Denver beat Chicago 90-89 tonight after Brad Miller's last-second shot was (correctly) deemed to have left his hand a split-second after the horn. Miller sank a long two after catching an inbounds pass with three-tenths of a second left on the clock, but my argument with the referees and how these situations are handled in general actually starts with the play before.
With the score tied at 89, Denver's Chauncey Billups drove and was fouled with six tenths of a second remaining. He made the first free throw, and missed the second. Chicago's Joakim Noah grabbed the rebound, the horn sounded, and the game was apparently over.
The officials, however, ordered three tenths of a second put back on, ruling that the Bulls had called a timeout prior to the horn sounding. They did this without consulting the tape. By rule, Chicago had the right to advance the ball to midcourt, setting the stage for its last-ditch play.
Why three tenths? I can't say for sure, but I can make a good guess, because it's what first seemed proper to me, before I took a moment to think about it: The NBA has a rule that a player can catch and shoot in three tenths of a second -- anything less, and the player must tip the ball. Presumably, then, it takes as long to catch the ball and call timeout.
But hang on. If it takes three tenths to catch and shoot, it can't possibly take the same amount of time to catch and call timeout. Catching and shooting involves two distinct actions that must be taken by the same player; namely, gaining possession of the ball, and shooting it. Because you can call timeout verbally and because the officials presumably awarded the timeout to the Bulls on the basis of coach Vinny Del Negro alerting the officials prior to Billups' second shot that his team wanted a timeout as soon as they grabbed the rebound. The gaining of possession and the timeout occurred contemporaneously. Noah didn't bobble the ball. He presumably caught it as fast as anyone can or would have. There's nothing about the "catch" of a rebound that is different from the "catch" in the three-tenths-to-catch-and-shoot rule. Because the officials didn't consult the tape and therefore weren't measuring the time it took Noah to control the ball, the catch couldn't logically have taken three tenths to complete. Given the league's current rules, then, the refs should have put more time back on the clock.
On to the final play, where the three-tenths-to-catch-and-shoot rule again factors in. If we accept, as I think we have to, the premise that some players have quicker releases than other players, then for this rule to make any sense at all, three tenths of a second has to be the absolute minimum amount of time it takes to catch and shoot. If someone can do it faster, then it's unfair to take that skill away from them with the rule. In order for Miller to have gotten his shot off in time, his release would have to be at least as fast as any other player's in the league, something that isn't terribly plausible.
There are a number of other problems with this rule, and precision timing in the end-game in general. For instance, the rule -- at least in its application -- doesn't seem to contemplate where the receiver catches the ball. We've all probably seen instances of a player catching a ball away from his release point, moving it to said point, and releasing it, allegedly within the three tenths of a second time limit. Moving the ball from catch point to release point takes some amount of time, however small, and if you can catch, move, and release in three tenths of a second, you therefore can catch and release, without moving to a release point, in less time.
The way these situations are handled also treat human reaction time oddly, or at least inconsistently. Back when I played high school ball (without tenths of a second on our clocks or the benefit of replay), I learned from my father, a ref, that the rules allowed for one second of reaction time from the moment of the occurrence that triggered the stopping of the clock. For example, on a simple play where the ball goes out of bounds, there's no sensor in the physical basketball that automatically stops the clock the moment the ball hits the floor. The official has to notice that the ball has gone out of bounds and blow his whistle, and the scorer has to similarly react to the whistle. That takes time; hence, the one-second allowance for human reaction time. That time is "made up," so to speak, when the ball is inbounded, and the scorer re-starts the clock a fraction of a second after it has been touched (which is what triggers time beginning to run again).
Today, replay and tenths of a second eliminate this reaction time for stoppages, but it doesn't for restarts. By going to the tape, the officials can see a freeze-frame of the precise moment the ball hits the floor out of bounds, and can reset the clock accordingly, eliminating the reaction time. They cannot similarly do so when the ball is touched by a player on an inbounds pass, and the result is that teams get more time than they technically should.
I do not, at the moment, have a solution that preserves the precision timing an entire generation of basketball fans has become accustomed to. I think it's important, however, to understand the problems with the current system.
(UPDATE: My father, the former ref, did the research I should have done and discovered that, by rule, "no less than :00.3 must expire on the game clock when a player secures possession of an unsuccessful free throw attempt and immediately requests a timeout." This strikes me as kind of silly and arbitrary, as I see no reason why it should take as long to call a timeout as it does to shoot a basketball. But it appears that the officials were right, and I apologize to the officials, as well as anyone who may have been swayed by my argument. It's a good thing hardly anyone reads this blog.)
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
TMJF: Warriors 146, Wolves 105
Stat Line: 34 minutes, 8-17 FG, 1-6 3FG, 3-3 FT, 20 pts, 5 rebs, 6 assts, 1 stl, 6 TOs.
It's hard to analyze an individual player performance in a game that got so out of hand so quickly. Jonny Flynn took too many three-pointers, but can you blame him for jacking a few up when his team trailed by 19 by halftime, 34 at the end of the three, and as many as 45 in the fourth? Six turnovers is certainly ghastly, but that's what happened when a hyper-competitive rookie point guard finds himself quarterbacking a sinking ship.
Other than Al Jefferson, Flynn is Minnesota's most dangerous offensive weapon right now (and with Big Al J hardly looking like himself in the early going, Flynn may be tops on that list). The threes and the turnovers aren't going to make coach Kurt Rambis happy, but Flynn's presumed replacement, Ramon Sessions, has been as careless with the ball without being as much of a scorer on a team that needs points. It looks like Flynn's burn is safe, at least for the foreseeable future.
I have a feeling that watching the Wolves 82 nights this year is going to be more soul-crushing than enjoyable. I've never seen a team play as badly on both ends of the floor as they did last night: Sloppy with the ball, despite not running anything terribly intricate on offense; and absolutely clueless defensively. Lack of respect for the rock and low basketball IQ are two of my pet peeves, and the Wolves seem to have both in spades. I don't mean to pile on, but the scoreline and the boxscore really don't do justice as to just how bad Minnesota was last night.
It's hard to analyze an individual player performance in a game that got so out of hand so quickly. Jonny Flynn took too many three-pointers, but can you blame him for jacking a few up when his team trailed by 19 by halftime, 34 at the end of the three, and as many as 45 in the fourth? Six turnovers is certainly ghastly, but that's what happened when a hyper-competitive rookie point guard finds himself quarterbacking a sinking ship.
Other than Al Jefferson, Flynn is Minnesota's most dangerous offensive weapon right now (and with Big Al J hardly looking like himself in the early going, Flynn may be tops on that list). The threes and the turnovers aren't going to make coach Kurt Rambis happy, but Flynn's presumed replacement, Ramon Sessions, has been as careless with the ball without being as much of a scorer on a team that needs points. It looks like Flynn's burn is safe, at least for the foreseeable future.
I have a feeling that watching the Wolves 82 nights this year is going to be more soul-crushing than enjoyable. I've never seen a team play as badly on both ends of the floor as they did last night: Sloppy with the ball, despite not running anything terribly intricate on offense; and absolutely clueless defensively. Lack of respect for the rock and low basketball IQ are two of my pet peeves, and the Wolves seem to have both in spades. I don't mean to pile on, but the scoreline and the boxscore really don't do justice as to just how bad Minnesota was last night.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
TMJF: Blazers 116, Wolves 93
Stat Line: 30 minutes, 4-10 FG, 1-4 3FG, 2-3 FT, 11 pts, 3 assts, 2 stls, 2 TOs.
Six straight losses for Minnesota, after the opening night, come-from-behind victory over (still winless) New Jersey. Jonny Flynn is looking for his offense more and more; he took ten shots against Portland, right on his average, but eight of those came in the first half. Clearly, the Timberwolves' offensive ineptitude is getting to Flynn, as it would to any young point guard who consistently sees his teammates miss open jumpers and play out-of-control offensively (see Brewer, Corey). This will probably have a negative impact on Flynn's playing time -- coach Kurt Rambis seems most concerned with getting Flynn to quarterback the offense, even if it comes at the expense of empty possessions. To his credit, Rambis seems to treat each game as a clean slate, and Flynn's mis-steps associated with trying to create something out of nothing do not seem to carry over in his coach's eyes.
The Wolves play Golden State on Monday night, and the Warriors' uptempo style should provide Flynn with the most comfortable environment of his short career. Flynn should look to get to the basket and get to the line, and could easily set a career-high in assists against Golden State's rather lax defense.
Six straight losses for Minnesota, after the opening night, come-from-behind victory over (still winless) New Jersey. Jonny Flynn is looking for his offense more and more; he took ten shots against Portland, right on his average, but eight of those came in the first half. Clearly, the Timberwolves' offensive ineptitude is getting to Flynn, as it would to any young point guard who consistently sees his teammates miss open jumpers and play out-of-control offensively (see Brewer, Corey). This will probably have a negative impact on Flynn's playing time -- coach Kurt Rambis seems most concerned with getting Flynn to quarterback the offense, even if it comes at the expense of empty possessions. To his credit, Rambis seems to treat each game as a clean slate, and Flynn's mis-steps associated with trying to create something out of nothing do not seem to carry over in his coach's eyes.
The Wolves play Golden State on Monday night, and the Warriors' uptempo style should provide Flynn with the most comfortable environment of his short career. Flynn should look to get to the basket and get to the line, and could easily set a career-high in assists against Golden State's rather lax defense.
Boston 86, New Jersey 76
Ugh.
[recap] [box score]
[recap] [box score]
- First of all, poor New Jersey. The only regular starter who played was center Brook Lopez. They started Rafer Alston (filling in for Devin Harris), Trenton Hassell (Courtney Lee), Bobby Simmons (Chris Douglas-Roberts), and Josh Boone (Yi Jianlian). They played their guts out -- just as they did in a narrow loss the night before in Philadelphia -- but you aren't going to win starting three career journeymen and Rafer Alston. The Nets are 0-7, and with a Wednesday home date against Philly followed by a weekend back-to-back in Florida, it looks very likely that they'll have to wait at least another full week before they get their first win.
- Doc Rivers again tried an all-bench lineup to start the second quarter, but House, Giddens, Wallace, Scalabrine, and Shelden Williams couldn't get anything going. Without Marquis Daniels, who missed this game while tending to personal matters, the second unit needs Pierce or Ray Allen to spark the offense. That three-minute stretch was the best indicator we've had of how good Daniels has been thus far.
- I won't be at all surprised if Giddens doesn't have a job in the NBA next year.
- The Nets committed 23 turnovers, an incredible 20 of which were Boston steals. Rajon Rondo led the way with 5 thefts, but in all, six other Celtics got at least one: Rasheed Wallace (4 steals), Kevin Garnett (3), Brian Scalabrine (3), Paul Pierce (2), Eddie House (2), and J.R. Giddens (1). Boston had active hands and jumped passing lanes all night, but New Jersey also threw quite a few balls directly to men wearing green jerseys.
- One such steal by Eddie House was basically an outlet pass, and House turned it into a two-on-one break down the right side, with Scalabrine filling the left lane. House dropped a perfect bounce pass that caught Scal in stride; for a great number of NBA players, this was a catch, two steps, and a jam. Scal being who he is, however, stopped more or less on a dime and backed the ball out. Seeing it teed up so perfectly for Scal, I was led to contemplate whether he could still dunk. I know what you're thinking: "He's 6'9", of course he can dunk." Well, I played with a guy in high school who was 6'8", and he could only throw it down if he could take one step, gather, and jump off of two feet; in other words, he could only really do it in practice. Again, I know what you're thinking: "Okay, but he was an NBA player?" No, he wasn't, but he also wasn't a 31-year-old with a bad back, an extra 20 pounds or so on his frame, and a nickname ("Veal") that isn't just a play on words. It's entirely possible that he can't. Even if you disagree with me, you wouldn't feel very comfortable betting on it, would you?
- Scal did give us the lead for good by burying a three (our first successful attempt from long distance) on the first possession of the fourth quarter. He hit a long two a couple trips later. I can't believe I'm saying it, but we may want to keep him around all year, rather than trade his expiring contract for another piece.
- Boston's lineup for the final four minutes: House, Allen, Pierce, Garnett, Kendrick Perkins. Rondo sat the entire fourth quarter and didn't look terribly amused about it while sitting on the bench.
- They mentioned on the broadcast that this was the 50th anniversary of the first meeting between Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain. Ironic for me, because I just finished the Russ v. Wilt chapter of Bill Simmons' new book, The Book of Basketball. I'm no Sports Guy fanboy, but I'm excited for the rest of this book. Simmons has bitten off a lot -- he defines his purpose as "evaluating why certain players and teams mattered more than others" -- but as an NBA fanatic first and a journalist (I use that term loosely) second, he seems up to the task. I'll have a full report once I finish the nearly 700-page treatise.
Off 'til Wednesday, when the Jazz come to town. Three days off should be a welcome break for the Cs, who have played a league-leading eight games in the season's first twelve days (a few teams have only played five games, and Golden State has played just four). This should be a chance for the team to get back in the practice gym to work out some of the kinks from the last two games, as well as to get some well-deserved rest.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
TMJF: Bucks 87, Wolves 72
Stat Line: 9-17 FG, 0-3 3FG, 2-3 FT, 20 pts, 4 reb, 1 asst, 3 stls, 3 TOs.
This game was touted by some as Jonny Flynn vs. Brandon Jennings, the two lottery point guards. Flynn got the better of Jennings in their one-on-battle, but Jennings got the win.
Flynn scored 12 of his game-high 20 points in the fourth quarter, going against Luke Ridnour as Jennings sat the whole fourth quarter. Minnesota is so offensively inept right now that I have to believe Kurt Rambis is going to give Flynn more of a leash in the first three periods.
Flynn got many of his buckets on pull-up jumpers, but he also got five points on breakaways that were the highlights of his game.
The first came when the Bucks posted up Andrew Bogut on the right block. Flynn snuck around the big man and knocked the ball loose, then went hard to the basket. He was met there by Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, who tried to wrap Flynn up. Flynn absorbed the contact, then flipped up a little seven-footer that crawled in. Flynn then drained the free throw.
On the second play, the steal was the highlight. Bogut set a high screen for Ridnour, who dribbled right. Flynn managed to avoid getting swallowed up by the pick, but he was rubbed enough for Ridnour to gain a half-step on him. Nevertheless, Flynn, off balance from the contact with Bogut, managed to reach out and pick Ridnour cleanly, retrieving the ball and going in uncontested for an emphatic, if ultimately meaningless, jam.
This game was touted by some as Jonny Flynn vs. Brandon Jennings, the two lottery point guards. Flynn got the better of Jennings in their one-on-battle, but Jennings got the win.
Flynn scored 12 of his game-high 20 points in the fourth quarter, going against Luke Ridnour as Jennings sat the whole fourth quarter. Minnesota is so offensively inept right now that I have to believe Kurt Rambis is going to give Flynn more of a leash in the first three periods.
Flynn got many of his buckets on pull-up jumpers, but he also got five points on breakaways that were the highlights of his game.
The first came when the Bucks posted up Andrew Bogut on the right block. Flynn snuck around the big man and knocked the ball loose, then went hard to the basket. He was met there by Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, who tried to wrap Flynn up. Flynn absorbed the contact, then flipped up a little seven-footer that crawled in. Flynn then drained the free throw.
On the second play, the steal was the highlight. Bogut set a high screen for Ridnour, who dribbled right. Flynn managed to avoid getting swallowed up by the pick, but he was rubbed enough for Ridnour to gain a half-step on him. Nevertheless, Flynn, off balance from the contact with Bogut, managed to reach out and pick Ridnour cleanly, retrieving the ball and going in uncontested for an emphatic, if ultimately meaningless, jam.
Phoenix 110, Boston 103
Phoenix was good. Boston wasn't.
[recap] [box score]
That's not really even accurate. Defensively, they were disorganized, but Boston's offense was fine, although the uncharacteristically poor three-point shooting (4-of-18) probably cost them the game. Even with that horrible showing from deep, the Celtics still shot better than 51 percent from the field. They also only committed 12 turnovers, a nice number for them.
But they couldn't stop Jason Richardson, and they couldn't stop Amar'e Stoudemire, and they couldn't stop Channing Frye when it mattered.
Even with all of that, Boston had a shot at this game. Rajon Rondo was alone under the basket with the score 104-100, but Stoudemire blocked his shot. Boston got a stop and Rasheed Wallace got a good look at a three, but it rimmed out. Steve Nash drained a three on the other end and that was that.
I've been ruminating on this one for a while now and I really can't think of anything to say. (I guess I'm a lot better when we win.) We didn't play good defense, they did a nice job on Pierce. We missed threes, they hit threes. We missed a bunch of free throws, they didn't. We lost, they won.
Oh well. Who knew Brian Scalabrine was so important?*
*Scalabrine didn't play because of back spasms. In a game last year against Phoenix, however, Scal held Stoudemire to three points while scoring four himself. Clearly, that was the problem on Friday.
[recap] [box score]
That's not really even accurate. Defensively, they were disorganized, but Boston's offense was fine, although the uncharacteristically poor three-point shooting (4-of-18) probably cost them the game. Even with that horrible showing from deep, the Celtics still shot better than 51 percent from the field. They also only committed 12 turnovers, a nice number for them.
But they couldn't stop Jason Richardson, and they couldn't stop Amar'e Stoudemire, and they couldn't stop Channing Frye when it mattered.
Even with all of that, Boston had a shot at this game. Rajon Rondo was alone under the basket with the score 104-100, but Stoudemire blocked his shot. Boston got a stop and Rasheed Wallace got a good look at a three, but it rimmed out. Steve Nash drained a three on the other end and that was that.
I've been ruminating on this one for a while now and I really can't think of anything to say. (I guess I'm a lot better when we win.) We didn't play good defense, they did a nice job on Pierce. We missed threes, they hit threes. We missed a bunch of free throws, they didn't. We lost, they won.
Oh well. Who knew Brian Scalabrine was so important?*
*Scalabrine didn't play because of back spasms. In a game last year against Phoenix, however, Scal held Stoudemire to three points while scoring four himself. Clearly, that was the problem on Friday.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Boston 92, Minnesota 90
Doc Rivers won't like it. Most fans won't like it. But that's how I like my Celtics-Wolves games to be.
[recap] [box score]
I always want Minnesota to do well because they have Al Jefferson, one of the truly likable former Celtics, as well as Ryan Gomes, another Boston guy who was part of the Garnett trade and who I've loved since his freshman year at Providence. And, of course, they have Jonny Flynn, whose performance I'll get to in a little bit.
So, coming into the game, given that Boston was 5-0 and Minnesota hadn't tasted victory since a wild comeback in their season-opener, I was worried that this one would be a laugher. I even told a friend of mine who's a Wolves fan that I wouldn't really care if we lost this one, and I meant it. At least I think I did. Ultimately, I was pleased with the game: A night when the Celtics finally had to face a little adversity; a confidence-builder for the Wolves; and an eventual win for the green-and-white.
If I were a rabid Wolves fan (see what I did there?), I'd be awfully upset with coach Kurt Rambis. Either Minnesota doesn't have a single player who can play help defense worth a damn, or Rambis decided to introduce a defensive scheme on the fly without installing it in practice first. Either way, it likely cost his team the game.
Minnesota defended Rajon Rondo the way the Lakers did in the 2008 Finals, when Rambis was an assistant coach in LA: They sagged way off of him (never covering him above the free throw line), using his defender to double the ball or clog driving lanes. Eventually, the Celtics realized that leaving Rondo at the top of the key wasn't the best counter to this strategy, and started moving him around the basket.
My favorite action they ran to counter Minny's defense was to iso Paul Pierce on the wing, with Garnett on the opposite block and Rondo floating on the baseline. The other two men on the floor were up high, opposite the ball. Flynn, the designated free safety, was stationed just outside the lane on the strong side, keeping an eye on Pierce. Garnett came across the lane to set a screen on Flynn; Garnett's defender, Ryan Hollins, followed him (he had to, to keep KG from posting up Flynn); no one rotated down or over; and Pierce hit Rondo with a pass for an easy two. Rondo had 14 points in the third quarter, and a good portion of it came on plays like that.
The reason I think there's a chance that 'sota never practiced this before is because after every Rondo layup, Flynn's head snapped over to the Wolves' bench, as if he were asking Rambis, "Am I really supposed to just leave him back there?" I've never seen a player act this way, and while it may have just been some rookie frustration boiling over, it really looked like the team wasn't on the same page at all.
Bullets:
[recap] [box score]
I always want Minnesota to do well because they have Al Jefferson, one of the truly likable former Celtics, as well as Ryan Gomes, another Boston guy who was part of the Garnett trade and who I've loved since his freshman year at Providence. And, of course, they have Jonny Flynn, whose performance I'll get to in a little bit.
So, coming into the game, given that Boston was 5-0 and Minnesota hadn't tasted victory since a wild comeback in their season-opener, I was worried that this one would be a laugher. I even told a friend of mine who's a Wolves fan that I wouldn't really care if we lost this one, and I meant it. At least I think I did. Ultimately, I was pleased with the game: A night when the Celtics finally had to face a little adversity; a confidence-builder for the Wolves; and an eventual win for the green-and-white.
If I were a rabid Wolves fan (see what I did there?), I'd be awfully upset with coach Kurt Rambis. Either Minnesota doesn't have a single player who can play help defense worth a damn, or Rambis decided to introduce a defensive scheme on the fly without installing it in practice first. Either way, it likely cost his team the game.
Minnesota defended Rajon Rondo the way the Lakers did in the 2008 Finals, when Rambis was an assistant coach in LA: They sagged way off of him (never covering him above the free throw line), using his defender to double the ball or clog driving lanes. Eventually, the Celtics realized that leaving Rondo at the top of the key wasn't the best counter to this strategy, and started moving him around the basket.
My favorite action they ran to counter Minny's defense was to iso Paul Pierce on the wing, with Garnett on the opposite block and Rondo floating on the baseline. The other two men on the floor were up high, opposite the ball. Flynn, the designated free safety, was stationed just outside the lane on the strong side, keeping an eye on Pierce. Garnett came across the lane to set a screen on Flynn; Garnett's defender, Ryan Hollins, followed him (he had to, to keep KG from posting up Flynn); no one rotated down or over; and Pierce hit Rondo with a pass for an easy two. Rondo had 14 points in the third quarter, and a good portion of it came on plays like that.
The reason I think there's a chance that 'sota never practiced this before is because after every Rondo layup, Flynn's head snapped over to the Wolves' bench, as if he were asking Rambis, "Am I really supposed to just leave him back there?" I've never seen a player act this way, and while it may have just been some rookie frustration boiling over, it really looked like the team wasn't on the same page at all.
Bullets:
- I haven't written much yet this season about Marquis Daniels, but he's just a perfect player for us. He does a little bit of everything, which you can see from the box scores, and he takes the pressure off of whichever starter (usually Pierce or Ray Allen) plays with the second unit to be the primary ballhandler and initiator of the offense, which you can't see from the box scores. Brian Scalabrine's recent return allowed Doc to trot out a five-man bench unit (Daniels, Scal, Rasheed Wallace, Eddie House, and Shelden Williams) in the second quarter, and that group cut a 31-23 lead to 33-31 in about three-and-a-half minutes together.
- Perkins then replaced Williams and became the only starter on the floor, somethin I've fairly certain we haven't seen in the past two-plus seasons, at least outside of crunch time. Perk promptly dropped in a half hook over Jefferson off the glass, and Allen came in for Scal at the next stoppage. That's about all the "Perkins as Option A on offense" I'm comfortable with, but I'm encouraged that this experiment didn't have me staring in horror at my television, which it would have as recently as last year, before the playoffs.
- The bench gets the credit for this win: No Boston starter had a positive +/-.
- Boston had been shooting the leather off the ball to start the year, but they cooled off considerably on Wednesday, shooting just 44.6 percent from the floor and making only five of 19 threes. I had wondered how the team would react when the shots stopped falling -- in particular, whether Rondo would step up his aggressiveness. We didn't really find out, as Rambis' peculiar defensive scheme sort of ran our offense for us.
- As good as Boston had been offensively, they had been better defensively, and that also wasn't the case for most of this game. Minnesota shot 52 percent for the game, and everyone -- especially Oleksiy Pecherov, but also Gomes and Jefferson -- seemed to be making whatever the put up. (The exception was Corey Brewer, a unique but maddening player who cannot be portrayed any more favorably than he is here.) The D stepped up big-time when we needed it, however, allowing just one bucket in Minnesota's final eight possessions.
- Celtics play-by-play guy Mike Gorman kept pronouncing Minnesota journeyman forward Brian Cardinal's last name "Car-di-NAL," like he was from Ibiza and not Illinois. For God's sake, look at the guy. How do you think he pronounces his name?
TMJF: Stat Line: 33 minutes, 4-6 FG, 1-1 3FG, 1-1 FT, 10 pts, 5 rebs, 5 assts, 2 TOs.
Wednesday was probably Flynn's best game as a pro, though most of his stat line came in the first half, and those who didn't watch the game will blame him for Rondo's big offensive night. He stayed within himself most of the evening, his only real mis-step coming on a couple of drives to the bucket that resulted in a missed layup and a blocked layup. But he left Rondo in the dust on a number of occasions, a testament to his quickness. And he played more than twice as much as Sessions, a sign that Rambis was pleased with his play, as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
