collapse

* Resources


UDM 4

* Villanova SOTG

No Stud when we lose.
2019-20 Season SoG Tally
Howard11
Anim2
Bailey2
Cain1
McEwen1

'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

If Wojo left the program today... by Mike Deane's Seat Belt
[Today at 01:00:28 AM]


Marquette opens -7.5 vs. Georgetown by keefe
[Today at 12:50:05 AM]


Wojo's Peer Group by TAMU Garcia
[Today at 12:44:49 AM]


Recruiting as of 2/15/20 by JakeBarnes
[February 25, 2020, 11:38:14 PM]


7 years ago tonight by JWags85
[February 25, 2020, 11:32:08 PM]


Upsets! / Surprise results. by We R Final Four
[February 25, 2020, 10:20:00 PM]


NM by rocket surgeon
[February 25, 2020, 09:54:35 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: Georgetown

Marquette
72
Marquette vs

Georgetown

Date/Time: Feb 26, 2019 - 7:30pm
TV: FS1
Schedule for 2019-20
Providence
84

Author Topic: No foul up 3, again!  (Read 3499 times)

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13364
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2020, 08:40:11 AM »
Couple things wrong with this.  First, its Symir.  Second, Koby was the one who committed the foul you described against DePaul.  Third, Symir was the one who failed to foul against X, not Jamal.  Fourth, after failing to foul against X and them hitting a game tying 3, we won, so there is an instance where we failed to foul and still won (although if we had fouled we would have won in regulation).

Correct, although with one nit ...

We would not necessarily have won in regulation had we fouled X. Maybe they hit the first FT, miss the second, get a quick pass out to an open shooter at the 3-point line, he hits it, and we lose. That potential scenario is exactly why Majerus always refused to foul up 3. "Fouling up 3 is the only way you give yourself a chance to lose the game in regulation," he'd say. A more likely negative outcome is that they get the rebound, score a layup, and it's tied.

Just last night, in 3 games we know of, a highly-regarded coach (Pearl, Chambers) either opted not to foul, or a team (Ohio State) failed to execute ... and those teams were 3-0. Of course, on other nights -- usually when we play  >:( -- a foul isn't committed and the opponent makes the 3 to tie it.

Someday soon, one of these analytics lovers needs to do a real study on what the best strategy is. I'm talking real data instead of a bunch of anecdotes, which right now is all any of us can provide.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than Scoop game threads."

-- Obi-wan Kenobi

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7547
Re: Fire Wojo!
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2020, 09:00:34 AM »
It’s tough.  I’m sure he told them to, but these kids struggle with the execution part of things at times.
Coach I want you to foul them, but make sure you do not foul them when they are shooting and make sure you do not foul too hard because we do not want a flagrant foul. I could see this type of message making a freshmen a little hesitant.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13364
Re: Fire Wojo!
« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2020, 09:14:48 AM »
Coach I want you to foul them, but make sure you do not foul them when they are shooting and make sure you do not foul too hard because we do not want a flagrant foul. I could see this type of message making a freshmen a little hesitant.

Good points.

The middle-school team I coach, I actually taught them in practice how to commit a foul without it being close to being deemed intentional or flagrant. And then we practiced it, which you can imagine was fun for them.

The couple of games where we had to foul, it all came off well ... except on one occasion, when an excitable kid in the heat of action did a two-handed shove that was correctly called intentional. The opponent hit the 2 FTs, got the ball, and what already had been a near-impossible situation became impossible.

I'm guessing Wojo -- and every other college coach -- does something similar in practice. But athletes don't always execute the plan. And sometimes it's even the ref's fault; last night, the OSU player clearly grabbed the Michigan player but the ref doesn't call it and Michigan ends up with a decent look at a tying 3. Shot hit the rim.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than Scoop game threads."

-- Obi-wan Kenobi

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #28 on: February 05, 2020, 09:34:35 AM »
FWIW, neither Bruce Pearl nor Pat Chambers fouled when up 3 tonight. And on both occasions, the opponent missed the 3s, so the coaches' no-foul strategy worked.

In the Penn State - Michigan State game, Winston got a better look than the Providence guy did vs us. One of the best players in the country missed his tonight; some no-name who was shooting 25% made his vs Marquette.
I don't agree with this logic.  Because the losing team missed a game tying 3 is not evidence that this approach 'worked.' A 0% or 1% 3 point shooter can tie the game if given the opportunity.  Its not that this guy is their best shooter vs. this guy shoots only 25%.
Take the chance to tie the game by the losing team out of the equation. Remove it.
I know...I know....always the chance of a made FT, followed by a missed FT, followed by a tip out, followed by a made 2 or 3 by the shooting team.  Neither of these scenarios is a guarantee. We have witnessed this season alone a few times what not fouling gets you. 
Additionally, we have seen what fouling up 3, and NOT allowing a game tying 3 had done for us.

SaveOD238

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #29 on: February 05, 2020, 09:37:52 AM »
Someday soon, one of these analytics lovers needs to do a real study on what the best strategy is. I'm talking real data instead of a bunch of anecdotes, which right now is all any of us can provide.

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

              W    L   OT    Cases
Foul      122   5   11     138
Defend  598   2   76     676

Looking at percentages, that means if you Foul, theres a 11.5% chance of losing (3.5% chance) or going to OT (8% chance).  If you figure that you lose half the time you go to OT, that means that Fouling up three gives you about a 7.5% chance of losing the game, 92.5% to win.

If you don't foul.  There is a very similar 11.5% chance of losing or going to OT.  However, that chance is way more heavily slanted toward OT (11.2% chance) than losing outright (0.3% chance).  Again, figuring that you lose half the time in OT, that makes a 5.9% chance of losing the game, or 94.1% chance to win.

Either way, theres an 88.5% chance to win in regulation and about a 6-7% chance of losing at some point.  However, Foul is more likely to produce an outright regulation win, whereas Defend almost always leads to OT at the very least.


With all of that said, I still contend that Wojo made the right call in two of three games. 

Providence: No foul. Let a bad shooter shoot a three.  We only go to OT if he gets lucky, which he did.  Lost a crapshoot in OT.
Xavier: Foul.  We were already in bad foul trouble, and down a few players.  X not a good FT team.  Go for the win in regulation.  Unfortunately the play was poorly executed.  But we pulled it out in OT.
DePaul: Foul. I would have chosen NOT to foul.  DePaul hadn't been doing much from beyond the arc all game and their whole team was in deep foul trouble.  IF that game goes to OT, we're in good shape to win.  Don't risk the 3.5% of a weird rebound leading to a loss.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13364
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #30 on: February 05, 2020, 10:20:27 AM »
It has been done. https://kenpom.com/blog/yet-another-study-about-fouling-when-up-3/

              W    L   OT    Cases
Foul      122   5   11     138
Defend  598   2   76     676

Looking at percentages, that means if you Foul, theres a 11.5% chance of losing (3.5% chance) or going to OT (8% chance).  If you figure that you lose half the time you go to OT, that means that Fouling up three gives you about a 7.5% chance of losing the game, 92.5% to win.

If you don't foul.  There is a very similar 11.5% chance of losing or going to OT.  However, that chance is way more heavily slanted toward OT (11.2% chance) than losing outright (0.3% chance).  Again, figuring that you lose half the time in OT, that makes a 5.9% chance of losing the game, or 94.1% chance to win.

Either way, theres an 88.5% chance to win in regulation and about a 6-7% chance of losing at some point.  However, Foul is more likely to produce an outright regulation win, whereas Defend almost always leads to OT at the very least.


With all of that said, I still contend that Wojo made the right call in two of three games. 

Providence: No foul. Let a bad shooter shoot a three.  We only go to OT if he gets lucky, which he did.  Lost a crapshoot in OT.
Xavier: Foul.  We were already in bad foul trouble, and down a few players.  X not a good FT team.  Go for the win in regulation.  Unfortunately the play was poorly executed.  But we pulled it out in OT.
DePaul: Foul. I would have chosen NOT to foul.  DePaul hadn't been doing much from beyond the arc all game and their whole team was in deep foul trouble.  IF that game goes to OT, we're in good shape to win.  Don't risk the 3.5% of a weird rebound leading to a loss.

There have been articles explaining criticism of KenPom's research -- it was incomplete, too small a sample size, didn't take some mitigating factors into consideration, etc.

Otherwise, I like the way you look at each situation and come up with a reasonable strategy in each one. This is what Calipari does, too; every situation is not the same.

I don't agree with this logic.  Because the losing team missed a game tying 3 is not evidence that this approach 'worked.' A 0% or 1% 3 point shooter can tie the game if given the opportunity.  Its not that this guy is their best shooter vs. this guy shoots only 25%.
Take the chance to tie the game by the losing team out of the equation. Remove it.
I know...I know....always the chance of a made FT, followed by a missed FT, followed by a tip out, followed by a made 2 or 3 by the shooting team.  Neither of these scenarios is a guarantee. We have witnessed this season alone a few times what not fouling gets you. 
Additionally, we have seen what fouling up 3, and NOT allowing a game tying 3 had done for us.


It would appear that many coaches, perhaps even the majority these days, agree with you.

Bruce Pearl and Pat Chambers are pretty good coaches. They disagree with you - or at least they did last night. Rick Majerus was a pretty good coach, and he disagreed with you. Calipari has won a lot of games and he takes each situation as it comes. I am NOT saying they are right and you are wrong. I'm just saying I don't think, "Foul when up 3" is a no-brainer. If it is, then what does it say about the basketball intelligence of Pearl, Chambers, Majerus, Calipari and others?
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than Scoop game threads."

-- Obi-wan Kenobi

MuMark

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3831
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #31 on: February 05, 2020, 10:41:24 AM »
"It would appear that many coaches, perhaps even the majority these days, agree with you.

Bruce Pearl and Pat Chambers are pretty good coaches. They disagree with you - or at least they did last night. Rick Majerus was a pretty good coach, and he disagreed with you. Calipari has won a lot of games and he takes each situation as it comes. I am NOT saying they are right and you are wrong. I'm just saying I don't think, "Foul when up 3" is a no-brainer. If it is, then what does it say about the basketball intelligence of Pearl, Chambers, Majerus, Calipari and others?"


Add Tony Bennett to this list....I watched his game against Wake Forest ....it was the same situation as Wojo had against Providence. 3 point lead....20 seconds left. He played defense......Wake dribbled into a double team with 10 seconds left and called time out. So with 10 seconds left......Wake taking it out at half court.....and a minute to talk about strategy......Tony decides again to not foul.....his guys play good defense....and then foul the shooter with less then a second left. Guy makes 3 free throws.....and then end up in OT.....Virginia wins in OT......

Now I have to say I would have fouled when they threw it in with 10 seconds left....they had plenty of chances....but the point still stands......Tony Bennett is a great coach who just won a NC........he not only didn't foul once.......he didn't foul twice.

forgetful

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4000
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2020, 10:43:09 AM »
It has been done. https://kenpom.com/blog/yet-another-study-about-fouling-when-up-3/

              W    L   OT    Cases
Foul      122   5   11     138
Defend  598   2   76     676

Looking at percentages, that means if you Foul, theres a 11.5% chance of losing (3.5% chance) or going to OT (8% chance).  If you figure that you lose half the time you go to OT, that means that Fouling up three gives you about a 7.5% chance of losing the game, 92.5% to win.

If you don't foul.  There is a very similar 11.5% chance of losing or going to OT.  However, that chance is way more heavily slanted toward OT (11.2% chance) than losing outright (0.3% chance).  Again, figuring that you lose half the time in OT, that makes a 5.9% chance of losing the game, or 94.1% chance to win.

Either way, theres an 88.5% chance to win in regulation and about a 6-7% chance of losing at some point.  However, Foul is more likely to produce an outright regulation win, whereas Defend almost always leads to OT at the very least.


You statistics say that you also have the best chance of outright losing in regulation if you foul.

But as MU82 points out there were flaws in that collection of data and analysis.

GOO

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1194
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2020, 10:47:19 AM »
What I have learned from these discussions, and previous discussions and posts by MU82 (thank you), is that those who call for fouling when up 3 - as if not to do so is a terrible inherent mistake - don't get it.  It is not so simple. The Kenpom info is also well done above by SaveOD, with a slight possible advantage to not fouling.

The other factor that isn't discussed is the "when to foul."  We know not to make it intentional, not to foul in the act of shooting, etc.  Foul too soon and the other team can make both free throws... and then the team that is up by one has to inbound the ball and advance it, etc.  Not always an easy task. MU at Creighton last year is an example.  Make 2, then foul on inbound - may only need a two to win, which is a big problem if the foul is committed too soon.

There is a lot that can go wrong fouling. I'd say fouling with more than 4 or 5 seconds on the clock would make me nervous. If there is a stat someday for fouling up three with more than 7 or 8 second on the clock, I'd like to see it.

robmufan

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2020, 11:01:56 AM »
What I have learned from these discussions, and previous discussions and posts by MU82 (thank you), is that those who call for fouling when up 3 - as if not to do so is a terrible inherent mistake - don't get it.  It is not so simple. The Kenpom info is also well done above by SaveOD, with a slight possible advantage to not fouling.

The other factor that isn't discussed is the "when to foul."  We know not to make it intentional, not to foul in the act of shooting, etc.  Foul too soon and the other team can make both free throws... and then the team that is up by one has to inbound the ball and advance it, etc.  Not always an easy task. MU at Creighton last year is an example.  Make 2, then foul on inbound - may only need a two to win, which is a big problem if the foul is committed too soon.

There is a lot that can go wrong fouling. I'd say fouling with more than 4 or 5 seconds on the clock would make me nervous. If there is a stat someday for fouling up three with more than 7 or 8 second on the clock, I'd like to see it.

I was thinking about timing yesterday while watching the end of OSU v Michigan. Michigan had the ball with 17 secs left I believe and was able to run a great set to get an open 3 (which they bricked horribly). But it looked like OSU was trying to foul, but couldn't get the call.

My point is actually the strategy of the team with the ball when you have 10+ seconds. Doesn't it make sense now to get down the court and fire? At least you will be able to get that 3 pt shot off before the team fouls. It will be interesting to see how the offensive strategy shifts as more teams do start to foul.

Its DJOver

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1909
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2020, 11:06:32 AM »
My whole thing with fouling is that this team is exactly what you would want to close out a game by fouling.  Two separate guards that have been clutch from the line all season, one of whom is a likely AA that is at or near the top in fouls drawn, the other is 6'-4".  We also have a legit 7'er that is near or at the top in rebounding %.  We also have a two 5th year Sr, a 4th year Sr, a 4th year Jr, and a 22 year old Sophomore, I'm not sure you could ask for more experience.  Our team should be able to execute that game plan correctly.  Next year when Markus, Sacar and Jayce are gone I might have a different opinion, but with this current squad we should be able to get it done 99.99% of the time.

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2020, 11:12:51 AM »



Add Tony Bennett to this list....I watched his game against Wake Forest ....it was the same situation as Wojo had against Providence. 3 point lead....20 seconds left. He played defense......Wake dribbled into a double team with 10 seconds left and called time out. So with 10 seconds left......Wake taking it out at half court.....and a minute to talk about strategy......Tony decides again to not foul.....his guys play good defense....and then foul the shooter with less then a second left. Guy makes 3 free throws.....and then end up in OT.....Virginia wins in OT......

Now I have to say I would have fouled when they threw it in with 10 seconds left....they had plenty of chances....but the point still stands......Tony Bennett is a great coach who just won a NC........he not only didn't foul once.......he didn't foul twice.
Tony Bennett has had the one of the best defensive teams in the country for the last several years.  It's who they are.  Its their identity. Their defense is an advantage to him and them.
He can rely on his team's defense in the closing seconds because they are very, very good at it.  It seems his lack of fouling did hurt him in this case. He very well could have avoided OT and won in regulation.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13364
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2020, 11:17:59 AM »
Tony Bennett has had the one of the best defensive teams in the country for the last several years.  It's who they are.  Its their identity. Their defense is an advantage to him and them.
He can rely on his team's defense in the closing seconds because they are very, very good at it.  It seems his lack of fouling did hurt him in this case. He very well could have avoided OT and won in regulation.

I don't dispute a thing you say here. But again ... not a no-brainer. An awful lot of coaches with very highly respected basketball brains choose not to automatically foul up 3 in the closing seconds.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than Scoop game threads."

-- Obi-wan Kenobi

oldwarrior81

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2020, 11:31:48 AM »
was it the South Florida game around 2010/2011 where Buzz intentionally fouled a guy with about a second left, who was standing with his back to the basket which was 90 feet away?  I'm not sure of the odds of his making a three to tie from that place on the court.

Buzz said the numbers say foul.   But in reality, they moved the opponent from 90 feet away to the free throw line in position to make one, miss the second and possibly rebound and tip to tie.

forgetful

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4000
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2020, 11:38:06 AM »
was it the South Florida game around 2010/2011 where Buzz intentionally fouled a guy with about a second left, who was standing with his back to the basket which was 90 feet away?  I'm not sure of the odds of his making a three to tie from that place on the court.

Buzz said the numbers say foul.   But in reality, they moved the opponent from 90 feet away to the free throw line in position to make one, miss the second and possibly rebound and tip to tie.

Buzz has many screws loose in his head. Although he is a stat-junky, he doesn't understand a thing about statistics, or situational awareness.

MuMark

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3831
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #40 on: February 05, 2020, 11:53:42 AM »
Tony Bennett has had the one of the best defensive teams in the country for the last several years.  It's who they are.  Its their identity. Their defense is an advantage to him and them.
He can rely on his team's defense in the closing seconds because they are very, very good at it.  It seems his lack of fouling did hurt him in this case. He very well could have avoided OT and won in regulation.

Tony Bennett's team this season is allowing opponents to make 29.4% of its 3 pointers........MU is allowing teams to make 31.4% of their 3s.

That difference when it comes down to 1 attempt at the end of a game is minimal.

Now again you can argue that fouling is the right thing to do......but its not a no brainer in the minds of many coaches....and its certainly not a no brainer for any coach when 20 seconds are still on the clock.

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #41 on: February 05, 2020, 12:06:25 PM »
Never said as much.
Great coaches on both side of this argument.

WhoaJoe2020

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 861
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #42 on: February 05, 2020, 12:23:53 PM »

I think GOO came close to MU82s unspoken point.

People were losing their minds when the team didn't foul at the end of regulation against Providence, and declared it proof that Wojo sucks.

The numbers say it's a close call and Wojo has already stated that the team has been coached to foul  when the shot clock is under ten seconds and Marquette is up by three.

A lot of different scenarios can happen when fouling up three with over ten seconds on the clock.

It isn't a no brainer like many portrayed it to be.

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #43 on: February 05, 2020, 12:38:39 PM »
So, it appears to be a no brainer for the some coaches.
Not fouling was a no brainer for Majerus, fouling is a no brainer for Wojo.

WhoaJoe2020

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 861
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #44 on: February 05, 2020, 12:44:40 PM »
So, it appears to be a no brainer for the some coaches.
Not fouling was a no brainer for Majerus, fouling is a no brainer for Wojo.

I guess it comes down to ideology, but no one should use either one as justification to declare that a coach sucks based on fouling up three under ten seconds or not. It's basically a coin flip.

Mane'shouse 84

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2844
Re: Fire Wojo!
« Reply #45 on: February 05, 2020, 12:50:07 PM »
Coach I want you to foul them, but make sure you do not foul them when they are shooting and make sure you do not foul too hard because we do not want a flagrant foul. I could see this type of message making a freshmen a little hesitant.
I know this is probably the case, but let's get in the way back machine and go back in time a year ago, when Symir was a senior in high school. He's the top dog, big cheese, number one guy, head honcho, of his high school team.  They're up 3 with 8 seconds to play and the coach told his team to foul, similar to what Wojo did.  Why is Symir THE guy to probably make that foul in the correct way as the senior star, but now that he's a freshman in college, he can't be expected to do it properly? 

HILLTOP SENIOR SURVEY from 1984 Yearbook: 
Favorite Drinking Establishment:

1. The Avalanche.              7. Major Goolsby's.
2. The Gym.                      8. Park Avenue.
3. The Ardmore.                 9. Mugrack.
4. O'Donohues.                 10. Lighthouse.
5. O'Pagets.
6. Hagerty's.

Mr. Sand-Knit

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3142
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #46 on: February 05, 2020, 12:51:27 PM »
Correct, although with one nit ...

We would not necessarily have won in regulation had we fouled X. Maybe they hit the first FT, miss the second, get a quick pass out to an open shooter at the 3-point line, he hits it, and we lose. That potential scenario is exactly why Majerus always refused to foul up 3. "Fouling up 3 is the only way you give yourself a chance to lose the game in regulation," he'd say. A more likely negative outcome is that they get the rebound, score a layup, and it's tied.

Just last night, in 3 games we know of, a highly-regarded coach (Pearl, Chambers) either opted not to foul, or a team (Ohio State) failed to execute ... and those teams were 3-0. Of course, on other nights -- usually when we play  >:( -- a foul isn't committed and the opponent makes the 3 to tie it.

Someday soon, one of these analytics lovers needs to do a real study on what the best strategy is. I'm talking real data instead of a bunch of anecdotes, which right now is all any of us can provide.

Have seen a number of times.... make first , miss the second , offensive team gets rebound and in the scramble/chaos makes the layup and gets foul. Makes ft... ball game!
Political free board, plz leave your clever quips in your clever mind.

Mr. Sand-Knit

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3142
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #47 on: February 05, 2020, 12:57:39 PM »
What has been mostly lost in the whole Xavier game discussion and discussing a Freshman’s mistake has been the play of Sacar.  5th year senior goes under the screen up 3 with 2 seconds left leading by 3.  Simply baffling decision on Sacars part, leaving Marshall’s shot completely unhurried and uncontested.  Really really bad.
Political free board, plz leave your clever quips in your clever mind.

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #48 on: February 05, 2020, 01:05:38 PM »
Really? You’ve seen that described scenario a number of times?
That’s crazy that you’ve seen it a number of times because it is extremely rare.
Not even OT....from down 3 and win it outright?
Wild.
Only time I can recall is Mason hitting the corner 3 and the foul.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 01:07:21 PM by We R Final Four »

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13364
Re: No foul up 3, again!
« Reply #49 on: February 05, 2020, 01:06:36 PM »
I guess it comes down to ideology, but no one should use either one as justification to declare that a coach sucks based on fouling up three under ten seconds or not. It's basically a coin flip.

That's some mighty fine insight, sir (or ma'am). Please keep sharing it with us.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than Scoop game threads."

-- Obi-wan Kenobi

 

feedback