There is no way that I feel sold out in witnessing coaches play a chess game by using stall tactics and allowing players to match their outstanding skills -- dribbling, ball-handling abilities, moving without the ball, breaking for the open layup, steals -- against each other. If this is wrong, then why are platooning and using up the clock via the ground game allowed in football?
I must admit that the first half of the recent Duke-Carolina game was less than entertaining. However, since a delay offense to slow the tempo had proved so successful in Clemson's defeat of Duke earlier in the week, the Tar Heel mentor (Dean Smith) can't be blamed for trying something similar and for trying to pull Duke out of the two-three zone.
It showed one determined coach matching wits against another who was just as determined. In this case, the stall backfired just as it did in the NCAA final against Marquette two years ago.
Dean Smith has proven that he is an extremely able strategist and motivator of young men.
Any coach that is averaging 21.33 victories per year in his 18th season as a head coach and has finished regular-season play in first place in the league nine times and second four times in the past 13 years has been doing something right. Isn't the main object of all sports to win?