Selection Sunday-NCAA tournament thread

Agree with Ruckus.

 

Hard to say after only 61 posts, but I get your point.

Didn't know we did that here, though. All people being equal, etc., etc.

 

10 seconds is too early to foul when you are ahead. With that much time left you are essentially giving the other team a free opportunity at more points and an extra possession.

In general, I don't agree with the philosophy of fouling up by three, even with just a few seconds left, though I can understand if a coach thinks the odds are in his favor with less than five to go. You are ahead, why give away points. Play good defense, stop them and go home. If a guy does hit a well-guarded 3 it doesn't beat you, it just sends it to overtime.

But what if a guy throws up some wild shot while you are trying to foul him and the ref calls it a shooting foul? You really want to give them three free throws to tie it rather than putting it on your defense. What if he makes that shot and goes to the line for a free throw to win it? Or how about you foul, the guy makes the first one, misses the second and they get an offensive rebound and putback. What if he gets fouled on the putback, you are sending them to the line for a shot to win.

If I was a coach I would hope I'd put together a team that played good enough defense to trust them to not give up an open 3-pointer with the game on the line. I'd tell them I'm not sacrificing points to play the odds because I'm not sure they can do it, just go win this.

 

I would like to see what FGCU does getting the ball back down a point with 10 seconds left. I hate when coaches call a timeout in that situation -- if you have a good smart point guard and have worked on an end-of-game play, you have an enormous advantage as the defense has to scatter back.

I'd bet Enfield rolls the dice on Brown finding the open man even if there's a bit of improvisation involved.

 

You play to win, and to do so you look at percentages. You are much more likely to win by fouling up three than by not fouling up three. It's been proven. Yes, there technically are ways you CAN lose, but playing the percentages says that fouling is a much safer bet.

 

I would guess it would be Comer with the ball in that situation. I agree, though, that I prefer to see teams get the ball and go when down in the final seconds as long as the coach has someone he trusts to make a good decision without a play needing to be called. That keeps the defense from being able to set up, especially since college teams still have to go the length of the court after a timeout.

 

Proven, huh. Do you have a link for that? Maybe the overall odds do say that, but what are the odds if you are a good to great defensive team? And the worst that can happen if they hit a tough shot is overtime. They still have to go out an beat you over the next five minutes. You start giving away points and you make it possible to get beat in regulation.

 

http://deadspin.com/5621868/up-three-time-winding-down-do-you-foul-harvard-smartypants-say-it-doesnt-matter-we-say-otherwise

""In only 3 of 52 cases did a team miss the 2nd free throw, successfully get the offensive rebound, and score."

And therein lies the problem with this study. The whole purpose of fouling when up three is to force exactly that scenario. The rest of the times that the team being fouled ended up scoring three, it was because they were fouled in the act of shooting the three. They went on to sink all three free throws.

This suggests to us that fouling when up three is the right call, as long as it's done right. If you don't wait until the shooter puts up a shot to foul him, you can guarantee a win 49 out of 52 times. That's a better bet then not fouling at all, by a wide margin."

 

Hate all the fouling and the timeouts in the last two minutes or five minutes of the game. They kill the momentum and ruin the show for the fans. I'd like to see them banned.

Let 'em play. Make 'em play, unfettered by timeouts and intentional fouling. God forbid a close game at the end — it turns into a disgustingly boring chess match. Who wants to see that?

Make 'em play basketball.

 

Here's a link that had a bunch of other links to most of the main pieces on the subject from recent years: http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2013/01/31/college-basketball-strategy-review-fouling-up-by-three-points-late-or-playing-defense/.

 

If you foul someone, to cause a foul and make the other team shoot free throws, that is an intentional foul. CALL IT. A foul is not a basketball play, it is the antithesis of a basketball play. I reach in to steal the ball, my intent to to only touch the ball and steal it. If I reach in with the intent to touch the arm of the opposing player to have an official whistle a stoppage in play and award free throws, that's an intentional foul. The opposing player shoots a technical or two, and they get the ball back.

Play by the rules the entire game, not just the first 38 minutes.

 

One automatic point for the team fouled plus possession would make basketball look a lot different.

And players do not accrue fouls, so no more foul trouble.

Heck, with all the time saved not shooting free throws, you could make a half 25 minutes instead of 20.