« Reply #17 on: September 22, 2016, 05:48:05 PM »
Whomever is hot that night.
I don't agree with the whole idea. I get the idea of #1, #2 and all that to a point but basketball isn't like a pass play in football where you look here first then here... There is no benefit to thinking in terms of #1, #2 etc. There is no value to the team in even trying to define this.
The most successful teams will simply move the ball and find the open man. Sometimes you may be looking to feed a hot hand but that is usually not the best approach either. Being "hot" is a debatable theory anyway. Red believed you could be hot but sabermetrics tell us that it is statistically normal to hit say 5 shots in a row sometimes. Sooner or later, a hot player takes a shot that gets called a "heat check" and usually misses and goes back to shooting their normal percentages.
Of course at the end of games, you want the ball in the hands of you best creater (not necessarily best scorer) but for the vast majority of the play, you need to force the issue, see how the defense reacts, and then keep the ball moving until you find an open man or a beneficial match-up that may have been created by a switch. I don't think IT should even think of himself as #1. He should be trying to create and keep the ball moving, finding open people, take shots when they are there, just the same as the other 4 on the court.
I think Stevens agrees with you. It is simply fans' short-hand to say #1, #2, #3 scorer but this really means the scoring leaders for any given game, not that this person is actually the #1, #2 or #3 option within the offense. That's how I interpret it anyway.
Sure, you want to find the open man but its adventageous for a team to design an offense that makes their best offensive player that open man as much as possible. That guy would be your first option.
Logged
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008