We've been screwed against the Lakers, Raptors, and now the Sixers. With the amount of time left on the clock last night, why didn't we foul? Would you foul with little to no time left on the clock, up by three?
We weren't up by 3 on the Lakers. 2 free throws ties it. That was just bad defense. Vs. the Raptors and Sixers.....yes. My only guess is that McHale is trying to teach something.....now what that is, I have no idea.
Yes. It's text book basketball strategy. If you're up 3 with less than 30 seconds left, you foul and you beat them at the line.
I don't think there should be a fast and hard rule on shooting vs fouling. I think it should depend on who's taking the 3. Ideally the coach preps you on WHO is shooting and HOW they've been shooting. In the case of James Anderson, I would have fouled him and taken my chances given how he was on fire. Against Steve Blake, 50/50. Against Rudy Gay, I think you have to let him take the shot since he was shooting like crap (11/37) all game. Of course, that would assume the Coach *knows* who's on the floor and has a plan...
No.. not with Howard. If we were up 3 and fouled, now say they make both and are down by 1. Then they foul Howard and Howard misses. Now the Sixers can win it with a bucket.
while I generally agree with torocan - I'm not a huge fan of having players thinking too much in reactionary situations. That can lead to late recognition and ultimately fouls while in the act of shooting. I prefer the foul on the floor method. I would have done it in all three instances - but most definitely last night. You knew before the ball left his fingertips it was going in - and JLin had plenty of time to foul him on the floor.
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/6992/up-three-without-the-ball-to-foul-or-not-new-insight John Hollinger has written about this quite a lot, and makes it clear that opinions differ as to at what point this strategy starts paying off. I'm a big advocate of fouling when up by three in late-game situations, especially when the opponent is out of timeouts, but generally you need to be in single digits on the clock to make it worthwhile. Stan Van Gundy said his own rule of thumb was six seconds, while Jackson said his was five; regardless, it sure as heck isn't 11. Hollinger makes a tremendous point: It matters if your opponent has a timeout left or not. With one, they can shoot their free throws, foul you to get the ball back, and then call a timeout to move the ball and strategize their next play. A timeout also lets the trailing team stop the clock in the event the leading team misses its final free throw. Ten Seconds is Likely Too Many In his new book "Mathletics," Wayne Winston -- Indiana University professor and consultant to the Dallas Mavericks -- tackles this issue, and offers some new data. First, he faults two of the main studies on the topic, by Lawhorn and Annis, for failing to account for the many different ways games can unfold. Neither, he says, embraces the idea that a game has an unknowable number of possessions left. Then Winston does something delightfully simple. He asks: Has it worked? He presents, for the first time I'm aware, the evidence: A student in my sports and math class, Kevin Klocke, looked at all NBA games from 2005 through 2008 in which a team had the ball with 1-10 seconds left and trailed by three points. The leading team did not foul 260 times and won 91.9% of the games. The leading team did foul 27 times and won 88.9% of the games. This seems to indicate that fouling does not significantly increase a team's chances of winning when they are three points ahead. He adds a key footnote: We believe more work needs to be done to determine the definitive answer to this question. We are working on a simulation model of the last minute of a basketball game that should help settle the issue.
Not with this team. Last in the league in FT shooting, right? I'm OK with the defense Lin played on the last shot in regulation last night. Anderson was out of his mind all night.
You foul moreso yday when you had fouls to give. Make the team inbound and run clock. That was a fail by McHale just like he has failed repeatedly in close games. His in game management and awareness is appalling.
So basically its a 90% chance you will win the game if you foul or you dont foul in that situation. HOWEVER... there is the old sports superstitions that come into play here where you have to prepare yourself as a coach for luck or randomness which is part of what makes sports so dramatic & exciting in the first place. I'm personally not the type of guy that likes to allow for luck or great acts of a higher power to happen on my watch. If I have Dwight and Omer Asik on my team to rebound a potential misses 2nd free throw, I foul, and put that team at the line. However the one thing you have to consider is how bad the free throw shooters are that are rebounding the ball off a miss. Ex: The Dwight Affect 2.0- If for some reason the Rockets were up 3 against Philly with 10 seconds left, the Rockets could foul lets say James Anderson. Then Anderson makes the 1st free throw but misses the second... probably on purpose. Then Dwight grabs the rebound and is fouled immediately... since he has the ball you can foul him intentionally. Then you are banking on Dwight Howard making free throws to ice the game. If Dwight DOESN'T make the free throws, then Philly gets the ball back with 4 to 6 seconds left to only make a 2 point shot to send the game to OT. Just food for thought when considering personnel. It was argued before in a previous thread but IMO personnel... matters a hell of alot when factoring in these things when you have someone like Dwight Howard on the floor with that type of weakness at stake. IMO, Dwight or Omer being on the floor in this situation adds a wrinkle to this argument.
I'm an advocate of fouling. In both the Toronto and Philadelphia game, if we would've fouled, we probably would've won both in regulation. Last night was disappointing. It pathetic that, as a Houston Rockets fan, I fully expect every scrub to hit the last second three, and I fully anticipate losing at least one game every year to a lucky last second three (think Monta Ellis last year).
how many points the other team can make with 2 FT? they spend one more time out and score 2 point, i will do this every single time.
Make Dwight inbound the ball. We should have go-to plays to get high percentage foul shooters to the line.
Free throws puts them down 1, and with how bad we are at the line they still get the ball back potentially just down 2 and that's when we can get burned. Our Defense on Rudy Gay and James Anderson was phenomenal, they just made crazy shots. We're already up 3, a miss and the game is over.
I'm talking about if they miss the 2nd bucket and Dwight grabs the rebound. you can either take Dwight out of the game and put smaller players in to get the rebound or take the risk that he gets the rebound. You can instruct them to call a timeout ASAP, but there is still a possibility that he's fouled before he has the ability to call one.
