FOUL FOUL FOUL FOUL FOUL FOUL FOUL if you've been watching rockets game this season, you would know that their 3pt defense SUCKS! why mchale trusts his 3pt defense in crunch time i dunno, but im glad he stopped that tonight. plus the team defense as a whole isnt that good. the team is off to a terrible start to the season. how obvious does it have to be for mchale to realize you need to foul in these late game situations?
yeah agree except only if its a hot streak shooter even if cold. and specially someone who is hot just foul before the shot. Anderson, Gay, Blake or Melo against the Lakers we fk on the parsons inbound to Howard and also on defending Blake he had been hot all game
Gay? The dude was like 9-34 at that point in the game. Anderson was a broken play with good defense by Lin, and Blake we were up by only 2 so if you foul you're an absolute moron. Tonight, we did foul and it was the right move because of the situation.
You do know foul away from the ball give freethrows and possession of the ball if it's less than 2 minutes.
yes always foul!! Very rare for refs to call continuation...and why let them run a play for 3? especially when your coaches cant coach defense (Yao pretty much said so as well, though he was much more generous simply saying if JVG were the coach, these late game breakdowns wouldnt be happening). Here are 2 options 1) they run a play and get off a 3 point attempt or 1) you foul, they have to make the first. (There would be a ton of pressure to make) 2) If the first is made, the 2nd has to be missed. For whatever reason, a lot of times these players either accidentally make it or miss off the backboard, not even touching rim in which case the play is over they lose the ball. 3) THey have to grab a rebound, or a tip has to go to the right person. With Dwight down there, Parsons with good height as well as asik/jones, I wouldnt be all that concerned 4) Then after the first 3 things have happened they have to get another shot off in relative quick succession, rarely with this even be a good look or a shot worth taking in any other situation. Go with the option where a million things have to go right.
Idk, Harden lucked out on fouling at the end of the Knicks game. He committed a very weak foul that didn't prevent him from shooting. Ref could easily have called continuation and given the Knicks the win.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Official Scott Foster on Harden's foul of Anthony: “The initial contact was before he started to turn, while his back is to the basket."</p>— Jonathan Feigen (@Jonathan_Feigen) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Feigen/statuses/401217697251205123">November 15, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Harden @1:13 <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/gck0IiiOLZo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I thought this thread was an extension of some of the discussions that had gone on another thread(LINK), which is not really about just yesterday's game.
Yes, except he really didn't back up any of his statements with facts. In fact the more recent studies contradict his statements. Fouling when up by 3 is situationally a good strategy. The question of debate is how much clock should be left before you try it? I don't know of any coach in the NBA intentionally fouls with more than 12 seconds on the clock up by 3. There could be 3 or more possesions left with that much time left trading free throws and time outs. Most coaches don't intentionally foul when up by 3 period, which limits the amount of data available for intentional fouls. Recent studies show that the chances of winning or losing when intentionally fouling are roughly identical, with a statictically insignificant increased chance of losing when fouling intentionally. See the following articles for more info: http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/6992/up-three-without-the-ball-to-foul-or-not-new-insight http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpr...-points-the-first-comprehensive-cbb-analysis/ http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/yet_another_study_about_fouling_when_up_3 There is also earlier published studies by Bill Fenlon and Lawhorn, which SPORTSBET referenced, both of which are addressed and refuted in the more recent studies I linked. From the espn article: This study alone contradicts Lawhorn's theory that because the NBA average 3 point % under 11 seconds when down by 3 is 20%, it is 4 times more likely to bite you than intentionally fouling. Of course part of the problem with Lawhorn's study was ignoring the possibility that the defending team could steal the ball, a turnover, offensive foul or other execution problem causing the team down 3 to not get a shot off, and expecting perfect execution for the team fouling intentionally, as well as ignoring the possibility of additional possesions after the intentional foul. Also Lawhorn using <11 seconds for his NBA average 3 pt % when down by 3 query is questionable. An excerpt from the espn article above: Bringing this back to the Rockets this season, note that Phil Jackson and Stan Van Gundy only intentionally foul when up by 3 with 5 and 6 seconds respectively on the clock, meaning only Van Gundy would have potentially fouled Anderson in the 76ers game, who made his tying 3 at 6 seconds. I say potentially because if he waited til 6 seconds that is exactly when the shot was going in. So Phil Jackson at the very least would have been an "idiot" for not doing the "no brainer" thing in that situation. Personally I am a fan of fouling intentionally under 7 seconds, but despite the Rockets facing the up 3 with seconds left in 3 games already this year, most NBA teams will only find themselves in that situation 6-7 times a year, and at this point the numbers say that the team that is up wins most of them at a roughly equal rate regardless of which strategy they use.
there should be like a special teams that comes in for this specific situation, of fouling or last second three point defense: Bev, Brewer,Garcia, Parsons, and howard.
