Do you foul?

Just read a short blurb about the four USA coaches discussing over dinner whether you foul when you are up by 3 and the other team has the ball in the final seconds of the game. Two coaches said you take the three-pointer out of play by putting the other team on the line. The other two coaches said trust your defense and force the opposing team to make the necessary play.

McMillan, D'Antoni, Boeheim, Krzyzewski.

If you haven't read this, which coach picked which strategy?

 

I don't remember what everyone else said but I seem to recall that Nate said you trust your Defense. It's bee awhile. BTW do you have the link?

 

Well I was hoping to get some responses before showing the answer. But I got to run soon, so anyone who wants to see the answer, here is the link.

http://columbian.com/article/20080904/BLOGS05/809049981/-1/blazerbanter

 

I can see both side of this argument. It depends a little on the team your playing against. Normally I would just trust your defense and force them into taking a 2 points shot but if they have a bunch of great 3 point shooters especially ones that get their shot off the dribble I would probably foul.

 

I say foul. My blazers have been burnt a couple times in the past for not.

 

I foul unless they have great rebounding.

 

Foul. It's the basketball equivalent of the prevent defense.

 

Disagree... by fouling you do two things that you don't want.

1- you extend the game. The clock is your enemy when you are ahead .. stopping the clock for any reason is a bad idea.

2- fouling is the only chance you have to actually lose the game. If they make the 1st FT - then intentionally miss the 2nd - they have the opportunity to rebound kick for a 3 and win the game.

Play it straight up and hope to defend the 3 well.. if they hit it - you go to OT... worst case scenario.

 

If you foul and lose, you should have trusted your D.

If you trust your D and lose, you should have fouled.

Seriously, though, I think it depends on who has the ball. If you can force them to pass it to Shaq, you foul the crap out of him. If Nash has the ball, you play it straight up.

 

Wasn't it Dunleavy who refused to foul? I remember Snapper calling him out a couple times for not.

 

I thought Dunleavy was the inventor of the "Hack-a-Shaq".

 

You might be right. I just remember a couple games back in his day......... nevermind! It was Mo Cheeks!

 

More play time is bad. Stopping the clock to let them shoot free throws with only a few seconds isn't really a negative. It doesn't "extend the game"...it is essentially saying, "We'll take the possession for the remaining time left, the better to run that time off. As a trade for getting the ball back, we'll give you a good chance at 2 points, when you need 3."

Since you advocate defending the three-pointer, you can lose the game letting them shoot, as well. If they nail the three-pointer and draw a foul, they can win the game on a four-point play. You can't say "Don't foul"...if you expect your team to try and defend the three-pointer well, that means close defense on the shooter which always runs the risk of a foul.

You simply have to consider the likelihoods, not just "What ways can you possibly lose?" The chance of a made free throw, a miss, offensive rebound, kick out and shot in time, and made three-pointer is remote. There are so many components to the chain, you're just snake-bitten in terms of luck if it happens.

Whereas, making them shoot free throws reduces the likelihood of their best chance at spoiling your win: making a three-pointer in a half-court set. It's always best to reduce the other team's best chance, even if it introduces an exotic new way they could tie or win.

 

Funny, you'd think some economist or statistician somewhere would've done an analysis of both strategies and determined the likelihood of the better outcome. Seems like it'd be pretty easy to study and arrive at a conclusive answer.

 

They did that very thing for football. They came to the conclusion that coaches punt on 4th down too often and they don't go for two enough.

 

And there's a whole quasi-field for it in baseball, called "sabermetrics." I find the application of advanced statistical models to sports to be quite fascinating, especially when it validates or belies conventional wisdom.

I've always thought coaches were too conservative on fourth downs! (I'm sure I was the only one... )

 

I read that article and it was amazing. It even had teams going for it on 4th down on their own end of the field. Good stuff.

I think you should foul. I didn't click on the link, but I'm sure Nate is a "trust your defense" guy.

If you are at home, maybe you trust your D. If it goes into OT, you've got the home crowd advantage. If you are on the road, you should foul and turn it into a FT battle.

I read an article on ESPN that talked about international coaches and their strategy for ending games. They were asked if it was a tie game, who do you defend at the end of the game, Lebron, Kobe, or Wade. All the coaches laughed and said they'd foul to get the ball back, EVEN IN A TIE GAME! They all said they'd rather have the ball last to have a chance to win the game. It's obvious they don't preach defense like they do in the states.

 

Well, a related thing that has always been interesting to me: would you rather be up 1 and defending on the last possession, or down 1 and with the ball for the last possession?

Obviously, the offensive and defensive abilities of each team make a big difference, but let's say both teams are dead average offensively and defensively.

I'm generally pro-active, so I'd want the ball, trailing by 1. I'd want to "decide it" so to speak, and I think the defensive team is in the passive role. A defense can, of course, make a play to decide things, but generally it comes down to whether the other team can execute and make the play. I feel it is more in the hands of the offensive team. Yet, despite preferring to trail by 1 and have the ball, I can't imagine having the guts (perhaps stupidity!) to intentionally put the other team on the line with a 1 point lead and the other team having last possession.