I was watching that game, and it was so obvious Irving was going to shoot. There was like 3 seconds left and he still had the ball beyond the 3 point line moving slowly. Ever since he got the ball, he was dribbling casually…obviously he was planning on going for the win; otherwise, he would have attacked the basket as fast as possible.
At that point I was literally screaming at the tv “get up in his face!!”

I blame the coach on this as well…the one thing you should be telling your players in a situation like that is not to give up clean look at a 3.

Raptors would ahve been 3 games out of 8th with a win. That was a heartbreaker.

However, I agree with Brett. Once it became clear that the Cavaliers weren’t running a set play, or even setting a pick for Kyrie, the defender HAD to play Kyrie more aggressively rather than sagging back and giving him plenty of space.

Know your opponent – Kyrie is the Cavaliers’ best scorer (especially with Varejao out) and a very good 3-point shooter.
Playing him aggressively once there were under 5 seconds left would force Irving to either take a contested 3-pointer or drive to the basket to get a more open shot.
Given how far outside the paint Irving was (several feet behind the 3 point line), there would be plenty of time for the defense to rotate if Kyrie drives, in which case Irving either takes a contested 2 point shot or passes the ball to a less talented teammates.

A contested 3-point shot is a win for the defense since it’s a very low-percentage shot.
A contested 2-point shot is a win for the defense since it’s still not a high percentage shot, and at worst, it ties the game.
Irving passing the ball to a teammate after help defense arrives is a win for the defense since if you’re Toronto, you want anybody except Irving taking that shot.

The worst outcome the defense could allow was an uncontested 3-point shot being given to the opponent’s best 3-point shooter.
That’s the outcome the Raptors’ defense allowed.

Again – great shot by Kyrie, but awful defense by the Raptors.