Speaking of last second end-game strategies

[MarquetteDano]

Did anyone watch the end of the Big Sky Tournament?  Montana up one going to the free throw line with 2.1 seconds left.  Player legitimately tried to make first free throw and missed.  Then, the coach had him purposely miss the second free throw.  It bounced on the rim a bit, and by the time Weber State got the board, game over.

Much better than making the second free throw and other team can get a long inbounds pass.  Note that Weber State was out of timeouts.

[PaintTouches]

I was baffled as to why the Weber State coach used his last timeout before the last free throw. Wouldn't it be smarter to save it? There was plenty of time to call a t.o. even if the second free throw was missed and that would have gotten them a better shot than the one handed full court heave they took.

[Oldgym]

Fantastic finish any way you slice it.  What did Anthony Johnson have....42?  I only saw the end, but Montana was down 20 at the half and playing in their opponent's house.  Climbed all the way back to win.  That was fun to watch.

[RawdogDX]

We also almost got to see the foul when down by three backfire.  The Bearcats went for a foul at half court but didn't get it in till sosa had started his shooting motion.  Luckily they got a clean strip or there would have been 3 FT's.

[Doctor V]

We also almost got to see the foul when down by three backfire.  The Bearcats went for a foul at half court but didn't get it in till sosa had started his shooting motion.  Luckily they got a clean strip or there would have been 3 FT's.

True, but this is on Deonta Vaughn (i believe it was him). Coach said that the specific instructions were to foul as they crossed half court, but instead he waited until sosa got to the 3 pt line. I suppose the moral of this story is make sure your players have some sense before trying to perform the foul strategy (like ND player did as he fouled DJO right at mid court)

[MarquetteDano]

We also almost got to see the foul when down by three backfire.  The Bearcats went for a foul at half court but didn't get it in till sosa had started his shooting motion.  Luckily they got a clean strip or there would have been 3 FT's.

I was thinking about this... when it becomes a lot more common to foul in these situations, how many coaches are going to instruct players to get ready to be in a shooting motion when they sense the foul coming.  I have a feeling we will see a day where a guy gets fouled at third quarters court and given three free throws.

Not arguing against the strategy of fouling.  No strategy is perfect however.

[ChicosBailBonds]

True, but this is on Deonta Vaughn (i believe it was him). Coach said that the specific instructions were to foul as they crossed half court, but instead he waited until sosa got to the 3 pt line. I suppose the moral of this story is make sure your players have some sense before trying to perform the foul strategy (like ND player did as he fouled DJO right at mid court)

It is true to execute this strategy, the players have to be able to process with their brain cells what instructions were given.  Bilas, Raftery were both saying to foul, Cronin the same thing....it's pretty easy, get across half court and foul but the Cincy player wasn't able to "process" this fairly simple task and made matters worse by almost fouling him on the 3 attempt.   Cincy has never been known for having a bunch of Academic All Americans out there.  I'm sure Cronin was pulling out the last 4 hairs in his head with how his player executed on that one.

[Big Papi]

Its easy to say that the sound strategy is to foul at an exact precise moment but we are not dealing with robots here.  You want to foul, but you don't want to foul too soon.  You want to foul, but you don't want to foul a player who is in their shooting motion.  You want to foul, but do you really want to put a ref in a situation that determines an outcome of a game?  I have seen too many bad calls to trust any refs.  Also, there seems to be more and more NBA type reffing going on where there are some crazy continuation plays creeping up in games.  I would hate to be up 3 and lose on a 4 point play.  And finally in MU's case, you want to foul but do you want to risk 2 - 6'6" players trying to box guys out who are taller, bigger and stronger.  There are just as many moving parts when you foul or when you dont.  

[GuamanianTerror]

Just win, baby!

[BrewCity83]

Its easy to say that the sound strategy is to foul at an exact precise moment but we are not dealing with robots here.  You want to foul, but you don't want to foul too soon.  You want to foul, but you don't want to foul a player who is in their shooting motion.  You want to foul, but do you really want to put a ref in a situation that determines an outcome of a game?  I have seen too many bad calls to trust any refs.  Also, there seems to be more and more NBA type reffing going on where there are some crazy continuation plays creeping up in games.  I would hate to be up 3 and lose on a 4 point play.  And finally in MU's case, you want to foul but do you want to risk 2 - 6'6" players trying to box guys out who are taller, bigger and stronger.  There are just as many moving parts when you foul or when you dont.  

...and you want to foul, but you don't want to make it so obvious as to risk being called "intentional".

[GOO]

And, if you get too aggressive to make that foul happen, the ref may call an intentional.  I agree with the comment above: "I suppose the moral of this story is make sure your players have some sense before trying to perform the foul strategy (like ND player did as he fouled DJO right at mid court)"

I might add, it may depend if you are coming off a time out and can instruct the players right before going out there.  Also, if there is more than 5 to 7 seconds or so on the clock, and you foul right away in the back court, then that may leave too much time on the clock. 

A lot can go really wrong and then you loose, instead of a tie, like in the ND vs. MU game.  If the 3 point shot at the buzzer is a 30% shot, and if they make it you go to OT, and then say you have a 50% chance of winning in OT.... with all the complexity, it may normally be better to not foul.  Maybe keep it simple for the players, unless you are coming out of a time out and then allow only certain players the option of fouling?

But chicos posts to some articles with the numbers, questions the safe approach.....

[M@RQUETTEW@RRIORS]

Not so much on this board, but on the other board.  I wonder how many posters that supported Buzz for not fouling would have also supported the decision to foul if thats what Buzz decided to do?  There seems to be an attitude that the coach always knows better.  Let me tell you, every coach makes mistakes and most will readilly admit to it. 

[BrewCity83]

The bottom line is, it's just not as clear cut a decision as some people want to make it.  You can go with the "right" choice in theory, bhere are so many ways to screw it up if you don't execute it exactly right.

[NersEllenson]

Not so much on this board, but on the other board.  I wonder how many posters that supported Buzz for not fouling would have also supported the decision to foul if thats what Buzz decided to do?  There seems to be an attitude that the coach always knows better.  Let me tell you, every coach makes mistakes and most will readilly admit to it.  

I'll support whatever decision our coach makes - either way - as to be critical from a hindsight perspective is what losers do.  Everyone can be 100% right after the fact.  Real genius there.  But, I trust that a guy who has directed this team to a great season, and has far exceeded expectations, and has studied and spent more time around basketball than any of us armchair fans have...deserves 100% support.  Sure, a coach can make a mistake - but why expect a coach to be 100% bullet proof and perfect, when none of us are in our everyday jobs?  Second guessers and knee jerk reacting, armchair fans need to relax.  The debate over which strategy is best to employ is great, but to be critical, in my view is pretty lame.

[StillAWarrior]

And, if you get too aggressive to make that foul happen, the ref may call an intentional.

I probably don't watch as much basketball as many people on this board, but I cannot recall ever seeing this happen.  I've seen literally thousands of late game fouls that everyone knew were "intentional" and designed solely to get the other team to the line, and I can't say that I remember ever seeing a ref call an Intentional Foul in that situation and award the team two shots and the ball.  Maybe I've seen it and forgotten, but I just don't remember seeing that.  Under the circumstances, this would be an awful call by a ref and would totally change the game.  Obviously, I'm not suggesting that there could not be an appropriate "Intentional Foul" late in the game, but I haven't seen one called just for the type of ticky-tack "intentional" fouls at the end of the game.

I'm perfectly willing to sit back and hear how this happens all the time, and I've just missed it.

[M@RQUETTEW@RRIORS]

I'll support whatever decision our coach makes - either way - as to be critical from a hindsight perspective is what losers do.  Everyone can be 100% right after the fact.  Real genius there.  But, I trust that a guy who has directed this team to a great season, and has far exceeded expectations, and has studied and spent more time around basketball than any of us armchair fans have...deserves 100% support.  Sure, a coach can make a mistake - but why expect a coach to be 100% bullet proof and perfect, when none of us are in our everyday jobs?  Second guessers and knee jerk reacting, armchair fans need to relax.  The debate over which strategy is best to employ is great, but to be critical, in my view is pretty lame.

A little sensitive dont you think?  Why cant a person disagree with a SINGLE decision and still think otherwise the coach has done a fabulous job?  You just admitted to agreeing with two totally different decisions in the same situation if they were made by our coach.  Who is being genius?  3 people in the room with me called for a foul DURING the situation.  Hardly hindsight.  As I said earlier Im willing to bet Buzz thinks he has made mistakes, so your idea of agreeing with him no matter what he does seems ridiculous.  FWIW I do think he has done an outstanding job.  Im really not getting at the end of the ND game in particular.  I just find it comical that people find it reprehensible to question a coach.  Who probably second guesses himself from time to time.  He is human after all and it doesnt mean people dont like him or the job he is doing.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Incidentally, driving home from work yesterday they had about 1 hour topic on the "foul or don't foul up by 3 points with less than 10 seconds" argument.

It was great radio.  Wish I had the audio from it.

[GGGG]

I'll support whatever decision our coach makes - either way - as to be critical from a hindsight perspective is what losers do.  Everyone can be 100% right after the fact.  Real genius there.  But, I trust that a guy who has directed this team to a great season, and has far exceeded expectations, and has studied and spent more time around basketball than any of us armchair fans have...deserves 100% support.  Sure, a coach can make a mistake - but why expect a coach to be 100% bullet proof and perfect, when none of us are in our everyday jobs?  Second guessers and knee jerk reacting, armchair fans need to relax.  The debate over which strategy is best to employ is great, but to be critical, in my view is pretty lame.

Why even post to a message board then if you are just going to be the cheerleader guy who's going to pretty much never disagree with anything the coach does?  That's pretty much what a forum like this is about.

[GOO]

I wish I could remember what game it was from last year that I was watching (may have even been two years ago as the older I get the more I underestimate time), but the intentional was called right at the end and it cost the game.  I think the player made an obvious grab of the shirt on an inbounds - maybe even before the inbounds pass.  The call was made.  Not sure on who the ref was, but I can sure see a Higgins type of ref making the call - saying that they make the correct call regardless of the situation.

I probably don't watch as much basketball as many people on this board, but I cannot recall ever seeing this happen.  I've seen literally thousands of late game fouls that everyone knew were "intentional" and designed solely to get the other team to the line, and I can't say that I remember ever seeing a ref call an Intentional Foul in that situation and award the team two shots and the ball.  Maybe I've seen it and forgotten, but I just don't remember seeing that.  Under the circumstances, this would be an awful call by a ref and would totally change the game.  Obviously, I'm not suggesting that there could not be an appropriate "Intentional Foul" late in the game, but I haven't seen one called just for the type of ticky-tack "intentional" fouls at the end of the game.

I'm perfectly willing to sit back and hear how this happens all the time, and I've just missed it.