The decision looks much worse retrospectively. Kobe took a 28 foot shot. He's been a poor 3 point shooter for a while now. I don't give a damn how good he is in pressures situations - the odds weren't good that it would go in. It did. So Larry Brown looks stupid. Of course, he'd also look bad if he'd told them to foul, then Shaq made the 1st, missed the 2nd, and nailed the rebound. Not likely, you say? Well, neither was that 3.
No, it's a lot more likely that Kobe hit a 28 footer than Shaq making one FT and nailing the rebound. How many times have you seen a guy like Kobe hit a game winning/tying 3? Quite a lot. Just look at those "miracle" shot lists sprung up after Fisher's shot. And how many time have you seen a team succeed in making one FT and getting the rebound on the second and make the basket? I have seen teams trying it many time when down 3 points at the end of game. But I don't remember one single success attempt. The more likely scenario, if they fouled, was a FT shooting contest. Detroit had far better FT shooters. And LA had no time out. They had to move the ball quickly upcourt after Detroit's FTs.
I can't think of one sport where the coach says, hey, we are in the lead, so let's stop the clock. That strategy favors the losing team everytime.
If you foul Shaq, that's FT for sure and right away, the clock is stopped. What if he made both or just one, then foul you right away, coz big ben is likely to get the rebound, and he is likely to miss both in that game. They will come back, then Kobe's 3 could even be the winning bucket. If you don't foul, yes, Kobe has a chance to tie, but you also have chance to defend, and he also have chance to miss. There is no way you give them a very possible 1 point or even 2 points and stop the clock, still leave window open for them to come back to hurt you again. Just look at the possibility, you can not say that backwards fouling Shaq was the best option. Give the Lakers credit, although I hate them. And Pistons didn't concentrate and maybe paniced as well. But there is no way it's all LB's fault. He's a very good coach. Otherwise, they won't even be in this position. Remember how everybody wrote them off even before the serie started?
i think larry descision to no foul wasn't that poor of a decision but when there was 40 seconds left and they were up by 6, then he should have started fouling. think about it, take the obvious decision to foul when up 3 with 20 seconds left and double it. in order for the pistons to have lost then they would have had to miss 6 free throws and and the lakers would have to make 6 for 6. i would have turned into a free throw war long before kobe had the ball in his hands down by three
Not to disagree with you, but ironically I personally witnessed a regular season game where the intentional FT missed worked, and it worked in favor of the very same Lakers. In was a season where Glen Rice was still with them and they were playing Golden State in oakland. After erasing a 20-point 4th quater deficit thanks to Kobe and Rice, It comes down to the last second with Lakers down 3 and need a 3-pointer. As soon as Rice got the ball, he was fouled. He then proceeded to sink one FT and intentionally missed the second one, where Kobe timely tipped it in right before the buzzer. Of course Golden State lost that game in over time.
Let's look at each possibility here, assuming Shaq's FT% is .500 (he shoots .490 in regular season and .440 in playoffs), each scenario has a 25% chance in pure probability: 1. Shaq misses both FT. Detroit still up by 3 and have the ball with about 8 seconds left. Best scenario for Detroit. 2. Shaq misses the first and makes the second. Detroit up by 2 and can inbound the ball with about 8 sec. Since it an inbound play, they can basically choose the best FT shooter to receive it. It is extremely unlikely that this guy will miss both. Let's say he makes one. Detroit by 3 with 7 sec. Same lead, killed 3 sec. Detroit in better situation than before. 3. Shaq makes both FT. Same as #2 with the lead reduced by 1. Reduced lead, less time. Detroit in slightly worse situation. 4. Shaq makes the first but misses the second. Detroit up by 2 and Ben Wallace fouled immediately after the rebound. Ben may miss both. Reduced lead, less time. Detroiot in slightly worse situation. Detroit then can have the options of either make it a FT shooting contest the rest of the way or dare them to go down the court to beat them with a rushed 3 with under 7 sec. to go. #1-#3 assumes that the best FT shooter (over 85%) of Detroit misses at least one FT (28% chance). Or Ben Wallace misses both (25%--Ben has almost the same percentage as Shaq). And Detroit still comes out better in half of the cases and the other half isn't that shabby. Thus, by fouling, the probability of Detroit comes out worse off is about 15%, and it is not that much worse. What is the probability of Kobe making a 3 in 10 sec.?
That is a lot "if"'s. You have to have Shaq make both FT first, and then Piston stupidly give the ball to big Ben (they could have used the 20-sec TO the bring the ball the midcourt and give the ball to a guard instead), AND you have to have Lakers organize a good posession from back court. Remeber, they DIDNOT have any TO left!
Excellent analysis. Just to add. The Lakers don't have a TO. Even if somehow Shaq makes 2 and Billips misses 1--a very remote possibility, the Lakers would only have like 6 seconds to score from their own end (less if Billips miss is on his 2nd FT). I'd take a 2 point lead with the opponents having 6 sec to go the length of the court (like a 1/10 chance of a 3 where you lose the game at the buzzer and 1/10 chance the game is tied at the buzzer where 3/5 you lose from there) over a 3 point lead with 10 seconds and the ball in the offensive teams end (like a 1/3 chance of 3 where you get the game tied and then have like 3/5 chance of losing from there). Thus even if Shaq makes 2, and Billips makes 1--the lost time and position makes that situations close to equal. One could argue Shaq could make the 1st and miss the 2nd--but with Shaq at the line instead of the block and Karl Malone useless the odds of an OR and really low (e.g., 10%). Even then their is no time or TOs to set a play. In short, by far the best position was fouling Shaq with 6 or 7 seconds. Second option was fouling Walton with like 5. Odds are the Lakers never get even a chance even tie the game, and the next most plausible option is they have to hit a half courter just to tie, rather than Kobe getting a chance to collect himself and measure his shot. Most other possibilities (Shaq makes 2, Billips misses 1, Shaq makes the 1st, OR on the 2nd) are further remote and even then not that bad given reduced time and lack of a TO. Detriot played not to lose (worst case scenario is OT, let's let them measure up their shot) instead of playing to win.
