Video Request: PCF and Crew Mechanics

[crosscountry55]

OSU @ OU, 1/30/17, ESPN, 14:22 2nd Half.

OSU on offense entering its frontcourt. O0 (that's orange zero) drives from the tableside wing to the tableside elbow guarded by W3. W3 makes contact with his arm, but not extended and certainly nothing I'd call. O0 then pushes off with his right arm before passing to the opposite wing.

I'm not as concerned about whether this was NCI or NCC, so much as I'd like to talk about:

1. Whether or not the L should have been rotating on this play in the first place.

2. The view and positioning of the new C on this play, what he may or may not have seen, and why he may have passed on the call.

3. What kind of opinion new T might have had, and whether or not he could/should have made a call.

[JRutledge]

I am assuming we are talking about Oklahoma State-Oklahoma correct?

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am assuming we are talking about Oklahoma State-Oklahoma correct?

Peace

Affirm. Why, does Oregon State just happen to play Oregon today?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Affirm. Why, does Oregon State just happen to play Oregon today?

Shoot, I'm colorblind, so I may be way off, but doesn't Oregon State also have an orange jersey combination?

Or maybe the Buckeyes had a non-conference game against their MAC neighbors? LOL

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

1. Whether or not the L should have been rotating on this play in the first place.

I have no issue with the rotation. The ball is on that side of the court, balance the floor IMO.

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

2. The view and positioning of the new C on this play, what he may or may not have seen, and why he may have passed on the call.

I am only wondering when the C picked up this play and probably did not see the entire thing. He did have a player that might have blocked part of his view of the play. But I would like to be more engaged on this play if this were me.

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

3. What kind of opinion new T might have had, and whether or not he could/should have made a call.

He might have not had a great angle on the play, but it looks like all about angles for him more than anything.

Here is the play with the play at the very end of the transition.

[SNIPERBBB]

I think L should of gone across with a bit more hustle.

New C looks like he was looking at the play the whole time .

[bob jenkins]

Good rotation. The ball was below the FT line (not that this is a requirement), and there was no post player on the L's old side.

Probably a foul, but when the defender is already moving back and the offensive player stops, the defender keeps moving even without a little shove, so it's sometimes hard to get.


No call on one end ==> no call on the other -- that's the consistency coaches want, right?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

I think L should of gone across with a bit more hustle.

New C looks like he was looking at the play the whole time .

I have no issue with the rotation "hustle." Some suggest you should not run at all during a rotation. And he had nothing else going on on that side of the ball.

It does look like the C is watching the play, I was just wondering if he go screened by one of the two players and passed for that reason. But to me this looks like a foul on the dribbler.

Peace

[Bob Bball]

The hustle problem in this clip is the C. He stopped running and walked the last 10 steps into position. He was there yet when the push off happened. He was still moving. We do not make good decisions if we are not ready! He was not ready.
The original C and new trail on the other side stayed and looked like he was looking at the drive into the key and that match up which was his only match up to look at.
He did not make a call. And he did not make a call at the other end.
Nobody went fishing out of their primary.
Should there have been fouls at both ends. Of course!