The worst grade school coach isn't dumb enough to call for a foul at the end

[MikeyT42]

At what point did USF have a shot to tie the game?????



When?




............. they didn't..... the foul obviously worked.

[MisterJaylenBrownMU]

For whatever it's worth and to put an end to this discussion:

Jae Crowder's Postgame:

"After DJO’s last two FT misses, were you instructed to foul: “I was supposed to. When we talked in the locker room after, I told the coaching staff I don’t think I should have because I don’t think they had a timeout, 1.8 left, they had to make a shot from almost the length of the court. So I told them that and they agreed with me, but in the situation we did what we had to do and thank God it worked out.”"

[TJ]

That's actually a good question. Do you have to factor in there that an official like Higgins, Driscoll or Burr might call an intentional foul? Was Burr the nearest official on that play tonight?

I know I was worried about that at the time.  It did fit into the definition of intentional foul I think - Jae certainly wasn't going for the ball.  That would have sucked!

[BM1090]

A full court heave is 1/100 at the most. If i'm sitting at the gym I can make probably about 5-10 3/4 court shots out of 100. Not an exxageration

[KC_Warrior]

Horrible, horrible call.  Would you rather have USF take a 90 footer or rebound a missed free throw?  The answer is obvious.  Another example of Buzz' in-game coaching skills, or lack thereof.

[CTWarrior]

Don't want to knock Buzz because I am a big supporter, but grabbing a reobound with no timeouts and turning it into a 3 point bomb from 88 feet is near impossible.  And I've seen us not control the rebound on too many missed free throws to think that the make/miss tip scenario is near the level of impossibilty of the 3/4+ court heave.

Granted fouling probably made the the odds of going to OT from 1 in 300 to 1 in 180 or something like that.  I think it was a dumb move ut one that probably isn't going to hurt in the end.

I am in the camp that fouling up 3 when the other team has time to get a resonable 3 point shot is good strategy, but here I think it was a very bad choice.

Take the win and move on.

[4everwarriors]

A full court heave is 1/100 at the most. If i'm sitting at the gym I can make probably about 5-10 3/4 court shots out of 100. Not an exxageration

And, I'm still averaging 22 putts per round.

[lurch91]

You people are crazy.

The same people complaining about this win are the same people that say there are no good losses.  Get a grip.

By the way, Nova lost last night because they didn't foul up 3 with just a few seconds left.

Or, to be more specific, Wright gave them a chance to win by not fouling up 3 with just a few seconds left. Johnathan Mitchell (25 points on the night) raised up with .8 seconds left on the clock for a tying three-pointer, was fouled on the shot, and hit the free throw to give the Scarlet Knights their 13th win on the year (4th in the Big East).

Coaching 101. There were plenty of chances for Villanova to foul on the last possession, all of them before Corey Fisher fouled Mitchell on his three-point attempt, but Wright said afterwards they were not going to foul. They were just going to try and get a stop. He also admitted after the game that it was a mistake not to foul.

“Talk about poor decisions — I made one there,” Wright said. “We talk about it all the time. That’s one of those times you say, ‘We should have fouled.’”

Full article by Ray Mernaugh

[Tugg Speedman]

To Review ...

Jay Wright = Dumb for not fouling when up by 3 last night with a few seconds left (post above)

Buzz Williams = Dumb for fouling when up by 3 last night with a few seconds left (this thread).

Conclusion, if you are up by three with a few seconds left, you're a dumb coach.

[LON]

And, I'm still averaging 22 putts per round.

I hate your memory.

I didn't mind the call, but wasn't expecting it either.  Glad it worked.  On to G'Town.

[TJ]

To Review ...

Jay Wright = Dumb for not fouling when up by 3 last night with a few seconds left (post above)

Buzz Williams = Dumb for fouling when up by 3 last night with a few seconds left (this thread).

Conclusion, if you are up by three with a few seconds left, you're a dumb coach.

Didn't take logic in college, did ya?

They were not even close to being the same situation and you know it. 

- Our foul allowed USF to walk all the way from under our basket down the court to under their basket with the clocked stopped at 1.8 seconds.  It was made before the defender even had the chance to land with his rebound.  To tie, he would have had to land, turn around, and heave an 80+ foot shot on target in 1.8 seconds - and it was off a free throw so we knew that it was < 2 seconds from the start.

- Nova was playing half court defense and the ball was already on the other side of the floor.  A good look at a normal 3 point shot before the clock expired was a definite possibility.  What they really needed to do was either foul, or play defense and NOT foul for any reason.

Admittedly I don't like the fouling strategy, so I'm biased, but I don't think Wright made a bad decision.  I don't think either strategy gives a significant statistical advantage, so you have to go with your feel of the current game if you're a coach.  Fluke losses happen with both strategies.  Kentucky fouled in the SEC tourney last year and lost because the second missed free throw was tipped out to the 3 point line.  The player simply cannot foul on a shot if you don't go with fouling on the floor.

[77ncaachamps]

Rutgers didn't foul down two with 45 seconds left. At the charity stripe to win right now.

Edit. They won. And stormed the court. 

+1

[Pakuni]

Admittedly I don't like the fouling strategy, so I'm biased, but I don't think Wright made a bad decision.  I don't think either strategy gives a significant statistical advantage, so you have to go with your feel of the current game if you're a coach.  Fluke losses happen with both strategies.  Kentucky fouled in the SEC tourney last year and lost because the second missed free throw was tipped out to the 3 point line.  The player simply cannot foul on a shot if you don't go with fouling on the floor.

I'm generally not a fan of the fouling strategy, but can see why some advocate it.
That said, MU really was in close to a no-lose situation at that point.
It's exceptionally unlikely that a guy is going to pull down a rebound with 1.8 seconds remaining and somehow turn and shoot himself, or dish to a player who could get off a better shot. We agree on that.
But it's also exceptionally unlikely (probably at least equally unlikely) that with 1.1 seconds left - the time on the clock after the foul, IIRC - a guy is going to make his first free throw, then successfully miss his second in such a manner that the ball would escape two MU rebounders with inside position and wind up in the hands of a USF player, who then would successfully knock down a shot. All in 1.1 seconds.
Impossible? No. As unlikely as a three-quarter court (or longer) shot going in? Probably.

We can debate the strategy, but either way USF had minimal chance of tying the game at that point and all the teeth gnashing and criticism is a little silly since USF's chances of tying the game weren't significantly - or any - better in either situation.

p.s. Kentucky won the SEC tournament last year.

[LON]

I'm generally not a fan of the fouling strategy, but can see why some advocate it.
That said, MU really was in close to a no-lose situation at that point.
It's exceptionally unlikely that a guy is going to pull down a rebound with 1.8 seconds remaining and somehow turn and shoot himself, or dish to a player who could get off a better shot. We agree on that.
But it's also exceptionally unlikely (probably at least equally unlikely) that with 1.1 seconds left - the time on the clock after the foul, IIRC - a guy is going to make his first free throw, then successfully miss his second in such a manner that the ball would escape two MU rebounders with inside position and wind up in the hands of a USF player, who then would successfully knock down a shot. All in 1.1 seconds.
Impossible? No. As unlikely as a three-quarter court (or longer) shot going in? Probably.

We can debate the strategy, but either way USF had minimal chance of tying the game at that point and all the teeth gnashing and criticism is a little silly since USF's chances of tying the game weren't significantly - or any - better in either situation.

p.s. Kentucky won the SEC tournament last year.

I'm pretty sure we were pinching the two low block players for USF, at least I'd think 1 of our 2 guys at the high post would, while maybe the other boxes out the shooter.

It would have been a freak play to tie the game up.

[Canadian Dimes]

I'm generally not a fan of the fouling strategy, but can see why some advocate it.
That said, MU really was in close to a no-lose situation at that point.
It's exceptionally unlikely that a guy is going to pull down a rebound with 1.8 seconds remaining and somehow turn and shoot himself, or dish to a player who could get off a better shot. We agree on that.
But it's also exceptionally unlikely (probably at least equally unlikely) that with 1.1 seconds left - the time on the clock after the foul, IIRC - a guy is going to make his first free throw, then successfully miss his second in such a manner that the ball would escape two MU rebounders with inside position and wind up in the hands of a USF player, who then would successfully knock down a shot. All in 1.1 seconds.
Impossible? No. As unlikely as a three-quarter court (or longer) shot going in? Probably.

We can debate the strategy, but either way USF had minimal chance of tying the game at that point and all the teeth gnashing and criticism is a little silly since USF's chances of tying the game weren't significantly - or any - better in either situation.

p.s. Kentucky won the SEC tournament last year.

Pakuni i think you are dead wrong....the chances of USF getting the rebound and going right back up and scoring are significantly greater than them hitting a full court shot.  USF had just gotten the offensive rebound off of their last missed FT.
They also substituted in their 7 footer ..Famous for the fts'.
I am not really into debating which tactic is the best, I think the rutgers analogy is bad because that was a 20 foot shot not a 90.
 Even if USF hurls the ball the leangth of the court we are still tied.  Luckily he made the shot and we can argue about tit after a win not a loss.  What happenes if they get the rebound put it back in and get fouled? oops?

[tower912]

Whatever decision a coach makes, he leaves himself open to criticism.   Like Buzz last year when we kept losing on dagger 3's, letting ND tie it up on a late 3 only to lose in OT,  like Jay Wright last night not fouling, like Buzz last night.    Personally, I take the chance with the 75 footer.    Only 1.8 seconds left.    But, for the rest of the board, how much time needs to be left for it to be acceptable to foul up 3?

[Pakuni]

Even if USF hurls the ball the leangth of the court we are still tied.  Luckily he made the shot and we can argue about tit after a win not a loss.  What happenes if they get the rebound put it back in and get fouled? oops?

I think that confluence of events your describe - a perfectly missed free throw, an offensive rebound from a guy without inside position,  a successful shot and a foul - all in 1.1 seconds is about as likely, and possibly less likely, than a three-quarters court shot.

[wildbill sb]

I think that confluence of events your describe - a perfectly missed free throw, an offensive rebound from a guy without inside position,  a successful shot and a foul - all in 1.1 seconds is about as likely, and possibly less likely, than a three-quarters court shot.

CD's right. Clock doesn't start until the ball is touched after a missed FT, and USF did snag and score on a FT miss just seconds before.  Also, given the bizarro nature of the game, it would be completely in character for MU to foul on a last micro-second put back. Look at the finish to the VU/Rutgers game.

[uncle zeffy]

a W is a W and an L is an L, yesterday we got the W. Today the only people that care about how the game played out are MU and USF fans, the rest of the nation see a MU victory.

Focusing on the last 1.8 seconds of the game is splitting hairs! No matter what Buzz did, those complaining about the foul would instead be complaining about leaving a shooter open.

The game of what if's and should have done's has become increasingly apparent on this board and is just sad and pathetic. Yes it would be great if the game played out the way you fantasied it in your head, because if that were possible I would have won the lottery, be dating a super model and living in a mansion rather than working an entry level sales job and living with my parents to save money.

[StillAWarrior]

Didn't take logic in college, did ya?

They were not even close to being the same situation and you know it. 

- Our foul allowed USF to walk all the way from under our basket down the court to under their basket with the clocked stopped at 1.8 seconds.  It was made before the defender even had the chance to land with his rebound.  To tie, he would have had to land, turn around, and heave an 80+ foot shot on target in 1.8 seconds - and it was off a free throw so we knew that it was < 2 seconds from the start.

- Nova was playing half court defense and the ball was already on the other side of the floor.  A good look at a normal 3 point shot before the clock expired was a definite possibility.  What they really needed to do was either foul, or play defense and NOT foul for any reason.

Admittedly I don't like the fouling strategy, so I'm biased, but I don't think Wright made a bad decision.  I don't think either strategy gives a significant statistical advantage, so you have to go with your feel of the current game if you're a coach.  Fluke losses happen with both strategies.  Kentucky fouled in the SEC tourney last year and lost because the second missed free throw was tipped out to the 3 point line.  The player simply cannot foul on a shot if you don't go with fouling on the floor.

According to ESPN.com's Play-by-play, USF had only used two time outs the entire game.  Is that accurate?  If so, USF would have been calling a TO as soon as the player hit the floor.  Then they would have tried to get the ball to a player considerably closer to the basket than 80+ feet.  I don't like giving them a chance to run an inbounds play with 1.5 seconds left; that's a catch and one dribble and a shot.  It's not difficult to imagine that this could have been a 25' shot.  I like the call to foul.

[Dr. Blackheart]

After DJO’s last two FT misses, were you instructed to foul: “I was supposed to. When we talked in the locker room after, I told the coaching staff I don’t think I should have because I don’t think they had a timeout, 1.8 left, they had to make a shot from almost the length of the court. So I told them that and they agreed with me, but in the situation we did what we had to do and thank God it worked out.”

Jae's quote after the game is above.  Fouling right away because MU thought USF still had a time out makes more sense to me considering all that had to happen--which makes a free throw situation a better option than an in-bounds play from a time out for a set up Jumper from just outside the arc (vs. 3/4ths of the floor prayer off a FT miss).  Buzz stated that the strategies (to foul or not to foul) are about statistically equal but that with less than four seconds, they have a general rule to foul.  As Buzz stated:

After DJO missed those last two FTs, was Jae instructed to foul: “Yeah.”

Can you explain your reasoning: “It’s a philosophical thing. Statistically they say the variance is 1.7% on whether you foul or don’t foul when you’re up three. My reasoning behind it, or my philosophy behind it, is if they’re in the single bonus, if they’re length of the floor and it’s under 5 seconds – sometimes 4 – foul. So we foul, there’s 1.8 seconds left, he has to make the first one. And the reason I believe in the single bonus, I believe that’s a little added pressure – ‘I’ve got to make the first one before I can try to miss the second one.’ The problem with that, and it almost backfired on us tonight, is you have to rebound the ball. I can tell you that we don’t practice missing free throws. And so in that situation, you have to make the first one and then you have to miss it in such a manner that it gives your team a chance to get the rebound. And I think that’s a lot of stuff, but it didn’t work. The end result was OK, but that didn’t work.”

[Pakuni]

CD's right. Clock doesn't start until the ball is touched after a missed FT, and USF did snag and score on a FT miss just seconds before.  Also, given the bizarro nature of the game, it would be completely in character for MU to foul on a last micro-second put back. Look at the finish to the VU/Rutgers game.

Correct. The instant the ball is touched, the clock starts running. So are you suggesting that, under those circumstances, USF had a reasonable chance of collecting clean rebound from outside position (i.e. not tipped, not fought over, not bounced around, etc.) and getting off a shot and possibly even being fouled, all in a span of 1.1 seconds?
I doubt anyone has ever crunched the numbers in that circumstance, but I suspect the odds aren't much, if any, better than a three-quarters court shot.

And since it's been mentioned twice, the offensive rebound USF snagged off a missed free throw (the only time it happened during the game), did not lead to any points.

[oldwarrior81]

Fouling
Assumptions:  a 80% FT shooter got the rebound.  He can miss a FT 1 out of 2 times he tries.  Assume the offense gets the rebound 1 in 10 missed FT.  The team that is trailing scores with in 1.1 second 1/10 times that they get the rebound.

Stranger things can happen.
Look back at the foul by DJO and FTs by Poland with 52 seconds to go.  Makes the first, misses the second, Gilchrist, despite Otule having inside position, knocks the ball off of Chris for USF possession under the basket.

While rewatching the game, an Espn graphic showed USF with 1 timeout remaining at 1:03.  Heath called one with 8 seconds to go.

[bilsu]

After thinking about the foul, it was clear that Crowder just grabbed him. That is a definition of an intentional foul. While it is not likely that a foul like that is called, it is what should have been called. Result SF gets two free throws and the ball. The play was risky and stupid.

[TJ]

p.s. Kentucky won the SEC tournament last year.

Sorry, it was the reverse and KY won because of it.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2790426/sec_tournament_2010_goes_to_kentucky.html?cat=14

Kentucky was down 3 and Miss St. fouled them with 4.9 seconds left.  Bledsoe made first free throw, missed second on purpose.  John Wall gets rebound, misses 3 pointer, and DeMarcus Cousins put back to go to OT.  KY wins in OT.

Similar situation to Nova game yesterday - it can go either way with either strategy.