ADVERTISEMENT

Last Play

NTCAT

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2013
115
34
28
Why wasn't Pardon in there? My only thought would be because of free-throws, but we knew we were holding for one shot, and that we were gonna probably need to stop them on the other end. Skelly got lost in transition D, not stopping the ball, or running to guard Bryant (who was his man because he was playing the 5). Not a knock on Skelly but Pardon is our best defensive center and plays most of the mins there for a reason. Why isn't he in up two when we know no matter what happens on offense, if we stop them on defense we win?
 
CCC expected IU to foul and didn't want his least reliable free throw shooter in there. It was a mistake, at least in retrospect.
 
CCC expected IU to foul and didn't want his least reliable free throw shooter in there. It was a mistake, at least in retrospect.

Was he quoted saying that? Wow if true. I'm pretty sure everyone (announcers included) expected them to play defense with 38.6 left. Our team shoots 76% from the line, and BMac is up near 90%. And we had struggled in this game (and other games) getting shots late while freezing the ball. And even if they were fouling, Pardon would be away from the ball. Makes no sense at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D_C_B
Was he quoted saying that? Wow if true. I'm pretty sure everyone (announcers included) expected them to play defense with 38.6 left. Our team shoots 76% from the line, and BMac is up near 90%. And we had struggled in this game (and other games) getting shots late while freezing the ball. And even if they were fouling, Pardon would be away from the ball. Makes no sense at all.
Pardon played 35 minutes, but not the last 38 seconds. There is no other explanation.

Skelly was in at center. It was the game's only sequence where Benson and Pardon were both on the bench. Taphorn-Skelly-Law was the frontcourt.
 
At it actually would have worked, as we broke the press and had numbers with open shooters spread out, but they decided to pull the ball back out an hold for one. At that point, perhaps we should have a called a time out to get Pardon in there, but then you have to run sideline out of bounds and their defense was set.

As it was, Bryant got a very good look; the only reason it did not go in was that he appears to have been fouled on the play. If you watch the tape, you will watch the Indiana defender immediately raise his hands, reacting like he was going to be called for the foul and trying to sell the official on the fact that he had his hands straight up. It worked.
 
At it actually would have worked, as we broke the press and had numbers with open shooters spread out, but they decided to pull the ball back out an hold for one. At that point, perhaps we should have a called a time out to get Pardon in there, but then you have to run sideline out of bounds and their defense was set.

As it was, Bryant got a very good look; the only reason it did not go in was that he appears to have been fouled on the play. If you watch the tape, you will watch the Indiana defender immediately raise his hands, reacting like he was going to be called for the foul and trying to sell the official on the fact that he had his hands straight up. It worked.

Yes. The guys who were in there were in there to break the press and have the best FT shooters on the court. Given we were in the double bonus and Pardon was generally looking ok from the line, this choice is debatable. What a brutal sequence! The Maryland game two years ago was also gut-wrenching at the time, but the stakes were much lower.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT