I just watched press conference with Pop and an Italian reporter asked if Pop had thought about fouling when they were up 95-92. Pop's reaction: "That's a European question right?" The reporter responds: Yes, we usually do that in Europe. Pop looking at the guy like r u kidding me ans says: Yeah, right, right...we don't! Now I'm wondering, where does this attitude in the NBA come from of coaches not wanting to foul in that situation. One reason I've heard is pride, which definitely seems to be with Pop with the way he responded. But is it just that? Let's say they fouled Lebron before he tried to go for the three, he would've made both and it was a 1 point game with about 10-20 seconds left. You are still up, you have the ball and the other team will either foul or try to pressure. Are the odds of a guy tying the game or making it a one point game that much lower than fouling and taking a chance on being up 1 to come up with a win? So would the argument would be based on taking less risk and taking a chance with them trying to tie the game over fouling and risking a TO / FT choking. So my question is, why and would you do? I seriously do not know but to not even consider it - for whatever reason - seems silly to me.
i don't think he has confidence in his FT shooters. that's probably part of the reason he put duncan on the bench too (duncan has a long history of missing big FT's)
...after taking 5 minutes standing at the FT line thinking about how he's going to miss it. Pop was saving the viewers some quality time.
I would have played it exactly as Pop did except I would have fouled immediately after that rebound came off the rim. I think it was Bosh who got it. It was the sensible thing to do but very few coaches would have had the foresight to relay that message to the players that far in advance.
I usually think it's best to foul when it gets down to about ten seconds or less and the other team needs a three to tie. However, if you are a bad free throw shooting team I can understand why a coach wouldn't choose that strategy.
I think coaches should base their decision on who they are playing. A team like Miami has several guys who can get their three off, even with pressure. Lebron and Wade can do it off the dribble, Allen is a true jumpshooter and a master at catching, rising, and releasing quickly. Miller isn't as skilled at jump shooting or one on one, but he's got enough range to shoot well behind the three, where the D won't pick him up closely. Battier is awkward in this situation, but he also has the ability to throw it up from 30 feet with good form. That's very different from playing a team with just one good one on one player from three and shooters who are short, set shooters, and/or they can't shoot a normal shot from 30 feet. So, yeah, foul. Let some time run off the clock and foul.
Fair enough, but why do you guys feel Pop reacted the way he did and tells the reporter that WE - the NBA / US in general - don't do that. Don't you think this means him along with many other coaches feel fouling in situation like that is degrading, weak, shameful and would hurt their pride so will not even consider it?
If they fouled Lebron on the catch is it just two free throws or two free throws and possession since less than two minutes remained in the game?
If Lebron caught the ball then its just 2 FTs. If they foul someone away from ball its FT + Possession.
Another thing to keep in mind is that Miami was out of timeouts, so they would have had to take it the length of the court. Advantages to not fouling: Force them to make a 3 If they hit the shot, you should get the ball back with time to get off a shot Pressure - more on them to hit the 3, less on you, not forcing your team to hit FT's Simple odds...most likely, they're going to miss the 3, and you're going to get the rebound, especially with Duncan there to snatch it...oh, wait.... No chance you foul while they're shooting, give them an and 1 or 3 free throws, not likely, but the chance exists Advantages to fouling: No chance for Miami to tie on that possession Force Miami to hit their FT's or miss on purpose Most important, IMO, run time off the clock, not only when they're forced to foul you, but also when they have to go full court because they had no timeouts left. A chance to close it out if they miss 1 or 2 and you make 2 or 1, respectively. I'm sure there are a few things I left out. You also have to consider other things like the type of players on the court. Are they great 3 point shooters? Are they great free throw shooters? Are they great rebounders? I've always been indecisive when the team that is down has timeouts, but when they're out of timeouts (like last night), I'm definitely a fan of fouling. Of course, Pop is one of the greatest coaches of all time, and he's definitely stubborn in his ways, so he's going to do what he thinks is right, and I'll take his choice over mine (most of the time). In a perfect world, they would have fouled Bosh when he got that rebound, but they may not have been ready to do that, had time to do it, or were just told not to foul, no matter what. Edit: Here's a good breakdown using numbers to determine which route is best. "The basic conclusion we come to is this: With time running out (final possession), and a 3-point lead, the defensive team is roughly 4 times more likely to "blow the lead" and have to play overtime if they choose to play defense, rather than foul in the waning seconds of the game."
Ridiculous and arrogant thing to say. Rockets were up by three in Game 7 against the Suns (1995). Rockets decided to foul the Suns player (Ainge) during the inbound play instead of allowing the Suns to even attempt a three. Worked out well for the Rockets. I am pretty sure neither the Suns nor the Rockets played in Europe.
I know it worked for the Rockets but I really hate it. Ruins the best part of basketball and that's the clutch shot. I wish it were impossible to foul intentionally in that situation personally. We would have been robbed of a great moment had they just fouled.
