Reply With Quote
It probably does give CP3 and their guys some rest, but it gives our older guys rest too.
Hack a DJ works. Or has ever worked. It looked bad during the season, we lost that game against them, and I remember at the time feeling like it broke our offensive flow. Here we are in the playoffs, and I'm pretty sure there are stats out there pointing out we don't really gain an advantage when we employ it, in the game or score in an overall sense.
Is it really working? Doesn't it just give CP3 rest?
It probably does give CP3 and their guys some rest, but it gives our older guys rest too.
Worked well with Josh Smith. I haven't seen it work so well with Clippers as of yet.
We won series in the past hacking 52% Shaq
It would be stupid not to do it to 40% Jordan
he made 6-17, and we were fouling him to protect a 2 point lead in the last few minutes of the game. it worked when our offense was stale
the Clippers kept getting offensive boards off of DJ's FT bricks and scoring. Spurs were up ten, went cold on the offensive end, and the Clippers started coming back.
It works if we grab the ING REBOUND
I think that had more to do with how bad DJ was clanking the ball of the rim. The offense going cold is more of a by product of not having someone that could initiate the offense. Parker with his injury and Manu fouling out.
Is it a net positive for the Spurs? Hard to say. I'm not completely sold on it.
Absolutely.
Drove me nuts.
The guards are not blocking out well either. Jordan and Griffin can get to the ball and play tippy tap.
Their guards snuck in a number of times.
This is a good post for discussion though.
Thanks.
We have been bombarded with stupid for a while.
I'm not sure it works in total either.
It stops the clock and usually gives the Clippers a point. And Spurs still have to get a rebound. Then Spurs still have to come down and score to make it all a net positive.
I think it's good once in a while but as it goes on, I would think Jordan's % goes up also as he gets "hot". If that's possible.
Funny that you aren't totally convinced it works, when I'm totally convinced it doesn't.
Last night it was a disaster on all counts: 2 FTs + a chance at an OReb (the Clippers got the OReb 3 times I think); players in foul trouble (Tim, Manu...); Clippers starters getting some rest; Spurs offense cooling off and players mentally disengaging from the game; if no OReb then Clippers defense set, which is harder to beat; sending signal from Pop that the players aren't good enough to beat the Clippers in a regular setting, so have to resort to tricks; chance to get 3 FTs, or even worse an And-1 if somebody else is shooting while Jordan is being fouled; pissing off the refs; pissing off the crowd; and last but not least, turning a 10-point lead into a 2-point deficit.
Jordan is a pretty bad free throw shooter, probably the most ideal candidate to do the hacking strategy. Spurs just couldn't grab the rebound or run a good offense on the other end. Spurs' half court offense is just terrible without a healthy Parker.
Pop has to either employ it or not. He cannot go at it half assed and then stop suddenly because "it didn't work". We'll never know if it works or not, but Pop probably knows as does Doc. Neither will say, but it's a strategy and it has a ulative effect. Now DJ knows what's going to happen, he knows he's going to miss a lot of FTs and have millions watching him brick FTs during the playoffs. It's a pressure you cannot overstate, and it's easy to do. The price for it is giving up fouls and eventually some points, so you have to respond at the other end.
If the Spurs had a ty FT shooter (pick one right now), other teams would do that to them. It's not much different than exploiting a match up. You have a guy who shoots decent from midrange and he's left open by choice, he's probably going to shoot. You live with his results because the others will absolutely destroy you from mid range.
I think DJ presents the small amount of control Pop can exert on the game and he likes exerting control.
This pretty much sums it up. No one on the Clips were particularly lighting it up either, so it's not like we were taking the ball out of the hot hand.
I think if the Spurs showed they can handle the Clippers Pop has no reason to use that strategy. When it's close like that, even with a lead, Pop sees it as a viable method to change the tempo of the game, right when the Clippers crowd is trying to get into it.
Yet the fact remains that the Spurs scored 0 (ZERO) points during the Hack-a-Jordan sequence. The Clippers were suffocating and it brought them back into the game.
In favor of Hack a Jordan, the Clippers did have to pull him out the last couple minutes of the 3rd quarter to avoid the Spurs putting him on the line. That opened up space for our offense as once he's out, there are no shot blockers.
I think Kevin Harlan mentioned that the Clips are 16-2 (now 16-3) when teams do Hack-a-Jordan.
This. Sometimes 2-3 offensive boards on one god damn possession..was getting me irate
How much of the Shaq free throws related to him getting fouled after getting the ball down low? Much higher percentage scoring play than when a team is starting off its possession.
My issues are:
1.) When leading, let more clock run as opposed to taking foul with 23 or 22 seconds left on the 24.
2.) Gives a team with no bench time to catch their breath.
3.) Defense can reset; less fast break opportunities
4.) Bad shots lead to bad rebounds. Spurs need three solid rebounders in the key and still won't get everything.
From here (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/web...ding_data_dump), about 15% of free throws lead to offensive rebounds while 34% of all other shots lead to offensive rebounds. Not a perfect formula, but:
- Average points from a possession: ORtg gives a good measure but it's a circular calculation as possession doesn't end on offensive rebounds
- Player shoots 50% from FT line plus team has 15% chance of grabbing OReb. Assuming a 105 ORtg, a Hack-A results in an effective 108 ORtg. If the OReb% is higher at 25%, you would need the FT shooter to be a 47% guy instead of 50%.
- Formula is (FT%) + (1 - FT%)*(OReb%)*(Assumed points per possession) as the possession is effectively restarting.
Need to evaluate factors like how good the offense is (Clippers are very good), how bad the FT shooter is, and what the likely outcome is from the re-possession of the ball.
Also need to analyze the hole it puts your offense in. PPS is lower when not in a fast break situation, and fast break is less likely after a free throw than in open play.
It works really well unless you do not get the rebound.
Cause vs correlation. They got shot opportunities.
the spurs were struggling pretty bad offensively after the midway point of the 4th. we didnt score a single point from 6:41 left until 3:40... duncan was missing layups, we had some turnovers, etc. the spurs were up 88-80 or 88-78 (can't remember which) and the clippers clawed back. at that point we started hacking DJ and it preserved the lead.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
