In the LA game maybe but definatley not in the Philly game, there was still 18 seconds left and if we foul them it turns the game into a free-throw contest and we are the worst free throw shooting team in the NBA.
Come on, i realy don´t understand, how many more games the teams need to lose to do this move. when the ball was in the hands of T.Young you have to do the fault. In Europe you does this every time, for me this is not even a question.
That 3 pointer they made sent it to overtime. If Houston fouled them and then they fouled Howard and Howard misses (which is very likely), Sixers would then have a chance to win it with any bucket... a layup, a three, and jump shot... anything.
How they do the fault on Howard? You need to take out he from the game. Mchale do this on monday, when put Brooks and take out Howard. You put your best free throws shooters on court.
No thanks. We foul, they make two. Now they can steal on the inbound and win, they can foul a bad shooter and win, they can foul and we miss one and win, we make both and they still have time to shoot again etc etc. You create more opportunities for them to steal the game.
I'm not saying the math is wrong... but I do have a hard time believing it without more data. Did he exclude "And 1" fouls in the foul scenario, or other "accidental" fouls, so that he was just looking at intentional fouls? Also, I'd agree that the 10 second mark is too long. I'd say 6 seconds, but could be pushed to 7. I'm also questioning sample size. 260 on one hand, vs. 27 on the other. That coaches aren't fouling as much might tell you something, but that could be good or bad. Clearly, teams don't practice the foul scenario as much... which might also point to the % being slightly lower in that case. finally, in the first scenario, is win-loss even the right thing to consider? ultimately, sure. but i think the more useful math is the % of games that ended up either lost in regulation or gone into overtime.... because in my mind, it's a definite foul scenario... if (1) practiced beforehand, (2) with intelligent players on the floor, and (3) not in a scramble situation. I will say this. I don't watch 100% of the basketball games out there... heck if I watch 5% a season (the Rockets games plus another 40 or 50) that might be about right. I can't recall a single game over all those years where a team fouled and lost. Clearly, according to the above math, it happened 3 times between 2005 and 2008 (though again, I'm curious as to the exact scenario in those three times)... but I can't recall it. On the other hand, the number of game tying threes I've seen are countless. Clearly, 2 already for the Rockets this year. But take it to the highest level. Literally, if the Spurs had simply fouled while trying to get a rebound at the end of game 6 last year, they'd be NBA champions. The "loose ball" foul approach. Granted, that was a bit of a scramble then, but the math works. The "loose ball" foul approach clearly should have been employed last night. The Sixers were about to turn the ball away and threw it way up in the air to the top of the key. But for Lin's lack of height and relative lack of vertical/length, that could have been a steal. But it definitely SHOULD have been a MUCH MUCH MUCH more aggressive attempted steal, even with fouling. I'm not blaming Lin... clearly they've been taught to play solid, clean defense. And frankly, both Lin last night and Parsons against Gay have definitely done so. Those were very tough, highly contested threes. But they happened... they went in.
It depends. If you have b2b game tomorow - just fould them, we don't need a game go to overtime. If it's not - I see us gambling against some teams without fouling (except Warriors/Heat/Spurs/Wolves/Wizards, maybe couple other teams) Other issue with this is 1 player inbounds, and if Howard is in they can leave him without defender and be 5v3 to steal the ball. Howard gets the ball, gets fouled, comes another issue (~0.300FT% clutch time)
I'm pretty sure the next time we're in this situation McHale is going to tell them to go ahead and foul and someone is going to chunk the shot as the foul is called and end up with a 4 point play. It seems just like bad luck at this point, normally not fouling is the better option.
they can't foul Howard unless he has the ball , you don't pass the ball to Howard during clutch time(yeah i'm looking at you Parsons)
I believe the thinking is that if you foul them then they make the first and then intentionally miss the 2nd. You'd need Howard in the game to secure the miss of the 2nd FT but they would be able to foul him as soon as he secured the rebound. That would mean clock stopped, Rockets up by 1 with Howard shooting free throws. Replacing Howard with Asik would put you in a similar situation except Asik shooting the FTs.
