2.4 Seconds on the clock and 2 points down .... you would?

I would run that exact same play but with Scola taking the inbounds instead of Brooks.

 

Battier was their best inbound passer. I believe Budinger screwed up an inbound pass late in the last preseason game vs. Spurs.

The play looked fine... AB had a chance to lay it up but the Lakers defended it well. 2.4 seconds left wasn't going to give you a good shot anyway.

 

E: Run a fked up play that makes no sense and go to the locker room and repeat this for the rest of the season.

You don't need superstars to run an inbound play to get a shooter an open shot........

 

second this^

 

You go for the best look, regardless if it's a 2 or a 3.

Also, as I mentioned in another thread, I don't think some of you understand how tough of an inbound pass that is from the deep corner. It's not like you have a few easy plays to run. I thought we were quite lucky to find an opening like that to AB.

 

Def go for the win, plus it was horrible play, Kevin should have had the last shot.

 

I just dont understand the last 2 plays. Scola goes up for no real move against LA and couldve easily passed out for an open 3 or quick penetration.. blows it...and then our inbounds play to tie or win is... passing it to Brooks low on the baseline to tie it????

Martin was rounding the corner at the arc and wouldve had a shot! At LEAST a shot! Instead Brooks pulls a middle-school reverse-layup try and we blow a large lead against LA like usual.


Sorry, in most situations you do try to to tie, go for the best shot, or get FTs, but in this one? The ring-ceremony-on-their-home-floor-vs-defending NBA CHAMPIONS-down-2-with-2.4-seconds-left-game?

You try to steal that sht! Dagger in the heart man. I'm so annoyed right now. I didn't even expect us to win this game, but I knew we "could"... and as their ahead ALLLLL game I just get this feeling like usual vs Utah, Phx, SA, Dallas or the Lakers... that we're gonna blow it. We played a great 3+ quarters of bball and just blew it by turnovers and missed layups down the stretch.

Yao also hurt us tonight, I almost wish he had just sat. Seeing him miss point-blank-layups, being beat for rebounds, and missing shots he'd normally make was just depressing. It'll get better, but for tonight we might've actually won without him.

 

I completely agree with you.

 

I would put the hot shooting Budinger in, either to catch and shoot, if open, or to draw a defender away from the designated shooter.

The Rockets showed some flashes of what they could become when they start to jell. They are really good. Let us not get disheartened by a loss to a team whose core just won the championship. Our day will come sooner than later.

 

pass to a rolling Martin who would pump fake and draw 3 free throws or jack up a 3 for the win.

 

I wouldn't want Budinger inbounding the ball. I just think he's a great option as a finisher on an out-of-bounds play.

I guess Adelman really likes Battier as the inbounder, and he wanted two bigs on the floor for rebounding.

 

Did u see Martin running the curve and was opened for 3?? Shane could have passed to him instead of Brook. Pass to Martin for the WIN...i see that play all along and was disappointed Battier did not see it.

 

There was no first option. Brook was the first option...Battier passed to him..but i prefer the 2nd option when Martin roll around....he could have gone for the win.

 

They should have passed to Martin bottom line. They didn't and they paid for it. Battier went for the tie by passer the ball to Brooks because he is a loser with a i just want to do well enough to look smart type of attitude. He looked ridiculous after that play...

 

I like the way you think.

 

Wrong. Basketball is a very dynamic with multiple options. The ball generally goes to the player who with the best option. Shooting a 3-pt or long 2 is a risky play since Roxs shot abysmally in the 2nd half. However, it will be hard to tell who was the primary option in the last play, so you ppl are idiots for trying to discuss this.

 

Down 2 on the road, first of a back to back, I say go for the win with a 3.

 

On the road: 3-pt

At home: 2-pt

 

Cut Chuck Hayes!

 

I am not too sure, but I think Martin left his man and was open for a three . Battier decided to pass it Brooks who was closer to him. If Battier had seen Martin, Martin would have thrown up a three ball comfortably. Gotta watch the highlights again and confirm.

and I think an extra dribble killed Brooks' finish. that gave time for a defender to converge and put a hand up.