Okay, those that were in chat tonight had to listen to me ranting about Adelman's decision making skills. I pointed out that Adelman reacts to what the other team does and doesn't think multiple steps ahead of his opponent as you would in a game of Chess. Point in case. In tonight's game... As the Magic coach you know that Chuck has been playing well defensively... you haven't fouled even once in the quarter yet and the whole world knows that the kid struggles shooting free throws. You need to succeed offensively, so you want to get their more defensive minded players off the court. You call your time out and tell them to hack at Chuck... so that Adelman knows you know he can't shoot free throws, hoping he will panic and put in a different player. Adelman takes the pawn and puts in Bonzi. The smarter decision would be to think farther ahead than the one foul on Chuck... let Orlando foul Chuck three more times. You know the kid won't have to shoot it until they get to foul #5 so you get that much closer to your team getting free throws on every possession while keeping a defensive team on the court to protect the lead. Instead your defense falls apart. I guess my point is... when a coach is reactionary rather than using strategy to make his decisions it almost ALWAYS leads to errors. I would like to hear what yall think.. rather I am being biased or "reactionary" myself.
You are right, Rick should have kept Hayes in until there was 4 team fouls, and then have taken him out.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Keep chuck in there until the magic has 4 team fouls. I don't know about chess but in basketball don't you want the other team to accumulate fouls and get to the penalty? Specially with your center that touches the ball in every play down the clutch being a great free throw shooter?
I think as long as we have a lead or if the score is fairly close,there is no need to take guys like Chuck out even if he is missing free throws as long he is defending/rebounding. If the opposing team is getting him into foul trouble easily by attacking the basket,then he needs to be changed quickly.
I think it can be argued either way. Typically, a team expects to get a little more than 1 point per possession. So, for 3 possession you'd expect to get 3.1 or 3.2 points. With Chuck shooting FTs at around 27%, you can only expect to get .54 points per possesion, or about 1.6 points per 3 possession. The question is whether it's worth giving up the expected difference of 1.5 points to rack up 3 more team fouls on the other team (actually, it's not 3 more for certain... since if you run your normal offense, there's still a chance you get fouled). In any case.. that's the math. Edit: Also, I think the greater point might be that Adelman has a lot of faith in Bonzi-- maybe more than he should at this point, especially given his injured shoulder. Bonzi Wells to Adelman almost reminds me of Juwan Howard to Van Gundy-- he appears to be the coach's security blanket. Further Edit: Forget what I said... I didn't realize we are talking about committing fouls when the team has no team fouls. I would definitely stay with Chuck then. Adelman really must just have a lot of faith in Bonzi.
That SVG would think to commit a foul on Chuck when the Magic have no team fouls, suggests that he thinks pretty highly about how Chuck impacts the game. It makes no sense to do that unless he wanted Chuck to be pulled out, since there would be no free throws attempted for a while.
why Adelman took Hayes out of the game to avoid "hack the Chuck"? I make it simple for you. 2 words: offensive rhythm. Adelman doesnt want to have Hayes shooting FT and his team cant run the offense for some consecutive possesions. This can get his team out of offensive rhythm and his team offense could go cold after that.
When Hayes went out, I thought Scola should have been put in there instead of Bonzi interesting the Rockets coaching staff did not know the team foul situation at that time
Eh, I find Adelman more erractic then unthinking...in general. Although I guess the two can be related. Case in point, did anybody catch a brief glimpse of Rashard Lewis iso'ed on Novak?
The Magic didn't have any team fouls, so Chuck wouldn't even be shooting FTs. Really, pulling Chuck out of the game served no purpose there, unless he didn't really want him on the court in the first place. As Hayesfans pointed out, it was just a waste of an opportunity to get some team fouls called on the Magic.
What's also strange is that Adelman left Yao out on the final play - you'd think you'd leave your shot blocker in there to force a jump shot of some sort and at least grab the rebound.
yeah, I think it can be argued either way. Keeping Hays in might give the ball to Magic. We are not 5 or more points ahead. There is a big chance that Magic might grab the chance to overtake us.
I think Adelman took Hayes out because he did not want the team disrupted offensively. Teams did the hack a Shaq and hack and Ben in the past to cut into the scoring by messing with the teams offensive sets, also hoping they go to the line an miss free throws. If they are hacking him Hayes and he is not shooting free throws then SVG intention was to disrupt the offense of his opponent. Hayes should stay in if he is not shooting free throws and offense is not stagnant. Adelman may have other reasons other hack of Hayes that influenced his decision to have a more offensive lineup.
Dude, we have like 3 fouls to give. Then you take hayes out and the next foul puts us in the penalty and at the ft line which is a good thing.
Yeah the switching on picks messed up the drawn up play. They were very very close on getting 5 sec. called
