Epicurus wrote:Moonbeam wrote:Classic game. Sad to see the Blazers fall just short. Very-late game execution did them in with missed free throws, the late foul, and the silly challenge.
Silly challenge? Known factors: 1 point lead; .9 seconds on the clock; 87% free throw shooter getting two free throws----why wouldn't you with that reality challenge a dubious call on a last second desperate fling and fall, coming as it did on a late whistle (probably conditioned on whether the shot went in or not)?
The clock was not reset prior to the challenge but after it. There was no way of knowing at the time of the challenge or timeout to reflect on it, what the refs would do with the clock. It was not until a ruling that the clock was changed.
Silly? Coaching malpractice, given the known circumstance, to not challenge then? Yes.
It felt silly at the time. Obviously I’m just a fan and I can’t claim to be some master strategist, but it felt obvious to me at the time that the call would not be overturned, and the lack of a timeout to advance the ball felt like it hindered Portland’s chances of winning the game. While the additional 1.5 seconds was a benefit, I imagine it’s harder to come by points inbounding from full court with 2.4 seconds than from the frontcourt with 0.9 seconds remaining.
Maybe there’s a little Monday Morning Quarterback mentality here at play from me given the challenge was unsuccessful, but I felt it was a mistake to challenge even before I knew the outcome.
I understand you are a big Stotts fan and often come to defend him against criticism. I like Stotts, too, and would much rather the front office part with Olshey, but that doesn’t mean Stotts should be immune from criticism. Maybe other coaches would have made the same call to challenge in that situation, but it was risky.
