Can someone explain to me how fouling a 56% FT shooter over and over again is a good thing? It's the same thing as Harden for example shooting 56% from the field. I would love anyone that can shoot 56% from the field. Hack-Asik can only be successful in small sample sizes where you hope the free throw shooter uncharacteristically makes less than say 56%. This would be akin to increasing the variance. I wouldn't even try it unless a guy shot less 50% from the line at the very least. Brooks showed how dumb he was. He was actually lucky that they were able to cut it to 6 during the hack-Asik part of the game. He should have stopped right there. By continuing to foul he decreased the variance and allowed the math to beat him.
If the guy shoots better than 50%, it fails. One thing, though, is that it could interrupt the opponent's momentum and offensive rhythm. But that could also do the same to your own team's offense.
They were hoping that Asik would get nervous and start missing free throws regardless of him being able to make 1/2 at least most of the time.
I thought it was a good strategy, but maybe they did it one possession too many. You also have to factor in that it stops the clock.
I hope no one explains the math to him. McHale shouldn't have even considered pulling Omer when they started it. It was to our advantage the longer they did it. Morey was sitting back laughing at their stupidity.
Nope, I don't think he'll try it again. Asik's form looks pretty good and he has confidence now. Reckon he's actually a 65% FT shooter right now.
It works if your center doesn't have huge nuts and hits most of them. Because then you stop the clock and have an opportunity to put points on the board on the other side. It got the score down to 7, but they should've played ball from there. Although, looking back at it with hindsight is unfair. That's like going gambling, up 400 and then losing 200, just to say, "I should've stopped at 400!"
Really dude? I had a Facebook discussion about it and here are my thoughts from that: I feel like it only works with someone like Shaq who fundamentally has a terrible form and a disadvantage because of his big hands. Someone like Asik has a good enough form that if you keep making him shoot it he'll shoot better after he gets in rhythm.
It only works if the guy shoots less 50%. Like I said, giving him 14 or 15 free throws gave Omer too big a sample size and allowed his free throw average to work in our favor. If the foul shooter makes say 3 or 4 out of the first 5 free throws for example, and is a 56% shooter like Omer is, then you are very likely doomed to failure.
Hack-a-Shaq is very, very infrequently a good strategy no matter how bad the FT shooter is. The only time I've ever seen it have a huge role in the victory was earlier this year when Houston did it to Dwight. Most of the time, it can have little effects when used as a surprise move to force a coach to sub out a good defensive player, or to shift momentum. This is how Pop has used it somewhat successfully in the past. The reason it is bad even if the other FT shooter is terrible is that it inspires the other team and deflates the defense, because it's basically saying "we don't trust you guys to get a stop". Also, it allows the team being hacked to regroup and set their defense, eliminating the easiest option in the NBA which is the transition hoop off a missed shot. It's unbelievable that Brooks kept with it when it was so obviously failing, but he's also a guy that will give Fisher quality minutes. Coaches like him and Vinny Del Negro show you that even guys who've played for a really long time haven't really picked up anything about the game.
The problem with "hack an Asik" is that his free throw shooting touch isn't that bad. He has enough rotation and touch that if he just hits the rim it has a pretty good shot of going in unlike for example Shaq. His free throw touch makes it so he pretty much has to swish it every time. I highly doubt they'll try to "hack an Asik" in game 6.
Yeah if Harden shoots 100 two point shots and makes 56 of them you have 112 points. If Omer shoots 200 free throws (the equivalent of 100 two point shots) and he shoots 56% then you have 112 points.
The reason why it's effective is it gives you a chance to come back while taking very little time off the clock. Even if they abandoned it, they would hardly have lost any time. The reward is worth the risk.
Ok. They were down 9, and with no fouls, each team would get, say, around 8 posessions each. If Houston scores on average, say, 8 points with those 8 possessions, OKC would have needed to score 17 with 8 possessions, pretty much not doable. With fouling, if OKC fouled 15 times, and Omar scored 17 points, OKC would have needed to score 26 points on 15 possessions, which is slightly more doable. Statistically it makes sense, but realistically I think it's an awful choice.
I still think Brooks will try it again next game. Maybe a bit earlier to see if it works. What they really need to do is hack a Smith. He can't score, he can't defend, he can't rebound, and he can't shoot FT's.
