Game Thread | Game #33 | Bucks @ Cavs | Dec. 21, 2022

[kidduck]

I love how Mitchell attacks the rim in clutch time. He is an
elite finisher.

 

[KilgoreTrout]

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.

Hire Quin Snyder and Kevin Garnett as coaches, and we are on our way!

 

[kidduck]

From Milwaukee:

Allen provided a steady presence in the paint for the Cavaliers, even if he couldn’t quite wrangle Antetokounmpo any better than his teammates the last time. That said, he did individually defend the Bucks’ star strongly enough in the fourth quarter to force missed shots around the rim, preventing Milwaukee from pulling within single digits until the final minutes.

The pair of big men also traded dunks on one another, leading to a bit of trash talk between the two.

“I love that," Antetokounmpo said. "He’s not backing down. I’m not backing down. He’s a great player, a great teammate, loves to play the game of basketball and I respect that. Whenever I’m on the court with him, I try to go at him. And he’s tried to go at me as well, so I respect him.”

The Cavaliers leader finished with 19 points and eight rebounds, but he also battled for loose balls, creating extra opportunities for his teammates.

“We played it a little differently this time around, but he played well,” Brook Lopez said of Allen. “He played with a lot of energy, he got some good looks and he made good plays.”

His return also helped pave the way for the Cavaliers to have a 54-46 advantage in points in the paint, even though fellow big man Mobley was plagued by foul trouble. Lopez had to respect Allen’s movement on offense enough to go with him, allowing other Cavaliers chances for easier looks inside.

 

[Peacedog]

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.

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.

 

[Cement]

though my preference would
be 1 per quarter.

good for you for sneaking in a nominee for worst idea of 2022 just before the buzzer!

 

[Peacedog]

good for you for sneaking in a nominee for worst idea of 2022 just before the buzzer!

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.

 

[CavsFaninNJ]

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'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.

Meanwhile, whether the team is up 18 or 20...or 20 vs 22, is usually not as likely to be momentum changing as a 4 point lead vs a 7 point lead. But it can be. Teams start big runs down any number of points. If you have a good shot at winning, I would take it early - but only if you know, the way Love did, that it will work. It is potentially deflating to think you might be down, say, 18 points but the lead goes back to 21.

I guess I think they are most useful where there can be a momentum shift - and that you ought to be more sure when you use it earlier than later - as the plays are less likely to shift anything. It's nuanced though. I might change my mind lol

 

[RonG]

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 ignored the casual fan comment, it was what it was and well I am anything but a casual fan. I don't think we will ever agree on using a challenge if and when we are up 20 plus early game and that's ok. I am not here to change your mind. jbb has been inconsistent all year with either using his challenges or not using them.

I will say this, as soon as he challenged I turned and looked at my 30 year old son and said " why the fuck are you challenging here, nothing game changing will come out of this call." Then fast forward to the 4th quarter and there were some challenges situations we definatly could have won and and would have helped break the game momentum.

If the NBA wants to get the calls right specially in crunch time they need to review a lot more of these calls in game in the last 2 minutes versuses sending out the 2 minute report admitting their misses.

 

[Peacedog]

I'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.

 

[foucault87]

Well you are all casual fans in my heart

 

[bob2the2nd]

I'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.

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 points

That said i will not fault JBB for successfully challenging a play, and I am not a huge fan of him. Anyone doing so is absolutely looking to make up reasons to criticism him. However the fact that we are even having this discussion is a fault of the NBA and absolutely no one else. Why in the world shouldnt a team keep their challenge if they get one successful.

Spoiler: conspiracy theory

The NBA absolutely wants the ability to control their refs and influence the outcome of games. They have for decades. If teams were able to keep a challenge as long as they win them, it would start to screw with the NBAs influence of a game and really start to highlight either A) how terrible and unbalanced NBA refs are B) the refs are clearly directed towards certain teams/players

 

[Cavatt]

Yes, there were calls to challenge, but getting successful challenge that wiped 2 points was pretty great and important. It totally stopped a Giannis run.

I think it is such a tough thing to make a call on. It also made them use their challenge faster and lose it lol

 

[Adam]

Given the talk on challenges all I will say is it depends on who it's on. If a vet asks you to review the play and challenge it then as a coach you are more likely to request it than a rookie. Firstly they are most likely right. Secondly it helps them save face and keeps them engaged. Yes they should be better than that, but hey this is the NBA

 

[jjvors]

The NBA Top 10 Plays. Cavs and Bucks have three of them. Who's there and what's the number?

 

[Rich]

@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.

I'll also say when you're up 22 and rolling, don't break the flow with a challenge.

Basketball more than probably any other sport is a game of flow and rhythm.