PG: Bucks Win 15th Straight over Kings

[Ron Swanson]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

[SirChurros]

I don’t want to kick the guy when he’s down but PG Graveyard absolutely trashing Dame for like the last two pages of the game thread and then Dame hitting that shot was amazing.

Kudos to him owning it at least.

[sidney lanier]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

20-20 hindsight certainly isn't. One of my pet peeves in business is the Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs when a 60-40 decision is made and the "I told you sos" pipe up from the sidelines when it comes up 40.

Take, for example, the decision to foul when up three in an end-game situation. Many times here we have been lectured that of course that's the right move because it prevents the possibility of the tying basket. Would you call that a 90-10 call? 50-50? 60-40? My point is the less likely thing might happen, and calling the decision idiotic because that's the way the dice land is itself well, I won't call it idiotic, but let's call it a bad misunderstanding of probabilistic decision-making.

[Ron Swanson]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

20-20 hindsight certainly isn't. One of my pet peeves in business is the Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs when a 60-40 decision...

Sid, just no. Intentionally fouling up 3 with 11 seconds left on the game clock is not a 60-40 decision. Letting Giannis decide regulation on back-to-back possessions sending him to the line when he's a notoriously shaky FT shooter is not a decision that only looks bad in hindsight. This was Jason-Kidd-Math level brainfarts. These were objectively dumb coaching decisions that led to predictable consequences that everyone could see in real time. Will Griff learn from this? I mean, hopefully he does. Thankfully it didn't bite us this time, cuz Dame things. Be happy for that, absolutely.

[msiris]

Fouling up three with 10 seconds would only be supprted by .01 of people who have ever coached a basketball game. That .01 coaches the Milwaukkee Bucks.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

20-20 hindsight certainly isn't. One of my pet peeves in business is the Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs when a 60-40 decision is made and the "I told you sos" pipe up from the sidelines when it comes up 40.

Take, for example, the decision to foul when up three in an end-game situation. Many times here we have been lectured that of course that's the right move because it prevents the possibility of the tying basket. Would you call that a 90-10 call? 50-50? 60-40? My point is the less likely thing might happen, and calling the decision idiotic because that's the way the dice land is itself well, I won't call it idiotic, but let's call it a bad misunderstanding of probabilistic decision-making.

MJ on the call, me and other posters pointed out it was dumb doing it so early. Hell, the one by beas with 17 seconds left was bad. Compound it with no TOs and us already shown we can seem to get Dame the ball is exactly why it was dumb.

[msiris]

I don’t want to kick the guy when he’s down but PG Graveyard absolutely trashing Dame for like the last two pages of the game thread and then Dame hitting that shot was amazing.

Kudos to him owning it at least.

Great shot yes indeed. Have to admit that Dames shot slection can be crappy at times. The 3 that he took on the previous possession was so bad.

[MissKhriddleton]

Did anyone in the postgame presser ask why Giannis is the outlet in these situations??? If you want to talk about probabilistic decision making - there's a 21% chance Giannis makes 4 FT's in a row. 21%.

[PhoenixMilwauke]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

20-20 hindsight certainly isn't. One of my pet peeves in business is the Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs when a 60-40 decision is made and the "I told you sos" pipe up from the sidelines when it comes up 40.

Take, for example, the decision to foul when up three in an end-game situation. Many times here we have been lectured that of course that's the right move because it prevents the possibility of the tying basket. Would you call that a 90-10 call? 50-50? 60-40? My point is the less likely thing might happen, and calling the decision idiotic because that's the way the dice land is itself well, I won't call it idiotic, but let's call it a bad misunderstanding of probabilistic decision-making.

The foul when up by 3 only comes into play when there are 7 seconds are less usually.
You can hear Marques allude to it as it was happening as well.

That was very poorly done. Griffin is popular with the players but the X's and O's, I'm not convinced about.

[Brewhoopfan]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

20-20 hindsight certainly isn't. One of my pet peeves in business is the Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs when a 60-40 decision...

Sid, just no. Intentionally fouling up 3 with 11 seconds left on the game clock is not a 60-40 decision. Letting Giannis decide regulation on back-to-back possessions sending him to the line when he's a notoriously shaky FT shooter is not a decision that only looks bad in hindsight. This was Jason-Kidd-Math level brainfarts. These were objectively dumb coaching decisions that led to predictable consequences that everyone could see in real time. Will Griff learn from this? I mean, hopefully he does. Thankfully it didn't bite us this time, cuz Dame things. Be happy for that, absolutely.

100% fine with fouling when they did IF it's combined with a plan to get the ball to your best FT shooter. There was ZERO organization to inbound to Dame. I also didn't think Dame worked very hard to get it, although he was obviously gassed. If that's not bad enough, Griff doubles down during the postgame justifying sending Giannis to the line. There's a reason he's always open in these situations, Griff.....

Narrator: "He's not learning."

[sidney lanier]

Fouling up three with 10 seconds would only be supprted by .01 of people who have ever coached a basketball game. That .01 coaches the Milwaukkee Bucks.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Fouling up three with 10 seconds would only be supprted by .01 of people who have ever coached a basketball game. That .01 coaches the Milwaukkee Bucks.

Would like to see the parameters of that. Like I get the math when its less than 10 seconds. But giving them a chance to run full length with plenty of time to go full-length is dumb...as we saw on both ends.

[MissKhriddleton]

If that's not bad enough, Griff doubles down during the postgame justifying sending Giannis to the line.

There's no **** way. I need the quote.

[Brewhoopfan]

Fouling up three with 10 seconds would only be supprted by .01 of people who have ever coached a basketball game. That .01 coaches the Milwaukkee Bucks.

Is there a graph for when the coach leaves a slow 7 footer on the floor to defend the 3?

[sidney lanier]

Yesterday was an all-timer Wisconsin sports day and I have no problem compartmentalizing that happiness. Mind-numbingly idiotic end-of-game management is not an "imaginary issue" though.

20-20 hindsight certainly isn't. One of my pet peeves in business is the Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs when a 60-40 decision is made and the "I told you sos" pipe up from the sidelines when it comes up 40.

Take, for example, the decision to foul when up three in an end-game situation. Many times here we have been lectured that of course that's the right move because it prevents the possibility of the tying basket. Would you call that a 90-10 call? 50-50? 60-40? My point is the less likely thing might happen, and calling the decision idiotic because that's the way the dice land is itself well, I won't call it idiotic, but let's call it a bad misunderstanding of probabilistic decision-making.

The foul when up by 3 only comes into play when there are 7 seconds are less usually.
You can hear Marques allude to it as it was happening as well.

That was very poorly done. Griffin is popular with the players but the X's and O's, I'm not convinced about.

This guy uses 11 seconds or less, not 7. That seems reasonable to me.

https://www.82games.com/lawhorn.htm#:~:text=The%20basic%20conclusion%20we%20come,waning%20seconds%20of%20the%20game.

[Brewhoopfan]

If that's not bad enough, Griff doubles down during the postgame justifying sending Giannis to the line.

There's no **** way. I need the quote.

And ye shall receive. 3:55.

Watch on YouTube

[sidney lanier]

Fouling up three with 10 seconds would only be supprted by .01 of people who have ever coached a basketball game. That .01 coaches the Milwaukkee Bucks.

Is there a graph for when the coach leaves a slow 7 footer on the floor to defend the 3?

Sorry, you don't get to draw pictures on the data. It doesn't care how much you hate the coach.

What's interesting to me here as I witness the Grief-stricken distort the facts and the data is the reverse halo or horn effect. The certainty that Griffin is an incompetent bumbler means everything he does becomes incompetent bumbling to them. The corollary, eagerly embraced here by some who should know better, is that he could not possibly have contributed to anything good that happens. This results in the amusing "players save coach" scenario. Hey John Wooden -- where would you have been without Alcindor or Walton?

[MissKhriddleton]

If that's not bad enough, Griff doubles down during the postgame justifying sending Giannis to the line.

There's no **** way. I need the quote.

And ye shall receive. 3:55.

Watch on YouTube

WTF. He admitted Giannis is the 2nd option after Dame. Shaq also has championship level DNA but you wouldn't make him the outlet when you're getting intentionally fouled. ****, this is so far beyond repair.

[Wonka]

There's no **** way. I need the quote.

And ye shall receive. 3:55.

Watch on YouTube

WTF. He admitted Giannis is the 2nd option after Dame. Shaq also has championship level DNA but you wouldn't make him the outlet when you're getting intentionally fouled. ****, this is so far beyond repair.

You can’t fix stoopid.

[Siefer]

Giannis needs to understand who should have the ball in their hands at the end of the game. Grief needs to stop listening to Giannis.

The entire overtime Gianni was setting screens and passing to wide open shooters. I don't think he was asking Griffin "Yo, coach, I got this" with the FTs.

Yep, I'm increasingly worried that on top of the awful game plans, he's actively seeking Giannis's approval, Blatt style.

Giannis needs to be inbounding on those late plays. He's actively great at it, and it keeps him off the line. I think Griff wants him on the floor because that's "his superstar."