3 at end of regulation

[Lennys Tap]

The same scenario you are postulating can happen on a foul when up three play as well, except a two will tie and a 3 wins. That's the risk side of an equation. Is it sound strategy to foul up 4 with 7 seconds left, not sure but the logic for why you do it is very similar to up 3, until you are up by 6 there is risk that if the opponent makes 3s while you are shooting FTs they can close that gap in less than 10 seconds. The whole point of the strategy up 3 is to A) kill some clock and B) make the other team go 94 feet for a tying or winning shot as opposed to have the tying/winning shot from 30 feet.

Would I have done it, no....but then again I haven't played in 3 games in the last two weeks where fouling the other team while you have the lead/tied has become such a prominent part of the games. No way to prove it but if the fouling up 3 hadn't come up so frequently of late, but I'm 100% confident the fouling up 4 strategy doesn't show up.

????

Never, ever, ever heard of fouling up 4. This is not a “would I have done it?” issue. Nobody does it because it’s dumb. Not as dumb as intentionally fouling an 86% foul shooter with 20 seconds left in a tie game dumb, but dumb nonetheless.

[Windyplayer]

The biggest risk is that your team gets called for a soft foul.

THey DonT EvEN KNOw hoW to FOuL InTENTIonalLy.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

????

Never, ever, ever heard of fouling up 4. This is not a “would I have done it?” issue. Nobody does it because it’s dumb. Not as dumb as intentionally fouling an 86% foul shooter with 20 seconds left in a tie game dumb, but dumb nonetheless.

Yeah, there is no sound strategy to foul when you are up four. 

[MU82]

The same scenario you are postulating can happen on a foul when up three play as well, except a two will tie and a 3 wins. That's the risk side of an equation. Is it sound strategy to foul up 4 with 7 seconds left, not sure but the logic for why you do it is very similar to up 3, until you are up by 6 there is risk that if the opponent makes 3s while you are shooting FTs they can close that gap in less than 10 seconds. The whole point of the strategy up 3 is to A) kill some clock and B) make the other team go 94 feet for a tying or winning shot as opposed to have the tying/winning shot from 30 feet.

Would I have done it, no....but then again I haven't played in 3 games in the last two weeks where fouling the other team while you have the lead/tied has become such a prominent part of the games. No way to prove it but if the fouling up 3 hadn't come up so frequently of late, but I'm 100% confident the fouling up 4 strategy doesn't show up.

Even though we disagree on the strategy, I like your take on the make-or-miss FT. All kinds of things could have happened either way, and it ended up being fine. As I said, I'd have done the miss, but I'm not violently opposed to the make.

But I still see absolutely no reason to foul up 4. None. It just doesn't make sense to me.

It's way different from fouling up 3, something you do so a made 3 doesn't tie it (as has happened to us several times). There was no threat of a made 4 to tie. None.

[StillWarriors]

And while we're talking late-game strategy ...

The one I still don't get is why did Cain try to foul up 4? Haven't seen or heard a reasonable explanation for that one. By fouling, you set up the possibility of a make, an intentional miss, a rebound, a pass out for an open 3, and an instant tie. Makes no sense to me.

BTW, I think discussing strategy like this doesn't have to be a sign that one is unhappy with the coach. There are hundreds of little decisions that go on in a basketball game, and I find it interesting to discuss them, especially since I started coaching basketball myself.

For example, Wojo again went to a zone after a time-out by the opponent -- a strategy that had worked and been praised in earlier games. This time, X shredded the zone for an easy basket. So does that mean the strategy was "bad" this time? No, not in my eyes.

I was scratching my head on the attempted foul up 4 as well. I couldn't come up with a reason for that unless there were fouls to give, but there weren't. Not sure on  that one.

I was thinking last game it was a matter of time before teams were prepared for the switch to zone coming out of a timeout in a late game or half situation. X clearly was. Cat and mouse game, which is what makes it fun and maddening at the same time.

[mu03eng]

????

Never, ever, ever heard of fouling up 4. This is not a “would I have done it?” issue. Nobody does it because it’s dumb. Not as dumb as intentionally fouling an 86% foul shooter with 20 seconds left in a tie game dumb, but dumb nonetheless.

There's lots of stuff that was never done that is done more now, like fouling up 3 or going for it on fourth down with anything less than 4 yards to go.....fouling up 4 has less mathematical justification then fouling up 3 but it's still on the positive side of win probabilities versus letting it play out. The whole point is taking the 3 point play off the table.

By the way, the win probabilities of fouling while tied are also positive....nobody does it because of the obvious blow back and it was clearly a mistake from Wojo but considering MU got two shots to win/tie the game against Butler show's that its not quite as insane as people think.

[MU82]

fouling up 4 has less mathematical justification then fouling up 3 but it's still on the positive side of win probabilities versus letting it play out.

Really?

I went into writing because I was told there was no math, so maybe I just can't wrap my math-averse head around it, but how so?

[Lennys Tap]

YES.  I was screaming at the TV to miss that final FT.   If the staff didn't call for it, Anim should have figured that out himself.

+1000. Everybody knows in that situation the proper play is to intentionally miss the free throw. Your bigs(if you even station them on the line) should be statues, never going for the ball. Basketball 101.

Last night’s game was a GREAT win - so many heroic individual play and amazing effort. That doesn’t mean We can’t scratch our heads (again) about how clueless we are in basic end of game strategies.

[mu03eng]

Even though we disagree on the strategy, I like your take on the make-or-miss FT. All kinds of things could have happened either way, and it ended up being fine. As I said, I'd have done the miss, but I'm not violently opposed to the make.

But I still see absolutely no reason to foul up 4. None. It just doesn't make sense to me.

It's way different from fouling up 3, something you do so a made 3 doesn't tie it (as has happened to us several times). There was no threat of a made 4 to tie. None.

You are absolutely correct, and if there is under 10 seconds left you definitely wouldn't do it. At that point in time there was more than 10 seconds and you are trying to take 3 point shots off the table because that's the only thing that closes the gap. If they make a 3 there, it's a 1 point game they foul....even if we make both it's still just a 3 point game with the ball coming out of bounds with 5-6 seconds left (which is even worse than a 2 point lead with 2.3 seconds left) which gives X a chance to tie. Worst case, you foul up 4, they make both(definitely not certain with X) and then you hope to make both or at least one and you are no worse than you were before.

Again, would I do it? No because it's too outside conventional wisdom but from a probability standpoint given time, score, both teams FT% to date it's not a bad strategy.

[keefe]

This is a free college sports message board...what do you expect? If you want throughout  conversation go to one of the paid sites

Because they possess deeper insight and are a more genteel crowd?

I guess the monthly dues serve as a cleansing station where ignorance and hostility are scrubbed off the backs of the uncouth foul-smelling Swarthy Hordes

[MU82]

You are absolutely correct, and if there is under 10 seconds left you definitely wouldn't do it. At that point in time there was more than 10 seconds and you are trying to take 3 point shots off the table because that's the only thing that closes the gap. If they make a 3 there, it's a 1 point game they foul....even if we make both it's still just a 3 point game with the ball coming out of bounds with 5-6 seconds left (which is even worse than a 2 point lead with 2.3 seconds left) which gives X a chance to tie. Worst case, you foul up 4, they make both(definitely not certain with X) and then you hope to make both or at least one and you are no worse than you were before.

Again, would I do it? No because it's too outside conventional wisdom but from a probability standpoint given time, score, both teams FT% to date it's not a bad strategy.

Thanks for the explanation, but I'm not buying it as viable strategy. I'd love to sit down with Wojo over a beer (or a big cup of ice water) and ask him about it.

[GOO]

Can someone link a statistical study that concludes that it is right to foul when up 3 based upon actual data? I assume it is out there based upon all of the proponents on here that are for it. 

For me, without data to show otherwise, I would not foul when up 3 as the odds of someone hitting a three late in the game are generally not more than 40% and probably well under 40% given the pressure, etc.  And, then if they hit this shot it goes to overtime, where presumably one has a decent chance of winning in OT.  Or, maybe get a shot off if time left to win anyway.

The bottom line, you probably win at least 60 to 70 percent of the time by not fouling in regulation and if they hit it, one goes to OT and has X change of a win in OT.

I'd have to see data that fouling up 3 with X amount of time on the clock increases odds of winning the game based upon an actual large study to convince me that it is such a no-brainer to always foul up 3.

[MU82]

I would not foul when up 3 as the odds of someone hitting a three late in the game are generally not more than 40% and probably well under 40% given the pressure, etc.  And, then if they hit this shot it goes to overtime, where presumably one has a decent chance of winning in OT.  Or, maybe get a shot off if time left to win anyway.

You agree with the late Rick Majerus, who said fouling when up 3 was the only way to lose the game in regulation (FT, intentional miss, rebound, wide-open 3). Many of the same Scoopers who genuflect whenever Rick's name is mentioned apparently think he's an idiot regarding this strategy.

Calipari, who has won a little bit, says he has no hard-and-fast rule: "It depends on your team. In most cases I would ride it out and not do it. Other cases, depending on their team, you do it. I've won and lost both ways."

KenPom did a study a few years back and said there was little difference in outcome regardless of which strategy is used, though he leaned toward not fouling:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/03/18/up-3-in-the-final-seconds-do-you-foul-or-defend/24981367/

As you can see in that article, his study was imperfect.

There is no consensus, and there does not appear to be a study that presents evidence that fouling up 3 is the no-brainer that a lot of folks claim it is.

Personally, I agree with Calipari: I'd take each situation on a case-by-case basis.

[GOO]

You agree with the late Rick Majerus, who said fouling when up 3 was the only way to lose the game in regulation (FT, intentional miss, rebound, wide-open 3). Many of the same Scoopers who genuflect whenever Rick's name is mentioned apparently think he's an idiot regarding this strategy.

Calipari, who has won a little bit, says he has no hard-and-fast rule: "It depends on your team. In most cases I would ride it out and not do it. Other cases, depending on their team, you do it. I've won and lost both ways."

KenPom did a study a few years back and said there was little difference in outcome regardless of which strategy is used, though he leaned toward not fouling:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/03/18/up-3-in-the-final-seconds-do-you-foul-or-defend/24981367/

As you can see in that article, his study was imperfect.

There is no consensus, and there does not appear to be a study that presents evidence that fouling up 3 is the no-brainer that a lot of folks claim it is.

Personally, I agree with Calipari: I'd take each situation on a case-by-case basis.

Thank you.  So, either strategy is legit.  I'll stick with letting the other team try a well under 50% shot to tie.  Keep it simple unless the statistical evidence makes it clear otherwise.

What is the risk of a guy trying to go for the foul and getting called for an intentional. Does Symir go for a hard foul, grab a guy, wrap him up, a lot harder foul to get the foul called?  But do it wrong and you are more likely to lose the game.

Rowsey for one of his 4 point plays?

MU82, probably makes sense to take it case by case.  I can think back on some of our undersized teams where getting a missed free throw seemed like a challenge.  A tip out on the second free throw seems like a legit risk. I can also look back on some of our teams that could not shoot a 3 (or under 30% as a team) and would beg a team to foul if we are down 3.

[mu03eng]

There are various opinions are the foul up 3 and a lot of statistical evaluation all of which says.....it depends. It's definitely not a hard and fast rule it really should come down to style, opinion, and match-ups. Fouling up 3 is very similar to going for 2 instead of 1 at the end of the game, you are either winning or you are losing....you take the tie off the table (fouling up four still allows for a tie which is why it isn't crazy).

Fouling up 3 against X makes sense because they are bad at FT shooting (but they are also bad at 3pt shooting), fouling up 3 against MU makes some sense because they are both good at FTs and 3s. It makes the most sense against a team that doesn't hit FTs well but does make 3s. But again it's not hard and fast, anyone that treats it as such doesn't know what they are talking about.

https://kenpom.com/blog/yet-another-study-about-fouling-when-up-3/

http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SSAC15-RP-Poster-Paper-An-Analysis-of-the-Basketball-Endgame.pdf