[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by letemplay

I've heard some argue that the amount of time put back on (1.0) is a bit irrelevant since the shot took way less than that. Let me offer that there is a huge difference in this case in 1 second and say .5, and that is what it forces the defense to be ready for. With one second a shooter would have time to come off a screen take a pass at the arc, square and release a 3 pointer, or they could run any number of plays to any spot in the front court scoring area. With less time, a catch and quick put back might be the only option, and thus could be better defended than what happened here, where the initial screener back cut for the lob. If I'm the defensive coach, (after scraping myself and players off the pile and realizing you had NOT won) I'd be arguing all I could for something under 1.0, so I would have less options to defend. As someone else said, we don't have luxury of review here.

I agree but they put on .8 or .7 and they could have gotten off a shot theoretically. And if you did not notice the clock did not even start exactly the time the ball touched the shooter's hand. So there is a lot of give and take in the time in these situations. Kind of like the game out west that made headlines about how a stop watch was used.

Peace