So I went back and ran through the the play-by-play for the game, as can be found here: http://stats.nba.com/game/#!/0041400311/playbyplay/ On a quick note, interactive box scores are one of the most incredible things that the NBA has done to cement themselves as a forward-thinking league. It's stunning to me that they actually now have video of every timeout that is taken in a game, archived less than 24 hours after the game concludes. Technically, Coach McHale did have timeouts to use in the period. As Kevooooo mentioned earlier, each team is allowed 6 full timeouts per game, and 1 20 per half. Each team needs to budget one timeout per quarter to fulfill their TV timeout requirement. There is also a limit of taking 3 full timeouts in the 4th quarter (plus your 20 for a total of 4), and a limit of taking 2 full timeouts (plus your 20 for a total of 3, though one of the full timeouts is treated like a 20) in the last two minutes of the game. With this in mind, a coach would ostensibly want to reserve 3 full timeouts plus his 2nd half 20 to use exclusively in the 4th quarter. Adding an additional timeout to fulfill the 3rd quarter TV timeout slot, and coach is limited to using 2 fulls and 1 20s in the first half. As far as I can tell, the vast majority of NBA coaches follow this rule. McHale has only broken it once in these playoffs, game 3 of the Dallas series, where effectively ending the series might have been a time to go to extreme measures. The reason that the Rockets (and Warriors) seemed so short on timeouts was because of a relatively interesting (to me at least) quirk, where both teams called their 20s timeouts in the first half roughly around the TV timeout break (6:00 and 3:00), when it wasn't their turn to take the timeout. By rule, this means that the 20s timeout is taken, then the TV timeout is taken immediately after, creating an extra long break. This had the effect of eliminating the 20s timeout for both teams in the first half. This seems like an internal rule/coaching axiom, rather than any kind of oversight or ignorance of the rules. Undoubtedly, most head coaches are going to delegate this counting duty to an assistant, who's going to tell the HC "we have this many timeouts left", not explain the intricacies of how and when to call them. It's why Tyronn Lue knows how many timeouts are left, and Blatt doesn't. So TL;DR, McHale "technically" had a timeout to burn, but it would be breaking the established pattern of timeouts, and would likely have left him 1 short of maximizing his timeouts in the 4th quarter/last two minutes of the game.
I'm thinking that the excuses in the presser were to cover for players. If the players were trying to right the ship, it blew up in their face (continuously), and Mchale is trying to take the blame instead. The play by play in the link says there was a full timeout at the 5:30 mark but I don't remember it.
http://stats.nba.com/game/#!/0041400311/playbyplay/#play205~ Right here in the play by play with video... Feel like it's more of Coach McHale thinking the question was reductive and hindsight laden. It's like asking a baseball manager if they considered going righty/lefty, or a football coach whether a specific run/pass play was a good idea; in hindsight he probably made the wrong decision, but phrasing it that way makes it seem like it was an obvious choice at that time.
Mana's got the best answer. But, even forgetting that, just because McHale said something doesn't mean he's telling the truth.
Again, MY opinion is that you are making a huge deal out of nothing -- and it appears that I am far from the only one who feels that way. And not to belabor the point... but considering the crazy off-season we had, the awesome regular season we had, and the rather unexpected/awesome post-season we've had (where McHale has managed things fantastically throughout, FWIW) -- it's pretty telling that you haven't made a SINGLE post during that ENTIRE time other than ripping him as a coach. Like, nothing else about this team this entire season has inspired you to post anything, considering what we've done this year? Again, that makes it incredibly hard to see this as anything but an overdramatic reach in line w/ your "McHale sucks" agenda.
With all due respect to everyone discussing this, I don't doubt for a second that McHale knew just how many timeouts he had available. If he seemed to say otherwise during the presser, which I didn't watch because I was disgusted with the way the game was called, along with our turnovers, and turned off the TV the moment it ended. My guess is that those saying he didn't know how many we had are are taking what he said out of context. Regardless, that didn't lose us the game. What cost us the game were turnovers, a whole series of absurd calls by the refs (or lack of calls on the Warriors), and Howard being injured in the 1st quarter. NOT whether McHale should or should not have taken a timeout. In my humble opinion. If you guys want to argue about this, have at it. I'm more concerned about tonight's game.
I really would be interested to see how much of an effect timeouts make in the middle of a run. Personally, it seems like teams on a run continue after timeouts, but then again I could be wrong.
On that point, it was interesting to see Kerr call a TO in between Terry's FT attempts as opposed to simply before or after. In a way it is like football's "icing the kicker." He made both FTs, but this has to be subtle way of turning the score a bit in your favor.
^^ Seems like quite a few coaches do this. I remember getting tickled during the Mavs series when Carlisle was calling TOs between Dwight's FTs. It's not like there was any rhythm to disrupt.
