The Kobe Assist

[nuraman00]

How Kobe Bryant's missed shots translate into a new NBA statistic, 'The Kobe Assist' - Grantland

 

[wildturkey]

The author tried waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too hard to sound smart.

 

[MHSL82]

The author tried waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too hard to sound smart.

Grantland does like to post off the wall posts. In regards to the Alex Smith - Colin Kaepernick situation in San Francisco, they suggested a QB closer, like in baseball, where one QB would finish games. I presume that would be Alex, because Kaepernick will just pitch it to the other team when nursing a one-score lead. Just kidding, that was the coaches' fault for calling that play.

 

[nuraman00]

I presume that would be Alex, because Kaepernick will just pitch it to the other team when nursing a one-score lead.

Lol.

Why has the term "pitch" been used, instead of throw?

You're not the first person to use that term, I've been hearing that play described as pitch. (I haven't seen the play yet, just heard about it).

 

[nuraman00]

The author tried waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too hard to sound smart.

I thought it was interesting, but:

1. It seems to rely on a team having good offensive rebounders.

2. I wish he had posted data on the top 30 players who who got Kobe Assists (or Iverson Assists, etc.) in terms of %, and who the bottom top % were.

Also, which rebounders completed the Kobe Assists?

Data such as this would have been nice.

 

[MHSL82]

Lol.

Why has the term "pitch" been used, instead of throw?

You're not the first person to use that term, I've been hearing that play described as pitch. (I haven't seen the play yet, just heard about it).

When a pass is thrown laterally, backwards, underhanded, flipped, etc., it can be described as a pitch - because it's not really thrown like a traditional pass. Football's my second most watched sport, so it sounds natural to me. The play just looks like a pitch, a bad one at that. Not a very good quality video, but here's the play:


All the Niners had to do was to run the ball, pass the ball forward (complete or incomplete so long as not intercepted), not fumble, punt the ball, execute the pitch well, fall on the ball when fumbled, or heck, even kneel and punt on 4th down, and they would likely win the game - or at worst go into OT. Instead, they called that play and poorly executed it. It was a hard ball to pitch, but it was worse than I would have guessed pre-snap (if I had known the play). The reciever (#19) should have just fallen on the ball instead of trying to pick it up, the coaches shouldn't have called it, Kaepernick should have pitched it better, and Moss should have blocked the guy that eventually recovered the ball better. So much went wrong on that play.

I have the game recorded on my DVR and they show Alex before the play look on his wristband to see the play called, he looks like "why are you calling this play?" (He's a risk adverse Qb, but also pretty smart.) Then, afterwards they show him, he looks like "how (what or why) the f did that happen?" I'm glad he didn't look happy, that would been classless. If I were not a Niner fan, that would have been funny.

 

[nuraman00]

Thanks.

Is the video from the end part of the same game? Why does the quality and turf look greener?

How much time was on the clock? Probably the easiest thing would have been to throw the ball out of bounds, to use up clock, right?

It didn't look like a bad idea, because # 19 was open. But once the throw was too high, and he went after the ball, you are right, he should have fallen on the ball.

Can a non-kicker/punter kick the ball? What happens if he does? So when # 19 went after the ball, could he have just kicked it in some random direction (maybe out of bounds)?

 

[MHSL82]

I will probably explain much more than I need to, so please don't take this as an insult to your knowledge of football. I just tend to give descriptive explanations.

Is the video from the end part of the same game? Why does the quality and turf look greener?

The video is from the end of the loss to the Rams and the video was probably someone recording his television, as opposed to digital feed on his computer. Depending on the settings, colors will look different, but always the quality is poorer.

How much time was on the clock? Probably the easiest thing would have been to throw the ball out of bounds, to use up clock, right?

There was 3:04 left at the end of the play (3:11 at the snap). Throwing it out of bounds stops the clock (where as throwing in-field, lets the clock run down) and when you throw it away from where he threw it, you have to have a reciever in the area of the throw. Otherwise, it's a penalty for intentionally throwing (grounding) it away. The reason for intentional grounding rule is because the defense is doing well if they can sack you, if all you had to do was throw it out of bounds, everyone would do it and the defense would be at a disadvantage. It rewards a defense for good play, but if there's a reciever in the area of the throw, then the QB did attempt a legitimate pass, and therefore penalty would be unwarranted). If you leave the pocket (middle of the field), you just need to throw it beyond the line of scrimmage where the play started. So throwing it away is best, but a bit difficult depending on the play and the pressure.

The refs incorrectly called Kaepernick for intentional grounding earlier in the game because they said the ball didn't pass the line of scrimmage, when it in fact, did. It's not a play that the refs can review because it's a penalty, not a ruling on the field, like say a catch or no catch. Since the pass was in the endzone, the Rams were given 2 points for a safety, because in an intentional grounding situation, you are assumed down at the point of release.

Can a non-kicker/punter kick the ball? What happens if he does? So when # 19 went after the ball, could he have just kicked it in some random direction (maybe out of bounds)?

If #19 kicked the ball out of bounds, with no intention to recover it, it would have been a penalty (half the distance to the goal) - which would have been well worth it. The Niners would be kicking from the endzone (risky) and the Rams would be closer to their goal, but there'd be no touchdown. If #19 kicked it out of the endzone, it would be 2 points for the Rams (safety) and the Niners would have to kick it to the Rams (assuming no trickery). It would be 10-4 with the Rams probably around the 20 yard line, with 80 yards to go in three minutes. They hadn't gone that far all game, so it would have been difficult to do against the Niners great defense.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many little things could have happened differently for the Niners to win. It was a perfect storm type of thing. The next possession, the Niners scored a field goal, before the Rams did, too. But there was one pass the reciever should have caught that would have been a TD for SF. Instead, the clock that they were trying to run out stopped. Then, the QB ran out of bounds, again stopping the clock. If the Niners ran the ball instead of the dropped pass, that would be 40 seconds off the clock (or the Rams would have to take their last timeout). Running out of bounds stopped the clock too - not doing so would have run 40 more seconds off the clock (or force the last timeout). The Rams needed that timeout in order to maximize their time to score the tying field goal. The Niners defense also had a semi-bogus unnecessary roughness penalty (bogus as in they didn't hit the helmet, but semi because it was a judgment call on whether it was late) - that made the fireld goal close enough for their rookie field goal kicker to tie the game.

 

[nuraman00]

I will probably explain much more than I need to, so please don't take this as an insult to your knowledge of football. I just tend to give descriptive explanations.

The video is from the end of the loss to the Rams and the video was probably someone recording his television, as opposed to digital feed on his computer. Depending on the settings, colors will look different, but always the quality is poorer.

There was 3:04 left at the end of the play (3:11 at the snap). Throwing it out of bounds stops the clock (where as throwing in-field, lets the clock run down) and when you throw it away from where he threw it, you have to have a reciever in the area of the throw. Otherwise, it's a penalty for intentionally throwing (grounding) it away. The reason for intentional grounding rule is because the defense is doing well if they can sack you, if all you had to do was throw it out of bounds, everyone would do it and the defense would be at a disadvantage. It rewards a defense for good play, but if there's a reciever in the area of the throw, then the QB did attempt a legitimate pass, and therefore penalty would be unwarranted). If you leave the pocket (middle of the field), you just need to throw it beyond the line of scrimmage where the play started. So throwing it away is best, but a bit difficult depending on the play and the pressure.

The refs incorrectly called Kaepernick for intentional grounding earlier in the game because they said the ball didn't pass the line of scrimmage, when it in fact, did. It's not a play that the refs can review because it's a penalty, not a ruling on the field, like say a catch or no catch. Since the pass was in the endzone, the Rams were given 2 points for a safety, because in an intentional grounding situation, you are assumed down at the point of release.

If #19 kicked the ball out of bounds, with no intention to recover it, it would have been a penalty (half the distance to the goal) - which would have been well worth it. The Niners would be kicking from the endzone (risky) and the Rams would be closer to their goal, but there'd be no touchdown. If #19 kicked it out of the endzone, it would be 2 points for the Rams (safety) and the Niners would have to kick it to the Rams (assuming no trickery). It would be 10-4 with the Rams probably around the 20 yard line, with 80 yards to go in three minutes. They hadn't gone that far all game, so it would have been difficult to do against the Niners great defense.

Many little things could have happened differently for the Niners to win. It was a perfect storm type of thing. The next possession, the Niners scored a field goal, before the Rams did, too. But there was one pass the reciever should have caught that would have been a TD for SF. Instead, the clock that they were trying to run out stopped. Then, the QB ran out of bounds, again stopping the clock. If the Niners ran the ball instead of the dropped pass, that would be 40 seconds off the clock (or the Rams would have to take their last timeout). Running out of bounds stopped the clock too - not doing so would have run 40 more seconds off the clock (or force the last timeout). The Rams needed that timeout in order to maximize their time to score the tying field goal. The Niners defense also had a semi-bogus unnecessary roughness penalty (bogus as in they didn't hit the helmet, but semi because it was a judgment call on whether it was late) - that made the fireld goal close enough for their rookie field goal kicker to tie the game.

Thanks, I didn't know those things.

Back to the video though, don't the colors look a lot different in the first 8 seconds, and from 9 seconds to 14 seconds? It's almost as if it's not from the same game.

 

[MHSL82]

Thanks, I didn't know those things.

Back to the video though, don't the colors look a lot different in the first 8 seconds, and from 9 seconds to 14 seconds? It's almost as if it's not from the same game.

Ohhh... the play at the end that they don't show the whole thing, the second was from the Bears game (at home, Rams on the road), I didn't watch that because it was a different play. I thought you were asking if the video was from the same game as the pitch play I was referring to. I was confused, I thought "that is the same play, so of course, that's the same game."

 

[nuraman00]

Ohhh... the play at the end that they don't show the whole thing, the second was from the Bears game (at home, Rams on the road), I didn't watch that because it was a different play. I thought you were asking if the video was from the same game as the pitch play I was referring to. I was confused, I thought "that is the same play, so of course, that's the same game."

Thanks.

Good use of quotes too.

 

[nuraman00]

I just saw you edited post # 8 at Today at 06:51 PM.

Now I have to re-read it.

 

[nuraman00]

Putting Back the ?Kobe Assist?

 

[MHSL82]

Didn't want to start a new thread, but how is D'Antoni supposed to win with his roster. Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard, Ron Artest (I don't care what his legal name is, that's who he is), Antawn Jamison, and nobody. I seriously have not heard of anyone else on that team. If they continue to lose with Gasol and Nash, fine.

What if they fired or D'Antoni resigned for medical reasons right when Nash and Gasol got healthy - I could see that as an opportunity for Phil Jackson to look like the hero again. They'd have to pay three coaches if they fired D'Antoni, so they'd either need to be really desperate to use their money or have to hope he quits if they don't win. And that's IF Jackson wants to come back.

 

[nuraman00]

Phil Jackson can't win with this roster either. They're most likely going to have a bottom 4 seed, and they'd need another low seed to break through to have homecourt beyond the 1st round.

And even though I don't think homecourt matters as much if you're an elite team, I think they're just too behind the 8-ball.

I don't think teams that get off to this kind of a start recover to go to the NBA Finals.

Dallas, in 2010-2011, didn't have that great of a regular season, though, but it wasn't this bad.

 

[MHSL82]

Phil Jackson can't win with this roster either. They're most likely going to have a bottom 4 seed, and they'd need another low seed to break through to have homecourt beyond the 1st round.

And even though I don't think homecourt matters as much if you're an elite team, I think they're just too behind the 8-ball.

I don't think teams that get off to this kind of a start recover to go to the NBA Finals.

Dallas, in 2010-2011, didn't have that great of a regular season, though, but it wasn't this bad.

I want Jackson back and then for us to beat him. This is and sounds like blasphemy, but I wanted the Lakers to win it with Malone and I wanted Jackson to win his last threepeat - but only because the Jazz weren't in it. I feel dirty. Going to bed without a midnight snack as part of my punishment for my basketball sins.

 

[nuraman00]

I want Jackson back and then for us to beat him. This is and sounds like blasphemy, but I wanted the Lakers to win it with Malone and I wanted Jackson to win his last threepeat - but only because the Jazz weren't in it. I feel dirty. Going to bed without a midnight snack as part of my punishment for my basketball sins.

You're so religious.

You're entitled to root for whoever you want, whenever.

Sports are about entertainment, to me. If you're not having fun, it's time to find a new hobby.

And if rooting for Phil kept your interest in the playoffs a little longer those years, then all the better.

I think Phil and Sloan were similar in one way - They let their players play through mistakes and didn't call quick timeouts. I didn't always agree with it, but I like how they had a philosophy.

As an offensive coach, Sloan and Popovich were much better. Phil just got his offense from Tex Winter.

Pat Riley sucked as a coach, IMO.


As for the Jazz beating a team in the playoffs, I would rather see them beat the Spurs in the playoffs.

The Lakers aren't good, so why beat on an irrelevant team? Beat the Spurs, and Celtics, in the playoffs. Or Bulls.

Of course, if you beat the Bulls, Celtics, or Knicks in the playoffs, you know what happens:

You do this to your hair:

http://www.yellmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/blue-hair2.jpg

 

[nuraman00]

I haven't read this yet, but this looks interesting.

OP delivering: "using statistics to test the conventional wisdom that three-pointers are easier to rebound for the offense" Part Two! : nba