End of Game Inbounding

[OrangeTown]

Okay so as I was watching the end of the game yesterday, something occurred to me and I thought I'd run it by the board here, since most of you are infinitely more knowledgeable of hoops than I (with the notable exception of Marsh, who has made it apparent that he knows jack about it).

So, here's the scenario. We're inbounding from under their basket with like 2.4 seconds remaining. Up by 2. Fair is doing the inbounding. Can't find anyone open, so calls a timeout. Second time, he's able to squeeze in a pass, and as expected, they foul us immediately.

However, the first time, right before he called the timeout, the announcers made mention of Triche being wide open sprinting down the court toward our basket - this made me think of the question in this thread.

Here's my question - why not send more of our team, if not all of them, into the far court at this time? If you throw a 3/4 court pass, it seems almost impossible for the other team to cleanly intercept and have a makeable basket with only 2 seconds. I realize there is a chance that someone could catch it cleanly, take 2 dribbles to half court, and heave a last minute hail mary.

The way I see it, chances are that a near full-length court pass to the other foul line would at the very least be tipped, causing the clock to start before anyone even has possession. Maybe it goes out of bounds under the other hoop or to the sideline, but then the odds are (if the ball even went out on us), that they get the ball with less than a second left with the whole length of the court to go.

Yeah I know there's some risk in this, and I'm sure there's a reason they don't do it. The same reason I'm sitting here being a Monday morning quarterback instead of bragging about my 900 wins. But I get so tense inbounding the ball there, where all it would take is a steal and a quick layup or jumper from near their own hoop, that it made me think of alternatives.

Just something to spark some discussion I guess. What do you all think? It seems to be weighing a shorter pass with faith in our free throw shooting potentially putting us up by an unreachable 4 points vs. a longer pass that could potentially give them a hail mary chance.

 

[iommi]

I think the concern, as you sort of alluded to, is if the long pass goes out of bounds without someone touching it, the opposition gets the ball with no time expired.

 

[tee1222]

Here's my biggest issue with this. I too have thought it would burn enough clock, but since the pass itself is risky, easier to be an errant pass than something on the inbound side of the court, what if the other team gets it easily, calls timeout right away?
They could still have 1 1/2 seconds to get a look.

 

[jdubs30]

Sending everyone deep and throwing the long pass is like throwing a hail mary in football; you significantly decrease your chances of catching it cleanly, and you increase the chance you get called for an offensive foul; if you do it you better make sure whoever is the inbounder throws a PERFECT pass. It's one thing to send 1 person deep, but if you send everyone deep you have to complete that pass in traffic.

 

[All4SU]

Try asking JB that question after a game. I would like to see his reaction. ;-0

I think as jdubs said, the last thing you want is to get called for a foul trying to catch a 50/50 ball, putting them to the line with essentially no time gone.

 

[Marsh01]

I think the concern, as you sort of alluded to, is if the long pass goes out of bounds without someone touching it, the opposition gets the ball with no time expired.

Just going to say this. Unless its a sure throw and catch tough to risk that throw.
Btw that should have been an intentional foul on triche as they bear hugged him


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SBU72]

Sending everyone deep and throwing the long pass is like throwing a hail mary in football; you significantly decrease your chances of catching it cleanly, and you increase the chance you get called for an offensive foul; if you do it you better make sure whoever is the inbounder throws a PERFECT pass. It's one thing to send 1 person deep, but if you send everyone deep you have to complete that pass in traffic.

Actually as Bilas pointed out, it is a free ball. The point is that offensive fouls are usually tougher to come by, ie a slight shove/push ismore easily ignored if you have posession of the ball but without that, any attempt to gain an advantage can be easily call.

 

[cusetown1]

I think the concern, as you sort of alluded to, is if the long pass goes out of bounds without someone touching it, the opposition gets the ball with no time expired.

Which pretty much happened with Triches miss on the 1 and 1.

 

[iommi]

Which pretty much happened with Triches miss on the 1 and 1.

True, but if you throw a long pass and it goes out of bounds without it being touched, the opposition would also get to inbounds it all the way back under the basket from which the throw-in was made. (In other words, Cincy would've gotten the ball under the same basket that CJ was inbounding the ball.)

 

[OrangeTown]

Yeah, pretty much all the reasons I figured would weigh into that decision, although I admit the offensive foul part was one thing I didn't account for, which seems would be the worst thing to happen.

I guess Triche's miss on the 1 and 1 as cusetown1 mentioned made me think of this more than I should. If he makes them, it's a moot point as I stated in the original post. But seeing Cincy get the chance to set up, do an inbounds play, and get a shot off from around half court made me start thinking of alternatives I guess.

 

[OrangeTown]

True, but if you throw a long pass and it goes out of bounds without it being touched, the opposition would also get to inbounds it all the way back under the basket from which the throw-in was made. (In other words, Cincy would've gotten the ball under the same basket that CJ was inbounding the ball.)

Correct - I guess I make my post with the assumption that the guy throwing the inbounds would be able to at least hit something with all those people down there. I guess I'm just playing devil's advocate and trying to spark some discussion.

But yes, if nobody at all touches it - that would be up there with an offensive foul as worst case scenario.

 

[kuethstheman]

Wonder what options CJ was given when they had no more timeouts to call. I'd guess if you can't find anyone to inbound to, you should probably chuck it into the front court. Floater, so it stays inbounds.

 

[SmilinBob]

I don't understand why teams don't just hold if it's not going to be called intentional. One thing that worried me was the board was on CJ's left and he is left handed but I wasn't sure how far under it he was if they were going to go long, which it did look like when they held Triche.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Okay so as I was watching the end of the game yesterday, something occurred to me and I thought I'd run it by the board here, since most of you are infinitely more knowledgeable of hoops than I (with the notable exception of Marsh, who has made it apparent that he knows jack about it).

So, here's the scenario. We're inbounding from under their basket with like 2.4 seconds remaining. Up by 2. Fair is doing the inbounding. Can't find anyone open, so calls a timeout. Second time, he's able to squeeze in a pass, and as expected, they foul us immediately.

However, the first time, right before he called the timeout, the announcers made mention of Triche being wide open sprinting down the court toward our basket - this made me think of the question in this thread.

Here's my question - why not send more of our team, if not all of them, into the far court at this time? If you throw a 3/4 court pass, it seems almost impossible for the other team to cleanly intercept and have a makeable basket with only 2 seconds. I realize there is a chance that someone could catch it cleanly, take 2 dribbles to half court, and heave a last minute hail mary.

The way I see it, chances are that a near full-length court pass to the other foul line would at the very least be tipped, causing the clock to start before anyone even has possession. Maybe it goes out of bounds under the other hoop or to the sideline, but then the odds are (if the ball even went out on us), that they get the ball with less than a second left with the whole length of the court to go.

Yeah I know there's some risk in this, and I'm sure there's a reason they don't do it. The same reason I'm sitting here being a Monday morning quarterback instead of bragging about my 900 wins. But I get so tense inbounding the ball there, where all it would take is a steal and a quick layup or jumper from near their own hoop, that it made me think of alternatives.

Just something to spark some discussion I guess. What do you all think? It seems to be weighing a shorter pass with faith in our free throw shooting potentially putting us up by an unreachable 4 points vs. a longer pass that could potentially give them a hail mary chance.

Sometimes we do send a guy running down court against an opponent's press. I don't like when every guy comes to the ball. Makes it very crowded trying to get it in bounds.

 

[upperdeck]

ask Gonzaga how not throwing into the front court worked out. teams run stupid in bounds plays all the time.

 

[OttosBestFriend]

Okay so as I was watching the end of the game yesterday, something occurred to me and I thought I'd run it by the board here, since most of you are infinitely more knowledgeable of hoops than I (with the notable exception of Marsh, who has made it apparent that he knows jack about it).

So, here's the scenario. We're inbounding from under their basket with like 2.4 seconds remaining. Up by 2. Fair is doing the inbounding. Can't find anyone open, so calls a timeout. Second time, he's able to squeeze in a pass, and as expected, they foul us immediately.

However, the first time, right before he called the timeout, the announcers made mention of Triche being wide open sprinting down the court toward our basket - this made me think of the question in this thread.

Here's my question - why not send more of our team, if not all of them, into the far court at this time? If you throw a 3/4 court pass, it seems almost impossible for the other team to cleanly intercept and have a makeable basket with only 2 seconds. I realize there is a chance that someone could catch it cleanly, take 2 dribbles to half court, and heave a last minute hail mary.

The way I see it, chances are that a near full-length court pass to the other foul line would at the very least be tipped, causing the clock to start before anyone even has possession. Maybe it goes out of bounds under the other hoop or to the sideline, but then the odds are (if the ball even went out on us), that they get the ball with less than a second left with the whole length of the court to go.

Yeah I know there's some risk in this, and I'm sure there's a reason they don't do it. The same reason I'm sitting here being a Monday morning quarterback instead of bragging about my 900 wins. But I get so tense inbounding the ball there, where all it would take is a steal and a quick layup or jumper from near their own hoop, that it made me think of alternatives.

Just something to spark some discussion I guess. What do you all think? It seems to be weighing a shorter pass with faith in our free throw shooting potentially putting us up by an unreachable 4 points vs. a longer pass that could potentially give them a hail mary chance.

Your concern/rationale was brought up a ton after Butler literally stole the game from Gonzaga the other night. Saw it on twitter and heard it on the radio.

I agree wholeheartedly with your instincts and think it's something that should be "textbook coaching" - like intentionally walking the #8 hitter with 2 outs, first base open, and the pitcher on deck.

 

[SmilinBob]

Maybe X didn't work so some of the kids panicked a little and went to the ball, unfortunately all of them had the same idea. It happens. Sometimes I wonder what would happen if the guy taking it out threw the ball towards midcourt, high in the air so there is a bit of a battle for it and not easy to catch clean. Probably wouldn't work but I'd like to see it happen but with less time on the clock...2.5 seemed like an eternity.

 

[armory]

I think the concern, as you sort of alluded to, is if the long pass goes out of bounds without someone touching it, the opposition gets the ball with no time expired.

Which is sort of what happened.

 

[armory]

Anyone disagreeing with this idea is disagreeing with JB, fyi. Because this is exactly what he told CJ to do if he couldn't get a clean pass in.

 

[OttoMets]

...

The way I see it, chances are that a near full-length court pass to the other foul line would at the very least be tipped, causing the clock to start before anyone even has possession. Maybe it goes out of bounds under the other hoop or to the sideline, but then the odds are (if the ball even went out on us), that they get the ball with less than a second left with the whole length of the court to go.
...

For other reasons you note, throwing the full-court pass is a high-risk move (though it beats the heck out of getting a five-second call, which is why Fair looked about ready to launch it downcourt).

But you do point out a reasonable scenario - that the ball is tipped and a significant portion of the 2.5 seconds runs off - that also applies to another late-game decision: not putting leaving any offensive rebounders for Triche's free throw.

It's a moot point; Boeheim will never leave guys down there for the rebound. This is as much the case today as it was in 1987 against Indiana. But one would think that having someone down there battling for a rebound would have a.) forced a Cincinnati timeout and b.) eaten up at least a second, leaving Cincinnati with a virtually unmakeable shot coming out of the timeout.

(Also, in the category of indefensible calls, how has no one noted the absurdity of awarding a timeout with only one-tenth of a second expiring from the clock? That's impossible. In a game where announcers routinely list how long a move takes - two-tenths for a tip, four-tenths for a catch-and-shoot - how could securing a rebound and calling timeout take so little time?)

 

[OrangeTown]

Anyone disagreeing with this idea is disagreeing with JB, fyi. Because this is exactly what he told CJ to do if he couldn't get a clean pass in.

That's right!

You all remember this in the future if responding to my posts. JB and I think alike.

 

[OttoMets]

Anyone disagreeing with this idea is disagreeing with JB, fyi. Because this is exactly what he told CJ to do if he couldn't get a clean pass in.

Just because Boeheim did it doesn't make it the right move, of course. But I agree with you - with no timeouts and the five-count rapidly expiring, the most reasonable thing to do it heave the ball 50 feet and let your player go get it.

 

[Halfmooncuse]

Didn't they foul Triche before inbound so no time expired? If so good move by Cinci cause if they went for steal and then foul it would have been a lot less than 2.5 seconds with Triche at the Ft. line. Then JB puts no one on the FT lane (ala Indiana 1987) and so as rebound Cinci coach gets auto TO to send to 2.4. Another heady play. Then JB does not defend the inbound passer (remember how Duke won Champ game ala Christian Laettner ) who gets a clean pass to player for three dribbles and a long heave. Wow. Lots of fodder for second guessing if that basket goes in. I know "In JB we Trust" (but this is not religion and we get to have a little discussion on the merits of the decision making).

 

[armory]

I'd be much more in favor of a clean in-bounds followed by an underhanded heave straight up in the air towards the other end of the court. 2-3 seconds easily run off before that thing could even be ruled out of bounds, let alone enough time for the opponent to get possession and get a reasonable shot off.

 

[DPCuse]

I'd be much more in favor of a clean in-bounds followed by an underhanded heave straight up in the air towards the other end of the court. 2-3 seconds easily run off before that thing could even be ruled out of bounds, let alone enough time for the opponent to get possession and get a reasonable shot off.

That is just what I was going to suggest. And if I recall correctly, this happened back in Jan 2003 when we upset Pitt at the dome. I forgot who it was but they inbounded the ball and heaved it straight up so the clock was ticking. This was the game that we stormed the court early and had to inbounds it again. Or at least that is what I remember.