> >As far as the characteristics of what might describe or predict whomight
> >be a good clutch player, I like John C's position (with an assistfrom the
> >always scrappy Tim Legler) that being able to actually create ashot via
> >moves or quick release may be more important than pure offensiveability.
> >IOW it is different than baseball, where the better clutch playeris just
> >the better overall player, in hoops the better clutch player may bea guy
> >who is a lesser player overall.Gilmore
> Almost certainly this is the case. How often do you see an Artis
> or even Shaq (well Shaq with his FT-shooting troubles is a specialcase)
> take the last shot, as opposed to a Kobe or ... who did the Bullsuse
> to take the last shot during the Artis years, I'd guess they'd wantvan
> Lier looking to hit either Wilbur Holland or Mickey Johnson as thefirst
> choice, with van Lier jacking it up himself if the first choicedidn't
> work out.One thing that seems to be the case, although I've never seen any data
to support this, is that during what most would describe as "clutch"
situations, the pace of the game slows considerably. Perhaps this
could be confirmed or refuted using play-by-play data.
Understandably, when you're under 30 seconds in a close game or so it
makes sense to play for the last shot to leave as little time as
possible for your opponent to score. But very often when you get
under 5:00 or so of a close game, you'll see teams getting more
deliberate, using up much of the shot clock, perhaps in an attempt to
get the ball in the hands of their best scorer, or perhaps to avoid
turnovers. This seems to be true for even normally fast-paced teams
like Sacramento. This strategy would indeed seem to favor players
who can create their own shot or at least have a quick release, and
particularly those with 3-point shooting ability. But I've always
wondered whether this is good strategy. Shouldn't a team simply use
its optimal point-scoring strategy throughout a close game?