Camden0916 wrote:By the way, the end of this game confirmed what I already knew. Ryan Saunders is not [yet?] meant to coach a winning team in the NBA.
Why?
How is it possible for Saunders to instruct his players to foul before the shot while up three on one play [against Durant] and then subsequently decides for the team to go away from that same strategy the very next play [against Curry]? I'm a fan of employing that strategy when orchestrated correctly so that's the not the issue here. The issue is him bailing on that exact strategy a play after putting it in motion. The Wolves executed it on Durant well -- Bates-Diop fouled him on the catch just a moment before he rose up for the jumper that was later waved off. But then when Curry is dribbling towards the corner with his head down and his shoulders not squared to the basket, why not foul there as well? Why give the best shooter of all-time an opportunity to tie the game, especially since you had just employed a strategy to not let one of the best scorers of all-time get a three off? Instead, a great shooter drains a three to tie the game and without a timely foul with 0.5 seconds to go, the Warriors likely steal a win in another overtime period due to that very play. Saunders' decision there makes no sense and shows that he has a lot to learn before he's ready to start out-coaching opponents on the way to wins.
Thanks Cam for the response. I may have to go back and watch that sequence.
Camden0916 wrote:By the way, the end of this game confirmed what I already knew. Ryan Saunders is not [yet?] meant to coach a winning team in the NBA.
Why?
How is it possible for Saunders to instruct his players to foul before the shot while up three on one play [against Durant] and then subsequently decides for the team to go away from that same strategy the very next play [against Curry]? I'm a fan of employing that strategy when orchestrated correctly so that's the not the issue here. The issue is him bailing on that exact strategy a play after putting it in motion. The Wolves executed it on Durant well -- Bates-Diop fouled him on the catch just a moment before he rose up for the jumper that was later waved off. But then when Curry is dribbling towards the corner with his head down and his shoulders not squared to the basket, why not foul there as well? Why give the best shooter of all-time an opportunity to tie the game, especially since you had just employed a strategy to not let one of the best scorers of all-time get a three off? Instead, a great shooter drains a three to tie the game and without a timely foul with 0.5 seconds to go, the Warriors likely steal a win in another overtime period due to that very play. Saunders' decision there makes no sense and shows that he has a lot to learn before he's ready to start out-coaching opponents on the way to wins.
Thanks Cam for the response. I may have to go back and watch that sequence.
Are we sure Bayless was supposed to foul... but simply didn't what he was told to do?
The Wiggins play at the end of regulation was less than inspiring. But how much is on Wiggins? The play to KAT at the end of OT was about all they could do... but it worked. Sorta.
I tuned in at the end of the game when I saw the Wolves were up. Those guys did everthing in their power to throw this game away, one bone-headed Timberwolves play after another. However, GS didn't always take full advantage and we made enough plays (like Okogies offensive rebound) to pull it out of our ass
Camden0916 wrote:By the way, the end of this game confirmed what I already knew. Ryan Saunders is not [yet?] meant to coach a winning team in the NBA.
Why?
How is it possible for Saunders to instruct his players to foul before the shot while up three on one play [against Durant] and then subsequently decides for the team to go away from that same strategy the very next play [against Curry]? I'm a fan of employing that strategy when orchestrated correctly so that's the not the issue here. The issue is him bailing on that exact strategy a play after putting it in motion. The Wolves executed it on Durant well -- Bates-Diop fouled him on the catch just a moment before he rose up for the jumper that was later waved off. But then when Curry is dribbling towards the corner with his head down and his shoulders not squared to the basket, why not foul there as well? Why give the best shooter of all-time an opportunity to tie the game, especially since you had just employed a strategy to not let one of the best scorers of all-time get a three off? Instead, a great shooter drains a three to tie the game and without a timely foul with 0.5 seconds to go, the Warriors likely steal a win in another overtime period due to that very play. Saunders' decision there makes no sense and shows that he has a lot to learn before he's ready to start out-coaching opponents on the way to wins.
Thanks Cam for the response. I may have to go back and watch that sequence.
Are we sure Bayless was supposed to foul... but simply didn't what he was told to do?
The Wiggins play at the end of regulation was less than inspiring. But how much is on Wiggins? The play to KAT at the end of OT was about all they could do... but it worked. Sorta.
So I went back and watched the last few minutes of the game and also Ryan Saunders Press conference afterwards and a couple observations.
1. I was absolutely agreeing that Bayless should have fouled and thought it was crazy he didn't foul if instructed to do so..,until I saw the baseline angle. Watching that angle Curry looked much more in position to get off a shot than it looked from the other angle. Could Bayless have still fouled him before he got off a shot? Yeah maybe but it did look much less questionable than other angles for sure.
2. They asked Ryan about not fouling there and his answer was that fouling in that situation is one of their concepts for the end of the game. It sounded like he wanted to foul that situation if possible based on that answer.
Cam I'm glad you brought up this situation because it was fascinating. I always think the fouling in this situations makes a ton of sense but I also think it can be difficult to execute. We kinda had it all in just a few seconds.
Either way, that Curry shot was stupid ridiculous. The difficulty level on that shot was a 10. I'm not sure that taking the chance on fouling there any potentially giving him 3 shots (if the Wolves fouled Durant, who's to say Curry wouldn't be prepared to go straight up with it?) at the line wouldn't have been the higher likelihood over a shot where he had zero vision on the basket in a suffacating corner. I realize Curry practices those trick shots from the corner, but it's still stupid difficult how tough that shot was that he made.
mrhockey89 wrote:Either way, that Curry shot was stupid ridiculous. The difficulty level on that shot was a 10. I'm not sure that taking the chance on fouling there any potentially giving him 3 shots (if the Wolves fouled Durant, who's to say Curry wouldn't be prepared to go straight up with it?) at the line wouldn't have been the higher likelihood over a shot where he had zero vision on the basket in a suffacating corner. I realize Curry practices those trick shots from the corner, but it's still stupid difficult how tough that shot was that he made.
Curry had his head down, shoulders not squared to the basket while he dribbled to the corner. That's when you foul him. He was in no way ready to get off a legitimate shot attempt. Just weird to foul once and then not again. Questionable thinking all around.
mrhockey89 wrote:Either way, that Curry shot was stupid ridiculous. The difficulty level on that shot was a 10. I'm not sure that taking the chance on fouling there any potentially giving him 3 shots (if the Wolves fouled Durant, who's to say Curry wouldn't be prepared to go straight up with it?) at the line wouldn't have been the higher likelihood over a shot where he had zero vision on the basket in a suffacating corner. I realize Curry practices those trick shots from the corner, but it's still stupid difficult how tough that shot was that he made.
Curry had his head down, shoulders not squared to the basket while he dribbled to the corner. That's when you foul him. He was in no way ready to get off a legitimate shot attempt. Just weird to foul once and then not again. Questionable thinking all around.
You're probably right, but I'm just playing Devil's Advocate
