1000. (0.19%) That answer is based on random distribution which I’m not sure fully applies to basketball with cold and hot streaks.

Take the 9% and multiply it 5 times like you did above …. But then multiply that result by 8 factorial minus 5 factorial (6x7x8) to factor in that it was 5 misses out of 8.

 

[gmacfor3]

I mean Taylor who is our best wing defender was on the bench. The point is Red doesn't really know what he is doing and it is very concerning he is not only in charge of a P4 program but in charge of a P4 program with a massive history as ours.

You also have to wonder about his assistants. They should be clamoring to get Lampkin off the floor and Taylor on it in a moment like that. Maybe they are and they are ignored (doubtful)?. Maybe Red’s style is similar to JB in which assistants have very little in-game say? Either way it’s really bad however you look at it.

 

[IthacaMatt]

One of the insiders on here mentioned that JB and the 75 Final Four team have some kind of beef but he couldn’t or wouldn’t talk about it.
I definitely understand his position, but I’m just being nosy and want the dirt.

Well, he was only an assistant on that team, so maybe he had a beef with one or more of the guys. I have a very hard time ever seeing Boeheim playing the role of the "good cop" toward players.

 

[IthacaMatt]

If there was a member of the Cuse media who had any stones the following questions would have been asked of Red:
-why did you have Cuffe and Carlos on the court for the final portion of the game? What did you think you were getting out of those guys that might not be evident to the rest of us?

Carlos and Cuffe together never made sense, and he's done it a lot. No shooting.

-given that Eddie weighs at least 280 pounds and has trouble moving, do you think it makes sense to play him all of the second half without a break especially considering that McLeod has been relatively useful the past two games? Were you surprised that he was clearly winded in the second half and in the overtimes?

Everyone knows that McLeod is healthy enough to contribute, and has played well, so again, this doesn't make sense on the coach's part.

-Was there a reason Choppa did not see the floor for most of the second half after giving you a lot of offense in the first half? In a lost season, doesn’t it make sense to give a potential building block for the future some experience in a close game when he is already playing well?

He also does this all the time. Gives Moore a run in the first half, and he doesn't play again. Bad player management, IMO.

-how does having JJ bring the ball up and having Carlos run to the corner and stand there help the team? If Carlos isn’t running the point don’t you have better shooting options at the two?

Again, obviously correct.

-why was Taylor relegated to the bench as the lead dwindled down in regulation but you saw a fit to bring him back in for the overtime?
-when Davis or Lampkin is backing his man down do you tell the other four guys just to stand and watch or do you ever consider having somebody cut to the basket?

Another really good observation.

-on the game tying three at the end of regulation, putting aside JJ running under a screen, which has never been corrected,

This is one thing I'll quibble with. I saw them fighting pretty hard to get over screens - including JJ - for most of the game. Not on that shot, you're correct. But there was also a bit of a moving screen by the BC big that made it really hard to get over the top.

were your players told to foul as soon as the ball was inbounded?
-when you were playing offense defense, why were you not taking Bell out for defense?

Yep. LOL

-did anyone explain to Petar there was no need to foul or to risk a foul when we were only down one with 40 seconds left and at some point shouldn’t he stop complaining when he mauls guys?
-in an obvious situation where BC is going to foul, doesn’t it make sense to take Eddie off the court?

We have way more talent than Boston College. They are awful. This should’ve never been anywhere near as close as it was.

Nice post. Agree with most of these questions. I offered several responses in the body up above.

 

[jncuse]

I posted this yesterday when the score had shrunk from 59-49, to 59-55 and there was 6 or 7 minutes to go. And the game basically ended up finishing the same way,

Syracuse blew it in the final 20 seconds. (Perhaps against Youngstown the big blown lead was in OT#1). That game against Youngstown went multiple overtimes as well. And both games ended up with big margins in the final OT.

 

[kcsu]

The D on that three should have been all 5 SU players about 2 feet
OUTSIDE of the 3 pt line which would have forced a ridiculously long three point attempt. The screen wouldn't have mattered as we would have set up closer to half court than the point on the floor that the screen took place.
No SU defender should have ever set up with a single foot inside the the three point line

 

[OttosShoes]

8!/(3!*5!)*.91^3*.09^5 = .025%

That's fair and a textbook answer. Mine was weighted assuming the shots would be streaky (there aren't actually 8^8 outcomes), but under-representing the middle. I can't say I spent a lot of time perfecting my model lol but I wasn't happy with the classic binomial.

Either way, percentages like that aren't totally absurd but tantamount to a career day in the wrong direction for the kid. I feel bad for him...but not too bad.

 

[tptcuse]

You guys act like these things never happen. Two weeks ago Kansas up up six with 7.9 seconds left and they were forced to go overtime and eventually lost. I don’t care who you play, games are never over. When you miss foul shots, stuff can happen and it did.

Of course. But I was replying to a post that said we were "disgusting" for not being thrilled with the game.

 

[jncuse]

8!/(3!*5!)*.91^3*.09^5 = .025%

My rough guess of .019% was pretty close. I missed a few factors in my rough calc (.09 to the fifth power *8*7*6)

 

[Eric15]

This was like watching a fight between two drunk hobos.

This is extremely insulting... to drunk hobos.

 

[orange79]

My rough guess of .019% was pretty close. I missed a few factors in my rough calc (.09 to the fifth power *8*7*6)

Idiot.

 

[Dcuse]

I am obsessed with knowing what was said during the 2 timeouts with 4 seconds left in regulation. Both Mike Waters and Brent Axe said that Syracuse “ CHOSE” not to foul. This would have been a damn near firable offense. Autry said in the post game press conference that they were supposed to foul and JJ made a terrible decision to go under the screen. Why did those two say we CHOSE not to foul?

 

[JaySU22]

I posted this yesterday when the score had shrunk from 59-49, to 59-55 and there was 6 or 7 minutes to go. And the game basically ended up finishing the same way,

Syracuse blew it in the final 20 seconds. (Perhaps against Youngstown the big blown lead was in OT#1). That game against Youngstown went multiple overtimes as well. And both games ended up with big margins in the final OT.

View attachment 249446

Nostradamus type call on your part. Well done!

 

[nycfan]

Does this take the cake of worst win? Where does it rank with Youngstown St Lemoyne, Colgate etc?

I didn't think we could top those non conference ones.

No sir. What you are forgetting is our miracle comeback in the 2nd OT. We were down 7 with under 2 minutes to play. Quite honestly, I thought we were cooked at that point. Additionally, at the end of the first overtime, when JJ missed the 2nd FT with 30 seconds left, BC got to hold for last shot in a tie game. And then incredibly, when JJ missed the 2nd FT with 11 seconds left in 2nd OT, once again BC got the last possession in a tie game with a chance to win it. So as bad as our chokejob was at the end of regulation, we really were quite fortunate to win that game in overtime. That needs to account for something -- thus, the gutsy play in OT would make this a better win than those other 3 you mentioned.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

I am obsessed with knowing what was said during the 2 timeouts with 4 seconds left in regulation. Both Mike Waters and Brent Axe said that Syracuse “ CHOSE” not to foul. This would have been a damn near firable offense. Autry said in the post game press conference that they were supposed to foul and JJ made a terrible decision to go under the screen. Why did those two say we CHOSE not to foul?

 

[Dcuse]

No thanks. I look at both sides of everything rather than spewing unconditional hatred.

 

[tbonezone]

We are 1 game back of a bye.

who wants a bye ? i mean we're not dancing so it's one more chance to play.

 

[Forza Azzurri]

That's fair and a textbook answer. Mine was weighted assuming the shots would be streaky (there aren't actually 8^8 outcomes), but under-representing the middle. I can't say I spent a lot of time perfecting my model lol but I wasn't happy with the classic binomial.

Either way, percentages like that aren't totally absurd but tantamount to a career day in the wrong direction for the kid. I feel bad for him...but not too bad.

That is also fair. The more the kid missed the less he became a 91% shooter at the line, IMO.

 

[djcon57]

You guys act like these things never happen. Two weeks ago Kansas up up six with 7.9 seconds left and they were forced to go overtime and eventually lost. I don’t care who you play, games are never over. When you miss foul shots, stuff can happen and it did.

Houston and BC, basically same teams

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I am obsessed with knowing what was said during the 2 timeouts with 4 seconds left in regulation. Both Mike Waters and Brent Axe said that Syracuse “ CHOSE” not to foul. This would have been a damn near firable offense. Autry said in the post game press conference that they were supposed to foul and JJ made a terrible decision to go under the screen. Why did those two say we CHOSE not to foul?

Because Mike Waters' first post-game story was written before Red's press conference.

Both Mike and Donna publish an initial story right after the game ends, then they both publish a second story after the press conference and player interviews.

This was from Donna Ditota's second story (after Red's presser):

“I think JJ might have went under the screen,” Autry said. “He had to be up and as soon as (Payne) caught it we wanted to give a foul. But you know, sometimes these things happen fast. We just couldn’t get there. But the plan was to foul.”

Waters didn't see a foul, so maybe he assumed that we chose not to?

 

[Dcuse]

Because Mike Waters' first post-game story was written before Red's press conference.

Both Mike and Donna publish an initial story right after the game ends, then they both publish a second story after the press conference and player interviews.

This was from Donna Ditota's second story (after Red's presser):

“I think JJ might have went under the screen,” Autry said. “He had to be up and as soon as (Payne) caught it we wanted to give a foul. But you know, sometimes these things happen fast. We just couldn’t get there. But the plan was to foul.”

Waters didn't see a foul, so maybe he assumed that we chose not to?

How about Axe? His podcast or article or….whatever it is he does….came out the next day. To me, that’s totally irresponsible to say he “ chose” not to foul if in fact Autry directed them to.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

How about Axe? His podcast or article or….whatever it is he does….came out the next day. To me, that’s totally irresponsible to say he “ chose” not to foul if in fact Autry directed them to.

You used "Axe" and "Irresponsible" in the same sentence.

That should answer your question.

 

[Dinkyspond]

I am a basketball fan and played competitively only until my high school's freshman team. I do not know a lot of intricate offensive and defensive details but what does "he went under the screen" mean. I know what a screen is but what should have JJ done instead of going "under the screen." Can someone explain "under the screen" and what JJ should have done instead?

 

[RF2044]

I am a basketball fan and played competitively only until my high school's freshman team. I do not know a lot of intricate offensive and defensive details but what does "he went under the screen" mean. I know what a screen is but what should have JJ done instead of going "under the screen." Can someone explain "under the screen" and what JJ should have done instead?

When an offensive sets a screen, the defender [who is blocked] has two choices. They can try to go around, and stay with their man. But that usually enables the offensive player to get separation, because the defender has to get past the screener to stick with their guy. This is possible -- sometimes defenders slide through before the screen gets set cleanly, or they fight their way through despite being "picked."

Or, the defensive player can go "underneath the screen." That is, instead of going around, I cut below the screen and pick up the offensive player on the other side. That usually works best when the offensive player is not looking for a jump shot. Because if you go underneath, the screener creates space for the player you were defending "behind" them, giving them a wide open look.

Now, there are also variations of how to attack it. Players can switch, so the screener's defender can try to pick up on the offensive player who goes around the screen, and the defender who got screened takes the screener [for example].

But the bottom line is that the team is coached to do things a certain way, so that there is no UNCERTAINTY about what to do, whether to switch, etc.

We made a dumb mistake, giving a hot offensive player a wide open three at the end of regulation by blowing how we defended that play.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

When an offensive sets a screen, the defender [who is blocked] has two choices. They can try to go around, and stay with their man. But that usually enables the offensive player to get separation, because the defender has to get past the screener to stick with their guy. This is possible -- sometimes defenders slide through before the screen gets set cleanly, or they fight their way through despite being "picked."

Or, the defensive player can go "underneath the screen." That is, instead of going around, I cut below the screen and pick up the offensive player on the other side. That usually works best when the offensive player is not looking for a jump shot. Because if you go underneath, the screener creates space for the player you were defending "behind" them, giving them a wide open look.

Now, there are also variations of how to attack it. Players can switch, so the screener's defender can try to pick up on the offensive player who goes around the screen, and the defender who got screened takes the screener [for example].

But the bottom line is that the team is coached to do things a certain way, so that there is no UNCERTAINTY about what to do, whether to switch, etc.

We made a dumb mistake, giving a hot offensive player a wide open three at the end of regulation by blowing how we defended that play.

Right, but my question on that particular situation—if you try to fight through, over the top of the screen, on a play where the opposition has to have a three to tie or win, doesn’t that increase your likelihood of fouling on the attempt? This either giving them three FTs or an and-one four point opportunity?

I agree that we’re horrible at defense through screens. HORRIBLE. But if there’s one situation to not go over, it may have been that one. I’d rather have had Lucas on the target from the start, and then a switch if necessary, when there was no time to pass off.

But I dunno—I defer…. Anyone?