Fouling up 3, revisited

[tower912]

In Marquette's last two games, the coach up 3 under 10 seconds chose to not foul.   It worked for both of them.

[PGsHeroes32]

In Marquette's last two games, the coach up 3 under 10 seconds chose to not foul.   It worked for both of them.

Todays possession started with 20 seconds and played straight through. Sure McD could yell from the other end and hope they hear him but I don't think any team in America is fouling in that spot.

With how frantic everything was theres a better chance they gift us and foul us for 3.

[MuggsyB]

That was an abysmal possession.  We had plenty of time to  get a quick deuce and extend the game.  It mirrored the awful possession vs Prov when we had the rock in a tie ball game with 29 secs to go.  Our h-c offense  and basic execution is something that will not be shown at basketball clinics.

[MU82]

In Marquette's last two games, the coach up 3 under 10 seconds chose to not foul.   It worked for both of them.

The majority of games I personally have seen this season in which a team has had a 3-point lead in this kind of situation, the coach has chosen not to foul and his team has won every time.

Beard, Self, Wojo, McCormick, etc.

I also have seen Wright and a couple others choose to foul up 3, and they also ended up having made the right choice.

That was an abysmal possession.  We had plenty of time to  get a quick deuce and extend the game.  It mirrored the awful possession vs Prov when had the rock in a tie ball game with 29 secs to go.  Our h-c offense  and basic execution is something that will not ne shown at basketball clinics.

Yep.

[We R Final Four]

In Marquette's last two games, the coach up 3 under 10 seconds chose to not foul.   It worked for both of them.

Haha—Tower you know the stats.
What is your point?
The team up by 3 pts ....with under 10 seconds wins...93% of the time.
So.....what that means....wait for it.....is that in 7% of those situations.....you can lose on a 3 pointer or....a tip in at the buzzer on a missed FT.
I find it comical, when some scoopers suggest they had the winning recipe by not fouling in this situation...yet fouling in that situation.
The moral of the story is this......do everything in your power to be winning the game by 3 points with less than 10 seconds left in the game. That is the goal. And if you do that....you will win 93% of your games. It really s that simple.

[tower912]

A few years ago, fouling up 3 was a huge debating point.    And coaches who DIDN'T were roundly criticized.     Now it appears we are back to 'depends on the situation and match ups', which I totally agree with.   

[brewcity77]

It comes down to time. Both yesterday and the Butler game the trailing team got the ball with 15+ seconds left. If you're going to foul up three, you want to do it when there's just a few seconds left, maybe in the 3-7 second range. If you have a team with good enough situational awareness to understand when to make that foul, you do it, but otherwise, you play it out.

[MU82]

A few years ago, fouling up 3 was a huge debating point.    And coaches who DIDN'T were roundly criticized.     Now it appears we are back to 'depends on the situation and match ups', which I totally agree with.

This.

It ain't a no-brainer, and those who think it is ain't usin' their brains!

[Dr. Blackheart]

How about fouling down three with plenty of game and shot clock to tie if your team makes a stop? MU fouls to make a one possession game a two possession game.

I get the preserve more clock and CU still in the 1-1. Statistically, that strategy (miss a ft)  is not going to work 70% of the time...and makes your hill to climb even larger...requiring even more clock.

That is not a confidence builder for your defense.

[CountryRoads]

It comes down to time. Both yesterday and the Butler game the trailing team got the ball with 15+ seconds left. If you're going to foul up three, you want to do it when there's just a few seconds left, maybe in the 3-7 second range. If you have a team with good enough situational awareness to understand when to make that foul, you do it, but otherwise, you play it out.

Yeah, I think a coach should only be criticized for not fouling up three when the losing team is inbounding the ball and have to go full length of the court with at most 8 seconds left. I think you foul when the guy reaches half court.

[MU82]

Yeah, I think a coach should only be criticized for not fouling up three when the losing team is inbounding the ball and have to go full length of the court with at most 8 seconds left. I think you foul when the guy reaches half court.

Cal, Self, Beard and others would disagree with you regarding the strategy you mentioned in your last sentence.

How about fouling down three with plenty of game and shot clock to tie if your team makes a stop? MU fouls to make a one possession game a two possession game.

It didn't look to me like Marquette actually was trying to foul (if we're thinking of the same situation). It looked like our guys were ticked off at the call.

[Dr. Blackheart]

It didn't look to me like Marquette actually was trying to foul (if we're thinking of the same situation). It looked like our guys were ticked off at the call.

Made DJ three at :45. Time out Wojo. Sy in for Theo. In bounds and foul by Cain at :41. Theo back in for Sy.

Seemed like a Wojo situational to me.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't mind the foul with 41 seconds left. ~30% chance you get the ball back with no time taken off and no points scored. Greater than 50% chance you get the ball back with no time taken off and only one point or less scored. Worst case scenario is you get the ball back with no time taken off and 2 points scored. Potentially sets up a 2 for 1 as well. We ended up with the worst case scenario this time. High risk, high reward call.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I don't mind the foul with 41 seconds left. ~30% chance you get the ball back with no time taken off and no points scored. Greater than 50% chance you get the ball back with no time taken off and only one point or less scored. Worst case scenario is you get the ball back with no time taken off and 2 points scored. Potentially sets up a 2 for 1 as well. We ended up with the worst case scenario this time. High risk, high reward call.

10% chance of success for the miss and tying three. Certainly a high risk making a one possession game a two.

Despite that, Carton came down after the made free throws and hit a three at 0:35...and it then took MU 12 seconds to foul.

Frankly, that whole sequence of situationals is a head scratcher. 

[CountryRoads]

Cal, Self, Beard and others would disagree with you regarding the strategy you mentioned in your last sentence.

The point is not all "foul up three" situations are created equal and many people try and fit them all in the same box anyway. There's a difference between being up 3 with 10 seconds when the opposing team has already been running offense in the half court for 10+ seconds and when they are up 3 with 10 seconds and haven't inbounded yet and need to go the full length. Certain situations lend themselves to more criticism than others, IMO.

Both situations the OP referenced were similar in that respect. The difference is against Butler our team went to double the ball handler with 3 seconds left and left a wide open three point shooter and MU barely got a shot off against Creighton's defense because they switched everything.

I get the sense that the OP is trying to give praise to Wojo's decision not to foul, but that still doesn't give enough context and mean the final play was executed correctly by both coaches.

[MU82]

The point is not all "foul up three" situations are created equal

Yep. Many aren't "foul up 3" situations at all.

[MU82]

Was watching "Bad Beats" on Sportscenter last night and they showed the end of the Samford-Mercer game.

Up 3 with a few seconds left, Samford tried to foul Mercer. But the Samford player pushed the Mercer player as the Mercer guy was beginning his shooting motion, and 3 FTs were correctly awarded. The Mercer player hit all 3, and Mercer went on to win in double OT.

That was one of the things Majerus used to talk about going wrong if you foul up 3, though he was most concerned about "FT make, FT miss, tap out to wide-open shooter, made 3, loss."

[We R Final Four]

Dumb play. If your players don't know how and when to foul to begin with....you should probably just play it out.

[brewcity77]

Dumb play. If your players don't know how and when to foul to begin with....you should probably just play it out.

Without seeing it but looking at the time and situation, there were only 4 seconds left when Samford scored. That's pretty much an ideal situation to commit the foul asap. It may not have worked out, but 4 seconds left and up by 2, I'm calling for the foul every time. Even if they foul in the act of shooting, the guy was a 76.9% shooter, so 45.5% chance he makes all three (admittedly better than his 3PFG%, but I'd take those odds hoping to get the foul before the shot).

[We R Final Four]

82 said they were up 3.
I certainly wouldn't foul a shooter...in the act of shooting.....on a 3.

[BrewCity83]

82 said they were up 3.
I certainly wouldn't foul a shooter...in the act of shooting.....on a 3.

Agreed -- never.  Unless you can foul a guy who shoots a higher 3-point percentage than his free throw percentage.  And then better make damn sure that you foul him hard enough that there's no chance he makes the three.  But not so hard that you get assessed a flagrant.  LOL.

[MU82]

Without seeing it but looking at the time and situation, there were only 4 seconds left when Samford scored. That's pretty much an ideal situation to commit the foul asap. It may not have worked out, but 4 seconds left and up by 2, I'm calling for the foul every time. Even if they foul in the act of shooting, the guy was a 76.9% shooter, so 45.5% chance he makes all three (admittedly better than his 3PFG%, but I'd take those odds hoping to get the foul before the shot).

They were up 3.

And Cal, Self and Beard (among many) would disagree with you. As would have Majerus.

Doesn't mean you're "wrong." It means (IMHO) it's not a no-brainer. I probably would side with the aforementioned coaches and not foul - make the guy hit a tough 3 to tie. But I wouldn't say those who foul are wrong. I WOULD say those who foul somebody in the shooting motion are wrong. I would never want to give up a 4-point play.

[brewcity77]

They were up 3.

And Cal, Self and Beard (among many) would disagree with you. As would have Majerus.

Doesn't mean you're "wrong." It means (IMHO) it's not a no-brainer. I probably would side with the aforementioned coaches and not foul - make the guy hit a tough 3 to tie. But I wouldn't say those who foul are wrong. I WOULD say those who foul somebody in the shooting motion are wrong. I would never want to give up a 4-point play.

Unless they were trying to foul him in the act of shooting, I think it's fine. It sucks, sometimes the opponent gets a shot off when you're trying to foul on the floor. I mistyped the 2, I knew you said 3, but it's been an insane day, so what can you do.

For me, it's probability. If they go to the line for 2 shots (which I assume was the plan) the odds of them scoring 3 points is far more remote than the 32.3% chance he hits a three from open play. Yes, fluky things happen and sometimes the other team pulls it off, but basketball is a game of numbers. You figure out the best odds and you gamble on them. Those that make the best bets are going to win more often than not. I won't argue that some very good coaches might decide to do what is statistically disadvantageous to them. That doesn't make them smart, it just means they've gotten away with making bad bets.

[MU82]

Unless they were trying to foul him in the act of shooting, I think it's fine. It sucks, sometimes the opponent gets a shot off when you're trying to foul on the floor. I mistyped the 2, I knew you said 3, but it's been an insane day, so what can you do.

For me, it's probability. If they go to the line for 2 shots (which I assume was the plan) the odds of them scoring 3 points is far more remote than the 32.3% chance he hits a three from open play. Yes, fluky things happen and sometimes the other team pulls it off, but basketball is a game of numbers. You figure out the best odds and you gamble on them. Those that make the best bets are going to win more often than not. I won't argue that some very good coaches might decide to do what is statistically disadvantageous to them. That doesn't make them smart, it just means they've gotten away with making bad bets.

OK, brew. I'm not gonna get into one of these classic Scoop arguments. I respect your opinion, and I'll say good night to this topic (for now).

[MU82]

Last night, Shaka fouled up 3; Bruce Weber didn't.

Worked out well for both.

Bilas is a big proponent of fouling up 3.

I'm gonna try to remember to post here in these situations as they come along - not because I'm trying to "prove" anything but because I think it's interesting to note which coaches use this tactic and which don't.

If I happen to see any comments from coaches explaining their thinking, I'll post them too.

I encourage others to do the same.