A team is down by 7 with 30 seconds left. I am amazed everytime when I here these announcers saying go for the two, there is plenty of time. Everytime I just want to scream what are you talking about. I know these announcers (Doug Collins?) know more about basketball than me. I just think the best shot in that scenario is a three. When someone hits a 3, it greatly affects the game. Not only does it make the score closer, it puts fear in the opponent and hope into the team trying to pull it out. I was reminded of it yesterday in the Orlando game. He was constantly calling for the two when it was basically too late. If there was ever a time to shoot and make a three, it would be this time. Just my opinion. What think ye?

Think of it mathematically...

a 2fg shoots 50%

a 3fg shoots 33%

in 30 seconds u may get 4 possesions

if: and Im using the Pistons vs Blazers from Bad Boys 90...10 sec per play... Isiah scores 90-85...

miss 2 ft's

Dumars scores 90-87...

now with 10 sec left...u still have a chance for the three to tie...


always shoot the two and foul immediately ..force them to make the FT's

Nobody would argue that hitting a 3 is better than hitting a 2, but Hubie Brown has often pointed out in last-minute situations that "if you miss a 3 here, the game is over." Situations differ, but I think he's generally right to observe that while the upside of hitting a late 3 is better than that of hitting a 2, you also have higher odds of eliminating any chance at all of coming back if you shoot a 3 (and miss it). Better to keep yourself alive by getting 2s, and waiting on the 3 until you absolutely need it, is the philosophy there.

Down 7 with 30 seconds left, I'd rather just get points, try for steals, and hope that the other team misses some FTs. You're going to need all of those things to happen to have any chance anyway, so take the best shot you can get and try to get some more chances to score. Hitting a 3 to cut the lead to 4 instead of getting 2 and cutting it to 5 would be nice, but I don't think the upside necessarily outweighs the increased risk of slamming the door shut if you fail to get any points at all on that possession.

if you attack the basket you get a high percentage shot. The other team will hestitate to contest in order to avoid a foul. If they contest, you get a shot at drawing a foul for a three point play or 2 FT's with the clock stopped.

__________________

Long shots result in long rebounds. I don't think it is necessarily true that if you miss the 3, the game is over.

What % of 3's result in offensive rebounds?

I would bet the % is higher when the offensive team doesn't care about getting back on D.

I guess that's true, though I wouldn't want to count on having that much better a chance at getting the board on a 3.

I would put forth the arguement that a long rebound isn't conducive for putbacks. That generally means a reset with precious time. I think the idea of going for two is that its a quick aggressive two.

__________________

I just don't like relying on the other team's best FT shooters to miss free throws. In college it works, but in the NBA, you get guys like Chauncey at the line.

WE have chauncey. THEY have Jameer.

__________________

I don't get it. Jameer shoots 83% free throws.

And we're discussing the situation in general... not what Detroit should do if we're down 7 to Orlando... because that would obviously never happen.