Hire Quin Snyder and Kevin Garnett as coaches, and we are on our way!The growth that’s happened in a matter of three months is incredible, especially when the lights are as bright, the pressure, big games, and we can only get better. Good teams, they continue to get better. We have a long way to go but we’ve made a lot of progress, a lot more progress anybody in this room and anybody in those locker rooms thought we’d made. - Donovan Mitchell
As the Cavs continue to make progress in playing as a team and also get Rubio and Wade back they will be better in a couple of months than they are now.
The Bucks will get Middleton back and up to speed. When (and if) these teams meet in the playoffs it will be something to see, assuming all the main players are healthy. Home court advantage could be the difference as the home team is 3-0 so far.
Two years from now Durant will be 36 and Kyrie 32. They're carrying the Nets now. Their window will be only as long as Durant can continue playing at this level for 37 minutes.
For the Bucks, in two years Holiday will be 34, Lopez 36, Middleton 33, George Hill 38, Ingles 37, and Ibaka 35. Their window is this year and next.
For the Sixers, Hardin will be 35 and Tobias Harris 32. For Miami, Jimmy Butler will be 35 and Kyle Lowry 38. Boston has a very good core of Tatum, Brown, Smart, and Williams but Horford is already 36 and they have little depth.
Toronto is in good shape with Siakam, VanVleet, Barnes and OG all under 30. I think Orlando is going to be really good with that huge, athletic front line. Cleveland might be in better shape than anybody, especially if Mobley develops like they think he is going to.
Point taken. I didn't mean to offend anybody (this time lol) with my "casual fan" comment. I should have worded that differently. You're obviously a great and knowledgeable Cavs fan.I have 35000 posts over the last 14 years on a niche Cavs basketball forum. I watch far too much basketball and consume way too much basketball media content. My point: I’m (and the vast majority of this board is) the furthest thing from a casual fan that there is.
I don’t necessarily think every challenge needs to be saved for a close game situation. But here’s where I think your premise is flawed: you cannot assume that the game would have played out identically and the only difference at the end would have been the three points. I’d contend even the very would have turned out likely different for both teams.
If there’s 6-7 minutes left and you’re up 9 and there is a huge momentum changing 3 point or 4 point play, I’m all for using the challenge if it’s a clear reversal. I do hear you about “winning” the challenge. Id be interested in seeing a statistical analysis on this but I’d guess the sample size of challenges prior to crunch time is probably too low to compare it with anything.
though my preference would
be 1 per quarter.
Actually, I think each team should get as many challenges as they want. Until they lose one. Then they're done. There shouldn't be a limit on how many referee mistakes are corrected. But you better be sure when you challenge a call, because we can't let the game take forever.good for you for sneaking in a nominee for worst idea of 2022 just before the buzzer!
I'll chime in here. I've long been a proponent of the entire game matters, not just crunch time - and I think these situations are tricky. On one hand, you'd love to have a challenge for crunch time. If the Bucks pulled within single digits, there is a decent shot that there will be a bad call in their favor once they come back. And a lesser, but still decent chance that it can be overturned. You'd love to have a challenge for a momentum-changing play.Point taken. I didn't mean to offend anybody (this time lol) with my "casual fan" comment. I should have worded that differently. You're obviously a great and knowledgeable Cavs fan.
To your point on things possibly transpiring differently given the two possible scenarios, I agree. But that can cut both directions. In the scenario I laid out, that late 3 by Connaughton could have cut the lead to 2, instead of 5. Perhaps with a 2 point instead of 5 point lead, the Cavs might have cracked and played worse than they did with the 5 point lead. We really can't predict how this plays out, so.....I'm left with my original points that the staff should prioritize:
1. Using their challenge EVERY GAME.
2. Picking it based on the highest likelihood of winning the challenge.
3. Picking it based on maximum impact to the score (another poster added this, and I agree).
4. Making it at ANY TIME of the game where points 2&3 apply, not waiting until late in the game.
Point taken. I didn't mean to offend anybody (this time lol) with my "casual fan" comment. I should have worded that differently. You're obviously a great and knowledgeable Cavs fan.
To your point on things possibly transpiring differently given the two possible scenarios, I agree. But that can cut both directions. In the scenario I laid out, that late 3 by Connaughton could have cut the lead to 2, instead of 5. Perhaps with a 2 point instead of 5 point lead, the Cavs might have cracked and played worse than they did with the 5 point lead. We really can't predict how this plays out, so.....I'm left with my original points that the staff should prioritize:
1. Using their challenge EVERY GAME.
2. Picking it based on the highest likelihood of winning the challenge.
3. Picking it based on maximum impact to the score (another poster added this, and I agree).
4. Making it at ANY TIME of the game where points 2&3 apply, not waiting until late in the game.
I think there are a lot of reasons for that, but primarily as a game gets closer to the end coaches are going to be more aggressive with their challenges even if they have a lower chance of success. Down 1 and you can challenge a play with a 10% chance of success that would get you the ball back, why the hell not take it. Compare that to a 2nd quarter you absolutely know the player stepped on the line and you can erase 2 pointsI'd be interested in seeing how the success rates on challenged calls varies by quarter taken. I wouldn't surprised of 1st quarter challenges were more successful than 2nd quarter challenges than, etc.
I'll bet anything 4th quarter challenges have the lowest success rate of any of the quarters.
@Peacedog if you think a challenge is simply about the math, then I can't really help you . However I'll explain my point. When you are up 22 early in the game, challenging and winning has little to no impact on the out come.
When the game is in the 4th and the team is on a run, and a play comes up that you can challenge and win, it not only changes the score, it can be a momentum killer. Or it's just the type of reverseal that can get the team going . There is a lot more nuance to it them simply math.